Up to #21 on scout / #12 on rivals

Moderators: greenyellow, UOducksTK1

User avatar
UOducksTK1
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 40708
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:28 pm
GM: Boston Celtics GM
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Up to #21 on scout / #12 on rivals

Post by UOducksTK1 »

And we'd move up to 17 on scout if they had the same amount of commits as Rivals has. Looking good!

Do Not Fear. Isaiah 41:13
bigfootlebowski
Three Star Recruit
Posts: 427
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:10 am

Re: Up to #21 on scout / #12 on rivals

Post by bigfootlebowski »

Phalanx wrote:I love following recruiting to see who the new Ducks are going to be, but seriously, these rankings don't matter to me much. I remember when Mark Asper signed with the ducks and he was totally off the radar and everyone complained that we couldn't get better recruits. He seems to have done pretty well. I would rather follow the ranking 2-3 years later when it is based on wins and losses. The one time we had a highly ranked class that I can recall was when all of the De La Salle guys came (minus Terrance Kelly, R.I.P.), and I don't think any of them really lived up to their promise. I kinda like the Ducks role - turning non-five star athletes into NFL players. Just as long as the coaches still know what they are looking for, I'm cool with it. Go Ducks!

So instead of a guy whos projected to be good and is a 5 star which historically has a much higher probablity of going tot he nfl...youd rather take the 2 star player with a much lower probabilty of going to the nfl...

can we play cards for a lot of money?
bigfootlebowski
Three Star Recruit
Posts: 427
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:10 am

Re: Up to #21 on scout / #12 on rivals

Post by bigfootlebowski »

Duck07 wrote:
sx1080 wrote:
greenyellow wrote:To me, 4-5* rankings just mean a recruit is probably more physically ready to play in college before like a 2-3* player. After about a year or two in a program, the rankings don't mean a whole lot, most players will be ready and now are just separated by certain physical traits and mental acuity for system they are in.

dont agree... 90% of two star recruits will never be 5 star talent and make the NFL.

and please dont throw out the exceptions over the past 5 yrs.


give me 20 4 and 5 star recruits/yr and I will beat your 20 2 and 3 star recruits/yr.
There are roughly 1600 nfl players, excluding practice squad players. Guess what? The overwhelming majority are 2 and 3* players. Consider that 05' recruit and transfer Levi Horn 2* is on the Bears.

as for the 2nd point, you sound like even more of an ass. rankings have been around for roughly a decade, so what else can you go by, Francis.

Your logic and math is completely wrong:

there are huge numbers of 2star and 3star players every year but there are far fewer that are given 4 stars or 5 stars:

the rivals numbers between 2004 to 2008...
2* (57% of players)
3* (30% of players)
for a total of 87% of players fall into these 2 categories

4* (11.6% of players)
5* (1.3% of players)
for a total of 12.9%

the probability of being named an all american with respect to star ranking:

<=2* is .1%
3* is .6%
4* is 1.5%
5* is 7%

when you recruit to the nfl u have huge numbers of 2* and 3* players growing, getting bigger and stronger and the nfl gets to hand pick them AFTER their college career from 100s of schools and they make up a whopping 87% of college players...the college coach doesn't have a crystal ball to decide BEFOREHAND which 2* and 3* will pan out in college...so obviously if ya want the maximum number of all american players ion your team you want as many 5* and 4* guys as you can get...
theres only so many so most teams...
User avatar
Duck07
All-American
Posts: 17123
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:36 am
Location: Parts Unknown

Re: Up to #21 on scout / #12 on rivals

Post by Duck07 »

Bigfoot - How is my math and logic wrong? 32 NFL teams x 53 man roster = 1696. Add another 352 (32x11) for practice squad players and you've got over 2000 players, the majority of which were not 4 or 5 star recruits, thats my only point. My point about Levi Horn serves your last point though, you can't determine, even early in a players career, how they are going to develop. I briefly knew the guy while he was on campus and I am stunned he turned himself around but he grew up and matured, not just physically but emotionally.

Go look at Scout's first recruiting class in 02'
http://recruiting.scout.com/a.z?s=73&p=9&c=4&yr=2002

Vince Young, Lorenzo Booker and Ryan Moore. Sure, VY won the Heisman, Booker is on the practice squad in Minny and Ryan Moore got kicked out of Miami and never did anything.

03's top 3 players were John David Booty, Demetris Summers and Whitney Lewis. Again, Booty is a practice squad player for the Texans, Summers spent 3 weeks on the Cowboys before being cut and ended up in the CFL. Lewis left USC to end up at N. Iowa and that was it for him.

I'm not saying don't get high ranked players, just that a proper evaluation of that player trumps those rankings. Sure, a lot of these high ranked guys will get offers from lots of schools, but as we've seen a lot of these same players end up not doing much. I'm sure James Wilder Jr will end up as one of those "can't miss" guys who was fine being missed out on.
Image
Post Reply