Brandon Kaho Commemorative Collegiate Career Impact Forecast - 2019 Results
Comments
-
chuck said:
How do you predict which ones are going to underperform? Did you arbitrarily pick some guys as flameouts/disappointments so your average would stay at what you deemed to be a realistic level?Houhusky said:Hmm, and I thought I was overly optimistic/generous.
The scores seem a tad skewed, there are going to be a few players that flame out or never contribute but no one really wants to give a 1 or 2.
Seems like most people graded most of the recruits on a 3-5 scale?
Giving the class an average predictive grade of 3.7+ doesn't seem realistic.
Most players are going to end up like a Jaylen Johnson or Tevis "3"... More will flame out as 1s or 2s than achieve All-American MMFG 5s.
@Woof How does the percentage distribution of 1-5 grades compare to the Jesse Callier grades given out historically? Also how have the average Jesse Callier grades changed over time?
Thanks, leave it on my desk, Ill be back after lunch.
Nothing wrong with rating guys lower than the services and most everyone else if it's based in your own evals.
I don’t really remember my picks, I didn’t put a lot of thought process into it other than players that reach 5 like gaskin are very rare, maybe 1-3 players in a class will achieve it if you’re lucky, 4s seem the most "mushy" rating to me with a large difference between a low 4 (BBK) and high 4 (Taylor Rapp), and most everyone will actually contribute as a 3 or lower.
I dont even think I dished out very many 1s or 2s, I think I just gave mostly 3s, some 4s, and fewer 5s?
If I was doing it again with more thought:
The same way I fill out my tournament bracket and bet on horses? drunk educated guessing.
You don't fill out a NCAA tournament bracket without picking a 5-12 upset. And you don't parlay bet the chalk.
You know a certain number of upsets are going to occur, might as well pick one or two? Asa as a 1 transfer? Pa'ama or Ah you as an injury flamout 1 or 2? Buelow is actually too slow 2? But I didnt do that this time around.
I like @Woof simplified measuring scale
1 - never played, or only played in garbage time and generally sucked
2 - played a bit, maybe some spot starts, but never held down a full season and/or generally was below average when on the field
3 - started about a year and likely contributed another year or two, but generally pretty average
4 - multi-year starter, above average for at least a year, likely with some postseason honors, All-Pac12
5 - multi-year starter that was above average for multiple years. Made lots of splash plays and won a significant award or was an All-American
Your class averaged out at 3.9?
There are people that probably gave out 7-8 5s, in one class... 7-8 All americans on defense, from one class? Is that a reasonable prediction?
To get a 3.9 average, what percentage of the class did you have to predict would at least be a multiyear above average starters with All-Pac12 honors as 4+? 60% of the class? -
Ok, my report is mostly finished, and here it is:Houhusky said:Hmm, and I thought I was overly optimistic/generous.
The scores seem a tad skewed, there are going to be a few players that flame out or never contribute but no one really wants to give a 1 or 2.
Seems like most people graded most of the recruits on a 3-5 scale?
Giving the class an average predictive grade of 3.7+ doesn't seem realistic.
Most players are going to end up like a Jaylen Johnson or Tevis "3"... More will flame out as 1s or 2s than achieve All-American MMFG 5s.
@Woof How does the percentage distribution of 1-5 grades compare to the Jesse Callier grades given out historically? Also how have the average Jesse Callier grades changed over time?
Thanks, leave it on my desk, Ill be back after lunch.
I'll start off with the Jesse Callier grades by class. Caveat here is that Coker did some of this, but his 2014 Jesse Callier data has disappeared into the ether, so I wasn't able to double check his math. Also, there were a few guys who fell through the cracks in various years, and thus never received a grade. I gave almost all of them 1s, except Damorea Stringfellow who I have a 2. I could barely remember a few of them.
