While there is certainly all manner of insanity here (both believing stars are everything and stars are nothing), we do have alternatives other than just blindly following the coaches. We know that having higher ranked classes has historically been a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for winning championships. We also know that sometimes lower ranked players pan out (and higher ranked players don't) and that our coaches are paid to find the ones that will (and avoid the ones that won't).
So the proper class should contain enough well-recognized talent to be ranked highly and a couple lower-ranked players who impress the coaches. That is to say, if we take nothing but 2 and 3 stars, it's a problem. Similarly, if we only offer 4 and 5 stars, it's a problem, because it's evidence that our coaches aren't doing their own evaluation. But if we take a couple 2 and 3 stars and a lot of higher ranked players, we should trust that our coaches are doing their jobs in evaluation unless presented with evidence that their evaluation is poor.
