Exactly. A solid, established post man and a strong wing shooter could make our team look very formidable, so I'm not sure why we insist on going after project after project, it's just annoying. Certainly, we have Moses Wright, and I love Moses and have loved his progression, but then we have an Evan Cole, a Didenko, a Ogbonda, a Sjolund. I hope Pastner makes me eat crow and Howard is fantastic for us, but I think we still need to get 1-2 more established transfer players.
First off Ogbonda was a holdover from the previous staff so I wouldn't really hold that against the staff.
Second, I think you're very quick to slap the project label on any player who doesn't come into college ready to play as a freshman. Moses was a project for sure. Completely unranked by 247 with no real other notable offers, at least until very late in the process. Cole, Didenko, and probably Price could be seen as project type players because both were more likely than not going to be mid major type players that we took a chance on. Sjolund, however, was ranked 208th by 247 composite and 171st by their own ranking. That isn't a project take just because he needs a year or two to adjust and develop. Likewise, Howard was ranked in the mid 200s (similar to Lammers) and was on the radar of high majors as early as his sophomore year. He was committed to Ole Miss I believe as a junior. That isn't a project, at least not how it is usually used.
And before people mention freshman year stats here are some other freshman year stats.
James Banks - 12.4 mpg, 1.7 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 1.2 bpg
Ben Lammers - 5 mpg, 1.2 ppg, 1.5 rebs, .2 bpg
Daniel Miller - 25.7 mpg, 4.4 ppg, 5 rpg, 2.2 bpg
Miller's the only one with any notable stats and that was more because he got to play, and even then that was after a redshirt year. It's also not just us, there are numerous examples of players like that who had very unimpressive freshman years and developed into really good to great players. And most of them weren't project players. They just needed time to develop.
