Thoughts on the value of each position (1 Viewer)

[Chase Stuart]

Assume that the sum of the worth of each offensive position adds up to 100%, and the worth of each defensive position adds up to 100%. How would you break down the average value of each position? Obviously it varies from team to team, but on average, here's what I would think the worth is of each player:

Offense

QB - 20%

LT - 12%

RB1 - 10%

WR1 - 9%

LG, C, RG, RT, RB2/FB, TE, WR2 - 7% each

Defense

MLB - 11%

DE1, CB1 - 10%

DE2, CB2, DT1, OLB1, S1 - 9%

DT2, OLB2, S2 - 8 %

What do you guys think?

 

[SuperJohn96]

The reality is that there will be some variation depending on the formation you want to run, but I'd say this is a good generic start.

 

[pollardsvision]

Offense

5 OL: 50% total, 10% a piece (i realize a LT is probably more valuable than the others, but i do think the most important factor in O-line play is how they function together as a whole, so i'll consider them all equal, even though salary structures don't follow that)

QB: 30%

WR1: 8%

TE: 3%

RB1: 3%

WR2: 3%

RB2/FB: 3%

(obviously, i think if you can put together a dominant O-line with a good QB, much of the rest will take care of itself)

Defense

4 DL: 15% apiece (i think if you can control the LOS and put pressure on the QB, it solves most defensive problems)

MLB/SS/CB1: 8% each

2OLB/CB2/FS: 4% each

 

[Bills_Fan11]

The reality is that there will be some variation depending on the formation you want to run, but I'd say this is a good generic start.

Yah everyone is going to have their quibbles, but it's not terrible...I'd bump QB & LT and reduce RB.

 

[Thorpe]

DT is the most important position on the defense. I don't care who the MLB is, he won't be effective if the DTs are garbage.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Offense5 OL: 50% total, 10% a piece (i realize a LT is probably more valuable than the others, but i do think the most important factor in O-line play is how they function together as a whole, so i'll consider them all equal, even though salary structures don't follow that)QB: 30%WR1: 8%TE: 3%RB1: 3%WR2: 3%RB2/FB: 3%(obviously, i think if you can put together a dominant O-line with a good QB, much of the rest will take care of itself)Defense4 DL: 15% apiece (i think if you can control the LOS and put pressure on the QB, it solves most defensive problems)MLB/SS/CB1: 8% each2OLB/CB2/FS: 4% each

You think the LG is worth more than three times the RB1?The second best DT on the team is worth almost four times the second best CB on the team?

 

[Chase Stuart]

DT is the most important position on the defense. I don't care who the MLB is, he won't be effective if the DTs are garbage.

While that's true, the average DT isn't garbage. I could say I don't care who the rest of your front seven is, if your MLB is garbage, you're not going to stop the run well. I think if any position is garbage on D, you've got a big problem.

 

[Mr Capicollo]

DT is the most important position on the defense. I don't care who the MLB is, he won't be effective if the DTs are garbage.

While that's true, the average DT isn't garbage. I could say I don't care who the rest of your front seven is, if your MLB is garbage, you're not going to stop the run well. I think if any position is garbage on D, you've got a big problem.

The most compelling part of your MLB argument IMHO is that that position tends to be the captain of the defense, wears the radio helmet, calls the plays, makes adjustments, etc. A good MLB is almost certainly worth more than 11%, and may even approach a QB's 20%. Guys like Ray Lewis, London Fletcher, Zach Thomas, etc. are and have been hugely beneficial to the players around them, above and beyond their own ability to make plays. An interesting contrast in this approach is the Eagles, who have traditionally devoted resources to their d-line and secondary, and have not stocked much talent over the years at the LB position.

 

[Chase Stuart]

DT is the most important position on the defense. I don't care who the MLB is, he won't be effective if the DTs are garbage.

While that's true, the average DT isn't garbage. I could say I don't care who the rest of your front seven is, if your MLB is garbage, you're not going to stop the run well. I think if any position is garbage on D, you've got a big problem.

The most compelling part of your MLB argument IMHO is that that position tends to be the captain of the defense, wears the radio helmet, calls the plays, makes adjustments, etc. A good MLB is almost certainly worth more than 11%, and may even approach a QB's 20%. Guys like Ray Lewis, London Fletcher, Zach Thomas, etc. are and have been hugely beneficial to the players around them, above and beyond their own ability to make plays. An interesting contrast in this approach is the Eagles, who have traditionally devoted resources to their d-line and secondary, and have not stocked much talent over the years at the LB position.

