Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Follow up to my tweet on P12 recruiting vs. NFL Draft

Dennis_DeYoungDennis_DeYoung Member Posts: 14,754
This is for the 8 years from 2008-2015 that could have produced draft eligible players for these drafts.

1st/2nd Round NFL Draft Picks over past 5 Seasons (with avg conf recruiting rank; avg 247 rating, 5* signed, 4* signed).

1. Washington - 12 (5.9; 85.2; 1, 38)
2. USC - 9 (1.3; 92.3; 20, 92)
3. UCLA - 8 (3.0; 88.6; 6, 78)
4. Stanford - 6 (5.1; 87.6; 3, 45)
5. Oregon - 4 (3.9; 87.4; 5, 57)
5. Utah - 4 (8.8; 84.2; 0, 12)
7. Colorado - 3 (9.4; 83.2; 1, 13)
8. WSU - 1 (10.6; 82.2; 0, 3)
9. OSU - 1 (9.8; 83.2; 1, 5)
10. ASU - 1 (6.0; 85.2; 1, 29)
11. Cal - 1 (6.1; 86.2; 1, 42)
12. Arizona - 0 (8.3; 84.0; 0, 17)

So for ratios...

UW had a 1st/2nd rounder for every 3.25 blue chips.
USC - 12.4
UCLA - 10.5
Stanford - 8
Oregon - 15.5
Utah - 3
Colorado - 4.7
WSU - 3
OSU - 6
ASU - 30
Cal - 43
Arizona - Div/0 error
«1

Comments

  • MisterEmMisterEm Member Posts: 6,685

    This is for the 8 years from 2008-2015 that could have produced draft eligible players for these drafts.

    1st/2nd Round NFL Draft Picks over past 5 Seasons (with avg conf recruiting rank; avg 247 rating, 5* signed, 4* signed).

    1. Washington - 12 (5.9; 85.2; 1, 38)
    2. USC - 9 (1.3; 92.3; 20, 92)
    3. UCLA - 8 (3.0; 88.6; 6, 78)
    4. Stanford - 6 (5.1; 87.6; 3, 45)
    5. Oregon - 4 (3.9; 87.4; 5, 57)
    5. Utah - 4 (8.8; 84.2; 0, 12)
    7. Colorado - 3 (9.4; 83.2; 1, 13)
    8. WSU - 1 (10.6; 82.2; 0, 3)
    9. OSU - 1 (9.8; 83.2; 1, 5)
    10. ASU - 1 (6.0; 85.2; 1, 29)
    11. Cal - 1 (6.1; 86.2; 1, 42)
    12. Arizona - 0 (8.3; 84.0; 0, 17)

    So for ratios...

    UW had a 1st/2nd rounder for every 3.25 blue chips.
    USC - 12.4
    UCLA - 10.5
    Stanford - 8
    Oregon - 15.5
    Utah - 3
    Colorado - 4.7
    WSU - 3
    OSU - 6
    ASU - 30
    Cal - 43
    Arizona - Div/0 error

    Whittingham shining through again. 4 out of 12.

    Not bad @89ute.
  • dawgs206dawgs206 Member Posts: 482
    Along with potentially having 4 players taken in the top 2 rounds (please have good medicals Miller and Murphy), we? also will see McGary, Gaskin, and Gaines taken in the mid-late rounds. That would put us? at 7 players taken overall, which would have tied us for second in this draft (Bama #1 with 12 lol, OSU, LSU, & NC State tied for #2 w/7). There's also Jojo, Jaylen Johnson, and Levi that could improve their stock with a big year.

    We? saw Lake and other coaches tweeting about developing NFL players. Recruits have started to notice. Wait until next year when we have 7 players taken, and hopefully 4 in the first 2 rounds. It will make a big difference and recruits from outside of Washington will notice (we hate WA recruits anyways).

    I've seen Eason's name pop up a few times. That would be hilarious. Transfers to UW only to declare before playing a game and leaving us with Haener in 2019.
  • whlinderwhlinder Member Posts: 4,808 Standard Supporter
    I like this and it gives me a massive doog boner.

    I am curious about the 2nd round delineation though. Either way it will be interesting, but the data could be totally different if that moves to the 3rd round, or 5th, or the whole draft, etc.

    And no, I'm not going to do the work myself cause fuck that.
  • dncdnc Member Posts: 56,746
    whlinder said:

    I like this and it gives me a massive doog boner.

    I am curious about the 2nd round delineation though. Either way it will be interesting, but the data could be totally different if that moves to the 3rd round, or 5th, or the whole draft, etc.

    And no, I'm not going to do the work myself cause fuck that.

    Agreed, fun with selective endpoints for sure
  • dncdnc Member Posts: 56,746
    Tequilla said:

    The USC data is super damning and will only get worse under Helton

    Did anybody else catch the coaching dig during the draft when talking about how Darnold showed minimal improvement from Year 1 and 2 and how much he will be coached up quickly at the NFL level?

    You think Helton's worse at developing players than Sark/Kiffen?
  • AIRWOLFAIRWOLF Member Posts: 1,840
    dnc said:

    whlinder said:

    I like this and it gives me a massive doog boner.

    I am curious about the 2nd round delineation though. Either way it will be interesting, but the data could be totally different if that moves to the 3rd round, or 5th, or the whole draft, etc.

    And no, I'm not going to do the work myself cause fuck that.

    Agreed, fun with selective endpoints for sure
    I usually use Top 3 rounds, since it is basically the Top 100 players and round numbers are handy. But if you look at the charts of average Approximate Value by draft slot, the quality of picks drops off very steeply from the top pick right down to somewhere between pick 50 & 75, where things start to level out. In other words, there is some evidence that the top two rounds is actually a pretty good way to look at things and not really about being selective to shape a narrative.
  • FireCohenFireCohen Member Posts: 21,823

    McGary will go higher than people think...the guy is freaky athletic.

    And fast strategy
  • pat_hmpat_hm Member Posts: 941
    BBK day one pick imo
  • PurpleJPurpleJ Member Posts: 37,286 Founders Club


    Arizona - Div/0 error

    GRONK!
  • TequillaTequilla Member Posts: 19,886
    dnc said:

    Tequilla said:

    The USC data is super damning and will only get worse under Helton

    Did anybody else catch the coaching dig during the draft when talking about how Darnold showed minimal improvement from Year 1 and 2 and how much he will be coached up quickly at the NFL level?

    You think Helton's worse at developing players than Sark/Kiffen?
    Yes

    And moreso, I think the area where there is going to be an even bigger gap is that Helton’s recruiting will gradually start falling off in part as we get stronger. The fact that Helton’s group is largely super lazy by offering guys we offer immediately after we offer them isn’t a good look
  • dncdnc Member Posts: 56,746
    Tequilla said:

    dnc said:

    Tequilla said:

    The USC data is super damning and will only get worse under Helton

    Did anybody else catch the coaching dig during the draft when talking about how Darnold showed minimal improvement from Year 1 and 2 and how much he will be coached up quickly at the NFL level?

    You think Helton's worse at developing players than Sark/Kiffen?
    Yes

    And moreso, I think the area where there is going to be an even bigger gap is that Helton’s recruiting will gradually start falling off in part as we get stronger. The fact that Helton’s group is largely super lazy by offering guys we offer immediately after we offer them isn’t a good look
    I’m mostly with you on recruiting. I don’t think he’s any worse of a developer than his post Carroll predecessors though.
Sign In or Register to comment.