Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 23 of 23

Thread: Lamar Peters

  1. #21
    Senior Member maroonmania's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    19,265
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by Ifyouonlyknew View Post
    Nope but at the time people acted like we had just lost Lebron.
    He certainly wasn't Lebron but was an all-SEC type player his last couple years (1st team all-SEC in 2011), so let's not act like he wouldn't have been a significant contributor for us had we gotten him.

  2. #22
    That New Coach - That's better than the Old Coach
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    9,909
    vCash
    3190
    Quote Originally Posted by maroonmania View Post
    He certainly wasn't Lebron but was an all-SEC type player his last couple years (1st team all-SEC in 2011), so let's not act like he wouldn't have been a significant contributor for us had we gotten him.
    I didn't say he wasn't good but he wasn't what everyone thought he'd be. People expected him to dominate from day 1 & he had 2 solid years & 1 really good year.

  3. #23
    Senior Member smootness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    15,091
    vCash
    3000
    Quote Originally Posted by thf24 View Post
    I wish they wouldn't have numerical ratings at all. Even if it's due to using some kind of formula, it's inherently going to be contrived to some degree. I remember seeing somewhere a while back that the stars actually stand for things, something like:

    5 star - immediate impact
    4 star - future starter, first year player
    3 star - quality depth, redshirt candidate
    2 star - project, questionable D1 player

    So if that's generally assumed, why also throw a numerical rating into the mix in which one point can mean the difference between two very distinct designations, when that's probably not accurate in reality? I think they should just use stars, seems like that would be plenty to satisfy the fans that are so in love with recruiting rankings and evaluations.
    It seems like you're actually advocating for removing the star system and just using a numerical rating. If your issue is that an 89 is a 3-star and a slightly better recruit at 90 gets an entire extra star, then how would only seeing one as a 3 and the other as a 4 help? At least with the numerical ratings added, you can see that they believe the two players are very similar, where under a star-only system, you would see them as entirely different recruits.

    But honestly, who cares? I will never understand why fans take the star system so seriously. It's an easy way to throw ratings on recruits/prospects, and it's supposed to be mostly fun. If a person is genuinely upset that a certain player is one rating and not another, I would suggest taking a break from any recruiting sites for a good 2 years.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Disclaimer: Elitedawgs is a privately owned and operated forum that is managed by alumni of Mississippi State University. This website is in no way affiliated with the Mississippi State University, The Southeastern Conference (SEC) or the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The views and opinions expressed herein are strictly those of the post author and may not reflect the views of other members of this forum or elitedawgs.com. The interactive nature of the elitedawgs.com forums makes it impossible for elitedawgs.com to assume responsibility for any of the content posted at this site. Ideas, thoughts, suggestion, comments, opinions, advice and observations made by participants at elitedawgs.com are not endorsed by elitedawgs.com
Elitedawgs: A Mississippi State Fan Forum, Mississippi State Football, Mississippi State Basketball, Mississippi State Baseball, Mississippi State Athletics. Mississippi State message board.