Silly Math Makes for a Better Class

Donate To GopherHole
gandharva

gandharva

Curmudgeon-at-large
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
65
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Using some geeky math I have determined that this year's recruiting class is slightly better than last year's overall. Taking Rival's numeric system I added the total numeric values of last years class and divided by the number of recruits. The average was 5.58. This year's class so far averages 5.62. This is primarily because although we have fewer 4 star recruits this year more of our 3 star recruits are rated higher numerically i.e more 5.7s rather than 5.6s and 5.5s. Just had some time on my hands and decided to crunch the numbers.

To be frank I have never held much regard for these ratings. So many 4 stars bust and 2 stars shine. However it can never hurt to recruit players that others feel have good potential. Measurables are just that. You can't teach size or speed. In the final analysis it is the coaches who must evaluate the available talent based on who they assess as fitting their system, both from a production and character standpoint. Brewster is looking for a specific type of player and I am quite certain he could give a flying expletive about stars on a website. Lets hope all of these kids coming in next year will play like their hair's on fire.
 

Add in a couple guys like Leon, McNeal, or Carter and you'll see it jump even higher. But you're completely right, on an individual basis, you will find numerous 4 or 5 guys who play like 2s and 3s and 2s and 3s who play like 5s. It's an imperfect science. On the whole, however, it typically works out that the best teams have classes ranking in the top 25 or so at least on a regular basis because on average, the rankings they receive play out more than they don't.
 

I'm not sure how geeky a mean is...if you really want to be geeky you could run a t-test and find if there is a statistically significant difference between the classes on a 95% confidence interval.

In all seriousness, I think this class is head and shoulders above last year's class. Of our 7 four star players we signed last year, how many were with the team/contributing this year?

Contributed: Brandon Green
Redshirted: Keanon Cooper
Injured/Ineffective: David Pittman
Medical Issue: Sam Maresh
ACT Issue: Marqueis Gray, 5.7 3-star Spencer Reeves
Application Rejected: Vincent Hill, Tim McGee


I have a feeling a few of the 4 star caliber players we got last year may have had asterisks by their names - most likely because of grades. I think the 5.7 and 5.8 rated players we have this year have fewer asterisks by their names. I think we are also in the mix for one or two more highly rated players (McNeal/Carter, perhaps other surprises like Keanon Cooper last year). Additionally, I think several players stand to have their ratings upgraded (Hageman/Campion/Garin/Alipate).

I don't know if this class will end up on paper as better than last year (I tend to think it will), but in terms of impact and potential I like this year's class a lot more. I'm not saying we will have many contributors in '09 from this class (Hageman, Carpenter, Wills and Lipscomb are the only ones I expect to contribute) but when all is said and done I think this class will easily outrank the class of '08 in terms of production.

As a disclaimer, none of my opinions about the classes are factually based, other than the situations of our recruits from last year. Feel free to disagree with me - any other opinions?
 

I like that even though we only have 2 4 stars so far, we have a lot of "High" three stars (RR=5.7). I think that this class will be as talented if not more than the last class.
 

If we factor in the transfers Carufel and Royston plus the players from last year who will be here this year, Gray, Reeves, and Maresh, I think the impact that the 09 class will have on the program will be significantly more substantial in the long run. I did not figure in those players at all in my considerations. If we counted in the Rivals ratings of those five players from their senior years in High School the average of incoming players for 09 would be about 5.66.
 



lets end the myth that 'so many 2 stars shine'. There are like 500 2 stars each year and maybe 50 turn into productive players and maybe 10 become stars. There are about 200 4 stars each year and most either turn into productive players or are at a school filled with other 4 star players so someone has to ride the bench.
 

Lets revist this topic in three years then we all may know what we are talking about.
 

Long-time lurker, first-time poster.

Took a look at Ivan Maisel's first team All-Americas and researched their Rivals ratings out of high school. Definitely too small of a sample size to make any conclusions, but the general assertion that players with higher ratings will be better players seems fair -- as expected. I used the all-america team rather than first round draft picks because it shows college production, which is what Rivals should be predicting.

Name, Position, Rivals Stars, Rivals Rating, (Position Ranking)

Michael Crabtree, WR 4*, 5.8 (16)
Jarrett Dillard, WR 2"*, NR (NR)
Jermaine Gresham, TE 4*, 6.0 (1)
Michael Oher, OL 4*, 6.0 (7)
Duke Robinson, OL 4*, 5.8 (15)
AQ Shipley, OL 4*, 5.9 (12)
Kraig Urbik, OL 3*, 5.6 (27)
Andre Smith, OL 5*, 6.1 (1)
Sam Bradford, QB 3*, 5.7 (12)
Shonn Greene, RB 2*, 5.0 (NR) -- 3* after year at military academy
Donald Brown, RB 3*, 5.5 (53)


Jerry Hughes, DE 2*, 5.3 (NR)
Mitch King, DT 3*, 5.5 (35)
Peria Jerry, DT 3*, 5.5 (32) -- 3* after year at military academy
Brian Orakpo, DE 4*, 5.8 (12)
Rey Maualuga, LB 5*, 6.1 (1)
Brandon Spikes, LB 5*, 6.1 (2)
Aaron Curry, LB 2*, 5.1 (NR)
Malcolm Jenkins, CB 3*, 5.5 (61)
Alphonso Smith, CB 3*, 5.5 (48)
Eric Berry, S 5*, 6.1 (1)
Taylor Mays, S 5*, 6.1 (2)


Again, no point to make. Mostly just looked up the data for myself and figured I'd share.
 



The Brewmaster said:
Long-time lurker, first-time poster.

Took a look at Ivan Maisel's first team All-Americas and researched their Rivals ratings out of high school. Definitely too small of a sample size to make any conclusions, but the general assertion that players with higher ratings will be better players seems fair -- as expected. I used the all-america team rather than first round draft picks because it shows college production, which is what Rivals should be predicting.

Name, Position, Rivals Stars, Rivals Rating, (Position Ranking)

Michael Crabtree, WR 4*, 5.8 (16)
Jarrett Dillard, WR 2"*, NR (NR)
Jermaine Gresham, TE 4*, 6.0 (1)
Michael Oher, OL 4*, 6.0 (7)
Duke Robinson, OL 4*, 5.8 (15)
AQ Shipley, OL 4*, 5.9 (12)
Kraig Urbik, OL 3*, 5.6 (27)
Andre Smith, OL 5*, 6.1 (1)
Sam Bradford, QB 3*, 5.7 (12)
Shonn Greene, RB 2*, 5.0 (NR) -- 3* after year at military academy
Donald Brown, RB 3*, 5.5 (53)


Jerry Hughes, DE 2*, 5.3 (NR)
Mitch King, DT 3*, 5.5 (35)
Peria Jerry, DT 3*, 5.5 (32) -- 3* after year at military academy
Brian Orakpo, DE 4*, 5.8 (12)
Rey Maualuga, LB 5*, 6.1 (1)
Brandon Spikes, LB 5*, 6.1 (2)
Aaron Curry, LB 2*, 5.1 (NR)
Malcolm Jenkins, CB 3*, 5.5 (61)
Alphonso Smith, CB 3*, 5.5 (48)
Eric Berry, S 5*, 6.1 (1)
Taylor Mays, S 5*, 6.1 (2)


Again, no point to make. Mostly just looked up the data for myself and figured I'd share.
Click to expand...

That is an impressive first post. Thanks for the info.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom