Why I care about the NFL Draft, part two

Quite simply, because stars matter, damn it ($$).

Of the 32 players selected Thursday night:

• Seven were five-star prospects out of high school
• Ten were four-star prospects out of high school
• 14 were three-star prospects out of high school
• 12 were rated as top-100 prospects

Some context:

• Yes, there were more three-star prospects drafted than five-star prospects. But you have to remember that there is not an even number of three-, four- and five-star prospects in each recruiting class. In a given year, there are roughly 35 five-star prospects and another 300 or so four-star prospects. That means the bulk of the nearly 3,000 college signees each year are three-star prospects or lower. A glance at the first-round results shows that more than half of the selections were four- and five-star prospects even though three-star prospects make up about 90 percent of those who sign in each recruiting cycle.

• That means roughly 10 percent of those who sign annually are four- or five-star prospects — but they made up more than half of the first-round selections Thursday night.

Math is hard, but it ain’t that hard.  There’s a reason Georgia’s recruiting budget is ginormous.

36 Comments

Filed under Recruiting, The NFL Is Your Friend.

36 responses to “Why I care about the NFL Draft, part two

  1. This is exactly why Kirby isn’t going anywhere as long as the recruiting pipeline stays full. I know people want to put an arbitrary deadline for winning a “natty or else,” but that does nothing but add to the narrative.

    Liked by 7 people

    • Got Cowdog

      Agreed, and I’ll add the thought that as long as CKS is pulling in these types of classes, sooner or later He’ll win the big one. I don’t think it will be in the Orgeron “lightning in a bottle” way either, it will be the first of several.

      Liked by 5 people

  2. Derek

    I’d also like to see a breakdown of how many of the threes are 5 year players and how many of the fives are 3 year players.

    I doubt many of the threes were first rounders after 3 years in college while some fives like Fields and Lawrence were top picks after far less time spent developing in college. I think Trevor would have been the first pick after his freshman season.

    Five stars matter.

    Liked by 4 people

  3. boz864

    Eric Stokes was a 3 star guy… just sayin’

    Liked by 2 people

    • boz864

      So maybe that Kirby guy can coach ‘em up a bit…

      Liked by 1 person

    • akascuba

      Eric Stokes is the perfect example of being coached up. Highschool running back with a single season at DB. It`s hard to teach speed. Kirby saw raw ability and with hard work from ES he worked his way to a first round draft choice. Outstanding coaching with hard work by the player. WIN WIN.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Dylan Dreyer's Booty

        I have no doubt that Eric was coached up, but coached more than, say, Tyson Campbell? I’m not so sure about that. What I think is that Kirby and staff have their analysis of players, and much of the time it coincides with the composite rankings of services, but not always. He has a bit of a record for recruiting that he thinks have what it takes even if the ranking services don’t see it. There are lots of examples besides Stokes: Jordan Davis, Javon Wims, and we may have a couple more in Adonai Mitchell and Daijun Edwards. Hungry players with physical ability are success stories.

        Like

    • Russ

      And congrats to Eric! A long way from blocked punt TD to first round with the Packers!

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Biggen

    I’m curios to see where Campbell goes. He couldn’t cover a table with a cloth.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Derek

      Second round probably. The measurables will be too much for him to sit much longer. You can’t develop big and fast.

      Liked by 1 person

      • mwodieseldawg

        I could see Campbell playing safety a lomg time in the league. He can fly and loves to hit.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Biggen

        You are probably right. Just feel like he didn’t live up to his potential or we didn’t develop him enough. One or the other.

        Liked by 3 people

        • JoeDashDawg

          It had to double sting Campbell seeing Surtain, who he was ranked right along side out of HS, and then his teammate go in the first round ahead of him. I’m not saying he didn’t play hard, but it always seemed like he just knew he had to get through 3 years in the program to get to the draft.

          According to the Draft guru’s he still measured great at his pro-day, which is why we will likely see him get drafted tonight – his college production was nowhere near what Stokes’ was.

