think theres much of a difference between a 4 star player and a 5 star player ?

I'm looking at the top 100 players for 2011. Kentucky has a bunch of 5 star players and St. John's has about 5   4 star players ranked in the top 100.  You wonder with good coaching a 4 star player could be a better player then the 5 star guys. Lavin assembled a good coaching staff to develop the players.
What kind of staff does Kentucky have ?

Dwayne Wade and Tim Duncan were 4 star players. Felipe Lopez and Luther Wright were both ranked number one in their class.

If High School kids were still draft elgible...a 5 star might be a lottery pick where a 4 star might be a post lottery pick?

We get so caught up in the number of stars next to someones name. Stars don't measure heart and competive spirt. Lopez was considered #1 in his class and we can all thing of college players that had better college career then him. These rating are a crap shot. AAU competion does help because you can see the players compete against the same level of competion.

There are never any guarantees. Lopez wasn't half the player that Marcus Hatten was, and Hatten came out of nowhere.

Dwayne Wade and Tim Duncan were 4 star players. Felipe Lopez and Luther Wright were both ranked number one in their class.

Lebron and John Wall were also 5 stars and the top rated players in there class. In football I think 5 star players are much more important because even if the player is great he stays atleast 3 years. In basketball alot of the elite 5 star players leave after 1 or 2 years.
 

The difference between 1-25 and 50-75 and 100-150 is pretty vast in some cases. I left out 25-50 and 75-100 because I feel those areas get a little more grey. You're always going to find exceptions but usually the creme rises to the top.

If you want a better judge go to Rivals Top 150 and look over past 5 years. Pick two random numbers and compare those over the 5 year span. 20/40 50/60