Recuiting Stars

[Blackshirt96]

Five - 5

Four - 10

Three - 15

Two - 2

Not rated - 0

Average - 3.56

 

 

Above is the Recruit Star Rankings coming into college for those players drafted in the first round. Kinda telling that stars don't tell the whole picture. I would assume these numbers will be pulled even futher down as the draft goes on.

[kchusker_chris]

There were only about 60ish 5* players that would have been eligible for this draft, and almost 10% of them went in the 1st round - you're right, it is pretty telling. There were what, about 6000 2* & 3* players during that same period? You get the idea...

[Blackshirt96]

There were only about 60ish 5* players that would have been eligible for this draft, and almost 10% of them went in the 1st round - you're right, it is pretty telling. There were what, about 6000 2* & 3* players during that same period? You get the idea...

We are also only looking at the 1st round. That number will only decrease as the draft continues.

 

The pool size makes no difference. There is a set number of spots in the first round open to all. Your bust ratio will be smaller, but you have missed advantages that 5 star recruits receive over say a 2 or 3 star guy. ie School, Facilities, Coaching and there are many others.

 

Also the #1 recruit for 2010 will likly not be drafted after failing a drug test. #2 blew out his knee in 2012

[kchusker_chris]

Recruiting stars are all about potential. The potential to make an impact. 5* players have a greater potential than 3* players. It's pretty heavily tilted in favor of the 5* guys.

 

How many 1st round guys have we had in the last 10 or so years. If we had a class full of 5* guys, the percentages indicate we'd have around 2 a year. If we had a class of nothing but 3* guys, they say we'd have one around once every 10 years. Argue stars all you want based on quantity, but since they aren't evenly distributed in the first pace you're argument is BS.

 

 

...if only we could recruit 300 3* players every year to even out the percentages...

[kchusker_chris]

this was last year based on the 2009 class, after the first 3 rounds...since you think there's going to be dramatic shift of some sort as the rounds go on...

 

Ranking Total Drafted %

5 Stars 35 11 31.4%

4 Stars 400 31 7.8%

3 Stars 1195 32 2.7%

2 Stars 2195 14 0.6%

[Mavric]

Here's the breakdown from the 2011 Draft:

 

 

In a given year, 2,500 players will sign football scholarships to Division 1 programs. The star allocations for those players:

Star Players

5 50

4 250

3 1000

2 1200

The breakdown for the first round of the 2011 NFL Draft.

Star 1st Round Picks

5 5

4 13

3 9

2 5

Odds of becoming a 1st round pick in the 2011 NFL Draft

Star Odds of 1st Rnd

5 10-1

4 20-1

3 111-1

2 240-1

Two conclusions are obvious when seeing where the players were ranked before they arrived at their respective colleges.

First, it's an inexact science. Nearly as many 2-Star and 3-Star players went in the first round as 4-Star and 5-Star players.

Second, the probability of becoming a first round pick is directly proportional to the ranking a player had in high school. Afterall, there are nearly 25 times more 2-Star players than 5-Star players.

[kchusker_chris]

Kind of in relation to the stars, because it's sort of how I feel about them....would you take 1 Suh, if you had to give up Turner, Santos, Collins, Taylor, McMullen & C Jax? (this list has nothing to do w/ their stars at signing, more their position on the current team)

 

 

Bo is signing some great classes recently. Everyone I listed above are solid contributors in the 2 deep. A few of them will probably see the field in an NFL jersey. But I'm not sure if he's signed that difference maker that can take over a game and elevate us to that next level. We don't need 10 of them, we need 1, maybe 2. And the odds are that those guys are going to be in that 4* or 5* category. That's proven by the percentages. If I forced Blackshirt to put up $1,000 on the next Nebraska All-American, he'd probably pick a 4* or higher.

 

Andrus Peat could have been one. David might have been one, but the cast around him just wasn't enough. Gregory might be this year. Not saying those type of players don't come out of 3* guys - but the odds are more in favor of the next Suh being a 4* or higher, than being a 2* unknown. That's becoming even more definitive as the recruiting services get bigger and better.

[Mavric]

A lot of statistics to spin on this issue. But you have to combine both arguments to get an actual answer, and that's pretty tough to do. There are obviously going to be a higher percentage of five stars drafted. But you would also expect that to be the case as they are supposed to be the best players.

 

The only way to answer the question is to look at how much different the percentage drafted is compared what would be expected - that is, how much better *SHOULD* the five star guys be than the three star guys. If the five star guys are supposed to be the can't miss guys (100%) and the three star guys are basically a coin flip (50%), you would expect basically all the five star guys to be drafted - though obviously not all in the first round.

 

The hard part is assigning what SHOULD happen. Should a five star be twice as likely to succeed as a four star? Should a four star have a 50% better chance to succeed than a three star? You have to answer those questions before any of the other statistics do you any good.

[Mavric]

Kind of in relation to the stars, because it's sort of how I feel about them....would you take 1 Suh, if you had to give up Turner, Santos, Collins, Taylor, McMullen & C Jax? (this list has nothing to do w/ their stars at signing, more their position on the current team)

 

This is a good question and a good point but it's pretty tough to answer. If it was that exact question, I'd probably say I wouldn't make that trade. I'd obviously love another Suh but losing Collins and McMullen would leave us pretty sparse on the rest of the DLine, not to mention three other potential starters at other positions. However, since that wouldn't happen in a vacuum, if the trade was Suh for those six but you would get five others who weren't quite as good but still contributors, that might be a trade to make.

[kchusker_chris]

Yeah, I guess the point I was getting at is how much value do you place in the difference maker. In college football, I personally place a HUGE amount of value in it. One Johnny Manziel, one Tebow, one Suh, one Russel Wilson, is the difference between 10 wins and 12. Rarely do you see a team with 12 wins be void of a superstar. While it's a team sport, at this level - like college basketball - a payer of that calibre can dominate and change the game. Who's our superstar next year?

 

I think this belief kind of conflicts with "Husker football" though....