Well, a good MLB is better than average. I don't think the average MLB is worth too much more than the average DT or S. I think it's still the most important position on the D, but we've seen how every position on the D is very important over the years (Tampa secondary, Ravens LBs, Giants DL all played a big part in their SB wins).

 

[Mr Capicollo]

DT is the most important position on the defense. I don't care who the MLB is, he won't be effective if the DTs are garbage.

While that's true, the average DT isn't garbage. I could say I don't care who the rest of your front seven is, if your MLB is garbage, you're not going to stop the run well. I think if any position is garbage on D, you've got a big problem.

The most compelling part of your MLB argument IMHO is that that position tends to be the captain of the defense, wears the radio helmet, calls the plays, makes adjustments, etc. A good MLB is almost certainly worth more than 11%, and may even approach a QB's 20%. Guys like Ray Lewis, London Fletcher, Zach Thomas, etc. are and have been hugely beneficial to the players around them, above and beyond their own ability to make plays. An interesting contrast in this approach is the Eagles, who have traditionally devoted resources to their d-line and secondary, and have not stocked much talent over the years at the LB position.

Well, a good MLB is better than average. I don't think the average MLB is worth too much more than the average DT or S. I think it's still the most important position on the D, but we've seen how every position on the D is very important over the years (Tampa secondary, Ravens LBs, Giants DL all played a big part in their SB wins).

Maybe. I subscribe to the theory that the greater the mismatch you can have on defense closest to the ball (when snapped), the greater the advantage you have. If your D-line is lights out, then you've got a huge leg up on the opposing offense whether they call a running play or a passing play. As you get farther away from the ball, the ability of players to impact plays becomes more specialized (e.g., the RCB can only greatly affect passing plays to his side of the field, while a dominant LDE can affect any play, anywhere). This was the defensive formula to the Giants' success last year, which BTW they achieved despite having a very average (or worse) LB corps, especially when you consider the injuries. Of course, it's very difficult to find multiple 275-300+ lb. difference makers, which is the rub.

 

[pollardsvision]

Offense5 OL: 50% total, 10% a piece (i realize a LT is probably more valuable than the others, but i do think the most important factor in O-line play is how they function together as a whole, so i'll consider them all equal, even though salary structures don't follow that)QB: 30%WR1: 8%TE: 3%RB1: 3%WR2: 3%RB2/FB: 3%(obviously, i think if you can put together a dominant O-line with a good QB, much of the rest will take care of itself)Defense4 DL: 15% apiece (i think if you can control the LOS and put pressure on the QB, it solves most defensive problems)MLB/SS/CB1: 8% each2OLB/CB2/FS: 4% each

You think the LG is worth more than three times the RB1?The second best DT on the team is worth almost four times the second best CB on the team?

those numbers maybe could use some tinkering, but they do fit with my overall theme for what i thinks makes for a successful football team.imo, the story of any football game can generally be told by what's going on in the trenches. it seems rare for a team to lose when they are consistently dominating the LOS.the exact values are off b/c the D and O lines success is usually do more to their ability to function together as opposed their individual talents, but the overall values are in line with my thinking.imo, 1/2 or more of an offenses' success is determined by the effectiveness of the O-line. same for the defense.with a great Oline, i think you can get away with a mediocre RBwith a great Dline, i think you can get away with mediocrity at other positionsspecific to your question, if the DT's are clogging the middle, stuffing the run, rendering an offense one-dimensional, a CB2's job becomes much easier (esp. if when the DL is pressuring the QB on every throw). i think even a good CB will look bad if he is kept off balance guessing (when the running game is effective) and has to cover for longer periods of time.on the offense, for example, i think steve hutchinson was 3 times more important than shaun alexander.

 

[MDSkinner]

Assume that the sum of the worth of each offensive position adds up to 100%, and the worth of each defensive position adds up to 100%. How would you break down the average value of each position? Obviously it varies from team to team, but on average, here's what I would think the worth is of each player:OffenseQB - 20%LT - 12%RB1 - 10%WR1 - 9%LG, C, RG, RT, RB2/FB, TE, WR2 - 7% eachDefenseMLB - 11%DE1, CB1 - 10%DE2, CB2, DT1, OLB1, S1 - 9%DT2, OLB2, S2 - 8 %What do you guys think?

I actually really like your numbers over all, other than I would probably lower the RB1 to about 6% and raise RT, RG, LG and C up a percent each. But I am unquestionably biased toward the OL. I think there are exceptions to this rule (Barry Sanders clearly worth more than his OL) but in general to build a good team a great LT is twice as important as a great RB and often times can help to create a great RB from an average one and that the OL as a whole will have a far bigger impact on the team as a whole than a great RB. JMO.

