forums

Star ***** or not. This is very interesting what do you guys think.

C

Caneofcanes

Sophomore
Joined
Jan 13, 2019
Messages
1,022
398BEF36-6F57-4CB4-B24E-43B0F288753B.webp
 
Advertisement
On average, there’s only 450 composite 4 and 5* per class, and yet they comprise over 50% of the top 100 players in the NFL. Additionally, they make up a large percentage of top draft picks. There’s 35-37 5 stars per class.

Stars matter.
 
In addition, there are a very limited number of five star players, but literally hundreds of 4 and 3 star guys. If you have a huge number advantage you will get more in the end solution.

For example if you count the number of Heisman trophy winners who make the HOF you get a good number, but the rest of the hall are nonwinners so they out number the limited number of H winners who were even eligible for the HOF making some conclude it is better to draft guys who did not win the trophy.
 
Bender said:
1. It's easier to identify 5-stars. 2. The star system is biased and favored towards certain areas, teams and prospects.
Click to expand...
Care to elaborate on the biased commentary? Biased toward certain areas? Like geography, schools, or positions?? Biased toward teams? High schools like STA, Gorman, St John Bosco, Mater Dei? Or colleges like Alabama, UGa and Taint? I'm 100% not looking for a fight; I'm genuinely confused by what you meant with the second half of that sentence.

I have heard that the five stars are chosen essentially based upon who the "experts" project to be the future first rounders and they (sort of) look like a mock draft in terms of QBs, OTs, DTs, CBs and Edges being regarded higher than centers, RBs and TEs. I'm over generalizing, but it appears to be true in terms of deciding who the 5 stars are.
 
BigDikDaddyFromCincinnati said:
Care to elaborate on the biased commentary? Biased toward certain areas? Like geography, schools, or positions?? Biased toward teams? High schools like STA, Gorman, St John Bosco, Mater Dei? Or colleges like Alabama, UGa and Taint? I'm 100% not looking for a fight; I'm genuinely confused by what you meant with the second half of that sentence.
Click to expand...
Go to a camp = get a bump in ratings. Receive an offer from a certain group of teams = bump in ratings. Commit to certain teams = drop or rise in ratings concidentally within a few weeks.

Be called Archie Manning = receive the best grade of everyone and have it uncontested despite not attending a single camp and not having social media to post offers.
BigDikDaddyFromCincinnati said:
I have heard that the five stars are chosen essentially based upon who the "experts" project to be the future first rounders and they (sort of) look like a mock draft in terms of QBs, OTs, DTs, CBs and Edges being regarded higher than centers, RBs and TEs. I'm over generalizing, but it appears to be true in terms of deciding who the 5 stars are.
Click to expand...
This also happens. Very few C are five stars.

Most of the time, they don't even really evaluate. They just take what a coach or a scout at the college level says and just paste it. Not a single soul in here with coaching or playing experience genuinely believes Andrew Ivins is an analyst who knows what he talks about. Never.
 
Advertisement
What I find interesting are the 2 star and unranked players and how it is they slipped under the radar. All interesting stories I am sure.

Speaking of which. Cam Ward unranked out of high school?
 
WeBallinBoyz said:
On average, there’s only 450 composite 4 and 5* per class, and yet they comprise over 50% of the top 100 players in the NFL. Additionally, they make up a large percentage of top draft picks. There’s 35-37 5 stars per class.

Stars matter.
Click to expand...

That and the ranking system has gotten more accurate with time. People who love touting the "stars don't matter" mindset are stuck in 2003 when year, stars mattered a lot less because scouting/rankings/etc were in the VERY early stages which meant a higher likelihood of busts.
 
In almost all walks of life, very easy to identify the top + bottom 5%.

The top 6% - 94% of ranked performers are actually separated by an incredibly thin margin, and its often self-inflicted.
 
Novacane32000 said:
What I find interesting are the 2 star and unranked players and how it is they slipped under the radar. All interesting stories I am sure.

Speaking of which. Cam Ward unranked out of high school?
Click to expand...
I agree, in other words, could UM be doing something different from a talent acquisition perspective to get an edge?

My guess is that it is a combination of non-nefarious factors:
* Some positions are harder to project in high school (to the above point about centers not being highly ranked, that's tough to project because of both the physical and the mental aspect)​
* Some prospects are late bloomers (or young for their grade)...easier to evaluate a kid that is 19 years old his senior year of high shool​
* Recruiting services and teams have finite resources - you'd rather go rate prospects where you can see a lot of them at once. I wouldn't call that bias, exactly, its just more efficient to attend a camp in South Florida​
* Related to the above, skill versus level of competition is harder to callibrate when you aren't matching up against other talented players or don't have much talent around you​
* Some prospects just end up being really good football players despite average measurables​
* I think there is certainly some interplay between team success and draft position...you don't get fired as a GM for drafting Alabama players (used to be UM players)​
 
Advertisement
Bender said:
Go to a camp = get a bump in ratings. Receive an offer from a certain group of teams = bump in ratings. Commit to certain teams = drop or rise in ratings concidentally within a few weeks.

Be called Archie Manning = receive the best grade of everyone and have it uncontested despite not attending a single camp and not having social media to post offers.

This also happens. Very few C are five stars.

Most of the time, they don't even really evaluate. They just take what a coach or a scout at the college level says and just paste it. Not a single soul in here with coaching or playing experience genuinely believes Andrew Ivins is an analyst who knows what he talks about. Never.
Click to expand...
HAHAHAHA at the bolded part. Totally agree with that, btw.

I don't really buy into the bump/drop in rating based on who they commit to, but I think the rest of what you said is pretty fair. The part about Andrew Ivins et al cutting and pasting scouting reports is true. I think a lot of that is true in today's internet/podcast era where any slapdik with two thumbs and an internet connection can "create content" while calling themself an expert. Knock Andrew Ivins all you want, but Brad Tejeda makes him look like a genius. I don't think Brad's ever had an original thought, ever. When he makes guest appearances on certain podcasts, I turn it off. He's that bad. Cliché heaven. It's a shame too because some guys like Brian Smith do a terrific job of getting off their azzes, going to camps, going to games and practices, talking to these kids and their coaches and formulating their own INFORMED reports. Want to know how you got a real one oing the reporting? Listen for him to say things like "I don't know; I haven't seen him in person."

Ok, now stop procrastinating and get back to studying for that overpriced advanced degree that you're working on!
 
Is it just me but aren't QBs the position where unheralded players seem to develop and excel, Kurt Warner, etc.?
 
When I look at that list, I just see that 50% of the NFL's top 100 are guys that have always been considered elite and the other 50% flew under the radar before college.

I'm curious to see the position breakdown.
 
Back
Top