Mostly Sark era:
2009 recruiting class: Jesse Callier ranking (JC) - 1.32 & star ranking - 2.58 for a -1.26 differential
2010 recruiting class: JC - 1.82 & star ranking - 3.13 for a -1.31 differential
2011 recruiting class: JC - 2.01 & star ranking - 3.13 for a -1.12 differential
Sark recruits with Petersen development:
2012 recruiting class: JC - 1.53 & star ranking - 2.90 for a -1.37 differential - for a 4th year class, this was an utter shit pile
2013 recruiting class: JC - 2.59 & star ranking - 3.29 for a -0.69 differential - jump in average coincides with UW winning the PAC
Pure Pete era:
2014 recruiting class: JC - 2.66 & star ranking - 3.04 for a -0.38 differential
2015 recruiting class: JC - 2.39 & star ranking - 3.15 for a -0.76 differential - this class is only about half complete, and will likely increase a bit (except for the Kyler Manu score)
The breaking point here is the 2013 class, which actually had some talent, and Pete was able to start winning with. It depends on where you segment the data but it seems like Petersen's development is worth about 0.5 to 0.75 of a star on the Jesse Callier rankings vs. Sark. That said, the Jesse Callier scores still lag the actual star rankings, and it would imply that our average star ranking of 3.65 for the 2019 class will turn out to average around a 3 when we do this exercise in 2023.
When it comes to distribution of scores by year, I didn't think the data was very interesting. Scores got higher for the 2013 recruiting class, which coincided with a bunch of guys that ended their careers in the Sugar Bowl instead of the wherever the fuck bowl we were the year before (Heart of Dallas I think?). I'm not going to go through the data, but needless to say, the 2nd highest score on the 2016 JCCCPCIRI (primarily 2012 recruiting class) was a 3.36 (Josh Perkins who beat out Littleton by 0.06), but that score would have rated just 10th in the 2019 version.
Regarding the scores of individual poasters:
Two key points here. First, @Samoyed is by far the biggest doog of all. Secondly, @NorwegianHusky and @dirtysouwfdawg might be twins separated at birth. -
My dot on the board seems to be just like me. 5’10”, white and slow strategy as fuck.Woof said:
-
I’m Portuguese and he’s a dirty Norwegian so not likely... well, one of my dads is Norwegian so maybe half bros.Woof said:
Ok, my report is mostly finished, and here it is:Houhusky said:Hmm, and I thought I was overly optimistic/generous.
The scores seem a tad skewed, there are going to be a few players that flame out or never contribute but no one really wants to give a 1 or 2.
Seems like most people graded most of the recruits on a 3-5 scale?
Giving the class an average predictive grade of 3.7+ doesn't seem realistic.
Most players are going to end up like a Jaylen Johnson or Tevis "3"... More will flame out as 1s or 2s than achieve All-American MMFG 5s.
@Woof How does the percentage distribution of 1-5 grades compare to the Jesse Callier grades given out historically? Also how have the average Jesse Callier grades changed over time?
Thanks, leave it on my desk, Ill be back after lunch.
I'll start off with the Jesse Callier grades by class. Caveat here is that Coker did some of this, but his 2014 Jesse Callier data has disappeared into the ether, so I wasn't able to double check his math. Also, there were a few guys who fell through the cracks in various years, and thus never received a grade. I gave almost all of them 1s, except Damorea Stringfellow who I have a 2. I could barely remember a few of them.
Mostly Sark era:
2009 recruiting class: Jesse Callier ranking (JC) - 1.32 & star ranking - 2.58 for a -1.26 differential
2010 recruiting class: JC - 1.82 & star ranking - 3.13 for a -1.31 differential
2011 recruiting class: JC - 2.01 & star ranking - 3.13 for a -1.12 differential
Sark recruits with Petersen development:
2012 recruiting class: JC - 1.53 & star ranking - 2.90 for a -1.37 differential - for a 4th year class, this was an utter shit pile
2013 recruiting class: JC - 2.59 & star ranking - 3.29 for a -0.69 differential - jump in average coincides with UW winning the PAC
Pure Pete era:
2014 recruiting class: JC - 2.66 & star ranking - 3.04 for a -0.38 differential
2015 recruiting class: JC - 2.39 & star ranking - 3.15 for a -0.76 differential - this class is only about half complete, and will likely increase a bit (except for the Kyler Manu score)
The breaking point here is the 2013 class, which actually had some talent, and Pete was able to start winning with. It depends on where you segment the data but it seems like Petersen's development is worth about 0.5 to 0.75 of a star on the Jesse Callier rankings vs. Sark. That said, the Jesse Callier scores still lag the actual star rankings, and it would imply that our average star ranking of 3.65 for the 2019 class will turn out to average around a 3 when we do this exercise in 2023.
