Do the Recruiting Stars Matter, 2023 Draft

[SweetasSoda]

2 5 stars
13 4 stars
15 3 stars
2 2 star/unranked

So the number of 4 stars did go up, but not nearly as much as I thought. 3 stars dominated the 2nd round with almost half of the total draft picks in this round.

using the same numbers from Round 1.
2/32 5 stars = 6%
13/300 4 stars =4%
15/700 3 stars = 2%
2/2109 (3141 - 1032) = 0.0009%

so your best bet of going highly in the draft is still to earn a higher rating. but now the numbers aren't nearly as dramatic as before. this trend says to me that the recruiting rankings are still more right than they aren't, but they aren't nearly as good at predicting this level of talent as they are Round 1 talent.

I don’t know, looks like they are predicting those 5* to be first then 300 4* to go, and the results have 700 that should not be in the first two rounds actually making it. If I were a 3* that would convince me that the odds were with me to have a good chance. As a fan that would convince me that there’s no need to freak out over 5 or 6 3* in a class as long as you get a lot of 4* and a couple 5*. Yet everyone has a meltdown when a 3* commits.

 

[SweetasSoda]

indeed I was surprised. I was going to do a cumulative after I did Round 3. Not willing to call anything yet because an outlier doesn't inherently change anything. The overall trend still favors recruiting rankings being better than a pure guess, they are just closer to a pure guess.

-I would expect pure guesses to either have very similar numbers for each star category, or no perceptible trend that matches their ranking system.

I was surprised with that many. Is it normal?

 

[LouderVol]

Round 3.

64. Zacch Pickens #8 5 star
65. Tyler Steen #1177 3 star
66. Sydney Brown #1598 3 star
67. Drew Sanders #22 5 star
68. Hendon Hooker #337 4 star
69. Tank Dell (JUCO) #162 3 star
70. Byron Young #77 4 star
71. Kendre Miller #1616 3 star
72. Garret WIlliams #952 3 star
73. Jalin Hyatt #197 4 star
74. Cedric Tillman #1677 3 star
75. Zach Harrison #12 5star
76. Marte Mapu unranked
77. Byron Young (JUCO) 14 3star
78. Tucker Kraft unranked
79. Josh Downs #95 4 star
80. DJ Johnson #74 4 star
81. Tyjae Spear #1403 3 stars
82. Yaya Diaby (JUCO) 41 3star
83. Riley Moss #2732 2 star
84. Devon Achane #137 4 star
85. Daiyan Henley #3723 2 star
86. Trenton Simpson #26 5 star
87. Ji'Ayir Brown (JUCO) 18 3 star
88. Tank Bigsby #40 4 star
89. Kobie Turner unranked
90. DeMarvion Overshown #52 4 star
91. Dorian Williams #2404 3 star
92. Wanya Morris #28 5 star
93. Darnell Washington #23 5 star
94. Michael Wilson #241 4 star
95. Jordan Battle #43 4 star

-apparently there were some extra (beyond 32) picks in Round 3. so I am not sure how this will effect the numbers

96. Brodic Martin unranked
97. Ricky Stromberg #498 3 star
98. Siaki Ika #138 4 star
99. Jake Moody (kicker) unranked
100. Tre Tucker #1347 3 star
101. Cameron Latu #131 4star
102. Mekhi Blackmon (JUCO) unranked

this is the round to be drafted if your name is Tank or Byron Young.

also this is the first round to introduce some other categories I am not sure how to accommodate so I am just going to through them in there. these are the first JUCO and kickers (247 doesn't rate kickers at all). so Instead of going to a different source or applying some sort of biased modifier to adjust their rankings to match a 247 HS ranking I am just going to accept it.

 

[LouderVol]

I was surprised with that many. Is it normal?

I have no idea what "normal" is.

 

[LouderVol]

6 5 stars 15%
12 4 stars 31%
13 3 stars (includes JUCO) 34%
7 2/unranked (includes JUCO and Kickers) 18%
38 picks.

