re: How meaningful are STARS? Player evaluations

In my opinion, the hidden gems are usually late bloomers with little exposure, but that's why LSU and Alabama pay their recruiters on their staffs good money.

I try not to base my opinion on kids I see play off of their rivals/scout profiles. If I know his height, weight and age, I could make a decent assessment of the kid. Meeting the family, especially if they have older brothers, helps out as well. 40 times, verticals and bench press maxs are great, but I like to read a little further into in comparison to the know-it-alls from scout and rivals. There just seems like there is something they miss when picking sure things and busts.... but I think that's based more on coaching schemes, player-coach relationships and the biggest issue IMO, the "unmeasurable intangibles", work ethic/attitude/leadership/accountability/etc

quote:

---

How is that not producing? You are doing nothing but cherry picking data.

---

check out where they have been ranked for the last five years and see what their record has been the last two. That's not cherry picking. that is a fact. If you want to say their ranking was accurate during the time they were successful then they have been inaccurate during the time they haven't been successful. you can't have it both ways.

quote:

---

According to this, Vinson was ranked 4th.

LINK


quote:


louisiana had it's lowest ranked class in many years in 2010




LINK

[quote]Where are you getting that from? It wasn't considered as good as 2009 or 2011, but was still a pretty good class. LSU finished ranked 6th on rivals that year. Many of the players you listed: Mathieu, Simon, Ried were all 4 stars, Wing was a 3 and the #5 kicker, all of them were 3*.

Let me ask you a question. do you think Les Miles and Nick Saban are star gazers? Did they both offer Robert Nkimdiche because he is a 5 star, or because they watched the tape and think he will be really good?

For that matter, do you think they signed any of the 5 star flops you mention because they don't know what they are doing or is it because its an inexact science?

---

1) i said louisiana, not lsu. check out the last time louisiana didn't have a single five star athlete. However, i would venture to say that t.m. and reid have played like five star guys.

2) no, i think they evaluate talent. I never said Robert Nkimdiche wasn't good? not sure what you getting at. didn't say all five stars are bust. some make it, some don't. i just don't look at the recuiting rankings as an exact science. you ranked high, therefore, you will win big. sometimes it correlates, sometimes it doesn't.

3)Nope, i think they sign some five star flops for two reasons. 1) because it's not an exact science. Even the pro's miss. 2) regional recruiting.

Al woods was a big athletic kid in your backyard. They may have said, great size, he plays high, maybe we can teach him to play low? however, we can't let this kid go somewhere else because we aren't sure we can sign someone else with better technique/ability out of california.

Its not exact, but is a good judge, not much diff in top 10-8 classes really. Sites also dont take into account recruiting for needs. We could sign 22 5 star wrs and have a high ranking, but we wont win shite on the field.

quote:

---

) i said louisiana, not lsu. check out the last time louisiana didn't have a single five star athlete

---

and I meant La, not LSU. La does not have a 5* every year. It happens all the time, if not every other year, 2 out of 5. 2010 La produced plenty of high level 4*'s that year. I thought 2008 was considered a lesser year, only 1 guy ranked in the top 100 and zero in the top 50. That's unusual.

quote:

---

. didn't say all five stars are bust. some make it, some don't. i just don't look at the recuiting rankings as an exact science

---

then why are you throwing out random examples of players that bust? You and the OP seem to be holding the rankings to an exact science even if you realize they are not, then you know that there will always be busts, always be teams that have highly ranked classes that have bad seasons ect.

I don't think anyone is saying the rankings are a gold standard. So what if Reid was a 4 and not a 5 star? At a 4 he was expect to be a very good player and that's what he is.

quote:

---

i think they sign some five star flops for two reasons

---

Right, they all have boards, where they rank guys and they will miss on some and hit on other. That's why you want to sign as many as you can, that way if Al Woods craps out it doesn't matter. That's why I think you should sign at least 1 QB in every class, even if you got a 5 star last year. If the 5 star pans out, the otehr kid can transfer if he doesn't get on the field, if he doesn't you have a fall back option.

I just use the sites and their rankings as a reference. I tend to do my own evals and use their rankings and reports as a way to gather more info on the kids. Imo the rankings are only important to fans for the most part and as a fan the key for me is to be happy with the kids we get. I can be happy with kids even if the sites don't like them. Same way I can not be high on a 5* according to some site.

I'll never fully believe in a system that can predict how many 5*(usually 25 give or take a couple) and 4*(usually 300-350) kids their will be in a given year and then at the same time claim that some years are down and some are up. Common sense and reality tells me that there has to be a year where only 15 or so kids are 5* or only 250 or so are 4*. On the flipside there has to be a year every now and then where there are maybe 40 or so 5* and maybe 400 4* kids. There's no way the numbers are consistently the same(within reason) every year in something as unpredictable as how much talent there is across the country. Either some kids are getting a little extra bump every year or some kids are getting shafted every year.

Imo the best thing to do is determine for yourself how good you personally think a kid is and go with that. Frankly, if we as individuals are happy with a particular guy, does it matter what some perceived expert thinks? Not to me and from reading and posting on this board daily, a lot of others don't really care either. Everyone has their own opinion of how good(or bad) a player is. I prefer it that way.

quote:

---

Consistency is key. Recruit top 10 consistently with character kids that want to work and get better. Lsu consistently recruits top 10 and kids with character and that's why they have the most talented team in the nation this season. I agree with the poster that said the line between 1 and 10 is very small. At that point, it comes down to player development and character.

---

I agree. Sign a bunch of 4* type guys for a bunch of years in a row, sprinkle in a few bona fide studs and a few high-reward projects. Develop them with solid coaching and a great S&C program. Pretty soon you will be one of the deepest and most consistent teams in America (like we are).