I’ve been doing a lot of work on what positional value is and how to best take advantage of it. So far my findings suggest that top 40 picks are the key to most high value positions, which according to NFL contract metrics, teams value in this order Extremely High Priority 1. Quarterback 2. Edge Rusher High Priority 1. Left Tackle 2. Pass Rushing Interior Defensive Line 3. Wide Receiver 4. Cornerback Middle Priority 1. Linebacker 2. Right Tackle 3. Safety 4. Guard Low Priority 1. Tight End 2. Running Back 3. Center In Joe Douglas’ tenure the Jets have invested a 1st round pick at QB, LT, + G. They also have Quinnen Williams as a former 1st round pick at IDL from the Maccagnan era. The 3 premier positions that remain uninvested are ED, WR, and CB. My research suggests that ED and CB should be targeted in the top 40, however WR shouldn’t be targeted in the top 40 unless it’s the top 10. I’ll touch on each position to explain my conclusion. If people have questions I’m happy to answer. QB: Finding a franchise QB is extremely difficult, but the top 40 is the most likely source and more specifically the top 10. I won’t go deep on this since the Jets have already invested a recent Top 10 pick on a young QB. ED: The top 40 is imperative to the elite pass rusher. 80% of the top 10 most lucrative ED contracts are for players drafted in the top 40. Much like QB however, top 10 makes a bigger difference. 40% of the top paid ED were top 10 picks, so unless you need a QB or an elite WR, there, you should just take an ED any time you’re in the top 10. If you aren’t drafting in the top 10, it should still be your #1 priority in the top 40 unless you already have an elite player at the position. Over the last 11 drafts, 1.64/year on average were taken in the top 10, and 6.18/year in the top 40. LT: The top 40 is also key for LT, but top 10 less so. 80% of the 10 most lucrative LT contracts were top 40 picks. While highly valuable, LT does not need to be prioritized in the top 10. Over the last 11 drafts, 1.36/year OT’s on average were taken in the top 10, and 5/year in the top 40. IDL: While many people feel DT is not a position that needs to be addressed in the top 40, this is only true for run stop specialists. It may surprise you to know that not only is IDL more well compensated than WR or CB, but 90% of the 10 most well compensated DT’s were taken in the top 40 picks. It doesn’t need to be a top 10 priority, but if you want an elite rusher from the interior of the DL, you really need to address it in the top 40. It is interesting to note however, IDL drafted in the top 10 have a low bust rate. Over the last 11 drafts, 0.55/year on average were taken in the top 10, and 3.91/year in the top 40. WR: This is perhaps the most interesting position. My research suggests that WR should be prioritized in the top 10, or outside of the top 40. Only 40% of the 10 most well compensated WR’s were drafted in the top 40, while 30% were top 10 picks. This indicates that a WR with both dominant traits and production in college such that they are top 10 worthy is significantly more likely to achieve elite status in the NFL. But once you break out of the top 10, WR should not be prioritized until into round 2 and beyond, by finding players with 1 or 2 high level skills and accumulating these players in volume because you are more likely to strike gold within that volume. Over the last 11 drafts, 1.27/year on average were taken in the top 10, and 5.09/ year in the top 40. CB: This position ties IDL at 90% of the 10 most well compensated players being top 40 picks. It’s not likely you will find a top player at this position later than this, so top picks should be invested here. If you don’t need QB, ED, LT, or IDL and your first round pick is outside of the top 10, you should target this position. If you are picking in the top 10 and you have a WR, or no WR warrants it, you can still target this position. Although only 20% of the top players were top 10 picks, it jumps to 40% if you fudge it to the top 11 picks so this is still a worthwhile position to draft high. Over the last 11 drafts, 1.09/year on average were taken in the top 10, and 5/year in the top 40. At this point you we step out of the premier positions, and while the information I’ll give you here will tell you the best place to find elite players at the position, you also have to ask exactly how important is it to find an elite player at this position? LB: Only 40% of the top 10 most well compensated LB’s were top 40 picks, and 0 of them were top 10 picks. If you want an elite LB, you have equally as good of a chance (if not better) to find them in picks 41-70 as you do in 11-40, so you really shouldn’t be spending a top pick on a LB. Over the last 11 drafts, 0.55/year on average were taken in the top 10, and 2.82/year in the top 40. RT: The market for RT’s seems to be climbing at a faster pace since last year, but as of now there is still a significant gap between LT and RT. 50% of the top RT contracts are with players who were top 40 picks, although one has to keep in mind many highly drafted OT were probably intended to be