Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Value of Position versus Value of Player

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Value of Position versus Value of Player

    Value: The regard that something is held to deserve; the importance, worth, or usefulness of something.

    For a first round pick what is more important? Position or Player?

    For me a first round pick only needs to achieve 3 goals

    1) Must be ready to play day one.
    2) Must make other teams have to scheme against him.
    3) No body is a better choice. at the time of the pick.

    Any position on the field with a 1st round pick if the right player is chosen, should be able to achieve all 3 the moment they are picked.

    So where is the grey area lies between Player
    versus Position?
    I could make compelling arguments for both sides. The entire MB can and will.


    Some would argue some positions in the 1st round should be held in higher regard than others. I agree to some extent but I am not as convinced as I once was.

    QB ,LT, Edge Rusher, WR, DB all seem to be in higher standing then other positions ( at least in the first 15 picks)
    If you observe what these positions all have in common. One thing is obvious. Pass the ball. Stop the pass.
    I can agree you need DBs and a quality pass rush ( always have always will) but should the rest of the Defense suffer for that mind set?

    So why did the Giants GM take a RB and a Guard with the first 2 picks? If position holds more value than Player?
    I kind of have an idea on why. Do you?

    Does position hold more weight than player?

    We could have taken a QB with the #2 pick
    .
    70% chance in any given draft a franchise QB is taken
    50% chance after the 1st Qb is taken off the board half of 70% is 35%. To get a franchise QB in any given draft after the first is picked.

    Was a 35% success rate worth that position with the 2nd pick? after the Browns took a QB?

    Some would argue this is a unique class. 20 years of drafts that I researched (the 04 class was an anomaly) Not one GM, HC , OC, QBC has been able to break the stats. Often the 1st QB taken is a hit the others are statically not worth a high pick.

    Is a QB worth a gamble with any top of the 1st picks that is not the first overall?

    Even with the blatant failure rate. QBs are still highly prized, The (pass the ball stop the pass) mindset that drives the madness.
    IMO: the mindset Reese had when he drafted Flowers and Apple

    So I believe I have established why the list QB, ER, LT WR, DB are so highly picked with the first 15 picks

    The question is: are they more valuable that the a TE, RB, MLB, DT, OG. (there are instances that these positions get drafted with high picks and have been in more recent years. But it not the norm ( or is it becoming)

    This is where the logic of that ( pass the ball, stop the pass) mindset comes into play. If there are so few “pure passers” and quality pass protectors in the NFL . Why try to build a team that cannot do what you want it to do? There are a handful of teams over the past few decades that have dominated with multiple wins. Yet every other team tries to follow that model “QB, ER, LT, WR, DB” with a top draft pick with futility and failure.. IMO: It is insanity.

    Now it seems some GMs have kind of broke away from that mind set. Are going back to Player value as opposed to Position value. Will it pay off hard to say. It is a change from a model that become elitist for some teams and a nightmare for the rest of the league. (Except for NE)


    So it goes back to Value of Position
    versus Value of Player?

    I would love to read your thoughts.
    Last edited by TEM; 05-12-2018, 10:11 AM.
    "Three things can happen when you throw the ball, and two of them are bad." Darrell Royal

  • #2
    Best player available should be taken regardless of position.

    Always.

    Keeps the decision process simple.
    "Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened." -- Dr. Seuss

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by WayBackFan View Post
      Best player available should be taken regardless of position.

      Always.
      I agree.
      "Three things can happen when you throw the ball, and two of them are bad." Darrell Royal

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by TEM View Post

        I agree.
        Finally, someone agrees with me.

        Oz has spoken!
        "Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened." -- Dr. Seuss

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by WayBackFan View Post

          Finally, someone agrees with me.

          Oz has spoken!
          but it seems most of the NFL does not, at least with in the first 15 picks. I find it hard to believe that TEs RBs OG, RTs and MLBs are not statistically in line with QBs, LT, Edge Rushers, WR and DBs, If the BPA model is adhered to. It would be spastically close. The whole BPA when spoken is falsely when compare to best player at one of the desired positions is available. By stats as it stands position trumps ( BPA) at least for most teams mindset. It is showing to be a model of failure for most teams.
          Last edited by TEM; 05-12-2018, 10:31 AM.
          "Three things can happen when you throw the ball, and two of them are bad." Darrell Royal

          Comment


          • #6
            TEM good to see you change your tune and are excited about the offenses potential with Barkley.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by EliDaMANning View Post
              TEM good to see you change your tune and are excited about the offenses potential with Barkley.
              I tried to wrap my head around the rational for a pick . I tried to look at it from a perspective that was not my own, What the NFL does and has been doing ? Why the Giants did not follow the status quo.
              "Three things can happen when you throw the ball, and two of them are bad." Darrell Royal

              Comment


              • #8
                All GMs have assets to build a team. These assets are players on the roster, draft picks, and dollars. Some positions fetch you more in a trade assuming a comparison of similar talent level (i.e. a good qb will fetch you more in a trade than a good mlb), some positions cost more than others, and the higher the draft pick the better chance at a good player.

                That's all matter of fact stuff.

                So, if you're a GM, how do you maximize your chances of having a good player at every position? To me, it's obvious, you draft the most expensive positions with your highest picks and spend your cap money on the cheapest positions.

                So, completely random scenario. Say you have the #2 overall pick and 20m in cap space in any given offseason and you have a top level quarterback already on your team. Looking at positional contracts, with these resources you can either sign the best pass rusher on the market and draft the top RB in the draft or you can draft the top pass rusher and sign the best running back and the best middle linebacker.

