I said a little higher, not extremely high. As I said, the likelihood of anyone being a mega star out of this class seems very slim to me - literally slim, in some cases, because I think the best shot for it is probably Chet.
I don't think it's likely AJ ever ends up a top 10 player, but is that a knock on him? Not really, especially given that I think that there's only maybe two people in this entire class who have any chance of ever ending up a top 10 player. But do I think he could be a top 30 player? Top 40 player? Sure, I think that's an attainable high end outcome for him. Do I think that there are 10 guys with higher probabilities than him of that outcome in this class (that is, ten names with plausible high end outcomes higher than his)? Not really.
It's also worth noting that, again, systems dictate a lot in college. He didn't get assists that often: that will tend to happen when you are relegated to being an off-ball player 90% of the time. Zion had 14 games in college with either 0 or 1 assists and only hit 5 assists 3 times. Yet in only 85 NBA games he's hit 5 assists 24 times and had 0-1 assists only 11 times. Fewer occurrences in a larger sample size. The difference? Well, in college he spent all his time being off ball and in the NBA he actually gets some run with the ball in his hands. That matters.
Am I saying I think AJ is just Zion waiting to happen to the NBA? Nah, of course not - if I did think that his high end outcomes were as realistic as that, I'd have him #1 in the class. But it's an example of how judging things based on college systems without first accounting for those systems can lead to misinterpretation of a player.