First Round Recruiting Rankings

[Theologator]

http://247sports.com/Article/2017-NFL-Draft-first-round-picks-as-high-school-prospects-52532819

Interesting article. Many of the first rounders were on the radar, some weren't.

I don't believe or place much stock in the recruiting gurus actually scouting and grading talent. That may have taken on a bigger role with the big national camps, but it is still secondary.

The real basis for recruiting rankings is the attention kids are getting from Saban, Meyer, Stoops, etc. Coaches know 1000 times more than journalists. And great coaches develop the talent they recruit.

 

[Gator Fever]

There is definitely a strong correlation with the rankings considering how the numbers decrease the higher the ranking. It does seem certain positions have a lot more 2 and 3 stars that overachieve in the draft compared to other positions. I wonder how many of those 5 stars were Rivals 5 stars also since they seem to be a little pickier when it comes to that.

 

[Marianna-FL_Gator]

There is definitely a strong correlation with the rankings considering how the numbers decrease the higher the ranking. It does seem certain positions have a lot more 2 and 3 stars that overachieve in the draft compared to other positions. I wonder how many of those 5 stars were Rivals 5 stars also since they seem to be a little pickier when it comes to that.

 

[Theologator]

There is definitely a strong correlation with the rankings considering how the numbers decrease the higher the ranking. It does seem certain positions have a lot more 2 and 3 stars that overachieve in the draft compared to other positions. I wonder how many of those 5 stars were Rivals 5 stars also since they seem to be a little pickier when it comes to that.

The other angle to check would be to see what percentage of 5-star players actually pan out to be at least solid starters or better.

I did that with the Gators during the Meyer era. About 1/2 his 5-stars bore out well, 40% of 4-stars, 33% of 4-stars. But that says more about his recruiting and eye for talent than the system as a whole.

 

[Gator Fever]

It looks like two of the 5 star first rounders in that composite were Rivals 4 stars but I am not sure if any of the 4 stars were 5 stars according to Rivals.

 

[Bernardo de la Paz]

I don't understand why we continue to talk about this. The evidence is overwhelming that kids that are highly ranked coming out of high school are more likely to be drafted.

 

[NavetG8r]

I don't understand why we continue to talk about this. The evidence is overwhelming that kids that are highly ranked coming out of high school are more likely to be drafted.

We all know this. Some just like to keep rubbing it in our noses because our HC went out and grabbed a bunch of 3* kids because he only had a month left to try to fill up a class. Since then he's done better with the proportions of 3* vs 4*, but there are some folks around here who would rather dwell on that one year and keep beating the dead horse about it.

 

[GatorJ]

We all know this. Some just like to keep rubbing it in our noses because our HC went out and grabbed a bunch of 3* kids because he only had a month left to try to fill up a class. Since then he's done better with the proportions of 3* vs 4*, but there are some folks around here who would rather dwell on that one year and keep beating the dead horse about it.

Huh? That's not true.

2015 - SIX 3 stars and THREE 2 stars: 38% of class

2016 - ELEVEN 3 stars and a THREE 2 stars: 56% of class


2017 - SEVEN 3 stars and ONE 2 star: 35%

The good news is that he actually had a large class of 2017 and brought a good number of four-star talent in. I think most people have been pleasantly surprised with 2017. Would like to now see an offense. The 2017 class was markedly better than the 2016 and 2015 class. Although those other two classes had one or two guys that were really top-tier.

I'm not gonna go through Meyer or Chump's classes. But I would assume that Meyer probably sat around 5% to 10% at 2 to 3 stars. And chump around 15% to 20%.

 

[T REX]

I don't understand why we continue to talk about this. The evidence is overwhelming that kids that are highly ranked coming out of high school are more likely to be drafted.

Times infinity. That hidden gem crap is just a way to rationalize Mac's recruiting...like Mac doesn't want highly rated guys...just HIS guys. GTFO.

 

[InstiGATOR1]

http://247sports.com/Article/2017-NFL-Draft-first-round-picks-as-high-school-prospects-52532819

Interesting article. Many of the first rounders were on the radar, some weren't.

I don't believe or place much stock in the recruiting gurus actually scouting and grading talent. That may have taken on a bigger role with the big national camps, but it is still secondary.

The real basis for recruiting rankings is the attention kids are getting from Saban, Meyer, Stoops, etc. Coaches know 1000 times more than journalists. And great coaches develop the talent they recruit.

By my count 12 of the 32 where rating worse than a 4 star recruit coming out of high school by 247.

 

[T REX]

By my count 12 of the 32 where rating worse than a 4 star recruit coming out of high school by 247.

Are you arguing for or against the star system?

 

[InstiGATOR1]

Are you arguing for or against the star system?

I was stating my reading of the hits and misses only. One could also take ranking a first round pick as a 4 star rather than a 5 star a miss. In general, I do not believe the star rankings are more than generally informative, but I was not making an argument in that post.

 

[T REX]

I was stating my reading of the hits and misses only. One could also take ranking a first round pick as a 4 star rather than a 5 star a miss. In general, I do not believe the star rankings are more than generally informative, but I was not making an argument in that post.

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/174883892/predicting-best-nfl-draft-prospects-talent

That is pretty convincing in support of the star system.

 

[rogdochar]

The article's stats are valid and convincing, covering the whole aspect of high-star rated athletes. Glad I read it.
Thanx Trex.

