NFL Pre-Draft Thoughts: Positional Value
Happy Sunday!
The NFL Combine wrapped up this weekend, so we are fully into NFL draft season. No surprise then that I’m seeing tons of conversation about the upcoming draft in April, including mock drafts, player projections, and content about team needs. That’s awesome for people like me that want to geek out over football, and you can easily spend hours (days? weeks?) pouring over every little nuance of potential roster moves. But there’s often something missing from a lot of the content I come across, specifically the importance of positional value and the cost of alternatives.
At a high-level, positional value is pretty straight forward and people get it intuitively: setting aside the talents of individual players, some positions generally have more value to teams than others. For example, it’s axiomatic that quarterbacks are more important in football than players at other positions, and it’s almost become dogma that left tackles are critical and that running backs should never be drafted early. Those conclusions make sense in the current NFL, but they don’t always provide enough information to weigh the relative values of NFL positions in general.
So, I want to use this post to talk about a pretty simple but powerful approach I like to use for understanding how to value the various position in the draft: who do you have to pay up for in free agency? If the position is expensive (especially at the top of the market), that strongly favors drafting it early.
Every year NFL teams dole out contracts in free agency, effectively putting a price on different players at different positions. That information is the purest form of price discovery that exists in the league since the draft isn’t a free market (worse teams get better picks), trades are much harder to measure when multiple players are involved, and undrafted free agents typically sign for the minimum. Thus we can use player contracts as a strong heuristic for how valuable each position is. The overall market still dictates the replacement cost for a particular position, regardless of whether an individual team has different views of positional value. Similarly, by looking at the broader market of player contracts, we can mostly ignore differences in perception about individual talent.
This approach isn’t anything unique that I’ve come up with, and I believe most teams do something like this when coming up with organizational draft philosophy. But it’s still a really useful exercise to go through because it forces you to think how much value you gain or give up by using draft picks (especially high draft picks) on particular positions.
The Process
Let’s start with the data on NFL contracts.
Every NFL player signs a contract with compensation comprised of base salary and often bonuses. It’s pretty common for NFL contracts include an upfront signing bonus (paid immediately) on top of base salaries (paid out weekly over each season of the contract) and future bonuses, too. Although some players—largely starters—get a portion of their future salary/bonus compensation guaranteed, typically NFL teams can release a player and avoid paying them future amounts. That means that assessing the “value” of an NFL contract can be a bit tricky.
To get around the valuation problem, I want to look at a couple different ways to value NFL contracts. The first is to look at the average annual value (AAV) of each contract—basically the total compensation divided by the number of years called for in the contract. The second is to look at the total guarantees in a contract. Looking at AAVs is the easiest short-hand, but I want to make sure there isn’t something totally unusual happening with guarantees (for example, some positions getting guarantees and others not). Plus, Overthecap and Spotrac have this kind of information readily available and I’m all about convenience.
Using data from Overthecap, I pulled together a list of all players league-wide under contract as of February 26, 2024 by position. I used positional groupings from Overthecap, too, except I excluded positions that aren’t common to all teams (fullbacks) or are purely for special teams (kickers, punters, etc.). The groups are as follows:
Offense:
Quarterbacks
Running backs
Wide receivers
Tight ends
Left tackles
Right tackles
Left guards
Right guards
Centers
Defense:
Interior defensive linemen
Edge rushers
Linebackers (excluding 3-4 outside linebackers)
Cornerbacks
Safeties
[The positional grouping for each player can be debated sometimes, particularly for positions like left vs. right side on the offensive line or between interior defensive linemen and edge rushers. I looked over how Overthecap grouped them and it seemed reasonable to me, though, so I didn’t dwell on it.].
The compensation data for the position groupings we care about covers 2,296 players (it’s available here, or you can email me if you want a copy of the spreadsheet I pulled the data into).
Looking at the data as a whole, it jumps out right away that the NFL pays top-tier players well and the lower-end players very little. At the high end, 19 players have contracts with AAVs of $30 million or more. On the other end of the spectrum, the vast majority of players—over 70%—are on contracts with AAVs under $2 million (for reference, the league minimum for 2024 ranges from $795,000 to $1.21 million depending on seniority); about the same number have less than $2 million in salary guarantees, too.
This disparity makes some sense once you consider that NFL teams have 53-man rosters (plus practice squads) and there is a distinct need to employ backups, special teamers, and injury replacements.
Practically speaking, it also means that at the bottom end of the pay scale, it’s basically impossible to draw meaningful conclusions about positional value because all the contracts start collapsing toward the league minimum salary. To avoid that issue, I’ve basically ignored lower-end contracts for purposes of this article (trust me, it doesn’t make a difference).
I also want to quickly point out that obviously not all positions are the same in terms of how many players you need to play them. Only 32 quarterbacks can start in the NFL, but most teams effectively “start” three wide receivers, two or three cornerbacks, two or three linebackers, two safeties, two edges, and two interior defensive linemen. That obviously has a material impact on the market—there are more wide receivers and cornerbacks that actually play than there are quarterbacks (before accounting for backups). That reality should be priced into player salaries, but it’s worth keeping in mind.
