Most Important Position in ALL Sports?

[renaissance]

you don't need a great team to score points, you just need hard workers to get some dirty goals. Fact: you cannot lose if you do not allow a goal

But you can't win if you don't score.

---------- Post added September-7th-2011 at 09:32 AM ----------

Anyway the answer to the question is there is no one player who is the most important. That's why they are team sports.

[Elessar78]

I'd have to say QB as well. Which I think is, MAYBE, not the greatest thing for teams. If you have a star QB, great. If you don't then you're stuck between mediocrity and decent.

---------- Post added September-7th-2011 at 09:37 AM ----------

Horse + jockey = Couple (not that kind, pervs.)

I require that my teammates have opposable thumbs.

[MattFancy]

I'd rank them:

1. Quarterback

2. Ace Starting Pitcher

3. Point Guard

4. Goalie (Hockey or Soccer)

[PokerPacker]

But you can't win if you don't score.

so what? you can't win if you allow 5 goals per game, either. You won't win in football if your defense allows 6 TDs every game. A hot goalie will have a greater effect on the outcome despite only attacking it from the defensive side of the game because the extent of their effect on defense is greater than that of a QB's effect on the offense. A QB with awful WRs can hit them in the hands all day long just to have them drop it if they suck. And even if they don't drop it, he can put up a bunch of points and still lose if his D can't stop the other team (see Green Bay v. Arizona in the 2010 playoffs).

[KDawg]

[/color]Anyway the answer to the question is there is no one player who is the most important. That's why they are team sports.

COMPLETELY disagree.

Peyton Manning makes some receivers who aren't so good look great.

Meanwhile, Tarvaris Jackson probably won't be able to get the ball to Sydney Rice.

Are you implying that receiver is just as important as QB? A serviceable QB is not equal to a serviceable receiver.

[renaissance]

COMPLETELY disagree.

Peyton Manning makes some receivers who aren't so good look great.

Meanwhile, Tarvaris Jackson probably won't be able to get the ball to Sydney Rice.

Are you implying that receiver is just as important as QB? A serviceable QB is not equal to a serviceable receiver.

Just because Manning is a better QB than Jackson doesn't mean the QB is the most important position on the team.

[mcsluggo]

Quarterback. Ask the Colts.

better stated as.....

Quarterback. Ask the Redskins.

[KDawg]

Just because Manning is a better QB than Jackson doesn't mean the QB is the most important position on the team.

They're not all equal. This is coming from a football coach. You can get by much easier with a serviceable OL. You can get by much easier with a serviceable WR. You can get by much easier with a serviceable defense. It's a lot harder to get by with a serviceable QB. It's only happened a few times in NFL history. Serviceable, by the way, means average here.

[TMK9973]

absolutely not. You would get lit up like a christmas tree. You'd be lucky to finish the game with a score 30-3

see - I don't buy that....If I have GREAT defenders they can stop the shots from being taken....I've gone to hocky games where the other team had less then 20 shots on goal....

But a Pitcher HAS to pitch to the other team...no way around it.

[ABQCOWBOY]

There is no one answer here. In football, you could say QB. In Baseball, you could say Pitcher, it really depends on the sport. To me, the answer is, the one guy who can change the game for you. The one guy who can make all the other players look like normal human beings instead of professionals at the very top of their respective sports. To me, that's always going to be the most important position because you build your team around that person. JMO

[DeaconTheVillain]

My first thought was pitcher...and I hate baseball.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

KDawg, I agree that the pit crew is similar to coaching staff.

GACOLB, In baseball it all starts with pitching,without good pitching your team has no chance. I love PG's too. But with basketball you don't need a dominant big man if 1-3 are pretty good. Rebounding is so important but some big men just eat space and are not really dominant. I don't know that there is a singularly important position in basketball.

See, I'm not looking at this as just the position. I'm looking at it as the individual. Which individual has the most value. So here's the thing with pitchers in that light: They play ever 5 games. They're not a regular, everyday player. A pitching staff as an entire unit is the most important element of a baseball team--that I agree with wholeheartedly. I don't think it's even close. But as an individual player, it's hard for me to put someone who doesn't play every single day as the most important.

I stick by what I said about basketball as well. If we're talking one single individual, then yes, a dominant, top-of-the-game bigman is the most important. You're right, if you have a great 1-3, you don't need a dominant 5. But if you have a dominant 5, you don't need a great 1-3. I mean just look at who's won titles over the years. For the most part, a dominant bigman has been THE force. (BTW, is bigman--in basketball context--one word or two? I'm going with one.)

I'm happy nobody has tried to argue that the closer is the most important position in baseball. So overrated.

[PokerPacker]

see - I don't buy that....If I have GREAT defenders they can stop the shots from being taken....I've gone to hocky games where the other team had less then 20 shots on goal....

yeah, but the offense knew they had to get good shots to beat the goalie. If they're going against a scrub, they can shoot from the blue line all day long and keep scoring. If a team gets even 10 half-way decent shots on you, your team will lose. I don't care WHO you have playing in front of you, if you play goaltender against an NHL team, your team will be embarrassed.

[Special K]

I'm going to go with...pitcher.

[HBnotBlades]

I'll echo what a lot of other people are saying and go with the QB. If the question was for one single game it would be a starting pitcher, but over the course of the season they can only pitch once every five days.

As a hockey goalie, I can tell you that the defense in front of me will drastically effect my performance. A good defense will limit shots from in close and the slot, effectively cut off backdoor options allowing a goalie to be more aggressive, and keep the front of the net (and his vision) clear. If the defense is allowing forwards to get open looks and easy back door passes the goalie is going to look like a fish flopping around on the ice.