IDK what all goes into star-rating a kid. But as important as it is, (to the kid and to the NFL)
Anyone that knows something about how a kid's High school career is evaluated, please comment-
correct my guesses, thus let others uninformed learn this deciding thing in H.S.FB, CFB, into the NFL.

My feelings:
1) evaluators should not view "selected" highlight tapes or view them as an incomplete story.
2) they should view entire games to see if the dominant player gets more exhausted than all others, say in 4th Q.
3) they should certainly watch a whole game film of a loss-game the rating player is in.
4) should not look at other rating services' star conclusions (better if all come independently to their top conclusions)
5) so, GatChat friends dispute my 4) &/or add some stuff really "in-the-know. IDK how it's done.

 

[InstiGATOR1]

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/174883892/predicting-best-nfl-draft-prospects-talent

That is pretty convincing in support of the star system.

It is somewhat convincing support of the star system though pretty confusingly written. For example I doubt that only 6.8% of 5 star players were drafted while a higher percentage, 18.5% of 2 star players were drafted as the first table states. I suspect the heading for the last column in that table should be % of Draftees.

When this discussion came up here a while back, it dawned on me that what we as UF fans should care about is how 3 star players with high D1 offers or multiple high D1 offers do compared to 4 star or 5 star players. The is clearly a pecking order among 3 star players. A 3 star player that has an offer from UF, FSU, Miami etc may be different than a 3 star player who has on offer from Troy, Wake and Purdue. I have not done nor seen such a study yet, but maybe I will sometime.

 

[T REX]

It is somewhat convincing support of the star system though pretty confusingly written. For example I doubt that only 6.8% of 5 star players were drafted while a higher percentage, 18.5% of 2 star players were drafted as the first table states. I suspect the heading for the last column in that table should be % of Draftees.

When this discussion came up here a while back, it dawned on me that what we as UF fans should care about is how 3 star players with high D1 offers or multiple high D1 offers do compared to 4 star or 5 star players. The is clearly a pecking order among 3 star players. A 3 star player that has an offer from UF, FSU, Miami etc may be different than a 3 star player who has on offer from Troy, Wake and Purdue. I have not done nor seen such a study yet, but maybe I will sometime.

I don't think you are reading it right...there's an enormous amount of data supporting the star system. Again, there are a lot of exceptions but for the most part...it is accurate. Telling yourself otherwise is either lying to oneself or rationalizing the poor recruiting of your current coach.

BTW, there are probably 1000's of 3 stars every year...so yeah...one guy might be ranked a 3 star at 500 while that Troy guy is still a 3 star but he's 1500th. Still....even after that disparity...the number bear out pretty spectacularly.

Nothing is ever exact...it never will be. But damn...it really hits home when you see those numbers.

 

[InstiGATOR1]

I don't think you are reading it right...there's an enormous amount of data supporting the star system. Again, there are a lot of exceptions but for the most part...it is accurate. Telling yourself otherwise is either lying to oneself or rationalizing the poor recruiting of your current coach.

BTW, there are probably 1000's of 3 stars every year...so yeah...one guy might be ranked a 3 star at 500 while that Troy guy is still a 3 star but he's 1500th. Still....even after that disparity...the number bear out pretty spectacularly.

Nothing is ever exact...it never will be. But damn...it really hits home when you see those numbers.

I am not reading it wrong. Go read that table yourself and see what it says.

I just believe the guy did not intend to say what he wrote. Otherwise, we have 2 star players with an almost 3 time greater chance of being drafted according to the author.

What might convince me more on the star ratings would be if one of these papers had conducted a statistical test maybe of the form:

H0: 4 star player success >= 5 star player success

HA: 4 star player success < 5 star player success

That would tell us if one could be statistically confident that differences in these reported means matter. Tossing around averages and acting like variances don't exist is not a way to show anything statistically.

 

[T REX]

I am not reading it wrong. Go read that table yourself and see what it says.

I just believe the guy did not intend to say what he wrote. Otherwise, we have 2 star players with an almost 3 time greater chance of being drafted according to the author.

What might convince me more on the star ratings would be if one of these papers had conducted a statistical test maybe of the form:

H0: 4 star player success >= 5 star player success

HA: 4 star player success < 5 star player success

That would tell us if one could be statistically confident that differences in these reported means matter. Tossing around averages and acting like variances don't exist is not a way to show anything statistically.

Yeah...I guess we'll just forget about this. The only reason it appears a 2 star has a greater chance is the shear numbers. In actuality you have less and less chance as your star ranking goes down. You have something like a 50% chance to make the NFL as a 5 star.

Nevermind.

Stars don't matter. It's the russians.

 

[InstiGATOR1]

Yeah...I guess we'll just forget about this. The only reason it appears a 2 star has a greater chance is the shear numbers. In actuality you have less and less chance as your star ranking goes down. You have something like a 50% chance to make the NFL as a 5 star.

Nevermind.

Stars don't matter. It's the russians.

1. The only reason it appears a 2 star has a greater chance of being drafted is that the guy who wrote the article is English challenged or his editor is and changed draftee to drafted. They mean two very different things.

2. I don't know about you, but my confidence in a statistical article goes down some when someone makes such a basic error even if it is a typo. I am prone to typos myself so I am giving the writer the benefit of the doubt by not believe he meant what he wrote.

3. My point on running a statistical test stands. Statistical tests are how you determine if difference in means are due to noise or some systematic difference.

 

[T REX]

You're right