Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Recruiting Potential
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="takethepoints" data-source="post: 756640" data-attributes="member: 265"><p>The problem with this analysis is the one with every evaluation system I've ever looked at and I've looked at plenty of them. It assumes that there is a discernible gradation between gross rankings.</p><p></p><p>Is it easy to discern who is a "5 star" player? Sure; they stick out like sore thumbs. It is less easy, but not an outrageous step to pick out some "4 star" players, provided you have the staff to do so and a well validated scale to use. But … that simply isn't the case with the ratings services. Their "staff' is made up of fans of various sorts who volunteer or are paid minimal amounts to rate players, usually for teams they are interested in. ( In the survey biz this is called rater bias.) Then they proceed to rank them on scales that use decimal points down to the 10K place to "determine" differences. This is done because the ratings sites demand it and they demand it because it is click bait, pure and simple. It <em>should</em> be possible to rate football players out of high school more effectively, though it would be much harder then for, say, baseball due to the smaller sample sizes. Do the rating sites try to do this? Why, no, they don't. It isn't in their interests to try.</p><p></p><p>This is why I've always thought that using average stars is a better way to approach comparing recruiting classes. Not much better, I'll admit, but better. Doing it that way gets rid of the noise introduced by the decimal ratings and cuts to the chase. There are problems with even this approach, as Jacket points out, but it is less likely to deceive the consumers about what the actual status of the recruiting efforts is. And the les likely a school is to bring in a top 10 class, the more accurate an approach based on gross rankings is likely to be.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="takethepoints, post: 756640, member: 265"] The problem with this analysis is the one with every evaluation system I've ever looked at and I've looked at plenty of them. It assumes that there is a discernible gradation between gross rankings. Is it easy to discern who is a "5 star" player? Sure; they stick out like sore thumbs. It is less easy, but not an outrageous step to pick out some "4 star" players, provided you have the staff to do so and a well validated scale to use. But … that simply isn't the case with the ratings services. Their "staff' is made up of fans of various sorts who volunteer or are paid minimal amounts to rate players, usually for teams they are interested in. ( In the survey biz this is called rater bias.) Then they proceed to rank them on scales that use decimal points down to the 10K place to "determine" differences. This is done because the ratings sites demand it and they demand it because it is click bait, pure and simple. It [I]should[/I] be possible to rate football players out of high school more effectively, though it would be much harder then for, say, baseball due to the smaller sample sizes. Do the rating sites try to do this? Why, no, they don't. It isn't in their interests to try. This is why I've always thought that using average stars is a better way to approach comparing recruiting classes. Not much better, I'll admit, but better. Doing it that way gets rid of the noise introduced by the decimal ratings and cuts to the chase. There are problems with even this approach, as Jacket points out, but it is less likely to deceive the consumers about what the actual status of the recruiting efforts is. And the les likely a school is to bring in a top 10 class, the more accurate an approach based on gross rankings is likely to be. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Who was Georgia Tech's starting QB in 2023?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Recruiting Potential
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top