The 2013 NFL Draft compared with Recruiting Rankings

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Notes:

1. This took forever. I'll get around to 2012 eventually, but I need a break for a bit
2. Insiders (247) is pretty bad. They had about 1/2 the draft in their database compared to about 84% for Rivals. On the ones they did rank, their rankings were almost mirrors of rivals. In other words, one of the services is poaching off of the other.
3. There were a lot of guys who transferred to lower schools and got drafted. This surprised me.

Conclusions:
1. Rivals Rankings tend to be more accurate in some states than others (particularly South Carolina). Unfortunately one state where they are severely inaccurate is Texas.
2. Redshirting tends to hurt your draft position
3. CA, GA, PA have the most unearthed gems. PA - Linemen, GA - Secondary, CA - Mix
4. 5* players aren't going to stick around
5. The rivals position Athlete tends to make it to the NFL more than any other position but DE. They are more likely to be in the secondary (10) than WR (7).

Data - 2013 NFL Draft traced back to their high school recruiting rankings

Key Points:

Of the 4 big states (CA, FL, TX, GA) where the draftees came from, 1/3 of them were not ranked in the top 100 of that state coming out of high school (35 out of 96).

GA - 9/20
TX - 7/21
FL - 8/29
CA - 11/26

State Rankings -> Top 25 getting drafted

Of the top 7 States by number of draftees, only South Carolina and Louisiana are accurate
Top 25 players getting drafted
FL - 24%
CA - 30%
TX - 23%
GA - 40%
LA - 66%
OH - 20%
SC - 90%

Note the Texas number. I need more data from previous drafts, but I think this is partially caused by the early recruiting epidemic as it is causing the rankings to be stacked in favor of guys who peak early.

Position of note that is poorly ranked in Texas -> WR - All 4 were above 60th in the state

Rivals.com positions of non-ranked players that most commonly fall through the cracks

OT (5), DE (5), DT (3), CB (3)

Most common locations for players to fall through the cracks -> CA, PA, GA

Early Entrants

Evenly split between InState (14) and OutofState(16) players
Most common positions are WR (7), RB(6), DE(5), CB(4), DT(3)
Star Rankings - 5* (8), 4*(13), 3*(8), 2*(1)

Note this is 33% of the 5*s from 2010 (8 out of 27 + Cam Newton for 9). The average round was 2.75 with 3 1st round picks.

General Stats

Avg Star Ranking of the draft was 2.93
31 out of 254 were not ranked out of high school
Avg Round by Star Ranking
5* -> 2.89
4* -> 4.18
3* -> 4.15
2* -> 4.67
UR -> 4.87

Effect of Redshirting

2008 (Redshirts) - Avg Round 4.95 - Total Drafted - 92
2009 (Non-RS) - Avg Round 4.07 - Total Drafted - 118
2010 (Early Entrant) - Avg Round 3.1 - Total Drafted - 30
2011 (Juco) - Avg Round 4.18 - Total Drafted - 11
2012 (Juco EE) - Avg Round 1.33 - Total Drafted - 3


I'll throw up some pretty pictures in a minute

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

http://ouportal.com/screenshots/picksbyclass.png

Note that 5 of our top 6 teams were from the SEC surrouned by FSU and Rutgers (wtf?)
Records
12-2
10-3
13-1
11-2
12-2
11-2
9-4
10-3
12-1

http://ouportal.com/screenshots/roundsbyconference.png

Please note that the while the SEC has a lot more talent than the other conferences, the biggest problem is the guys falling through the cracks to the random non-power conference guys

http://ouportal.com/screenshots/starsbyconference.png

This mainly shows the bias in recruiting stars against the lower level schools. Please note that all of the random 4*s are transfers from bigger schools. Their were 28 guys drafted from lower schools that weren't even IN the rivals database. It is a business and there just isn't any money in ranking guys from Elon.

http://ouportal.com/screenshots/starsbyschool.png

More than anything, this shows you the "Tiering" that rivals has with respect to stars and certain schools.

Other notes:

Of the first 5 picks, 2 were walkons and 1 was a 2*
The first 5* was taken at pick 9

The OTs taken off the board had the following ranks -> 2*, 4*, 0*, 5*, 2*, 3*, 0*, 3*, 4*, 2*, 0*, 4*, 3*, 3*, 0*, 4*, 0*, 0*, 0*, 3*, 3*, 2*

[8timechamps]

I love this stuff jkm! Excellent project.

I know this took a lot of time, but I can't wait to see how this trends.

One of the more surprising (maybe not though) points is the very last thing you mention; the OT's taken and their ranking.

[freshchris05]

Tear down this thread!

[JiminyChristmas]

I haven't followed recruiting much, so this may be a dumb question, but how many guys total does Rivals have ranked in a given year? Of those ranked, what is the split among stars? I assume it's not an even 20% 5 stars, 20% 4 stars, etc.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I haven't followed recruiting much, so this may be a dumb question, but how many guys total does Rivals have ranked in a given year? Of those ranked, what is the split among stars? I assume it's not an even 20% 5 stars, 20% 4 stars, etc.

It varies by year. For example, 2012

33 5*
320 4*
1512 3*
1602 2*
2000+ UR

So percentage wise, it will end up being 5*s then 4*s then 3*s then 2*s which is what the recruiting sites always tout.

[JiminyChristmas]

I haven't followed recruiting much, so this may be a dumb question, but how many guys total does Rivals have ranked in a given year? Of those ranked, what is the split among stars? I assume it's not an even 20% 5 stars, 20% 4 stars, etc.