LT’s or at least with the hope that they might be. At least 40% of these top RT’s I know for certain were drafted with the intent to be the franchise LT, but their teams ended up with other elite LT’s for various reasons. It does appear that most elite RT’s were drafted somewhere in the 1st or 2nd rounds. S: This position comes in at 50% of the top players being drafted in the top 40, but with the caveat that one was drafted as a CB and two others were late 30’s picks. Keeping that in mind, and looking at the other 50% scattered throughout rounds 2 and 3, there is also little reason to spend a top 40 pick here. Only 10% of them were drafted in the top 10. Over the last 11 drafts, 0.18/year on average were taken in the top 10, and 2.55/year in the top 40. G: While 50% of the top G contracts are with top 40 picks, it drops down to 10% if you exclude G’s who were initially drafted as OT’s but ended up as G’s, and G’s that were drafted in the mid-late 30’s. Rounds 2+3 are the primary source for G’s, although earlier in the 2nd will be your best bet to find an elite one. Over the last 11 drafts, 0.27/year on average were taken in the top 10, and 1.64/year in the top 40. TE: Only 20% of the top TE contracts are with top 40 picks. Nearly all of the top contracts are for TE’s scattered throughout rounds 2+3, and a couple are even later. Although I didn’t include rookie contracts, the market for TE’s is so low that Kyle Pitts already has one of the best TE contracts in the entire league just because the Falcons drafted him so high. To make the point… The Falcons are essentially paying more for Pitts than the Chargers are paying for Justin Herbert. There is nearly no reason to draft a TE in the top 40. Over the last 11 drafts, 0.27/year on average were taken in the top 10, and 1.18/year in the top 40. RB: Running back is also an interesting position, but more so for another stat that I’ll bring up later. Only 40% of the top RB contracts are with top 40 picks, although another 30% fall within picks 41-48. While there are effective RB’s throughout the draft, to obtain an elite player you probably have to look at the top of the 2nd round. Over the last 11 drafts, 0.55/year on average were taken in the top 10, and 2.09/year in the top 40. C: The least valued NFL position by contract values, it comes as no surprise that C has only 20% of its top contracts with top 40 picks. In fact, 50% of the top contracts are with players who were originally 5th and 6th round picks. The more you think about it, the more ludicrous it seems to spend a 1st round pick on a C. I am a Linderbaum lover, but frankly I’ve talked myself right out of picking him with my research. Over the last 11 drafts, 0/year on average were taken in the top 10, and 0.91/year in the top 40.
I think the last stat that I’ll include is the % of these top contracts that were available to be signed as FA. 1. C: 60% 2. G: 40% 2. RT: 40% 4. S: 30% 4. TE: 30% 4. CB: 30% 7. WR: 20% 8. ED: 10% 8. QB: 10% 8. LB: 10% 8. RB: 10% 12. LT: 0% 12. IDL: 0% What stands out to me here are two things. 1. “One of these things is not like the other.” By that I mean, if CB is a high value position, why is it more readily available in free agency? Well, I think the answer is twofold. Partly because at least one team overpaid for a non elite CB, bumping him into the top 10. And partly because true elite CB’s are extremely rare, and there may not be 10 elite CB’s on veteran contracts. Conversely, if LB and RB are lesser valued positions, why are so few available on the open market? For RB the answer is simple: There are only about 6 elite veteran RB’s, plus a couple who’s teams over-valued them. The last two make substantially less than the top 8. For LB? Well, similarly there are not a lot of elite veteran LB’s, and those elite players make a large difference. Since they are not particularly expensive, teams tend to extend them. 2. When you combine this info with everything from before, it lays out a clear path for maximizing positional value in this off-season. The Jets have needs at primary needs at ED, CB, S, G, TE, WR. They have secondary needs at IDL, LB, RB, OT. They should sign in FA: S x2 G x1 TE x1 WR x1 NT x1 RT x1 Only invest in starter level FA’s at S, G, TE. Rd 1 they should draft: ED+WR (If they believe there is an elite top 10 WR prospect) Or ED+CB Or ED+Trade Back+CB Rd 2 they should draft: IDL+CB Or IDL+Trade Back+WR Or IDL+Trade Back+LB Rd 3 they should draft: TE Rd 4 they should draft: G/C+RB Or GC+WR Or G/C+S Rd 5 they should draft: Any prospects they think have good upside I’ll be happy if they work within these combinations. I don’t know how they will feel about individual prospects, but generally it’s a deep CB class and it’s looking like a deep IDL class. So if they believe there is a top 10 worthy WR, my preference would be to come away from round 1 with an ED+WR and round 2 with an IDL and CB. If they spend a 2nd round pick on a veteran WR trade or there is no top 10 WR, I want ED+CB in round 1, and an IDL in round 2. I believe the Jets need to maximize their top 40 selections with the most valuable positions.
