- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
re: Evidence backing up Rivals star-rankings...
Posted on 2/1/10 at 2:31 pm to Baloo
Posted on 2/1/10 at 2:31 pm to Baloo
quote:
It's a numbers game. You want a lot of highly rated players, but getting hung up on one individual guy is probably a waste of time
Yep, and again, some of that has to do with "system buy in" ESPN getting behind guys simply b/c they were 5 star.
0
Posted on 2/1/10 at 2:32 pm to Salmon
quote:
Yeah, but a 2-star player from Georgia is more likely to make AA than a 5-star player at Vandy ( ) even if they have identical seasons.
So I really don't agree with you.
Actually, you are exactly agreeing with me.
Posted on 2/1/10 at 2:33 pm to Tiger Phil
I agree that all conference would probably give a better overall view
I don't understand how you don't see the support in the numbers. It's almost a perfect exponential curve
quote:
Jaydeaux
I don't understand how you don't see the support in the numbers. It's almost a perfect exponential curve
Posted on 2/1/10 at 2:37 pm to lsumma09
quote:
I don't understand how you don't see the support in the numbers. It's almost a perfect exponential curve
I don't agree in that if i take a few guys and say these are the heros, ESPN will make them such. I would argue the 3 and 4 star guys earn it and would mess that curve up if becoming an AA wasn't influenced by the entire system.
Posted on 2/1/10 at 2:50 pm to JPLSU1981
quote:
Evidence backing up Rivals star-rankings...
it's pretty obvious that 5* kids with the hype and name recognition have the best chance to make somebody's all american list. that said...it would be interesting to see stats for how the star ratings pan out at the next level. I, for one, don't dispute star rankings...I just feel that the measureables, many times, don't account for the fight in the dog.
Posted on 2/1/10 at 2:55 pm to Cash
quote:
:hester:
There they go, everytime star rankings are brought up, someone got to pull Hester out they arse.
Posted on 2/1/10 at 2:58 pm to lsumma09
I agree with the analysis and statistically 5 stars tend to pan out at a higher percentage but again it gets back to the intangibles of the individual player and thus you have to give credit to recruits like our 4 star Eric Reid ...who actually knows what an exponential curve is!
Posted on 2/1/10 at 3:02 pm to coolmonk
I don't think we need any scientific bullshite. How about looking at the averaged top three ranked recruiting classes the last three years, Bama, Florida and Texas, then look to see how these three obscure teams fared in the final rankings. I'd put those three teams against a team of combined palyers from Cincy, Boise and TCU anyday, anytime, and win 90% of the time. As far as Hester, yes, every once in a damn blue moon, one of these 3 star guys is going to develope, but rarely when compared to the 5 star stud.
Posted on 2/1/10 at 3:07 pm to SouthBayTiger
quote:
who actually knows what an exponential curve is!
I just thought I'd throw that out there. I am impressed with how the graph came out thoughPosted on 2/1/10 at 3:46 pm to JPLSU1981
The graph makes sense on a few levels. First of all, the 5-stars are definately very good/ great high school players. The so-called experts have tons of film on them and they go to all the camps. And second of all, almost all of them end up on high profile, winning teams...seen on national TV quite often...and are in bowl games usually.
But it doesnt mean that 3-stars and 2-stars...like the ones that make up the TCUs, Boise Sts, Utahs, Cincy's, and Va Techs cant form great teams. Again..the 5-stars get ALOT Of exposure and are on VERY successful teams. Im not saying the stars dont matter...but it's not as cut and dry as that graph makes it out to be.
But it doesnt mean that 3-stars and 2-stars...like the ones that make up the TCUs, Boise Sts, Utahs, Cincy's, and Va Techs cant form great teams. Again..the 5-stars get ALOT Of exposure and are on VERY successful teams. Im not saying the stars dont matter...but it's not as cut and dry as that graph makes it out to be.