It varies by year. For example, 2012

33 5*
320 4*
1512 3*
1602 2*
2000+ UR

So percentage wise, it will end up being 5*s then 4*s then 3*s then 2*s which is what the recruiting sites always tout.

Ok, thanks. Helps to understand the total data pool.

The Rutgers anomaly could be because of Schiano at Tampa Bay. I think they have 3 or 4 Rutgers guys on that team.

Pretty clear evidence of the lack of talent across the Big XII compared to the other power conferences. On par with the B1G, but behind everyone else.

One thing that would be interesting to know is if there is a team out there consistently outperforming others when it comes to taking 2 star and below guys and getting them drafted at an abnormally high rate. Would speak directly to coaching and player development. Some could just be "late bloomers" physically, but not most.

[NorthernIowaSooner]

I would think some of the discrepancy with lineman rankings and actual success may be attributed to their size. Many come out of high school in the 240-260 range and then have to put on a lot of weight. It's kind of a crapshoot how they will handle the extra weight.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

8x and my stance for a while now is that they are more accurate on certain positions than others.

http://ouportal.com/screenshots/StarsbyPosition.png

heh on DT and OG almost being normal distributions

http://ouportal.com/screenshots/StarsbyRecruitedDraftedPosition1.png
http://ouportal.com/screenshots/StarsbyRecruitedDraftedPosition2.png
http://ouportal.com/screenshots/StarsbyRecruitedDraftedPosition3.png

These three show you the positions drafted vs what rivals ranked them as. You can see the absolute jacked uppedness that is OG and DT. (NR means they weren't in their database)

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

So I figured out a slightly faster way to do the drafts and I have about 30% of 2012 done (python is pretty incredible btw). 2012 looks a little more normal at the top, but falls apart in the 2nd and 3rd rounds with schools like Appy State, North Alabama and Midwestern State in the early 2nd. So a trend to look at is whether the NFL is moving away from big school bias over time.

[Since71ASooner4Life]

Interesting post and unbelievable amount of work you put into this - thanks. A few observations:

1) no surprise about the highest average draft round being the rivals 5-stars - it only makes sense

2) acknowledgement about the SEC - those who want to keep arguing that the talent level there isn't at the top right now are living in denial

3) your probably right about the business aspect limiting coverage at the lesser know schools. But I also attribute many of the unranked ending up in the NFL, to the fact that not every 18 year old has reached his physical peak. AD and Clowney were full grown men at 18, but many others aren't. Probably a good part of the reason NFL OL in particular aren't so easy to project when they're in high school.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

2) acknowledgement about the SEC - those who want to keep arguing that the talent level there isn't at the top right now are living in denial


This is more about geography than anything. States with SEC schools in them produced 109 of 254 NFL draftees and the SEC is the flagship school in most of those states.

[Since71ASooner4Life]

This is more about geography than anything. States with SEC schools in them produced 109 of 254 NFL draftees and the SEC is the flagship school in most of those states.

we agree 110% Let's call it what it is - the NFL rosters are dominated by African Americans and 40 or so American Samoans. Google population ethnicity map and it its obvious why the SEC is dominant

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Census-2000-Data-Top-US-Ancestries-by-County.svg

I've heard it pointed to more than once that historically the deep south took longer to embrace black athletes at their universities. 20~30 years ago a good percentage of these kids were welcomed more readily at Michigan, Ohio State, Notre Dame and other northern schools. Now that the world has changed, these kids stay in their home states more. Although, its interesting how much of Alabama's roster comes from outside the state and all over the country. I guess everyone loves a winner and wants to be a part of it

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I've heard it pointed to more than once that historically the deep south took longer to embrace black athletes at their universities. 20~30 years ago a good percentage of these kids were welcomed more readily at Michigan, Ohio State, Notre Dame and other northern schools. Now that the world has changed, these kids stay in their home states more. Although, its interesting how much of Alabama's roster comes from outside the state and all over the country. I guess everyone loves a winner and wants to be a part of it

Yes, but the ones that get drafted are from Alabama. I just finished 2012 and Alabama has 17 players drafted.

AL - 10, LA 2, MS/AZ/TN/FL/GA 1 each

I need more data, but I think their current run is a combination of good coaching AND a home state boon of talent (like we had in 2000-2004).

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

2012 State Top 25 getting drafted vs total drafted

TX 34 total -> 15%
CA 28 total -> 7%
FL 25 total -> 36%
OH 17 total -> 30%
IL 9 total -> 44%
VA 9 total -> 22%
MI 9 total -> 56%

[Curly Bill]

One of the things I've always said about recruiting Texas is the difficulty in predicting which players have reached near their peak while in high school, and I contend that a higher number of recruits in TX are near their peak than in any other state, due to the high emphasis placed on football in TX, and the higher level of coaching high school players get in TX compared to most other states.

This is partly why the Whorns seem like such underachievers when they land these highly ranked recruiting classes based on TX players, and the results on the field don't match what the recruiting services predict should happen. Of course there's also the poor coaching and coddling of players at UT....

[SouthFortySooner]

Incredible work. Only slightly less daunting than figuring how a teams mindset trumps star ratings!

[picasso]

One of the things I've always said about recruiting Texas is the difficulty in predicting which players have reached near their peak while in high school, and I contend that a higher number of recruits in TX are near their peak than in any other state, due to the high emphasis placed on football in TX, and the higher level of coaching high school players get in TX compared to most other states.

This is partly why the Whorns seem like such underachievers when they land these highly ranked recruiting classes based on TX players, and the results on the field don't match what the recruiting services predict should happen. Of course there's also the poor coaching and coddling of players at UT....
Interesting angle.