Can someone explain the math on the rankings

#3
#3
Arpitpatel86 said:
View attachment 668343

Explain to me like I’m 5.

Auburn and Tenn both have 14 players 4/5* except all 14 are 4* for Auburn and then has 1 with 5*. In top of that Tennessee has 2 more 3*
Click to expand...
I could be wrong, but I think they only count the 20 highest rated players in each class. So having 23 commits vs 22 wouldn’t matter.

I also don’t know the specifics of the algorithm but their average player rating is 92.23 and ours is 91.63 and that has something to do with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol, LittleVol, Ned Ray McWorkher and 1 other person
#4
#4
$$$$$...oh yeah and $$$$$

Seriously though, I don't understand new math either.
 
#5
#5
Easy peasy....right. @Volprofch05 can you lend a hand

where c is a specific team's total number of commits and Rₙ is the 247Sports Composite Rating of the nth-best commit times 100.
Click to expand...
Explanation:
Click to expand...
In order to create the most comprehensive Team Recruiting Ranking without any notion of bias, 247Sports Team Recruiting Ranking is solely based on the 247Sports Composite Rating.
Click to expand...
Each recruit is weighted in the rankings according to a GAUSSIAN DISTRIBUTION FORMULA (a bell curve), where a team's best recruit is worth the most points. You can think of a team's point score as being the sum of ratings of all the team's commits where the best recruit is worth 100% of his rating value, the second best recruit is worth nearly 100% of his rating value, down to the last recruit who is worth a small fraction of his rating value. This formula ensures that all commits contribute at least some value to the team's score without heavily rewarding teams that have several more commitments than others.
Click to expand...
Readers familiar with the Gaussian distribution formula will note that we use a varying value for σ based on the standard deviation for the total number of commits between schools for the given sport. This STANDARD DEVIATION creates a bell curve with an inflection point near the average number of players recruited per team.
Click to expand...
Below is a graphical representation of how our formula works. You can see that the area under the curve gets smaller both as the rating for a commit decreases and as the number of total commits for a school increases. The z-axis in this graph represents the percentage weight of the score that gets applied to an overall team ranking.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Freak, ShoalCreekVol, chuckiepoo and 1 other person
#7
#7
Arpitpatel86 said:
View attachment 668343

Explain to me like I’m 5.

Auburn and Tenn both have 14 players 4/5* except all 14 are 4* for Auburn and then has 1 with 5*. In top of that Tennessee has 2 more 3*
Click to expand...
You don't get points for each 5*, 4*, etc. That is too statistically discrete. The points are statistically continuous. Aka a 4* could be rated a 90 or a 95, big difference. And that is what they get credit for, not for being in some broad star category.

Look at the average. You can see their quality of player is just a bit better.

To get a bit deeper, the top players in your class are worth more than the lower ones. This is actually logical, as the GOAT Bill C. (the man behind SP+ if you didn't know his earlier stuff) has shown that your best 10 recruits each year are actually a better predictor of success than considering entire 25+ man classes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KptVFL, chuckiepoo, TNRazor and 2 others
#8
#8
Evol said:
I could be wrong, but I think they only count the 20 highest rated players in each class. So having 23 commits vs 22 wouldn’t matter.

I also don’t know the specifics of the algorithm but their average player rating is 92.23 and ours is 91.63 and that has something to do with it.
Click to expand...
I believe thats rivals only. 247 & on3 use the another calculation metric that every commit counts incrementally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Evol, TNRazor and Devo182
#9
#9
there is a player rating number, 1 to 100, that is averaged together. That's where the ranking comes from. The amount of stars is irrelevant to the ranking, but it supplied anyway.

Also it used to be just the top 20 players averaged together. That may have changed, not sure.
 
#10
#10
Arpitpatel86 said:
View attachment 668343

Explain to me like I’m 5.

Auburn and Tenn both have 14 players 4/5* except all 14 are 4* for Auburn and then has 1 with 5*. In top of that Tennessee has 2 more 3*
Click to expand...
There’s a big difference between the 4 star player who is say the 40th overall ranked player and say the 300 ranked player who is also a 4 star.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gainesvol82
#12
#12
Arpitpatel86 said:
View attachment 668343

Explain to me like I’m 5.

Auburn and Tenn both have 14 players 4/5* except all 14 are 4* for Auburn and then has 1 with 5*. In top of that Tennessee has 2 more 3*
Click to expand...
It makes perfect sense.
Look to the right.

279.8 is greater than 279.44

And of course these “talent” numbers are unquestionable.

Auburn has a more talented class as one of their 4 stars went to camp that one of our 4 stars did not and therefore isn’t as talented.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OptimusPrimerib, adam.vol, A-RodWiLks and 2 others
#13
#13
The Hangover Math GIFs | Tenor
 
  • Like
Reactions: matt1107, KptVFL, DarthVol1 and 4 others
#16
#16
If we have 5 4 stars that rate a 95 and 5 that rate a 90, we would average 92.5. If someone has 5 4 stars that rate at 96 and 5 at 94, their average would be 95 giving them a higher average.
 
#17
#17
Voltrapnbama said:
If we have 5 4 stars that rate a 95 and 5 that rate a 90, we would average 92.5. If someone has 5 4 stars that rate at 96 and 5 at 94, their average would be 95 giving them a higher average.
Click to expand...
Which is why, a lot of time smaller classes will average a better but not in quality of depth and needs. That’s why a top 10 class is always going to be considered good. Butch would get a bunch of high level skill guys but low level everywhere or none at all. Giving a better rating class than what it really was in terms of needs.
 
#23
#23
Arpitpatel86 said:
View attachment 668343

Explain to me like I’m 5.

Auburn and Tenn both have 14 players 4/5* except all 14 are 4* for Auburn and then has 1 with 5*. In top of that Tennessee has 2 more 3*
Click to expand...
As you can see, the total score is very close. 279.41 to 279.80.

At a high level, recruit scores can vary within a pretty wide range and still be called "4-star", so if you look at "Avg", you can see our average recruit ranking is slightly less than theirs.

Couple that with us having one more recruit than them and that puts us very close.

When you consider that a lot of these rankings are at least partially defined by subjective means (they looked good in a camp, etc), then it's easy to take this to mean we are essentially tied at 5th for all intents and purposes.

BUT, the masses want no ties so we have this.
 
#24
#24
For one, the experts are not experts. Its just their opinion. They say scores are based on thier evaluation however when an Alabama or Ohio State offers the players score goes up. In a way this makes sense, great programs are great programs because they have a history of signing great players. Therefore, if Saban wants a player, services look at the player different. His evaluation were mostly correct over time. As Heupel has more success, his interest in a player will move that ranking higher. Everyone wanted George McIntyre therefore he became a 5 star even though he was on a bad team. One bad camp and he drops to a 4. Hopefully Brentwood Academy has better players around him this year. Bottom line: Our coaches may have evalutions for our recruits way above these rankings. They may think that instead of #6 we are #1.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top