When it comes to distribution of scores by year, I didn't think the data was very interesting. Scores got higher for the 2013 recruiting class, which coincided with a bunch of guys that ended their careers in the Sugar Bowl instead of the wherever the fuck bowl we were the year before (Heart of Dallas I think?). I'm not going to go through the data, but needless to say, the 2nd highest score on the 2016 JCCCPCIRI (primarily 2012 recruiting class) was a 3.36 (Josh Perkins who beat out Littleton by 0.06), but that score would have rated just 10th in the 2019 version.
Regarding the scores of individual poasters:
Two key points here. First, @Samoyed is by far the biggest doog of all. Secondly, @NorwegianHusky and @dirtysouwfdawg might be twins separated at birth.
FREE PUB BITCHEES -
This graph tells me I have a more favorable opinion about players after they play than before they play.Woof said:Regarding the scores of individual poasters:
-
I’m closest to the middle. What do I win?Woof said:
Ok, my report is mostly finished, and here it is:Houhusky said:Hmm, and I thought I was overly optimistic/generous.
The scores seem a tad skewed, there are going to be a few players that flame out or never contribute but no one really wants to give a 1 or 2.
Seems like most people graded most of the recruits on a 3-5 scale?
Giving the class an average predictive grade of 3.7+ doesn't seem realistic.
Most players are going to end up like a Jaylen Johnson or Tevis "3"... More will flame out as 1s or 2s than achieve All-American MMFG 5s.
@Woof How does the percentage distribution of 1-5 grades compare to the Jesse Callier grades given out historically? Also how have the average Jesse Callier grades changed over time?
Thanks, leave it on my desk, Ill be back after lunch.
I'll start off with the Jesse Callier grades by class. Caveat here is that Coker did some of this, but his 2014 Jesse Callier data has disappeared into the ether, so I wasn't able to double check his math. Also, there were a few guys who fell through the cracks in various years, and thus never received a grade. I gave almost all of them 1s, except Damorea Stringfellow who I have a 2. I could barely remember a few of them.
Mostly Sark era:
2009 recruiting class: Jesse Callier ranking (JC) - 1.32 & star ranking - 2.58 for a -1.26 differential
2010 recruiting class: JC - 1.82 & star ranking - 3.13 for a -1.31 differential
2011 recruiting class: JC - 2.01 & star ranking - 3.13 for a -1.12 differential
Sark recruits with Petersen development:
2012 recruiting class: JC - 1.53 & star ranking - 2.90 for a -1.37 differential - for a 4th year class, this was an utter shit pile
2013 recruiting class: JC - 2.59 & star ranking - 3.29 for a -0.69 differential - jump in average coincides with UW winning the PAC
Pure Pete era:
2014 recruiting class: JC - 2.66 & star ranking - 3.04 for a -0.38 differential
2015 recruiting class: JC - 2.39 & star ranking - 3.15 for a -0.76 differential - this class is only about half complete, and will likely increase a bit (except for the Kyler Manu score)
The breaking point here is the 2013 class, which actually had some talent, and Pete was able to start winning with. It depends on where you segment the data but it seems like Petersen's development is worth about 0.5 to 0.75 of a star on the Jesse Callier rankings vs. Sark. That said, the Jesse Callier scores still lag the actual star rankings, and it would imply that our average star ranking of 3.65 for the 2019 class will turn out to average around a 3 when we do this exercise in 2023.
When it comes to distribution of scores by year, I didn't think the data was very interesting. Scores got higher for the 2013 recruiting class, which coincided with a bunch of guys that ended their careers in the Sugar Bowl instead of the wherever the fuck bowl we were the year before (Heart of Dallas I think?). I'm not going to go through the data, but needless to say, the 2nd highest score on the 2016 JCCCPCIRI (primarily 2012 recruiting class) was a 3.36 (Josh Perkins who beat out Littleton by 0.06), but that score would have rated just 10th in the 2019 version.
Regarding the scores of individual poasters:
Two key points here. First, @Samoyed is by far the biggest doog of all. Secondly, @NorwegianHusky and @dirtysouwfdawg might be twins separated at birth. -
You have to take into account that we had a concencus All-american and P12 DPOY receive 2s and 3s because he's white and took Azeems starting job.Houhusky said:chuck said:
How do you predict which ones are going to underperform? Did you arbitrarily pick some guys as flameouts/disappointments so your average would stay at what you deemed to be a realistic level?Houhusky said:Hmm, and I thought I was overly optimistic/generous.