I think the answer to this question used to be the hockey goalie, but now it's the QB. As the NFL has moved more and more towards a passing dominated league, an elite QB has become critical to long term success. On the other hand, the NHL has seen incredible improvements in the understanding of effective team defense and efficient, technically-sound goaltending, de-emphasizing the need for an elite goaltender.

I would say that in today's NHL there's less drop off from an elite to replacement level goalie, than there is from an elite to a replacement level QB. I don't think that statement would be true 15 years ago.

[Sticksboi05]

see - I don't buy that....If I have GREAT defenders they can stop the shots from being taken....I've gone to hocky games where the other team had less then 20 shots on goal....

But a Pitcher HAS to pitch to the other team...no way around it.

It would not turn out like that, believe me. It'd look worse than the 1984 Oilers vs. the 2005 Capitals.

[rictus58]

Having a good goalie is great, but he doesn't get you any points on the board, and you have to have more points than the other team to win the game.

Tell that to Ron Hextal.

[Wrong Direction]

For the record, the pit is not on the field of play, but pit road is. The pit crew changes 4 tires, adds gas, removes the plastic on the windshield, adjusts the spoiler and cleans the grill while the bullets are flying all in about 14 seconds for a reason. The order going into the pits is never the same as the order coming out of the pits. They literally change the leader in a race. They're part of the equation, but I'd argue no one person or position there is as important as goalie, pitcher or QB.

If I were more industrious, I'd attempt to quantify the relative value of a starting pitcher, a QB and a goalie versus their contemporaries, and then quantify the change in odds of winning if you had an elite one as opposed to an average one of any of the above. I actually think that answer is somewhat quantifiable, and that we'd find some goalies being better than many QBs, and some QBs being better than many goalies.

For two reasons, I can't say starting pitcher. First, they always start, but rarely finish a game. Even in the post season. Second, they play a sport of series's, but don't pitch in every game. Therefore, the utility of one great pitcher might be greater on a game by game basis, but not in the overall results for a team (e.g., championships). So, they're below goalie and QB for me.

[First Colony]

I went back and read the OP, and I think there is a subtle difference in how the question was phrased. The question asked about "position" not "player". So, it's not about ability, or the fact that one pitcher goes every 5 days. It's the position that is important, not the skill of the player. So, for all of you saying that the QB is the most important, I would ask you this: isn't the center a more important position? After all, who is going to get the QB the ball? The center is the only one who touches the ball on every offensive down (he could always hike it to a RB or WR)

[elkabong82]

boxing: the boxer

[kevhow]

see - I don't buy that....If I have GREAT defenders they can stop the shots from being taken....I've gone to hocky games where the other team had less then 20 shots on goal....

Didn't you say you'd allow 90% of the shots to score? Even if the other team only took 20 shots, that's still an 18 goal hole your team needs to climb out of.

[MattFancy]

For the record, the pit is not on the field of play, but pit road is. The pit crew changes 4 tires, adds gas, removes the plastic on the windshield, adjusts the spoiler and cleans the grill while the bullets are flying all in about 14 seconds for a reason. The order going into the pits is never the same as the order coming out of the pits. They literally change the leader in a race. They're part of the equation, but I'd argue no one person or position there is as important as goalie, pitcher or QB.

If I were more industrious, I'd attempt to quantify the relative value of a starting pitcher, a QB and a goalie versus their contemporaries, and then quantify the change in odds of winning if you had an elite one as opposed to an average one of any of the above. I actually think that answer is somewhat quantifiable, and that we'd find some goalies being better than many QBs, and some QBs being better than many goalies.

For two reasons, I can't say starting pitcher. First, they always start, but rarely finish a game. Even in the post season. Second, they play a sport of series's, but don't pitch in every game. Therefore, the utility of one great pitcher might be greater on a game by game basis, but not in the overall results for a team (e.g., championships). So, they're below goalie and QB for me.

For the value of a pitcher, I present Justin Verlander.

22-5 on the season. The Tigers as a team are 23-8 when he pitchers

The Tigers record this season 81-62. Verlander has accounted for 1/4 of his teams wins and when he doesn't start, they are just 58-54.

[PokerPacker]

Didn't you say you'd allow 90% of the shots to score? Even if the other team only took 20 shots, that's still an 18 goal hole your team needs to climb out of.

I think he said he wouldn't need a save percentage of .900

but if you look at the team with the BEST SA/G, its 26.2. A scrub goalie who has no business in professional hockey wouldn't get a .500 save percentage, but I'll be EXTREMELY generous and give him .750, which comes to 6.55 GAA. That means you'll need a team that consistently puts up 7 goals per game. Good luck doing that when you're playing against Tim Thomas.

[kevhow]

I think he said he wouldn't need a save percentage of .900

Ha ha...ok that makes more sense for his argument. I went back to reread it, and I originally read it the opposite way that you did, but I think you're way is the way he intended it.

"Replace a Hockey Golie with....say...ME, and I wont be able to stop 90% of the shots, but if eveyone else on my team is REALLY good...we might keep it close."

[DCSaints_fan]

Have you ever watched a NHL playoff game?

Quite a bit, but not as much as I use to. I stand by my initial claim.

Who in your opinion is the greatest hockey player of all time, or even say the best 4-5 players, and what positions were they? If you were a GM and had a fantasy draft, which players would you pick first?