Posted on 2/1/10 at 3:49 pm to Cookieman
It would be more of a case if they had something a little more broad than all-american. You could use all conference but then you're going to have imbalance bw the strong and weak conferences
Posted on 2/1/10 at 4:33 pm to lsumma09
quote:The way to balance/average out for a more accurate predictor of success would be to include #'s and %'s of 5 stars that don't meet expectations vs. 3 stars that exceed expectations.
It would be more of a case if they had something a little more broad than all-american. You could use all conference but then you're going to have imbalance bw the strong and weak conferences
Posted on 2/1/10 at 5:09 pm to Baloo
quote:
Short version:
It's a numbers game. You want a lot of highly rated players, but getting hung up on one individual guy is probably a waste of time.
Ding. Ding. Ding.
This is recruiting in a nutshell. Only add on to that that you need to address holes year to year.
Posted on 2/1/10 at 5:55 pm to Jaydeaux
quote:
I would argue the 3 and 4 star guys earn it and would mess that curve up if becoming an AA wasn't influenced by the entire system.
Totally subjective argument. The numbers are what they are. You rinterpretation of them is debatable.
Posted on 2/1/10 at 6:00 pm to JPLSU1981
I think they are looking at this all wrong.
If 1.3% of the 5* make All American then they were wrong 98.7% because the other All Americans from the other star ratings should have been there instead.
Another way to look at it is this way. Eighty one players that made All American were not a 5* and should have been Instead of the ones that were and didnt make All American. This means Rivals was wrong 86% of the time grading out players to begin with.
This is not even close to being a glass half full or half empty situation. JMHO
If 1.3% of the 5* make All American then they were wrong 98.7% because the other All Americans from the other star ratings should have been there instead.
Another way to look at it is this way. Eighty one players that made All American were not a 5* and should have been Instead of the ones that were and didnt make All American. This means Rivals was wrong 86% of the time grading out players to begin with.
This is not even close to being a glass half full or half empty situation. JMHO
This post was edited on 2/1/10 at 6:07 pm
Posted on 2/1/10 at 6:10 pm to JPLSU1981
That is common sense. Every one should know that without anyone having to tell them.
Posted on 2/1/10 at 7:01 pm to flyintiger23
quote:
If 1.3% of the 5* make All American then they were wrong 98.7% because the other All Americans from the other star ratings should have been there instead.
You're interpreting the numbers incorrectly.
1.3% is the percentage of five stars in the entire group of college players (for the period analyzed). That percentage has nothing to do with All American selection.
In other words, out of all 13,447 players in college, only 1.3% of the players were rated a 5-star. ONLY 178 players have been given a 5-star rating in the period analyzed. Out of those 178, 12 earned All-American status in 2009, which could also be stated like this: Based on the research, approximately 1 out of every 15 5-stars will become an All American.
This post was edited on 2/1/10 at 7:06 pm
Posted on 2/1/10 at 7:08 pm to Common sence
quote:
That is common sense. Every one should know that without anyone having to tell them.
I agree. The numbers bear out exactly as one would expect them to.
Nonetheless, some people will always criticize the "star system" so it's nice to have empirical evidence that justifies me getting giddy when LSU signs a class full of 4 and 5 stars.
Posted on 2/1/10 at 7:41 pm to omegaman66
It's not about being an AA. It's about being a solid contributor. This data doesn't shed any light on that at all. It's an all or nothing data base.
Posted on 2/1/10 at 7:44 pm to Peachtree Tiger
quote:
It's not about being an AA. It's about being a solid contributor. This data doesn't shed any light on that at all. It's an all or nothing data base.
While true, I have a feeling if you looked at it from the "bottom, up" that you'd find the same thing...
Higher percentage of 5-stars become a major contributor for their team than percentage of 4-stars that become a major contributor for their team....higher percentage of 4-stars become a major contributor for their team than percentage of 3-stars...etc, etc, on down the line.
This post was edited on 2/1/10 at 7:47 pm
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News