And you kept a #2 after winning a championship?!!! That seems like a once ever type situation! Was he a SOPH I am guessing?

Posted by cal_bears on 1/9/2022 7:08:00 PM (view original):
And you kept a #2 after winning a championship?!!! That seems like a once ever type situation! Was he a SOPH I am guessing?

It was Ryan Black on Missouri. And he was #3 when he stayed as a Jr. He came in at #2 as a Sr. And ended up getting drafted 3rd overall after senior season. Oddly enough, I never thought he was a player deserving to be that high on the board anyways. Season 119 in Crum was the season he stayed, for anyone that wants to look.

Posted by cal_bears on 1/9/2022 7:06:00 PM (view original):
Yeah, I think postseason deep runs definitely influences the decision to leave early. It would seem for top 60 guys it puts it at a 100%, or near that.

Topdog, did you find the story on Louis Burns or Thomas Wright from Louisville?

This one, I have not found proof yet. I may have deleted a screenshot. So until then, I'm just all talk on this one. Haha. But i believe it to be Burns. But until I can find that screenshot, I can't verify. I'll dig for it.

I'm a little doubtful tho because it shows he was drafted in the 40s and you'd expect a +100 big board to go in the 50s. But I'm certain it was after a title run. And Missouri and Louisville are my only two. I have no reason to bring it up for no reason. I'll find it eventually.

Posted by shoe3 on 1/9/2022 12:41:00 PM (view original):
I think the impact probably depends on a number factors, most importantly if the player is near “the cusp” of a category change (“likely staying”, “on the fence”, etc).

George Washington in Iba lost an EE that moved up quite a ways after a Sweet 16 run; I was surprised by how far. In the last Big Board, James Gilbertson was listed as the second to last early entry to leave, but in the actual draft, 5 jrs are behind him, and he was drafted at #52, so he moved up considerably. I assumed some small movement for deep runs, but not a Sweet 16.

chances to go are fluid. the highest on the fence is always like 1.5% more to go than the lowest likely going. it's just way more fun to complain if your "likely going" leaves

Posted by cal_bears on 1/9/2022 7:06:00 PM (view original):
Yeah, I think postseason deep runs definitely influences the decision to leave early. It would seem for top 60 guys it puts it at a 100%, or near that.

Topdog, did you find the story on Louis Burns or Thomas Wright from Louisville?

no way its that severe, i've had lots of 50ish juniors return off championship teams

Posted by cubcub113 on 1/9/2022 9:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 1/9/2022 12:41:00 PM (view original):
I think the impact probably depends on a number factors, most importantly if the player is near “the cusp” of a category change (“likely staying”, “on the fence”, etc).

George Washington in Iba lost an EE that moved up quite a ways after a Sweet 16 run; I was surprised by how far. In the last Big Board, James Gilbertson was listed as the second to last early entry to leave, but in the actual draft, 5 jrs are behind him, and he was drafted at #52, so he moved up considerably. I assumed some small movement for deep runs, but not a Sweet 16.

chances to go are fluid. the highest on the fence is always like 1.5% more to go than the lowest likely going. it's just way more fun to complain if your "likely going" leaves

You may *see* slightly more guys listed as top “on the fence” leave than bottom “likely going” guys, based on the last available big board. Is that all you’re saying? I’ll buy that. But it’s not because they’re coded to be that likely; the reason is because there are changes to order between the last big board and the actual draft. Some of those players who looked like they were only “on the fence” were cuspers, and jumped up, either after postseason awards and/or NT runs, or a number of players ahead of them declined and they moved up that way. There’s no way for a spreadsheet to account for that happening, so it could look like the upper end of one group is coded to be more likely to leave than the lower end of the next, if you’re only looking at raw data.

Posted by shoe3 on 1/10/2022 12:24:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cubcub113 on 1/9/2022 9:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 1/9/2022 12:41:00 PM (view original):
I think the impact probably depends on a number factors, most importantly if the player is near “the cusp” of a category change (“likely staying”, “on the fence”, etc).

George Washington in Iba lost an EE that moved up quite a ways after a Sweet 16 run; I was surprised by how far. In the last Big Board, James Gilbertson was listed as the second to last early entry to leave, but in the actual draft, 5 jrs are behind him, and he was drafted at #52, so he moved up considerably. I assumed some small movement for deep runs, but not a Sweet 16.

chances to go are fluid. the highest on the fence is always like 1.5% more to go than the lowest likely going. it's just way more fun to complain if your "likely going" leaves

You may *see* slightly more guys listed as top “on the fence” leave than bottom “likely going” guys, based on the last available big board. Is that all you’re saying? I’ll buy that. But it’s not because they’re coded to be that likely; the reason is because there are changes to order between the last big board and the actual draft. Some of those players who looked like they were only “on the fence” were cuspers, and jumped up, either after postseason awards and/or NT runs, or a number of players ahead of them declined and they moved up that way. There’s no way for a spreadsheet to account for that happening, so it could look like the upper end of one group is coded to be more likely to leave than the lower end of the next, if you’re only looking at raw data.

they had a pretty good number of big boards, the sample size for the data was not that small. not exactly huge, i think it was a couple/few dozen big boards for about 3,000 players total or something? either way, the spread sheet really just encapsulates the results of a study cub and benis did.

cub - i haven't seen you say this is a 1.5% thing in such aw ay. i thought the claim was something like, the trend line / regression line for sophs and juniors was such that the peak for an on the fence junior is higher than a bottom likely going soph? or perhaps, that the likely going range for juniors and sophs was pretty materially different (significant more than 1.5%)?

seems to me, something as small as a 1.5% could be explained like other factors like NT success. i thought the junior vs sophmore odds range was a much more compelling story, but maybe i am mixing up a couple things?

