Plus I've automated much of the input. Among other things, I'm a programmer. I'm all for doing the least amount of work.

- Can you include both a median and mean? Might satisfy folks who are looking for certain aspects of their numbers.

- I think it was Tim K. who wanted some more specificity of "outlier" --I get that -- and suggested "weighting" outliers.

As you know, I've always thought that some services have drastically different ratings of some prospects for reason varying from: 1) they have small rating staffs and have not seen the player; 2) a player might be a frequent attendee of camps they're at/sponsor, etc.; and/or 3) They just think the player is the cat's meow or a not-so-shiny penny.

Can't tell what is an outlier per se: you kinda know it when you see it.
Five to 10 points doesn't catch my eye, but jumps of 20 points or more tend to do that. Even worse, non-inclusion, so I usually tend to drop the low-rated ones. However, your adding points to certain candidates -- if feasible -- seems right and tight.

- Lastly, Most of these services stop rating players once they're in school so they don't matter quite as much, save for going back to see how accurate a picture they gave.

TopDrawer Soccer continues to rate players throughout their entire career and All-White Kit may do one of the most thorough sketch of draft-eligible players I've ever read.

Could we go by various ratings based on game statistics? Sure, but would love to get some Chris Henderson "All White Kit' comments and insights there.

Including both a median and a mean for 1,000 or so high schoolers over 5 years takes about 20 seconds to implement. Is it really satisfactory though? I think what people really want is less stats but more meaningful ones.

I have the same problem with Efficiency and something called PCR which is Efficiency that better reflects guard contributions of assists, blocks and steals. A complaint about Efficiency is that it favors centers and forwards. For example, Ruthy Hebard had a slightly better Efficiency rating than Sabrina Ionescu last year, but Sabrina's PCR was higher. I could use both, but I think it would be more confusing than it's worth (and less consistent). Everyone knows the value of both those players.

As you wisely say in you last paragraph. OK, I'm going to paraphrase here. What are we looking for on the Bench, the mood of a stat class or the character of a sports bar—a high class sports bar? The banter and repartee is what I'm looking for (along with a few games), but a few understandable, meaningful stats can get the conversation going.