5 stars made a bit of resurgence, 4 & 3 stars are a pretty consistent number of the picks as compared to round 2 (again there were a lot of factors making Round 3 different than the others)

6/32 = 18%
12/300=4%
13/700=1.9%
7/2109 = 0.3%

 

[LouderVol]

Round 2
[12, 32, 37, 46, 61, 84, 149, 151, 168, 212, 216, 233, 316] [344, 345, 386, 439, 455, 652] [763, 795, 817, 936] [1065, 1083, 1170, 1221] [1495, 1617] [1783][] [3141, unranked]

in the first 326 (blue chip) ranked players you get: 13 players
in the next 326 players you have only: 5 player.
in the third group of 326 players you get: 4 players
in the fourth group of 326 players you get: 4 players
in the fifth group you get: 2 players
in the sixth group you get1
in the seventh group you get 0
in the eighth plus you get 2.

Round 3
[8, 12, 22, 23, 26, 28, 40, 43, 52, 74, 77, 95, 131, 137, 138, 162, 197, 241], [337, 498], [952], [1177], [1347, 1403, 1598, 1616], [1677], [], [2404, 2732, 3723, unranked, unranked, unranked, unranked,]

I excluded the JUCO (14, 18, 41, unranked)

in the first 326 (blue chip) ranked players you get: 18 players
in the next 326 players you have only: 2 player.
in the third group of 326 players you get: 1 players
in the fourth group of 326 players you get: 1 players
in the fifth group you get: 4 players
in the sixth group you get: 1
in the seventh group you get: 0
in the eighth plus you get: 7

 

[Devo182]

View attachment 549114

Yessir. Not by a huge margin, but by about 120 spots, Hooker was comfortably a bluechip.

Fwiw Carvin was not a bluechip by literally a handful of spots He was #375 and some guy in the 360s began the 4*s....so more-or-less for all intesive porpoises basically one.

 

[LouderVol]

Cumulative through 3 rounds.

in the first 326 (blue chip) ranked players you get: 52 players
in the next 326 players you have only: 8 player.
in the third group of 326 players you get: 9 players
in the fourth group of 326 players you get: 7 players
in the fifth group you get: 6 players
in the sixth group you get: 2
in the seventh group you get: 0
in the eighth plus you get: 12

19 5 stars
35 4 stars
36 3 stars
11 2 star/unranked
(this is only 101 I am not sure where I lost someone).

I went back and I think its all coming from Round 3 screwing with me, but I am not sure where I am getting the numbers wrong. I will try to go back and look, and see if I can sort this out. hopefully I figure something out when I get a chance this afternoon/tonight.

 

[jave36]

Alright so with the first round done, how do the draft picks translate into recruiting stars. because I know this argument is coming, and personally I hate when the numbers aren't provided, so I am providing it myself.

I am using 247. 247 typically nationally ranks about 1000s players a year.
the 32ish 5 stars make up 3.5%/1.7% of those players
the 270ish 4 stars make up 30%/15% of those players
the rest of the 600ish are 3 stars. 66.5%/33.3%
and then you have all of the guys who are not nationally ranked, typically there are at least as many of them as there are ranked guys. so that is why I am halving the percentages above.

#1. Bryce Young. #2 player nationally, 5*
#2. CJ Stroud. #42 player nationally, 4*
#3. WIll Anderson Jr. #17 player nationally, 5*
#4. Anthony Richardson. #204 player nationally, 4*
#5. Devon Witherspoon. completely unranked.
#6. Paris Johnson Jr. #9 player nationally, 5*
#7. Tyree Wilson. #424 player nationally. 3*
#8. Bijan Robinson. #15 player nationally. 5*
#9. Jalen Carter. #18 player nationally. 5*
#10. Darnell Wright. #10 player nationally. 5*
#11. Peter Skoronski. #113 player nationally. 4*
#12. Jahmyr Gibbs. #76 player nationally. 4*
#13. Lukas Van Ness. #1033 player nationally. 3*
#14. Broderick Jones. #11 player nationally 5*
#15. Will McDonald IV. # 787 player nationally, 3*
#16. Emmanuel Forbes. #186 player nationally. 4*
#17. Christian Gonzalez. #326 player nationally. 4*
#18. Jack Campbell. #662 player nationally. 3*
#19. Calijah Kancey. #837 player nationally. 3*
#20. Jaxon Smith-Njigba. #29 player nationally. 5*
#21. Quentin Johnston. #71 player nationally. 4*
#22. Zay Flowers. #1133 player nationally. 3*
#23. Jordan Addison. #275 player nationally. 4*
#24. Deonte Banks. #854 player nationally. 3*
#25. Dalton Kincaid. completely unranked.
#26. Mazi Smith. #106 player nationally. 4*
#27. Anton Harrison. #178 player nationally, 4*
#28. Myles Murphy. #7 player nationally. 5*
#29. Bryan Bresee. #1 player nationally. 5*
#30. Nolan Smith. #1 player nationally. 5*
#31. Felix Anudike-Uzomah, #2421 player nationally. 3*

Great post. Only thing missing, what percentage of a class is 3/4/5*? Then you can really see the over index to 5. There are only 20 or so per class, and looks like 11 of those 20 got drafted in the first round. Only about 1% of 3* get drafted in the 1st round, where over 50% of 5* get drafted in the first round. So stars definitely matter.