The scores seem a tad skewed, there are going to be a few players that flame out or never contribute but no one really wants to give a 1 or 2.
Seems like most people graded most of the recruits on a 3-5 scale?
Giving the class an average predictive grade of 3.7+ doesn't seem realistic.
Most players are going to end up like a Jaylen Johnson or Tevis "3"... More will flame out as 1s or 2s than achieve All-American MMFG 5s.
@Woof How does the percentage distribution of 1-5 grades compare to the Jesse Callier grades given out historically? Also how have the average Jesse Callier grades changed over time?
Thanks, leave it on my desk, Ill be back after lunch.
Nothing wrong with rating guys lower than the services and most everyone else if it's based in your own evals.
I don’t really remember my picks, I didn’t put a lot of thought process into it other than players that reach 5 like gaskin are very rare, maybe 1-3 players in a class will achieve it if you’re lucky, 4s seem the most "mushy" rating to me with a large difference between a low 4 (BBK) and high 4 (Taylor Rapp), and most everyone will actually contribute as a 3 or lower.
I dont even think I dished out very many 1s or 2s, I think I just gave mostly 3s, some 4s, and fewer 5s?
If I was doing it again with more thought:
The same way I fill out my tournament bracket and bet on horses? drunk educated guessing.
You don't fill out a NCAA tournament bracket without picking a 5-12 upset. And you don't parlay bet the chalk.
You know a certain number of upsets are going to occur, might as well pick one or two? Asa as a 1 transfer? Pa'ama or Ah you as an injury flamout 1 or 2? Buelow is actually too slow 2? But I didnt do that this time around.
I like @Woof simplified measuring scale
1 - never played, or only played in garbage time and generally sucked
2 - played a bit, maybe some spot starts, but never held down a full season and/or generally was below average when on the field
3 - started about a year and likely contributed another year or two, but generally pretty average
4 - multi-year starter, above average for at least a year, likely with some postseason honors, All-Pac12
5 - multi-year starter that was above average for multiple years. Made lots of splash plays and won a significant award or was an All-American
Your class averaged out at 3.9?
There are people that probably gave out 7-8 5s, in one class... 7-8 All americans on defense, from one class? Is that a reasonable prediction?
To get a 3.9 average, what percentage of the class did you have to predict would at least be a multiyear above average starters with All-Pac12 honors as 4+? 60% of the class?
This board is full of idiots.
-
You make some points. I don't actually remember my picks either for the most part. I didn't really feel solid in projecting them like this, but I took a bit of a different approach. Rather than worrying about the obvious fact that some guys don't work out for reasons we can't possibly forsee or predict, I tried to objectively focus on individuals and rate how good I think they'll be based on highlight films and what my experience as an amateur tbser told me. I rated some above their TBS rating (Fataunu, McDuffie, Pa'ama, Tuitele) and some below (Buelow, Kalepo and others). I don't see anyone I can go as low as a 2*, meaning they just suck, or a 1*, meaning they never contribute anything and leave early. Not based on the limited info I have (film). There will be some, but I couldn't find any supportable reason to say which ones.Houhusky said:
Your class averaged out at 3.9?chuck said:
How do you predict which ones are going to underperform? Did you arbitrarily pick some guys as flameouts/disappointments so your average would stay at what you deemed to be a realistic level?Houhusky said:Hmm, and I thought I was overly optimistic/generous.
The scores seem a tad skewed, there are going to be a few players that flame out or never contribute but no one really wants to give a 1 or 2.
Seems like most people graded most of the recruits on a 3-5 scale?
Giving the class an average predictive grade of 3.7+ doesn't seem realistic.
Most players are going to end up like a Jaylen Johnson or Tevis "3"... More will flame out as 1s or 2s than achieve All-American MMFG 5s.
@Woof How does the percentage distribution of 1-5 grades compare to the Jesse Callier grades given out historically? Also how have the average Jesse Callier grades changed over time?
Thanks, leave it on my desk, Ill be back after lunch.