          I don’t know if that’s coaching or not. Sometimes it’s hard to motivate a guy thats been told for 4 straight years he’s a lock for the league.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Munsoning

          No question he didn’t live up to his potential. Not even close. Big, fast, aggressive. Never learned to turn his head toward the ball. I mean, come on. Other commenters who know football better than I do have suggested that he’ll play safety in the NFL. He sure as hell won’t be a CB. Can’t imagine him trying to cover an NFL WR. PI all day.

          Like

  5. Illini84

    I didn’t know this. “Pace confirmed that Fields has been managing epilepsy. His family members diagnosed with epilepsy grew out of it, and he might, too. The Bears’ medical staff is well-positioned to help him, Pace said.”

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Fun with math: of the 32 players drafted, only 7 were 5-stars out of high school. That’s 22%. Half the number of 3-stars.

    So I don’t think stars matter all that much.

    Like

    • argondawg

      You dont math much do you? Seriously? Are you trolling?

      Liked by 2 people

      • What did I miss, Argon? 7 out of 32 is 22%, good buddy. Actually 21.875%, so I rounded up.

        Like

        • DawgFlan

          Keep going, Chop. 21.875% of the 1st round this year were 5 stars. Any given year there are about 2,500 scholarships given to Division 1 schools alone, of which about 30 get awarded 5 stars. That would mean 1.2% of Div 1 scholarship athletes are 5 star. So the fact that 21.875% of 1st round picks were 5 stars instead of 1.2% means 5 star players were 1,823% more likely to be a 1st round draft pick than the average Div 1 scholarship player.

          Liked by 3 people

          • argondawg

            Thank you sir.

            Like

          • So why isn’t every single 1st round draft pick a former 5-star, if there’s 30 5- stars every year? And why is it that there twice as many 3-stars as 5-stars, among this year’s first rounders? And only 12 of the 1st 32 drafted were even in the Top 100, of whoever’s ranking service this expert is using.

            IMO stars only matter to those football fans who want to play the fantasy game of recruiting rankings, year after year.

            Like

            • charlottedawg

              I can’t believe I’m taking the time to rebut this but I’ll unpack each one of your statements.

              Stars only matter to college football fans who want to play fantasy game of recruiting rankings: fact – every national champion in the bcs and cfp era STARTED the season as a top 10 roster solely ranked by the recruiting stars on their roster. Notice every eventual national champion was in the top 10 of this list which is compiled at the START of every season.
              https://247sports.com/Season/2020-Football/CollegeTeamTalentComposite/

              Which means at the beginning of every season before a down is played you can effectively eliminate all but 10 teams from title contention based solely on recruiting rankings. Doesn’t mean all 10 of those teams will perform well but nobody outside of those 10 is winning a national championship. The data is crystal clear, you cannot win a championship without a bunch of 5 star players.

              As far as your math, a 5 star ranking isn’t a guarantee of a first round pick, there are variances from player to player (there’s busts and there’s hidden gems) but on a macro level (lots of players) the data is pretty clear. Or to dumb down the math for you:

              In a given year there are 30 5 stars and about 1,300 3 stars. So if 7 out of 30 5 stars are first rounders, that’s a 23% chance of being a 1st round draft pick as a 5star.

              Same math for 3 stars, 14 first rounders out of 1,300, so a 1% chance of being a first rounder as a 3 star.

              In other words a 5star is almost 23x more likely to be a first round pick than a 3star.

              That’s the correct way to look at the math.

              Liked by 2 people

            • DawgFlan

              If you were a gambling man, which bet would you take?

              1 in 4
              1 in 40
              1 in 100

              Those are roughly the odds of a 5, 4, or 3 start high school senior developing into a 1st round NFL draft pick, respectively.

              High school recruits are not a finished product athletically, and even less so between the ears. Recruiting rankings are also not perfect, and there are legit times when diamonds in the rough are missed because they were playing out of position in high school (Stokes was a RB), picked up the sport very late in high school, or were from a small school and didn’t attend camps. There are literally thousands of HS QBs lighting up scoreboards every year so there will always be QBs in particular that are under-evaluated. Still – absent context give me a 5 star every damn time.