Or another way to put it, 1% of a class is 5*, but 30ish % of the first round is 5*.

 

[Orange_Crush]

One 5 second look at this list and ask yourself the question "How many 2* players are there? How many 3* players compared to 5* and even 4* players. Once you realize the magnanimous difference in the size of each pool, then the answer is obvious. If you cannot see the sheer difference in odds with those questions, then you are thinking wrong about it.

 

[SweetasSoda]

Great post. Only thing missing, what percentage of a class is 3/4/5*? Then you can really see the over index to 5. There are only 20 or so per class, and looks like 11 of those 20 got drafted in the first round. Only about 1% of 3* get drafted in the 1st round, where over 50% of 5* get drafted in the first round. So stars definitely matter.

Or another way to put it, 1% of a class is 5*, but 30ish % of the first round is 5*.

I thought someone said there are 32 5*s each year because that is the number of first round picks? If so, what percent of the 32 actually got drafted in the first round? And 70% were not the ones chosen to be 1st round?

 

[RAVOL]

Elite Talent in high school is easy to scout and give 5 star too. I believe if we broke down draft better comparison is Top 100 each year and percentage. Because once you get outside this identifying and developing is huge because many 4 star kids when looking at film is no better than kid 400 or 500 . Playing Football at high level is so mentally taxing and so many fall while others excel in the moment. So yes getting more elite talent is best but to just say kid is not a take because he is 3 star don't see. Remember there are 224 picks each year in draft and if it was only about stars very few 3 or lower stars would ever be drafted much less play in league. In CHRIST Alone

 

[Volmac2022]

Stars have always mattered. Yet when people say that alot of people on here get upset. There are less 4 star and 5 star players not living up to their star than their are underrated 3 star players who deserved to be ranked higher. This happens every year. It's why programs like OSU. Bama, GA etc... the elites recruit no more than 5 to 8 3 star players every cycle most of the time it's 5 or less 3 star recruits. However for some dumb reason a lot of people in here think every 3 star player we get is underrated and they some how will close the gap on the elites lol doesn't make sense but it is what it is.

 

[SweetasSoda]

Stars have always mattered. Yet when people say that alot of people on here get upset. There are less 4 star and 5 star players not living up to their star than their are underrated 3 star players who deserved to be ranked higher. This happens every year. It's why programs like OSU. Bama, GA etc... the elites recruit no more than 5 to 8 3 star players every cycle most of the time it's 5 or less 3 star recruits. However for some dumb reason a lot of people in here think every 3 star player we get is underrated and they some how will close the gap on the elites lol doesn't make sense but it is what it is.

Basically we do not know which 5,4,or 3* players will end up helping us to compete for championship or end up drafted in the first round. As stated every offseason, getting a highly ranked class usually means you can develop a good team especially if you do it year after year. But all teams take 3*s so there’s no reason to not hope that they will develop into a player that helps the team even if they don’t start immediately or ever. I especially don’t worry as much about 3* OL. I think what is most important is to have coaches that are good at evaluating talent and spotting what they are specifically looking for in a player then being able to develop the ones they are able to bring in. I think we finally have that after 4 hiring fails.

 

[LittleVol]

2 5 stars
13 4 stars
15 3 stars
2 2 star/unranked

So the number of 4 stars did go up, but not nearly as much as I thought. 3 stars dominated the 2nd round with almost half of the total draft picks in this round.

using the same numbers from Round 1.
2/32 5 stars = 6%
13/300 4 stars =4%
15/700 3 stars = 2%
2/2109 (3141 - 1032) = 0.0009%

so your best bet of going highly in the draft is still to earn a higher rating. but now the numbers aren't nearly as dramatic as before. this trend says to me that the recruiting rankings are still more right than they aren't, but they aren't nearly as good at predicting this level of talent as they are Round 1 talent.