Nothing wrong with rating guys lower than the services and most everyone else if it's based in your own evals.
There are people that probably gave out 7-8 5s, in one class... 7-8 All americans on defense, from one class? Is that a reasonable prediction?
To get a 3.9 average, what percentage of the class did you have to predict would at least be a multiyear above average starters with All-Pac12 honors as 4+? 60% of the class?
So, it sounds like your concern was to prevent your average rating from being unrealistically high. I didn't worry about the class average and focused on individual assessments which seemed the point of the exercise.
The other obvious difference is that I apparently like the players in the class better than you and especially some of the others. The really low ratings make no sense to me at all though. There aren't any weak looking prospects in the class. They don't all look like eventual superstars, but there isn't a single guy who screams "bust" to me. -
It looks close but I'm not certain about that.EsophagealFeces said:
I’m closest to the middle. What do I win?Woof said:
Ok, my report is mostly finished, and here it is:Houhusky said:Hmm, and I thought I was overly optimistic/generous.
The scores seem a tad skewed, there are going to be a few players that flame out or never contribute but no one really wants to give a 1 or 2.
Seems like most people graded most of the recruits on a 3-5 scale?
Giving the class an average predictive grade of 3.7+ doesn't seem realistic.
Most players are going to end up like a Jaylen Johnson or Tevis "3"... More will flame out as 1s or 2s than achieve All-American MMFG 5s.
@Woof How does the percentage distribution of 1-5 grades compare to the Jesse Callier grades given out historically? Also how have the average Jesse Callier grades changed over time?
Thanks, leave it on my desk, Ill be back after lunch.
I'll start off with the Jesse Callier grades by class. Caveat here is that Coker did some of this, but his 2014 Jesse Callier data has disappeared into the ether, so I wasn't able to double check his math. Also, there were a few guys who fell through the cracks in various years, and thus never received a grade. I gave almost all of them 1s, except Damorea Stringfellow who I have a 2. I could barely remember a few of them.
Mostly Sark era:
2009 recruiting class: Jesse Callier ranking (JC) - 1.32 & star ranking - 2.58 for a -1.26 differential
2010 recruiting class: JC - 1.82 & star ranking - 3.13 for a -1.31 differential
2011 recruiting class: JC - 2.01 & star ranking - 3.13 for a -1.12 differential
Sark recruits with Petersen development:
2012 recruiting class: JC - 1.53 & star ranking - 2.90 for a -1.37 differential - for a 4th year class, this was an utter shit pile
2013 recruiting class: JC - 2.59 & star ranking - 3.29 for a -0.69 differential - jump in average coincides with UW winning the PAC
Pure Pete era:
2014 recruiting class: JC - 2.66 & star ranking - 3.04 for a -0.38 differential
2015 recruiting class: JC - 2.39 & star ranking - 3.15 for a -0.76 differential - this class is only about half complete, and will likely increase a bit (except for the Kyler Manu score)
The breaking point here is the 2013 class, which actually had some talent, and Pete was able to start winning with. It depends on where you segment the data but it seems like Petersen's development is worth about 0.5 to 0.75 of a star on the Jesse Callier rankings vs. Sark. That said, the Jesse Callier scores still lag the actual star rankings, and it would imply that our average star ranking of 3.65 for the 2019 class will turn out to average around a 3 when we do this exercise in 2023.
When it comes to distribution of scores by year, I didn't think the data was very interesting. Scores got higher for the 2013 recruiting class, which coincided with a bunch of guys that ended their careers in the Sugar Bowl instead of the wherever the fuck bowl we were the year before (Heart of Dallas I think?). I'm not going to go through the data, but needless to say, the 2nd highest score on the 2016 JCCCPCIRI (primarily 2012 recruiting class) was a 3.36 (Josh Perkins who beat out Littleton by 0.06), but that score would have rated just 10th in the 2019 version.
Regarding the scores of individual poasters:
Two key points here. First, @Samoyed is by far the biggest doog of all. Secondly, @NorwegianHusky and @dirtysouwfdawg might be twins separated at birth. -
Bump!Neighbor2972 said:
We are so fuckedWoof said:Given the dooging that occurred in the BKCCCIF numbers, it came as no surprise to me that 86% of you believe Sav'ell Smalls will sign with UW next year.