Outstanding analysis Max! I'd put your work at least equal to any of the "experts" and better than most of them. Thanks! The only thing I'll quibble about for the time being is I wouldn't say Edge = QB. I think QB is its own category - if a team doesn't already have a FQB and they have a chance to get one, that overrides everything else. And while I think your numbers are valid, I also think that sometimes the availability of a true "superstar" in a given position changes that positional value. Also, over the last couple of years positions like LT and TE have become more highly valued by teams. Anyway, none of that is to take away anything from your great effort here.
I agree about QB, and I didn’t dive into it since the Jets just drafted Zach Wilson but that would have been a way longer segment. What I would have done is had QB in its own tier, then ED in its own tier, then the others. As far as teams valuing any position more, the contract rates go up for every position over time. It just depends on which year you look at which makes it look like the largest jump. 2021 was a year in which RT, G, LB, S, and CB took notable steps. In 2020 it was LT, TE, QB, ED. They all go up but usually on a 2-3 year cycle. As far as availability of superstars, I think that’s built into the numbers. I worked on the numbers in two tiers for every position to get a good grasp on whether the position takes a substantial hit after the top 5. If you consider players in the top 5 positional contracts “Tier 1” it”s what I broke down here for you: 1. QB 2. ED 3. LT 4. IDL 5. WR 6. CB 7. LB 8. RT 9. S 10. G 11. TE 12. RB 13. C But if you add in the “Tier 2” (contracts 6-10) it looks like this: 1. QB1 2. QB2* 3. ED1 4. LT1 5. IDL1 6. WR1 7. CB1 8. ED2* 9. LB1 10. RT1 11. WR2* 12. IDL* 13. LT2* 14. S1 15. G1 16. CB2* 17. TE1 18. RB1 19. LB2* 20. S2* 21. C1 22. G2* 23. RT2* 24. RB2* 25. C2* 26. TE2* All of the Tier 1 to Tier 2 drop offs are very consistent, with the exception of CB. It does suggest that there may be a shortage in elite players at CB vs. above average players.
Holy shit, when I read stuff like this it makes me realize how much the game has gotten away from me. Thank you, Max, Penny, and many others who I actually rely on more than the "Cimini's" of the Jets universe, who I feel don't dive as deep as many of you! Kudos and keep it up!
If you’re talking about 2020 and 2021 playoffs only it’s: QB: 60% ED: 80% LT: 70% IDL: 80% WR: 80% CB: 70% LB: 40% RT: 70% S: 80% G: 90% TE: 100% RB: 70% C: 60% I’m not really sure how much it tells you though
2021 Playoff Teams with top 10 Paid Players: LAR: WR, IDL, ED, CB CIN: RB, CB SF: LT, TE, LB KC: QB, G, WR, TE, ED, IDL, S TB: LT, G, C, TE, WR, IDL, LB, ED BUF: QB, CB TEN: LT, G, WR, RB, LB, S GB: QB, LT, RB, IDL DAL: QB, G, RT, WR, RB, ED LV: ———— ARI: C, WR, TE, S PIT: IDL, ED NE: TE, TE, S PHI: G, LT, RT, TE, IDL, CB Non Playoff Teams, going down in draft order. NO: G, RT, RB, WR, ED, CB LAC: C, RT, WR, ED IND: QB, C, RT, RB, IDL, LB MIA: LB, CB, CB BAL: LT, TE, CB, CB CLE: G, G, C, RT, RB, ED, S MIN: QB, RT, RB, S WAS: C, TE, IDL, S SEA: QB, LB, S DEN: LT, RB, S ATL: QB, IDL, LB CHI: TE, ED, S CAR: C, RT, RB, LB NYG: WR, IDL, CB NYJ: C, RT, LB HOU: QB, LT DET: QB, LT, C, ED JAC: C, LB I think I included them all
Awesome, amazing work, Max. Thanks for doing this and sharing it! Like Colorado, I have a couple of questions/comments that don't detract from the excellence of your work. With WRs, if one waits until the 2nd round or beyond, one winds up having to choose from what's left, and that can make things more difficult, and perhaps less like to find a WR that has the traits/characteristics one wants for one's offense. A prime example of this is Mims. Evidently, JD was not very high on Mims. He only took him after trading down in the 2nd round. Had he stayed put, he could have taken Claypool, I'm assuming that he wouldn't have taken one in the 1st round since he wanted Becton to fill our glaring hole at LT. If LT hadn't been a need, or if we had traded down, or had a 2nd 1st round pick, we possibly could have wound up with Lamb, Jefferson or Pittman. The other thing about the WR position is that I think Jefferson, Lamb, Chase, and maybe Pittman are all in top 10 WRs in the NFL in terms of talent, if not production, and if you did your analysis 5 years from now, the stats would look very different as these WRs would be starting their 2nd contracts, and would be a lot higher paid, and older WRs who are in the top 10 like Davante Adams, DeAndre Hopkins, Allen Robinson who were taken outside of the top 10 or top 40 will be retired. The other thing that affects all the positions is that position groups seems to come in waves. For instance, at WR, last year was an exceptional draft for WRs. Before that, there hadn't been another great draft for WRs since 2014. So that affects when WRs are taken. In "down years" most WRs are probably not taken until the 2nd or 3rd round, maybe later. I think the same is true for the TE position. Traditionally, the position hasn't been valued. Now there are schemes that highly value the TE position. Teams are drafting TEs more in the 1st round, if not the top 10, and early second round. I think in 5 years the stats will look markedly different for the TE position. Also, for teams that run offenses that highly value the TE position, they desire to have more of an elite player at the position, rather than just a guy that they can get later in the draft. So those teams will affect the stats because they will draft TEs earlier and higher. I think the same could very well be true of the center position since the NFL has become more of a passing league and interior pressure can have the most adverse affect on QBs.