Where Does the Money Go?
The chart below shows averages of the Top 5, Top 10, Top 20, Top 30, and Top 50 highest AAVs by position. As a cautionary note, these aren’t perfectly apples to apples comparisons for the top 50 column in particular, as there are different numbers of players at different positions.
[Figure 1]
The next chart shows the average total guarantees by position for the same groups (Top 5, Top 10, Top 20, Top 30, and Top 50).
[Figure 2]
Something leaps out immediately: Quarterbacks are crazy valuable!
That’s not really a surprise to anyone. In fact, they’re so valuable that they distract from what’s going on with the other positions. So let’s take as true that quarterback is the most valuable position in football (at least based on how NFL teams pay them) and take it out of consideration for now.
We can re-work the chart to exclude quarterbacks—here’s the same data without quarterbacks shown:
[Figure 3]
And here’s a line graph based on the same data (rounded), which makes it a bit easier to compare the positions against one another generally. I find the line graph a little misleading, but it’s a useful way to compare the positions at the different levels of extraction (top 5 to top 50).
[Figure 4]
Figures 5 and 6 are similar to Figures 3 and 4, but but by Total Guarantees:
[Figure 5]
[Figure 6]
These charts (Figures 3 to 6) are a bit easier to follow without quarterbacks mucking things up with their giant contracts.
I'm also including a table with the rounded dollar figures in millions (Figure 7) so they’re easier to see—you’re welcome to trace the bar charts if you like.
[Figure 7]
Alright, that’s out of the way.
This information is helpful to rank positions by value.
When looking at position AAVs, a pretty clear ranking shows up at the top of the market (top 5 and top 10):
Edge rushers
Wide receivers
Interior defensive line
Left tackles
Cornerbacks
Right tackles
Linebackers (T-7)
Safeties (T-7)
Tight ends (T-9)
Right guards (T-9)
Left guards (T-9)
Running backs
Centers
But if you look at top-market total guarantees, another order pops up—I’ve put in bold red text the positions that moved down and bold green text the positions that moved up relative to the AAV order:
Edge rushers (massive advantage over every other non-QB position)
Wide receivers
Cornerbacks
Interior defensive line
Left tackles
Right tackles
Linebackers
Safeties (T-8)
Tight ends (T-8)
Left guard
Right guard
Centers
Running backs
These generally rankings seem to generally stay roughly the same even as you expand to bigger shares of the market (top 30 and top 50 players at each position), but it’s again worth noting that the number of players that actually see the field for a given position (without injuries) starts to have a bigger impact once you get past the top 20-30 players at the position. This is most apparent with cornerbacks passing left tackles for AAV at the top 30—assuming health, only 32 left tackles start league-wide on any given Sunday, whereas you’re going to see at least 64 cornerbacks play each week (and probably closer to 96, since almost every team plays a lot of nickel defense at least). That same thing probably also explains why right guards, left guards, and centers all start to lump together after the top 20—at a certain point, you’re talking about replacement-level starters or backups at relatively low cost positions.
I was also curious and looked at the same AAV and total guarantees compensation data for each position sorted by the percentile ranking within the position itself. The data here isn’t averaged out by top 5, top 10, etc., it’s just the straight data. I also took out anything below the 75th percentile as the compensation starts to veer off toward the league minimum and just collapses on itself. I think it tells a pretty similar story, but I’ll post it anyway so folks can see (Figures 8 and 9 below). The major caveat here is that the number of players at each position has a HUGE impact on the bar charts below—offensive line at every level looks way more expensive, but that’s because there are the fewest players under contract at those positions. The data set I have covers 94 left tackles, 99 right tackles, 93 left guards, 77 right guards, and 70 centers, while there are 307 wide receivers, 277 cornerbacks, 234 interior defensive linemen, 231 edge rushers, 219 linebackers, 182 safeties, 159 running backs, and 153 tight ends. It skews the percentile comparisons a lot. For example the 75th percentile center is #18 in the league, whereas a 75th percentile wide receiver is #77. Take these with a grain of salt.
[Figure 8]
[Figure 9]
Lessons for Drafting
So let’s get to some lessons we can draw from the information above about the draft.
Edges and wide receivers are ideal early draft targets.
Excluding quarterbacks, the top edge rushers and wide receivers get more money per year on average than anyone else and get the most in guarantees. That premium cost shows up at the top end of the market clearly, but it continues even as you move downward. These are obviously high-value positions in the modern NFL, where the passing game is so important, but the substantial distance between their average pay and guarantees compared to other premium positions like cornerback and left tackle is pretty apparent, especially at the very top of the market.
The value of finding high-end talent at these positions in the draft is absolutely massive. First round rookies get signed to 4 year deals with a 5th year team option, so locking in All-Pro level talent with a first round pick at edge rusher or wide receiver can create a huge amount of surplus value to the team compared to getting the same level of talent at other positions.
I also want to flag something that came up as a bit of a surprise to me. Edge rushers get absolutely massive total guarantees in the veteran market compared to every other non-QB position (even wide receivers). If you look at Figures 5 and 6, it jumps out immediately—they’re getting $30 million or more in guarantees than any other position. While edge rushers may only make a couple million more per year than wide receivers at the high end of the market, that difference in guarantees actually is a major, major difference for teams who need to worry about the risk of injury.
