I think it is funny. In 1988 we had Chris Piper as one of our forwards. Averaged 3.9 for career, but no one remembers that. In his 1st two years, he averaged under 10 mins a game and had minimal stats. But for 1988 I remember, with the rosy glasses of retrovision, a major contributor as one of the "Miracles".
And he did have a lot to do with that tournament. Remember, we had lost Archie Marshall who was by far the better athlete. Despite rather journeyman stats before and overall, Piper averaged over 7 pts and 6.9 rebounds in 6 games.
Back then, though, with 4 years as the standard, bench players in their 2nd year were not expected to be major contributors. A guy like Lightfoot was expected to be pretty much unseen as a freshman, develop his game as a sophomore, and become a solid part of the rotation as a junior. Hopefully, become a starter as a senior.
My, how impatient we have become. Lightfoot is precisely where he should be if we all hadn't had our expectations change due to players leaving after 1, 2, or 3 years. The high level players we get now are able to do that, and we want their contributions accelerated as well. But to expect the same prodigious performances of everybody is absurd--"program players" like Mitch are the ones you need to fill those other 10 or 11 seats. And when given time to develop, yeah, they can be integral cogs in a drive to the top.