Gary Parrish

Here's Tuesday's Dear Gary ...

Dear Gary: Tyler Hansbrough is overrated! Go Duke!

-- Hayden

I knew that column about how Stephen Curry could be the New Face of College Basketball would be perceived as a shot at Hansbrough, which is why I went out of my way to write nice things about the North Carolina senior -- like that he's the "easy pick for Preseason National Player of the Year, destined to go down as one of the best in ACC history and if I had to start a college team tomorrow I'd take him with my first pick. Make no mistake, I like Psycho T (and let the record show I think he'll be a better pro than most expect)."

Despite all that, UNC fans thought I was bad-mouthing Hansbrough.

And anti-UNC fans -- mostly Duke fans, shockingly -- applauded me for ripping Hansbrough.

But both groups of fans are missing the point.

I was not bad-mouthing or ripping Hansbrough while writing about Curry, and let me take this moment to explain how Hansbrough is not overrated at all. Most people think he's the most dominant basketball player in America and that's exactly what he is, the most dominant basketball player in America. So Hansbrough isn't overrated. He's accurately rated. Likewise most people think the Beatles are the best band of all-time and that's exactly what they are, the best band of all-time. Thus, the Beatles are accurately rated, too. So Tyler Hansbrough and the Beatles are accurately rated, and I hope we never have to go over this again.

That said, I don't necessarily believe Hansbrough is the type of player casual fans love to watch on TV.

I kinda agree with the coach from the column on that point.

His game doesn't feature blocked shots into the second row, beautiful drives to the basket or gorgeous stepback jumpers. Hansbrough does his work in other, less-pretty ways. Which is why I think Curry is the guy most fans would rather watch play a game even though Hansbrough should be the Preseason National Player of the Year (he's the best player on the best team, after all). And I think that's a reasonable point that shouldn't be taken as a shot at Hansbrough.

I am the Walrus.

Goo goo g'joob.

Like I wrote in Monday's column, I don't agree with Lute Olson's decision to stop recruiting potential one-and-done prospects because I think it's silly to eliminate individuals for no reason other than that they supposedly belong to a group with which you don't think you're interested in dealing. In other words, if you don't want to invite a one-and-done candidate like Renardo Sidney (and the possible NCAA investigation that'll follow him) to campus, I sorta understand. But what I can't understand is why anybody wouldn't want a player like John Henson (committed to North Carolina), if only for a year.

That said, history indicates one-and-done prospects aren't necessary to succeed at the highest level.

In that respect, perhaps Olson is smarter than us all.

Consider that the past three national champions (Florida in 2006, Florida in 2007 and Kansas in 2008) did not have a one-and-done prospect and that just two of the past six national champs (Syracuse with Carmelo Anthony in 2003 and North Carolina with Marvin Williams in 2005) did. Furthermore, 17 of the past 24 Final Four