              Like

    • Down Island Way

      What position were those 5 *s drafted….

      Like

    • Dude, stars matter. IIRC, of the 6 guys Bama had drafted in the first round, Mac Jones was the only 3-star (and he only started his final season plus the games after Tua got hurt). All of the others were blue chip prospects (4+ stars). Are there 3-star prospects that can become 1st round selections? Sure, but if you don’t think assembling recruiting classes with a higher percentage of blue chips makes a difference, you aren’t looking at the data right.

      Like

  7. argondawg

    I am 100% on board with stars mattering. The thing I have trouble understanding is how we recruit neck and neck with Bama every year and they send 4, 5 or 6 first rounders every year and we don’t even come close to that. Are we not developing as well or are we signing the wrong players? Seriously we recruit right with with them but it never shows up on draft day. What do y’all think is going on?

    Liked by 2 people

    • charlottedawg

      I don’t know WHY that happens (yes, either we’re not developing our guys as well or we’re signing the wrong guys) but that pretty much sums up why we’ve lost 5 in a row to alabama and not won a national championship: Their players are better than ours.

      Liked by 2 people

    • classiccitycanine

      This is exactly my issue with Kirby. He needs to take the next step of developing all these blue chips into surefire 1st round picks instead of members of the no-name defense. According to 247, we have the most 5-stars and the most talented roster in CFB, not Alabama. Yet, Bama has had 4, 3, 4, and now 6 first rounders in each of the last 4 drafts. I’m glad Kirby has developed guys like Stokes, but we don’t recruit blue chippers like Campbell so they can be beat out by developmental 3-stars. It’s time for Kirby to stop wasting 5-star talent like Fields, Nauta, and Hardman and start turning guys like Nolan Smith, Adam Anderson, Travon Walker, and Jamaree Salyer into first-rounders. That’s the next step we need to take to get over the Tide.

      Liked by 1 person

      • JoeDashDawg

        100% agree. Like many, I’m in the boat of “Who out there is better?” with Kirby. As long as he’s recruiting like he has been, no change is coming.

        The danger is that if there are a few more drafts like this, will his recruiting fall off? Time will tell. I think we will see a few more Dawgs in the first round next year. (Maybe more if Pickens can make a quick turnaround).

        Was surprised Azeez didn’t go in the first round – it looks like some of the teams that took edge rushers reached for potential over production late in the first round. The one guy from Penn St had 0 sacks last season – but he’s 3 inches taller than Azeez and scouts fell in love with his “measurables” at his pro day. Not much you can do about that.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Munsoning

        I knew I’d read somewhere that the Dawgs are even more talented (on paper, anyway, according to 247) than the Tide. Thanks, ccc. Even if UGA and Bama are equally talented, there’s no good reason why the Tide gets 4, 3, 4, and 6 drafted in the first rounds of the past four drafts and the Dawgs get 3, 1, 2, and 1 in ’21–the same number as Kentucky and South Carolina, and one fewer than Florida.

        I’d forgotten that Adam Anderson was a 5-star. Nolan Smith sure hasn’t played like one. Travon and Jamaree need to have huge years in ’21. Too much talent at every position on the field for the Dawgs not to break through sooner rather than later. Again, not saying “natty or bust.” Not saying “Fire Kirby if we don’t beat Bama this season.” But there needs to be progress, and soon. Need to beat Bama at some point. More of these former 5-stars need to become first-rounders. Easier said than done, I know.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Munsoning

      Seems like 1) coaching (yeah, I know; duh, right?) and 2) players leaving too early, which IMO also comes down to coaching. Some knuckleheads will leave early no matter what. But Kirby has to do a better job of persuading the not-completely-knuckleheaded guys to stick around.

      Like

  8. I would like to see that broken down to percentages in the Pro Bowl.

    Like