@mcbmd, this took longer than I wanted it to (proabably 3 hours worth) but here you go.
2 things: 1) Washington didn't have HS numbers so they aren't in the list & 2) There were a number of Canadians drafted so they aren't include.
Lastly, I sorted on the last column PPK/AR. This is the Player/1000 athlete divided by the average rank of the player drafted. This was to highlight two things: concentration of talent and recognition of talent. By dividing by the average rank, if a state has a lower average rank (i.e., Rivals didn't analyze them accurately) it would increase the number. This is beneficial for a place like Utah which doesn't put out as much talent per 1000 as Louisiana...but their players are ranked almost 2 stars lower on average than Louisiana.
Enjoy.
2 things: 1) Washington didn't have HS numbers so they aren't in the list & 2) There were a number of Canadians drafted so they aren't include.
Lastly, I sorted on the last column PPK/AR. This is the Player/1000 athlete divided by the average rank of the player drafted. This was to highlight two things: concentration of talent and recognition of talent. By dividing by the average rank, if a state has a lower average rank (i.e., Rivals didn't analyze them accurately) it would increase the number. This is beneficial for a place like Utah which doesn't put out as much talent per 1000 as Louisiana...but their players are ranked almost 2 stars lower on average than Louisiana.
Enjoy.