Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

15 Jun 2010

ESPN: Spending By Position

This week's ESPN article uses salary data to analyze who spent the most and least at each position in 2009, and what return those teams got on their investment.

Posted by: Bill Barnwell on 15 Jun 2010

5 comments, Last at 17 Jun 2010, 11:55am by are-tee


by mschuttke :: Tue, 06/15/2010 - 3:55pm

To me, this further proves that the draft is still a bargain when compared to free-agency as it relates to building a team.

by Joseph :: Wed, 06/16/2010 - 12:29pm

The first two parts state what is obvious to anyone who reads FO--spend money on your QB, not your RB. Regarding the O-line and Miami, isn't that the reason for their success? I mean, Brown, Williams, & the FB Polite (iirc) aren't LDT in his prime and Peterson. As far as defense goes, I think that you pay money to obviously good players who would start anywhere, and work your way down from there. For example, that's why the Saints didn't pay Sharper as an UFA, and their SS Roman Harper signed his tender at the deadline to avoid getting a MAJOR pay cut. Neither of those guys are difference-makers--they're average starters. Sharper an All-Pro at pass D, but below replacement at run D--thus an average safety with one really marketable skill in Gregg Williams' attaking defense--but not in Minnesota's.

by tuluse :: Wed, 06/16/2010 - 1:41pm

I think Ronnie Brown is underrated. If he could only stay healthy.

by are-tee :: Thu, 06/17/2010 - 11:55am

"Regarding the O-line and Miami, isn't that the reason for their success?"

Only if you define "sucess" as a 7-9 record and third place.

by mickeyg13 :: Wed, 06/16/2010 - 6:26pm

No offense, but there's not any real analysis here. I expected a discussion involving perhaps replacement-level or the spread in talent at various positions. Those concepts can help provide a framework for what teams *should* be spending on various positions. Looking at the extremes tells us very little, especially when you don't even compare across positions. It might, for instance, be the case that the team that spent the least on say DL got the least production out of DL, but that it nonetheless made a wise decision because perhaps there is very little spread in talent at DL relative to other positions.

FO has set the bar for themselves higher than this...