(10-29-2023, 11:47 PM)Jag149 Wrote:

(10-29-2023, 11:20 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: To fans - there may be no standardized accepted chart - but the league and front offices have been nerding out on this stuff for many years and much data has been collected. While limiting the amount of early round picks spent on RBs is a very wise move depending on roster development stage IMO - I realize that the odds of landing an elite level player after the 2nd round decrease of course. (for every position) 

Nonetheless - there is indeed an accepted hierarchy of positional value to NFL front offices. Even if managers may disagree on the finer points from one to the next.  

I like the methodology of getting your team set at QB, in the trenches, at least one upper tier secondary spot, and at at least two other skill positions before moving to spend a 1st or 2nd on a RB. Until such a time I'd spend 3rd rounders or less repeatedly until a capable backfield is filled out. 

Positional value chart:

https://overthecap.com/positional-value-in-the-nfl

Draft value and correlation to positional tiers:

https://unexpectedpoints.substack.com/p/...lue-curves

For every fortunate ETN selection there is an existing possibility of a Leonard Fournette selection that sets your team back years in roster development. I prefer to take such a gamble on positions of an accepted greater positional value BEFORE taking that risk at RB.

Thanks for the statistical references. While I am sure the math is correct and it truly shows the tendencies over a number of years . (I will use it this year) One issue I see is doesn't take into account the available position depth of a draft in a given year or the human side of the players fitting the team culture. How could it as those things vary year to year. I would expect a lot of teams have their own graph to begin the process with rather than depending on someone else's.  Isn't that what Tony K is doing?

 I understand the process you would like followed to build a team and that is fine. (I believe the 49ers followed that model but missed on the QB) I also understand you would not have taken the risk on ETN, neither would I, but in this case we were both wrong...lol

Fix the O-Line!