 

[BigRed]

If this isn't asking from an FF perspective, shouldn't it be in FFA?

 

[Bluefire]

If this isn't asking from an FF perspective, shouldn't it be in FFA?

The Shark Pool (NFL Talk) - The Shark Pool is reserved for sharing NFL talk and fantasy football strategy discussion. Footballguys Free For All - The forum for all non-NFL topics. Most things go, but keep it clean. Be excellent to each other. And please don't whine.

 

[Mr Capicollo]

If this isn't asking from an FF perspective, shouldn't it be in FFA?

Ding! Fries are done!

 

[TME]

To answer this question, I would look at the average NFL salary for each position and then just take the %. That's where the owners/managers see the value, so that's where it must be. On offense, QB is certainly # 1 and LT would be # 2 most likely. Might be WR # 1 after that.

On defense, CB by a long shot. Not even close - both of them. Then probably # 1 DE.

Would be interesting if someone could pull together.

 

[BigRed]

If this isn't asking from an FF perspective, shouldn't it be in FFA?

The Shark Pool (NFL Talk) - The Shark Pool is reserved for sharing NFL talk and fantasy football strategy discussion. Footballguys Free For All - The forum for all non-NFL topics. Most things go, but keep it clean. Be excellent to each other. And please don't whine.

TIA

 

[Bri]

Assume that the sum of the worth of each offensive position adds up to 100%, and the worth of each defensive position adds up to 100%. How would you break down the average value of each position? Obviously it varies from team to team, but on average, here's what I would think the worth is of each player:OffenseQB - 20%LT - 12%RB1 - 10%WR1 - 9%LG, C, RG, RT, RB2/FB, TE, WR2 - 7% eachDefenseMLB - 11%DE1, CB1 - 10%DE2, CB2, DT1, OLB1, S1 - 9%DT2, OLB2, S2 - 8 %What do you guys think?

It's hard to separate the great players that come to mind from the average or ordinary ones. Seems like most teams at least have one key cog that drives the machine better.I figure LT and C need to be higher. Maybe take some away from WR2 and TE. TE especially, I can't think of a TE that drove his team to a Supe win...maybe Bavaro considerring their lack of quality WRs. Older guys might be able to say Ditka or Berry. Still all in all I don't think a **top** pass catching TE has been shown to be the key piece to winning a Supe. What's it done for KC to have Tony G? Sharpe was exceptional but so was Easy Ed and Rod, and it seemed TD was the missing piece not Sharpe. WR2 there just hasn't been that many great ones despite what we'd like to think in FF. One could argue Gary Clark or Holt(I think he was technically #2 to Bruce despite the stats) but more often than not it's just gravy to have a real good #2 WR.On Defense, Safety isn't as important like a top pass catching TE. It's sweet when you have Polamalu or Reed or Sanders or even Harrison but run thru all the Supe teams and a top S isn't something they all had. Some, sure, maybe even half but it doesn't prove that a top S is vital. It's sure not like having a junky CB1 that gets beaten on "every" play. San Diego had Harrison and Seau. Teams found they couldn't run so it was much easier to pass....maybe a bad example. Name the Giants safeties last year? Keep in mind I'm saying name the Safeties that had to stop a record setting passing offense with what may wind up being the best WR and best QB ever. I love a good outfielder or a good SS that will just lay a big smack hit on someone but, it just doesn't seem to be a piece that equals wins.

 

[BusMan]

Didn't some GM/executive type once talk about the five most important needs for any team?

1. Quarterback

2. Offensive tackle to defend said quarterback's blind side

3. Pass-rushing defensive end

4. Shutdown cornerback

5. Dynamic #1 wide receiver

 

[Bri]

Offense5 OL: 50% total, 10% a piece (i realize a LT is probably more valuable than the others, but i do think the most important factor in O-line play is how they function together as a whole, so i'll consider them all equal, even though salary structures don't follow that)QB: 30%WR1: 8%TE: 3%RB1: 3%WR2: 3%RB2/FB: 3%(obviously, i think if you can put together a dominant O-line with a good QB, much of the rest will take care of itself)Defense4 DL: 15% apiece (i think if you can control the LOS and put pressure on the QB, it solves most defensive problems)MLB/SS/CB1: 8% each2OLB/CB2/FS: 4% each

You think the LG is worth more than three times the RB1?The second best DT on the team is worth almost four times the second best CB on the team?