I think another reason that so many CBs become available is due to cap space issues. So many CBs wind up getting big contracts, and by the time a team pays its QB, LT, Edge, and perhaps an elite player at another positions, CB is one of the easiest places a GM can gain needed cap space. CB is somewhat like RB or WR where some rookies can come in and play at a very high level immediately.
Max you certainly get it! QB is the most important position in football so everything from defending him to protecting him to taking pressure off him to receiving passes from him is important. 1. QB 2. Edge 3. WR 4. T 5. LB 6. CB 7. RB 8. C 9. S 10. TE 11. G
Well, it’s definitely a snapshot in time. For WR’s who have been drafted in the last few years who haven’t reached their 2nd contract, I would say the top 10 in no particular order would be: -Ja’Marr Chase (5) -DeVonta Smith (10) -Jaylen Waddle (6) -Justin Jefferson (22) -Calvin Ridley (26) -AJ Brown (51) -Terry McLaurin (76) -Deebo Samuel (36) -CeeDee Lamb (17) -DK Metcalf (51) That list is made up of 60% players picked in the top 40 vs the 40% of the current most well compensated… but it’s impossible who will ride and fall over the next few years. Regardless, it’s still lesser than the 80-90% of the LT, ED, CB, and IDL groups. So really what I’m talking about is opportunity cost, Because while elite WR’s can be found outside of the top 40, it seems elite players at those other 4 positions generally can’t. So if you have needs at those premier positions, You have a better shot to hit both of you address the others beside WR in picks 11-40, and WR later. I’ll answer about TE’s separately. Edit: I meant top 10, not top 15 young WR’s who haven’t gotten a 2nd contract.
@NCJetsfan As far as TE, plenty of schemes if not all value the TE to some degree. But generally it’s either as a pass catcher or a run blocker, not both. If you have a scheme that depends on a TE to both be a high quality blocker and legit receiving threat, you’re probably not going to be super effective because those players are very rare. When we say the Shanahan wide zone scheme values TE’s what it really means is that it values a TE who can block well in the run game, and receiver skills are really secondary to that. There are other schemes that prefer flex tight ends who can threaten the seams, and blocking is really secondary for them. In the past 11 drafts, only 3 TE’s have gone top 10, (Ebron, Hockenson, and Pitts) and only 6 others (Eifert, Howard, Engram, Njoku, Hurst, and Fant). Most of them have been outright disappointments, and Pitts is really the only one who seems to be living up to the billing. The reason they are taken high is because they are rare athletes who are perceived to be players who can make use of dominant traits in the NFL, but the stats are telling us that you are just spending picks that you really should be spending on positions that you can’t find outside of the top 40. Would you rather find a TE or C in the 1st round and then only a 10% chance of finding an elite ED or LT later? Or would you rather have a good chance of finding a LT or ED in the 1st and also a good chance of finding a TE or C later? If you spend a 1st on a non premier position, yes, you may get a good player. But you are basically robbing yourself of the opportunity to get good players at premier positions. If you spend a 1st on a premier position, you have in no way inhibited your opportunity to then also get a good player at another 1-2 non premier positions. Ultimately, these draft tendencies and positional values exist because of an unspoken agreement between NFL teams. If 6-8 ED’s are always gone in the top 40, and 0-1 C’s are always gone in the top 40, if you wait until the 2nd to take an ED you probably have to take ED 9 or 10, but you’d be able to take C 1 or 2 or 3. If suddenly 4 C’s are going in the 1st round every year, it changes things. But I doubt a slew of NFL teams will suddenly change their practices at the same time.
This pretty much sums it all up. Again, there are exceptions to this, but a GM had better be a damn good judge of talent to go against these trends.