                It's a simple scenario, sure, but I hope this helps demonstrate the need to maximize how you invest all of your assets.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Imgrate View Post
                  All GMs have assets to build a team. These assets are players on the roster, draft picks, and dollars. Some positions fetch you more in a trade assuming a comparison of similar talent level (i.e. a good qb will fetch you more in a trade than a good mlb), some positions cost more than others, and the higher the draft pick the better chance at a good player.

                  That's all matter of fact stuff.

                  So, if you're a GM, how do you maximize your chances of having a good player at every position? To me, it's obvious, you draft the most expensive positions with your highest picks and spend your cap money on the cheapest positions.

                  So, completely random scenario. Say you have the #2 overall pick and 20m in cap space in any given offseason and you have a top level quarterback already on your team. Looking at positional contracts, with these resources you can either sign the best pass rusher on the market and draft the top RB in the draft or you can draft the top pass rusher and sign the best running back and the best middle linebacker.

                  It's a simple scenario, sure, but I hope this helps demonstrate the need to maximize how you invest all of your assets.

                  I get you analogy . It goes back to value of Position vs Player. I would sign the proven Pass rusher and draft a the RB. A proven pass rusher is like a proven LT . They are a rare commodity when one becomes available . It is worth the expense.
                  Last edited by TEM; 05-12-2018, 04:48 PM.
                  "Three things can happen when you throw the ball, and two of them are bad." Darrell Royal

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Imgrate View Post
                    All GMs have assets to build a team. These assets are players on the roster, draft picks, and dollars. Some positions fetch you more in a trade assuming a comparison of similar talent level (i.e. a good qb will fetch you more in a trade than a good mlb), some positions cost more than others, and the higher the draft pick the better chance at a good player.

                    That's all matter of fact stuff.

                    So, if you're a GM, how do you maximize your chances of having a good player at every position? To me, it's obvious, you draft the most expensive positions with your highest picks and spend your cap money on the cheapest positions.

                    So, completely random scenario. Say you have the #2 overall pick and 20m in cap space in any given offseason and you have a top level quarterback already on your team. Looking at positional contracts, with these resources you can either sign the best pass rusher on the market and draft the top RB in the draft or you can draft the top pass rusher and sign the best running back and the best middle linebacker.

                    It's a simple scenario, sure, but I hope this helps demonstrate the need to maximize how you invest all of your assets.
                    Value is not everything. Building a winning team is. You find players to fit your scheme anyway you can. Barkley fit what the giants are trying to build perfectly. And I dont mind the giants spending money on a lt like solider because you know what your going to get. Too many times lineman come out of the draft and struggle with the pro game.
                    [SIGPIC]

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by TEM View Post


                      I get you analogy . It goes back to value of Position vs Player. I would sign the proven Pass rusher and draft a the RB. A proven pass rusher is like a proven LT . They are a rare commodity when one becomes available . It is worth the expense.
                      Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems youre operating under the assumption that there is no risk in free agency. I mean I know you understand there's some risk involved (older player will be more injury prone, might fall off I production at end of contract, might get complacent due to financial security, etc.).

                      In my proposed team building model, I am increasing the amount of opportunities to acquire high level players, whereas your thought process theoretically decreases the risk associated with acquiring a lower number of high level players.

                      I wish I had the time and effort to do a thorough study on this, it would be fun to do something along the lines of simulating building a team based off say Daniel Jeremiahs top prospects, but only drafting expensive positions in the top 3 rounds and then buying top free agents at lower costing positions.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by bigbluejeep8888 View Post

                        Value is not everything. Building a winning team is. You find players to fit your scheme anyway you can. Barkley fit what the giants are trying to build perfectly. And I dont mind the giants spending money on a lt like solider because you know what your going to get. Too many times lineman come out of the draft and struggle with the pro game.
                        Getting the most value out of your assets is what helps you build a winning team, though. There's a reason teams with good qbs on rookie deals tend to be good. It's because they have 20mill a year more in cap space to throw around. That's like two pro bowl cornerbacks

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Imgrate View Post

                          Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems youre operating under the assumption that there is no risk in free agency. I mean I know you understand there's some risk involved (older player will be more injury prone, might fall off I production at end of contract, might get complacent due to financial security, etc.).

                          In my proposed team building model, I am increasing the amount of opportunities to acquire high level players, whereas your thought process theoretically decreases the risk associated with acquiring a lower number of high level players.

                          I wish I had the time and effort to do a thorough study on this, it would be fun to do something along the lines of simulating building a team based off say Daniel Jeremiahs top prospects, but only drafting expensive positions in the top 3 rounds and then buying top free agents at lower costing positions.
                          There is always risk ,but less risk than drafting.
                          "Three things can happen when you throw the ball, and two of them are bad." Darrell Royal

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Imgrate View Post

                            Getting the most value out of your assets is what helps you build a winning team, though. There's a reason teams with good qbs on rookie deals tend to be good. It's because they have 20mill a year more in cap space to throw around. That's like two pro bowl cornerbacks
                            Yea but that does not always win Ben Eli Rodgers Brady all have won with big contracts. Investment assets and value are 2 different things. A good investment can put a trophy in the case . Placing a value on a player in the draft opposed to a position builds a team.
                            "Three things can happen when you throw the ball, and two of them are bad." Darrell Royal

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by TEM View Post

                              There is always risk ,but less risk than drafting.
                              I would tend to agree, but I don't think it's as big of a gap as we might think. Alot of free agent pickups and/or contract extensions end up poorly.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X