- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Too many 4 stars rating are being handed out
Posted on 1/9/23 at 9:41 am
Posted on 1/9/23 at 9:41 am
i dont have the exact stats but 4 stars that end up being a bust seems quite a few. it should just be restricted to 100 real quality 4 stars. if 5 star is elite, 4 star should be very good only and the rest 3 stars
This post was edited on 1/9/23 at 9:42 am
15
Posted on 1/9/23 at 9:45 am to astonvilla
This is a wildly anecdotal take wo any data.
I'd suggest at least trying to back it up w something.
I'd suggest at least trying to back it up w something.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 9:47 am to astonvilla
It shouldn't be limited to certain amount. One year might provide more 4* worthy players than the next. Should a guy be a 3* simply because he is in a class that's more loaded than the previous one?
Posted on 1/9/23 at 9:50 am to astonvilla
They give out stars based on draft prospectus.
32 5 stars = 32 first round picks
There were an additional 230 picks in the last draft, so reality is 4-stars should go out to about 260-ish or so in the rankings, but it goes out to around 300 or so typically. Not sure why but is what it is there. This is also why sites like rivals, on3, 247 have a Top 250 or so rankings as those are basically guys they expect to be drafted.
3-stars are guys they dont expect to be drafted
32 5 stars = 32 first round picks
There were an additional 230 picks in the last draft, so reality is 4-stars should go out to about 260-ish or so in the rankings, but it goes out to around 300 or so typically. Not sure why but is what it is there. This is also why sites like rivals, on3, 247 have a Top 250 or so rankings as those are basically guys they expect to be drafted.
3-stars are guys they dont expect to be drafted
This post was edited on 1/9/23 at 9:54 am
Posted on 1/9/23 at 9:50 am to astonvilla
The system these recruiting services use make little to no sense. There should be a certain grading scale that they use to hand out stars. Whether you have 10 four stars or 100, so be it.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 9:52 am to thunderbird1100
quote:
4-stars should go out to about 260-ish or so in the rankings, but it goes out past 300 a bit.
On 247...the 4-stars go to about 420.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 9:52 am to astonvilla
There are definitions of what they all stand for.
4 stars are recruits theh believe have the potential to be drafted, which is more than 100 players.
4 stars are recruits theh believe have the potential to be drafted, which is more than 100 players.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 9:55 am to GMoney2600
quote:
On 247...the 4-stars go to about 420.
Hard to tell because they dont rank guys past their Top 247 internally. They have a 91 rating with guys ranked at #247 right now, and the only go down to 90 rating for 4 star, so Idoubt they have 170+ guys rated 91 or 90.
you're looking at the composite which isnt their own rankings.
This post was edited on 1/9/23 at 9:56 am
Posted on 1/9/23 at 9:56 am to thunderbird1100
quote:
you're looking at the composite which isnt their own rankings.
Yea, I was talking about composite.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 10:00 am to astonvilla
I think we should take to the streets with this.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 10:14 am to astonvilla
The recruiting services are right a lot more than they are wrong. The wrongs get all the headlines.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 10:26 am to astonvilla
quote:
if 5 star is elite, 4 star should be very good only
Seems like you're underestimating the size of the overall player pool. 4* IS "very good only".
The issue is that the 4* pool of players is going to include both (a) low-floor/high-ceiling projection guys, who might be more likely than not to never do much in college but also have an athletic profile that makes them potential high-end draft picks, and (b) high-floor/low-ceiling guys who are near-locks to be productive college players but will never really be pro prospects. It's kind of hard to rate those guys all together, so what you get is (what seems like) an "expanded" pool of 4* guys.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 10:36 am to astonvilla
I’d suggest trusting Brian Kelly.
If he offered a 2 star, be fine with it.
If he offered a 2 star, be fine with it.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 11:08 am to LifeAquatic
quote:
Seems like you're underestimating the size of the overall player pool. 4* IS "very good only".
I've always doubted that 95% of fans could tell the difference between a 4* and 5* watching both in a live game.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 12:07 pm to geauxtigers33
quote:
The recruiting services are right a lot more than they are wrong. The wrongs get all the headlines.
The job of ranking players is simple. They just follow the offer lists, Group then together, then rank. It why you don’t see many G5 players as 4 stars. Despite many being 1st rd picks every year.
The hard part of the job is databasing & reporting & keeping up on the offers. But it’s easier than it’s ever been because everything is put on Twitter now.
Oh, marquis montgomery announced lsu offer, let me follow up.
The leg work isn’t nearly what it used to be.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 12:10 pm to astonvilla
The accuracy of the recruiting industry has been proven over and over again. Tens of thousands of high school players and the recruiting sites are able to find the majority of the guys that go pro via a small subset that are ranked.
Last time I looked, the math was something like:
~30 5 stars with 50% going pro
~250 4 stars with 10% going pro
~900 3 stars with like 1% going pro
Run those percentages versus a randomized model and it’s clear they have predictive insight. Hence, the teams that finish top 5 in recruiting each year are the ones that win national championships (TCU can challenge that norm and would be a major exception to all priors).
Last time I looked, the math was something like:
~30 5 stars with 50% going pro
~250 4 stars with 10% going pro
~900 3 stars with like 1% going pro
Run those percentages versus a randomized model and it’s clear they have predictive insight. Hence, the teams that finish top 5 in recruiting each year are the ones that win national championships (TCU can challenge that norm and would be a major exception to all priors).
Posted on 1/9/23 at 12:24 pm to astonvilla
The star system should not be related to draft position at all. It should all be related to their potential in college, because that's what matters.
5 stars should be for impact players in a p5 programs. 4 stars for significant contributors. 3 stars have a chance to contribute by year 3 and so on.
5 stars should be for impact players in a p5 programs. 4 stars for significant contributors. 3 stars have a chance to contribute by year 3 and so on.
This post was edited on 1/9/23 at 12:28 pm
Posted on 1/9/23 at 12:29 pm to BigSlick
quote:does not take much to see the difference in a Harold Perkins vs a demario tolan
I've always doubted that 95% of fans could tell the difference between a 4* and 5* watching both in a live game.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 1:04 pm to dstone12
quote:
I’d suggest trusting Brian Kelly. If he offered a 2 star, be fine with it.
Nonsense! Didn’t u know tRant is full of future D1 career wins leaders?
At the end of the day, trust (or don’t) ur coaching staff to eval. The number of a star rating is irrelevant if ur coaching staff evals are what they should be.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 1:10 pm to astonvilla
Well, if it makes you feel any better you’re about a two star poster
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News