NDIrishGuy
Member
I just think you exaggerate to make your point. I think G is a bit more important than 'the most replaceable position' as you describe it. Even K and TE come to mind. And the stats... 9% of your starters??? By that measure, QB Is an even lower %. Is it then less important? If not, then why are you using that stat? I'm not going to get into a back/forth with you over this trivial stuff - it just seems you majorly exaggerate to justify a position. I might even agree with some of your positions. But your rational leaves me scratching my head at times.
Can't entirely defend his position or speak for him, but I think his argument lines up that for a truly important position the same percentage of first round picks (or more) should be used on them. QBs are 4.5% of the starters on a team, but well more than 4.5% of first round picks are used on them, indicating a higher priority position. Just like tackles are 9% of the starters, but more than 9% of first round picks are tackles. If you look at it in that regards I think you can see the point he is trying to make.