Quote
rampage666
I like your thinking. One thing I'd like to add is how I look at BPA. My version of BPA includes a weight for positional importance. Positional importance is a combination of the position's contribution to winning + the position's average player cost.
For example, say I have a CB and a RB and both players are tied talent wise. I will always take the CB because that position makes a greater impact on winning games. And CBs make more in salary than RBs. So, if I hit on the CB I save a more salary cap space than if I took the rb.
For reference the positions I rank as having the highest impact on winning games:
QB<-WR<-CB<-Coverage ILB<-OT<-Pass rusher<-Safety
And as you move further to the right the difference in win contribution from one position to the next decreases.
Interesting thoughts. But I would rank RB higher in terms of the impact on winning. What balances that is that very good CBs are harder to find than good RBs.