Originally Posted by JoeyBoy718
Sorry if I'm misunderstanding this, but the percentage next to the position is supposed to indicate how much that position has to do with the team's overall chance of winning the game? And yet people are giving QB something like 14%. I would say arguably the three best teams in the league the past few seasons, the Patriots, Packers and Saints, all had clearly the best QBs in the league and some of the other positions, which people argue are so valuable, were quite awful. I just think the way the NFL is, that the QB position is much more valuable than 14%. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the ratings.
Great questions. The numbers next to the unit add up to 100%. I went through a few drafts on this and started with QB at 25% or .25
That fit in my mind until I started to quantify the other 10 offensive positions into groups.
Is the QB = to the remaining 10 starters on offense?
I think the best way to look at it is in three groups that have a roughly equal weighting.
QB (1)____________________ .17
Offensive skill players (5)_____.16
Offensive Lineman (5)________.17
Defensive Front (7)__________.34
What I found most interesting about the exercise is that if you stick to two key ground rules:
1) Offense = Defense
2) QB is king
You come up with a one farily significant conclusion. And that's that your average non-QB offensive player is less valuable than your average defensive player.