those numbers maybe could use some tinkering, but they do fit with my overall theme for what i thinks makes for a successful football team.imo, the story of any football game can generally be told by what's going on in the trenches. it seems rare for a team to lose when they are consistently dominating the LOS.the exact values are off b/c the D and O lines success is usually do more to their ability to function together as opposed their individual talents, but the overall values are in line with my thinking.imo, 1/2 or more of an offenses' success is determined by the effectiveness of the O-line. same for the defense.with a great Oline, i think you can get away with a mediocre RBwith a great Dline, i think you can get away with mediocrity at other positionsspecific to your question, if the DT's are clogging the middle, stuffing the run, rendering an offense one-dimensional, a CB2's job becomes much easier (esp. if when the DL is pressuring the QB on every throw). i think even a good CB will look bad if he is kept off balance guessing (when the running game is effective) and has to cover for longer periods of time.on the offense, for example, i think steve hutchinson was 3 times more important than shaun alexander.

I don't disagree with your #s if you had a team in mind where it did work. My guess would be that's the Titans last year..eh well anyhow, like I said it's hard to keep stars out of it. Suppose you did have the Titans above, then you're thinking Vince(some would disagree but he does get Ws) Haynesworth and Vandenbosch certainly provided an excellent run stuffing DL and controlled the LOS. What's not to like about Finnegan or Bulluck? They lost a LG in FA to the Rams, a key free agent loss. (I think they replaced it fine with Scott but...) OK so am I right? Were you thinking Titans?They didn't win a Supe so that formula doesn't work well enough.

 

[Bri]

Didn't some GM/executive type once talk about the five most important needs for any team?1. Quarterback2. Offensive tackle to defend said quarterback's blind side3. Pass-rushing defensive end4. Shutdown cornerback5. Dynamic #1 wide receiver

Ernie Accorsi has a number of times.WR1 was not on his list

 

[BusMan]

Didn't some GM/executive type once talk about the five most important needs for any team?1. Quarterback2. Offensive tackle to defend said quarterback's blind side3. Pass-rushing defensive end4. Shutdown cornerback5. Dynamic #1 wide receiver

Ernie Accorsi has a number of times.WR1 was not on his list

That was the one I couldn't recall as clearly. Do you remember what was fifth on his list? Run-stuffing DT? All-Pro MLB?

 

[Bri]

Didn't some GM/executive type once talk about the five most important needs for any team?1. Quarterback2. Offensive tackle to defend said quarterback's blind side3. Pass-rushing defensive end4. Shutdown cornerback5. Dynamic #1 wide receiver

Ernie Accorsi has a number of times.WR1 was not on his list

That was the one I couldn't recall as clearly. Do you remember what was fifth on his list? Run-stuffing DT? All-Pro MLB?

with the Giants history of players I'd have to guess LB, I don't recall if he ever said MLB or OLB but yeah LB

 

[fatness]

"Missionary" is overrated.

 

[GregR_2]

Didn't some GM/executive type once talk about the five most important needs for any team?1. Quarterback2. Offensive tackle to defend said quarterback's blind side3. Pass-rushing defensive end4. Shutdown cornerback5. Dynamic #1 wide receiver

Yes, one did, but his list was actually:1. Dynamic #1 wide receiver2. Dynamic #2 wide receiver3. Dynamic #3 wide receiver who is big enough he could be a tight end.4. Dynamic #4 wide receiver5. Joey Harrington.I can't recall which GM said it though. But that's life... some mysteries may never be answered.

 

[Buddy Ball 2K3]

Offense

QB - 20%

LT - 15% (if right handed QB)

LG -7%

C- 7%

RG- 8%

RT- 12% (moves to 15 if QB left handed)

RB1 - 8%

RB2 - FB 2%

WR1 - 8%

WR2 - 6%

TE - 7%

Defense

LDE - 15%

RDE - 10%

DT - 9%

NT -9%

LOLB- 6%

MILB- 7%

ROLB- 6%

CB1- 15%

FS- 7%

SS- 6%

CB2- 10%

 

[pollardsvision]

Offense5 OL: 50% total, 10% a piece (i realize a LT is probably more valuable than the others, but i do think the most important factor in O-line play is how they function together as a whole, so i'll consider them all equal, even though salary structures don't follow that)QB: 30%WR1: 8%TE: 3%RB1: 3%WR2: 3%RB2/FB: 3%(obviously, i think if you can put together a dominant O-line with a good QB, much of the rest will take care of itself)Defense4 DL: 15% apiece (i think if you can control the LOS and put pressure on the QB, it solves most defensive problems)MLB/SS/CB1: 8% each2OLB/CB2/FS: 4% each

