Jump to content

Are DEs ends the RBs of Defense?


cconocool

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, diamondbull424 said:

😂 

I would love to hear your argument for how it is more important than all other positions in professional sports outside of which I presume to be QB at #1.

what else would you have picked? Maybe point guard?

 

The QB is clearly the most important. The guy whose job it is to kill the QB is therefore the 2nd most important. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, cconocool said:

I was thinking this for a few years. On the Vikings defensive line, production along the defensive end position hasn't had a huge dip depending on who's playing. Better players do produce better stats, but it isn't a huge disparity against someone who is a back-up, paid less a fraction of what an elite player makes. 

I don't think so.  I think you might be looking at 3-4 defenses, where the OLB'ers are rushing the QB.  In a 4-3 defense, those players will be your DE.  3-4 DE's still have potential to rack up numbers- Jonathan Allen had 8 sacks for a pretty bad Washington defense last year.  I think the run-stuffing NT is going the way of the dodo, so they don't qualify for this.  

3-4 MLB's or 4-3 OLB's are definitely the RBs of the defense.  Very few of those guys are three down players.  Any linebacker who can tackle and cover is taken early, and teams usually plug and play at least one of those positions depending on what package they are running at specific times.  At least one 4-3 OLB or 3-4 MLB are usually the first to come off the field when a nickel corner comes in.  Both 4-3 OLBs may come off the field when adding two DBs as well.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, KingOfNewYork said:

An Ace is going 3 games in a 7 game series. Closers are also vital. Mets blew like 30 saves last year because of Diaz. 

That was my point. Outside off some crazy crap even the best pitchers do not play every game. Just saying that makes them less important than a qb or goalie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, cconocool said:

I was thinking this for a few years. On the Vikings defensive line, production along the defensive end position hasn't had a huge dip depending on who's playing. Better players do produce better stats, but it isn't a huge disparity against someone who is a back-up, paid less a fraction of what an elite player makes. 

For our team (NE) it might be? We get rid of players Chandler Jones, plug in Jabaal Sheard or John Simon and make it work. I don't know if that makes them the RB of the D, but in our system, 1 player is expendable because it's all down to scheme. If you can't two-gap, if you're not disciplined and can't follow an assignment (for example don't rush Russel Wilson, just hold your blocker and wait...) then you're not on the team. So, maybe?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, KingOfNewYork said:

Quarterback

Pitcher

Goalie

Fly half in rugby (their closest version of a QB).

Box-to-box midfielder in soccer.

Striker in soccer (teams that don't get goals from strikers get relegated from divisions and go bankrupt eventually).

Fast paced bowler in cricket.

 

 

He said sports, so...

Edited by Hunter2_1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Vorsutus said:

That was my point. Outside off some crazy crap even the best pitchers do not play every game. Just saying that makes them less important than a qb or goalie

No way. A top-end ace pitcher is more important than an elite edge rusher. Yes he's only pitching every five games in the regular season, but when he does he has such a huge amount of control over the outcome of the game, it makes up for it. Then in the postseason when they can pitch twice in a series? And if you line it up right he can neutralize the other team's ace? It's definitely the pitcher over the DE.

Besides, give me elite pressure from the middle any day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pitchers don't play every game but they have a direct impact on the game orders of magnitude higher than a QB when they do play. If their catcher and defense are even of marginal quality they can pretty much shut down the opposing team on their own if they're talented enough. QBs being successful rely on so many things besides themselves to be successful, line play, coaching, game plan, decent receivers. QB more important overall I think, but I don't see how you could argue de>pitcher unless you have a strong dislike for baseball. Madison Bumgarner in the world series might have been the most dominant single player performance in a team sport I've seen.

I don't know enough about hockey or basketball but I'd wager goalie is more important too, basketball I know nothing. In soccer I'd wager a premier striker is more important as well. I mean, for most of these team sports you're probably going to have good arguments against any position in football (besides qb) since football has so many starters per team. Something like 25 starters versus 5 for basketball and 11 for soccer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...