1st round pick = 3 points
2nd round pick = 2 points
3rd round pick = 1 point
OL=5 pts (ie Snee and Beatty 2 pts each, Hatch 1 pt)
QB=7 pts (Eli lovers, remember he cost you two 1's and a 3, forgetting the 5)
But wait, we now must divide by the number of starters on the field:
So we now get the final answer of number of draft points allocated to each WEIGHTED player spot over the past 10 years (sorted from highest to lowest):
QB = 7.0
WR = 5.0
TE = 3.8
DL = 3.0
RB = 2.3
LB = 1.2
OL = 1.0
1) First we have to note that 32 points of offense were drafted vs 29 points on defense, so overall there has no particular bias between squads.
2) OL and LB have been denied resources. It is a good thing one of the 5 picks in the first three rounds in 2009 was taken on a LBer (Sintim) or else this position would have come in at a whopping low of 0.4. That is embarrassing. OL needs more resources and this has not received much attention ONLY because of the (knock on wood) health of the starters not exposing the lack of depth.
3) Despite the fact that we have always been on record that the Eli Manning trade was overpayment, it should not bother anyone to see QB get these resources over a 10 year period. But once again, this 7.0 rating should remind everyone just how much Accorsi committed and just how exposed the franchise was if the pick did not work. There was no value and no margin for error.
4) WR got too many resources. It has gotten consistently too much attention and these numbers bear that out. About the only logical extension of this misallocation is that at least the Giants are consistent in also allocating heavy resources to the same people COVERING them- the Defensive Secondary. So if you want to observe anything from all of this, the FIRST THREE POSITIONS ACKNOWLEDGE HOW THE RULE CHANGES FAVORING PASSING HAVE AFFECTED THE GIANTS' FOCUS TO THE PLAYERS DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE PASSING GAME.