You think the LG is worth more than three times the RB1?The second best DT on the team is worth almost four times the second best CB on the team?

those numbers maybe could use some tinkering, but they do fit with my overall theme for what i thinks makes for a successful football team.imo, the story of any football game can generally be told by what's going on in the trenches. it seems rare for a team to lose when they are consistently dominating the LOS.the exact values are off b/c the D and O lines success is usually do more to their ability to function together as opposed their individual talents, but the overall values are in line with my thinking.imo, 1/2 or more of an offenses' success is determined by the effectiveness of the O-line. same for the defense.with a great Oline, i think you can get away with a mediocre RBwith a great Dline, i think you can get away with mediocrity at other positionsspecific to your question, if the DT's are clogging the middle, stuffing the run, rendering an offense one-dimensional, a CB2's job becomes much easier (esp. if when the DL is pressuring the QB on every throw). i think even a good CB will look bad if he is kept off balance guessing (when the running game is effective) and has to cover for longer periods of time.on the offense, for example, i think steve hutchinson was 3 times more important than shaun alexander.

I don't disagree with your #s if you had a team in mind where it did work. My guess would be that's the Titans last year..eh well anyhow, like I said it's hard to keep stars out of it. Suppose you did have the Titans above, then you're thinking Vince(some would disagree but he does get Ws) Haynesworth and Vandenbosch certainly provided an excellent run stuffing DL and controlled the LOS. What's not to like about Finnegan or Bulluck? They lost a LG in FA to the Rams, a key free agent loss. (I think they replaced it fine with Scott but...) OK so am I right? Were you thinking Titans?They didn't win a Supe so that formula doesn't work well enough.

i wasn't thinking the titans in particular. they are a good example of why the DT's are so important though. i wouldn't call an '07 vince young the type of QB i'd want on a team with SB aspirations.

 

[Bills_Fan11]

DT is the most important position on the defense. I don't care who the MLB is, he won't be effective if the DTs are garbage.

While that's true, the average DT isn't garbage. I could say I don't care who the rest of your front seven is, if your MLB is garbage, you're not going to stop the run well. I think if any position is garbage on D, you've got a big problem.

The most compelling part of your MLB argument IMHO is that that position tends to be the captain of the defense, wears the radio helmet, calls the plays, makes adjustments, etc. A good MLB is almost certainly worth more than 11%, and may even approach a QB's 20%. Guys like Ray Lewis, London Fletcher, Zach Thomas, etc. are and have been hugely beneficial to the players around them, above and beyond their own ability to make plays. An interesting contrast in this approach is the Eagles, who have traditionally devoted resources to their d-line and secondary, and have not stocked much talent over the years at the LB position.

As far as Fletcher goes, the run defense he captained when from tops in '04 with Pat Williams to awful in '05 with every returning starter minus Pat Williams. Lewis - everyone remembers what he said about the organization before they drafted Ngata, right?

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

I think pass rush is the most important part of a defense. If you beat on the opposing QB enough you will win.

The Giants protected a mediocre secondary with their incredible pass rush. The Bucs Tampa-2 didn't get them to a SB until they added Simeon Rice. The Ravens may have been strongest at LB, but they also had good ends in McCrary and Burnett. Of course we all remember what DT Siragusa did to Rich Gannon.

On the other hand the Jaguars were helpless against the Patriots because they couldn't touch Brady.

The QB is far and away the most important player on the field. The fate of every play starts in his hands. He must go down and he must go down hard.

 

[Bills_Fan11]

I think pass rush is the most important part of a defense. If you beat on the opposing QB enough you will win.The Giants protected a mediocre secondary with their incredible pass rush. The Bucs Tampa-2 didn't get them to a SB until they added Simeon Rice. The Ravens may have been strongest at LB, but they also had good ends in McCrary and Burnett. Of course we all remember what DT Siragusa did to Rich Gannon.On the other hand the Jaguars were helpless against the Patriots because they couldn't touch Brady. The QB is far and away the most important player on the field. The fate of every play starts in his hands. He must go down and he must go down hard.

I sort of agree, but it should probably be pointed out that the pre-Rice Bucs didn't lose to the Rams 11-6 because of their defense. The Jags didn't really design their gameplan to pressure Brady, but that could've been because they didn't feel they had the personnel even if they tried.

 

[massraider]

I like those numbers Chase, I think I'd probably have DE1 as the #1 defensive position, as I think teams can hide/protect their MLB in certain schemes, and a stud DE is equally valuable to anyone.

of course, as I post that, I wonder about 3-4 defenses, that don't need stud DEs.