Nice work!

 

[Vol8188]

Numbers from Josh Pate
81.3% of 5* players were drafted this season
22.6% of 4* players were drafted this season

It seems recruiting rankings do matter.

 

[butchna]

Numbers from Josh Pate
81.3% of 5* players were drafted this season
22.6% of 4* players were drafted this season

It seems recruiting rankings do matter.

Now we'll compare how successful they are afterwards. 5 star Alex Leatherwood gets drafted in the first round 17th overall and that's prolly the only thing that kept him in the league after the Raiders cut him after a year. Jason Kelce, no star walk-on also gets drafted...sixth round 191st overall and is a borderline HOF 12 years later.




HOW MUCH do those rankings REALLY matter?

 

[Vol8188]

Now we'll compare how successful they are afterwards. 5 star Alex Leatherwood gets drafted in the first round 17th overall and that's prolly the only thing that kept him in the league after the Raiders cut him after a year. Jason Kelce, no star walk-on also gets drafted...sixth round 191st overall and is a borderline HOF 12 years later.




HOW MUCH do those rankings REALLY matter?

Is that what you see recruiting rankings as intended to do? To tell you who will be the better football player 10 years down the road?

Or to simply tell you who statistically is most likely to be a better college player and make it to the nfl?

And do you expect 100% accuracy? Or is 81.3% not really, really good?

 

[butchna]

Is that what you see recruiting rankings as intended to do? To tell you who will be the better football player 10 years down the road?

Or to simply tell you who statistically is most likely to be a better college player and make it to the nfl?

And do you expect 100% accuracy? Or is 81.3% not really, really good?

You identify and develop the best PLAYERS and your program will benefit. Not rocket science or whatever weird science those nerds you worship practice.

 

[Vol8188]

You identify and develop the best PLAYERS and your program will benefit. Not rocket science or whatever weird science those nerds you worship practice.

Yet their methods obviously work. Doesn’t really seem debatable at this point

 

[StoVol]

A 5 star is a 1st round projection

Then you skew the argument in your favor by taking as evidence projection favorability from the fact that said 5 stars were taken in ANY round

Many times these 17 year olds are developed physically at a younger age and dominate high school football

A third to half of them really are that good, ie, good enough to make the NFL in some round

But the 1st round projection is poor, seeing that "hey this young fella can really play some football" is not all that surprising that a subset really stand out

There is a mixture of pure talent and big fish small pond going on

The average hit rate of 5 stars going 1st round should be your starting point data

 

[Vol8188]

A 5 star is a 1st round projection

Then you skew the argument in your favor by taking as evidence projection favorability from the fact that said 5 stars were taken in ANY round

Many times these 17 year olds are developed physically at a younger age and dominate high school football

A third to half of them really are that good, ie, good enough to make the NFL in some round

But the 1st round projection is poor, seeing that "hey this young fella can really play some football" is not all that surprising that a subset really stand out

There is a mixture of pure talent and big fish small pond going on

The average hit rate of 5 stars going 1st round should be your starting point data

We’ve talked about that. And it’s higher than that of 4* or 3* players. And the odds of them being drafted is over 80%.

Why would we throw that out? And yes, it’s a very surprising subset to pick out of an entire nation 3-4 years in advance.

 

[butchna]

Yet their methods obviously work. Doesn’t really seem debatable at this point

But obviously that’s what we’re doing.

 

[Vol8188]

But obviously that’s what we’re doing.

So you agree it’s obvious the methods work yet you’re still trying to debate it?

 

[Vols4us]

Follow the results of the OP's analytics throughout the careers of the players listed. Do the same in prior years. You might be able to find a general trend line, but nothing specific that 100% validates.

How do you account for the various competencies of the coaching staffs' development and systems for all of the teams during up and down performance cycles of their orgs? That some are 3 and others are 4 or 5 can simply be because of their lack of development in HS.

There's a whole lot more to it. Presenting recruiting service rankings is prima facia type evidence. On first appearance it appears to be X, but subject to further evidence or information.

The player coming out of HS with a high rating will probably receive more offers from schools that have better coaching staffs and systems. So going to camps will provide more exposure. Not going to camps will provide less exposure. In general, there are more offers from better schools to those who go. Recruiting services do what they do to make money - they are not charities. Some cannot afford to go.

It goes on and on.