Started By
Message
0
Posted on 2/11/15 at 9:17 am to BornKjun
quote:
Fournette, Dupre, and Vadal Alexander are all #1 for their position for their year according to CBS
I like Fournette, but Chubb should be ranked #1 based on production alone.
Chubb averaged 7.1 ypc to Fournette's 5.5 (29% more ypc)
Chubb averaged a TD 15.64 rushing attempts to Fournette's TD for every 18.7 attempts (Chubb scored 20% more frequently)
Posted on 2/11/15 at 9:54 am to BornKjun
Can you post a breakdown of how you calculated the scores? Would be helpful to actually know what I'm looking at.
An NFL projection probably isn't a great way to rank college performance but still interesting. I think you would get a more accurate result if we were to take it and weight certain positions more heavily, and even weigh the most talented players more heavily. College is much more about utilizing your best guys than the NFL, especially skill positions.
An NFL projection probably isn't a great way to rank college performance but still interesting. I think you would get a more accurate result if we were to take it and weight certain positions more heavily, and even weigh the most talented players more heavily. College is much more about utilizing your best guys than the NFL, especially skill positions.
This post was edited on 2/11/15 at 9:58 am
Posted on 2/11/15 at 9:57 am to bamasgot13
quote:
Chubb averaged 7.1 ypc to Fournette's 5.5 (29% more ypc)
Chubb averaged a TD 15.64 rushing attempts to Fournette's TD for every 18.7 attempts (Chubb scored 20% more frequently)
Plus chubb is simply better which is clear to anyone who watched them both. But yeah the stats are nice too!
Posted on 2/11/15 at 10:24 am to DawgsLife
quote:
quote:That's 8 of 11 players ranked within the top 5 for position and year. By far the most talented team according to CBS. Says nothing about productivity. But...shouldn't it?
..a question so obvious that it shouldn't have even been needed!
Posted on 2/11/15 at 10:35 am to BornKjun
thank you for admitting the system was biased 
Posted on 2/11/15 at 10:36 am to BornKjun
So, what excuse will LSU use this year then?
Posted on 2/11/15 at 10:44 am to BornKjun
quote:This is what makes winning even more fun.
14. Missouri (7.3)
This post was edited on 2/11/15 at 10:47 am
Posted on 2/11/15 at 10:46 am to BornKjun
These lists are more of an indictment of coaching......
Posted on 2/11/15 at 10:52 am to Aux Arc
quote:
Is there any chance of finding this same analysis from prior years measured against the actual results from those years?
Anyone can rank a bunch of stats. But what are the rankings worth?
Well, he does rank draft eligible players from this year that I didn't include because it was meant to be one measure of talent for 2015 teams.
I could add them-- not going to-- to everyone else and it should somewhat be the 2014 version of this although it would have the benefit of hindsight-- some players who emerged this year would be ranked higher now than preseason.
The rankings are a step above ranking teams by recruiting class rank. While not flawless, recruiting ranking do tend to predict future success over time.
This post was edited on 2/11/15 at 10:56 am
Posted on 2/11/15 at 11:06 am to skirpnasty
quote:
Can you post a breakdown of how you calculated the scores? Would be helpful to actually know what I'm looking at. ..
I think you would get a more accurate result if we were to take it and weight certain positions more heavily,
Didn't really want to get into it.
In short, I do weight it by position. I used median salaries of NFL starters to determine weight. NFL teams spend about 20-25% of the total salaries for starters on offense on QBs. The QB's score is 20-25% of the offense's score, roughly.
In short, top 4 players were given a score higher than top 8, etc. 2014 Jrs. were considered slightly better than 2014 Sos. who were considered slightly better than 2014 Fr.
For example, as discussed above, I scored Fournette as an equal to Chubb because both are Top 4 RBs for 2018 according to CBS.
One problem was that no QB for Ole Miss was ranked. I used an average for the other SEC QBs for Ole Miss. That was it.
The numbers next to the team is basically meaningless except when compared to another team (higher is better). The ranking are only as good as CBS ranked them. Their ranking is probably about as good as it gets..
This post was edited on 2/11/15 at 11:33 am
Posted on 2/11/15 at 11:08 am to CharlesLSU
quote:
These lists are more of an indictment of coaching......
Negatigers all over the place.
This is a projection for 2015! Most of the talent on LSU's offense were freshmen last year.
Just let things play out
ESPN's FPI does have LSU ranked 3rd for next year.. Started at 11th last year; finished at 17th
ESPN 2015 FPI
This post was edited on 2/11/15 at 11:25 am
Posted on 2/11/15 at 12:12 pm to skrayper
quote:
So, what excuse will LSU use this year then?
Were not motivated, they beat themselves
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News