Why did I say that? And I quote from the post you took my quote from:giovanni wrote:" it's reasonable to believe that he would be a lesser player than Stan if he were to come here."
Why is this? Based on what? Before you get all bent out of shape and begin twisting things as negative, I really like Stan and believe he showed flashes of becoming a very good player with the ability to have a great senior season and be one of our better players. I am not knocking Stan in any way. He offers great defense , energy and many positives. But in reality , he also had some very bad games and only averaged 6 ppg, not an all league performer at this point. Hughes was going to just as good if not a better program, in a better conference and landed in a very similar conference setting and averaged 7 ppg. BTW, he is also known as a very good defensive player. I am only saying, what prevents him from not having as good or greater potential. What is that theory based on? Again if Dan is interested, he obviously thinks Hughes can be an asset.
"Stan was a better recruit out of high school then Hughes. Stan was also a better shooter than Hughes in college before he transferred, and we heard Stan was going to be a lockdown defender while we've heard nothing about Hughes' defense"
On what basketball court is Missouri last year a better program then Indiana when Stan was there? Stan played in the tournament at Indiana, Hughes played in two games in the SEC tournament before their coach got fired.
No, the SEC isn't better than the Big 10.
Where are you getting the info that he's a very good defensive player?
Nothing is preventing him from having potential. I literally said right before the quote you took that he could help us. But there's no reason as of now to think he'll be as good or better than Stan.