If you assume (as I do) that over time and on average, higher draft picks are more likely to end up being high-end NFL players, there’s no doubt that focusing on edge rusher and wide receiver for team’s premium draft assets (first round and second round picks) is a good bet.
On top of that, from a practical perspective, every team has to have at least three capable wide receivers and edge rushers. Offenses frequently run 3 WR sets and edge rushers really can’t stay on the field the entire game no matter how good they are. So even if you don’t get a player who turns out to be a top-of-market talent, landing guys who can play even at a back-end starter level has incredible financial value.
Don’t Forget the Beef (At Least On Defense)
You never hear anyone talk about defensive tackles as a premium position, pretty much ever. Occasionally, reporters and prognosticators will talk about how a couple interior D-linemen like Aaron Donald, Chris Jones, or Quinnen Williams are valuable because they can pass rush like ends, but that’s really understating things hugely. Even guys who are thought of more often as space eaters like Dalvin Tomlinson and DJ Reader are making $13-14 million per season on average. In fact, at every level of the market, defensive tackles are getting paid more than offensive tackles (left or right side) and corners, which isn’t the prevailing wisdom amongst pundits and draft watchers.
Also, like with edges and wide receivers, most teams have to regularly play three or more defensive tackles every game. These guys are big and asked to do a lot athletically—they need breathers, more than most positions. Having extras makes sense. And even if a defensive tackle doesn’t turn out to be an All Pro, having a top 50 player at the position is more valuable than getting a comparably talented offensive lineman, who will inevitably be a backup.
Be Cautious Drafting Right Tackles Early
The whole league values left tackles more than right tackles, since they’re the blindside protectors for right handed quarterbacks (though obviously there are a number of lefties in the NFL now like Tua Tagovailoa), so it’s no surprise that LTs are generally paid more than RTs per year. But I was surprised by how much of a gap shows up at the middle- and lower-end of the market for starters.
Amongst the top 10 players at each position, left tackles are paid on average about 13% more than right tackles. But that gap widens substantially when you look at the top 20 and top 30 at each position, where the pay difference is about 26% and 25% respectively. Using a high pick on a right tackle can be fine (it’s about middle of the pack in terms of positional value) if you end up with a high-end starter, but if you end up with a back-end starter it’s a lot less efficient financially that drafting a left tackle.
Common Wisdom Is Sometimes Spot On
Football followers all know this by now, but the league does not value running backs. The league’s highest paid (and presumably best) running backs are getting paid comparably to the 50th best edge rushers and wide receivers, or the 30th best corners and left tackles. Forget whether it’s true that you can find running backs late in the draft—simply paying for a running back in free agency is a cheap alternative to drafting one early. The opportunity cost of using early picks on running backs is far too high to justify in most situations. You’d have to believe that a given running back you draft will be a top 5 player at his position versus believing that an edge rusher you draft would be a top 50 player for it to make any sense.
Teams Seem to Know Centers Are Cheap, But Does Anyone Else?
I keep seeing mock drafts putting multiple centers in the first two rounds—usually Jackson Powers-Johnson from Oregon, Graham Barton from Duke, and Zach Frazier from West Virginia. That’s not a good use of draft capital, as centers are one of the easiest positions to fill in the open market, where a starting caliber player (top 20) is actually cheaper than even running backs. I never hear analysts talk about this, but it’s a useful lesson. DON’T WASTE EARLY PICKS!
A similar thing can be said for guards even though the top of the market is more robust. If a team thinks a guard will be a top 5 player at his position, it could be worth using early draft capital on him—any other outcome, and it’s similar to drafting a running back or center. It’s not a good position to use early draft capital on.
Safeties, Tight Ends, and Linebackers Are Fine, I Guess?
Perhaps the least interesting groups here are safeties, tight ends, and linebackers. Their comp seems to track each other reasonably closely and they land pretty squarely in the middle of the value stack. As a result, drafting them early isn’t the highest use of resources, but it’s not as inefficient as drafting RBs or interior offensive lineman like guards and centers. The “best case” outcomes really pale in comparison to edges, wide receivers, interior DL, and left tackles in terms of potential value though, so it’s probably best to avoid using first round picks on these positions even if you think the player is going to be great—just pay somebody in free agency instead.
Wrap Up
I really like looking at positional drafting based on market cost. It’s simple, intuitive, and reflects the real world value of the position. Teams always have the option of filling roster holes with free agency instead of the draft, so they ought to be thinking about how much it costs to do so when evaluating picks. Of course there are other interesting ways at looking at positional value (Pro Football Focus has a fun one looking at their wins above average stat), but most of them tend to rely on imperfect comparisons that may not reflect what’s actually happening in the league, so I tend to put less weight on them. And while obviously teams need to think about things like draft slot and their own roster, scheme, and strategy—those are important!—they always have to live by the rules of the market they exist in, since roster needs change, coaches get fired, and prevailing wisdom changes. Looking to the alternative cost of filling roster holes, besides draft picks, is a good place to start.