Posted by gillispie on 1/10/2022 9:33:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 1/10/2022 12:24:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cubcub113 on 1/9/2022 9:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 1/9/2022 12:41:00 PM (view original):
I think the impact probably depends on a number factors, most importantly if the player is near “the cusp” of a category change (“likely staying”, “on the fence”, etc).

George Washington in Iba lost an EE that moved up quite a ways after a Sweet 16 run; I was surprised by how far. In the last Big Board, James Gilbertson was listed as the second to last early entry to leave, but in the actual draft, 5 jrs are behind him, and he was drafted at #52, so he moved up considerably. I assumed some small movement for deep runs, but not a Sweet 16.

chances to go are fluid. the highest on the fence is always like 1.5% more to go than the lowest likely going. it's just way more fun to complain if your "likely going" leaves

You may *see* slightly more guys listed as top “on the fence” leave than bottom “likely going” guys, based on the last available big board. Is that all you’re saying? I’ll buy that. But it’s not because they’re coded to be that likely; the reason is because there are changes to order between the last big board and the actual draft. Some of those players who looked like they were only “on the fence” were cuspers, and jumped up, either after postseason awards and/or NT runs, or a number of players ahead of them declined and they moved up that way. There’s no way for a spreadsheet to account for that happening, so it could look like the upper end of one group is coded to be more likely to leave than the lower end of the next, if you’re only looking at raw data.

they had a pretty good number of big boards, the sample size for the data was not that small. not exactly huge, i think it was a couple/few dozen big boards for about 3,000 players total or something? either way, the spread sheet really just encapsulates the results of a study cub and benis did.

cub - i haven't seen you say this is a 1.5% thing in such aw ay. i thought the claim was something like, the trend line / regression line for sophs and juniors was such that the peak for an on the fence junior is higher than a bottom likely going soph? or perhaps, that the likely going range for juniors and sophs was pretty materially different (significant more than 1.5%)?

seems to me, something as small as a 1.5% could be explained like other factors like NT success. i thought the junior vs sophmore odds range was a much more compelling story, but maybe i am mixing up a couple things?

Yes, that last paragraph is what I’m saying. NT success, and other things.

William Wilensky at Michigan St (Phelan), for example, season 160, was in the 37-40 range on the last Big Board, I don’t remember exactly. I try to keep my cusper juniors at 40+ normally, but I rolled the dice with him a little more and he had a late bump. He also made the All American honorable mentions, and the team made the Sweet 16, which like I said before that may bump a little more than I thought, or potentially so anyway.

So the last Big Board has him at 37, I think. And he’s drafted #28. So on the spreadsheet, he’d have to be listed as on the fence, right? But as a junior at #28, he’d be likely going, if that’s the Big Board, and not the actual draft. That’s what I mean when I say there’s no way for the spreadsheet to account for these late changes, some few of them have to happen nearly every draft.

its interesting shoe, i don't actually know how that works. i mean, the guy drafted 28, he's probably more like.. 30 or something... with probably a couple guys ahead of him going back to school - when it comes to the 'final board' if you will. but that is not the point. if a guy is listed 35, but a ton of guys ahead of him get hot rolls on the staying side, and he moves up to 30 - are his odds of leaving impacted? in essence, are the EE odds based on listed number, or actual draft selection slot? that is all outside the NT stuff. i believe you theorize that, its based on draft selection slot. which is actually an idea i'd never heard before, until you mentioned it about a year ago. i have no basis to believe one way or the other.

also for what its worth, i am pretty sure its only actual all american awards. honorable mentions i am 95% sure do not count.

what is strange to me is, back in the day it seemed to me fairly clear that NT success impacted the odds of my dudes leaving. i mean, its extremely hard to eyeball and know that kind of stuff for sure, especially over time and without any note-taking. so i am not super confident. but it still seems significantly more likely to me, based on everything i know now, that NT success does impact EE odds. however, if you look at ALL the changes on the big board, to the draft, it seems awfully un-clear that NT success has any impact. you'll see a dude with a 2nd round or sweet 16 jump a handful of spots, but meanwhile final 4 and championship guys might not move at all. same for AA awards. i didn't study this super closely, but a couple/few drafts, i went looking, expecting to see a clear tie between the higher-drafted players and NT success, or AA awards. but i basically saw zero correlation.

that is why i'm wondering if NT success does not actually impact draft order? and it just impacts NT odds? that would leave an open question as to what the heck is actually impacting the final draft order then, but i don't think that is necessarily a good reason to doubt the hypothesis (that NT success does not impact draft order but rather odds)

Not exactly the same ballpark. But I just thought I'd mention that I just lost #83 on the board. The lowest Soph on the board to declare. Not quite in the 100 range. But another random goofy departure. Someone always has to be the "last EE on the board" each season. But it seems to find me often than not!