ImpactCap

Total Players

...

Loading...

Median APY

...

Highest position median

Top Efficiency

...

Impact per $1M APY

Avg Impact Factor

...

DSA composite score

APY Distribution by Position
Position Market Share
Impact vs Contract APY (Average Per Year) Market Map
Loading player data...
Loading...

Player Contract Analyzer

Player Contract Analyzer
Search any NFL player to view their contract analysis, expected APY range based on performance, and get data-driven negotiation recommendations

Find Your Next Contract Target

Search for any NFL player to instantly view their contract details, performance metrics, and receive data-driven negotiation recommendations based on position-specific market curves.

Contract Analysis

Current APY vs. expected market range

Impact Metrics

Performance impact and efficiency ratings

Negotiation Target

Data-driven APY recommendations

Efficiency by Position

Player Rankings

Contract APY (Average Per Year)
Impact Efficiency Rankings
Value Players

Understanding NFL Contract Markets

What the Data Is Actually Showing

NFL contract markets are threshold-driven and uneven. In this dataset, Contract_APY is extremely top-heavy: Top 10% of contracts capture ~51% of all Contract_APY dollars, Top 5% capture ~34%, and Top 1% capture ~11%. Most players sit in a crowded middle, while a small set of contracts break out into a different tier. ImpactCap is designed to surface that reality — not smooth it over.

Why Impact Alone Doesn't Predict Contract_APY

On-field impact matters — but it explains only a modest share of contract outcomes. Among players where we have both metrics (Impact + Contract_APY), the relationship is real but not strong: Pearson correlation ~0.31, Spearman ~0.44. Impact helps set the floor, but market dynamics and scarcity determine the ceiling. Two players with similar impact often land in very different Contract_APY tiers.

Position Sets the Market Ceiling

Positions don't just influence value — they define what's even possible. In the data, the ceiling is visibly different by position: QB 90th percentile ~$52.5M (max $60M), WR/DL/OL upper tiers commonly reach $28M–$45M, while RB/LB have materially lower ceilings (even with strong impact), and K/P/LS are structurally capped markets.

  • Show medians instead of averages
  • Compare within position groups
  • Separate expected outcomes from upside scenarios

This is why ImpactCap's design is right for NFL contract analysis.

Why the Market Feels Like a Hockey Stick

The Contract_APY distribution has a classic hockey stick profile: Median ~$1.42M, 75th percentile ~$4.50M, 90th percentile ~$13.28M, 95th percentile ~$21.18M, 99th percentile ~$45M, Max $60M. Most players live in a flat middle, and a small number cross thresholds that trigger explosive growth. Hockey-stick outcomes are rare contracts, not a normal progression path.

Why Efficiency Matters More Than Star Power

High Contract_APY spend doesn't guarantee high return. Efficiency (Impact per $1M Contract_APY) is negatively related to Contract_APY (Spearman ≈ -0.52). Median efficiency is about 0.15 impact per $1M, while the most efficient players reach roughly 0.80–0.95 impact per $1M. Many of the best returns per dollar sit below the top of the APY leaderboard. Star contracts often function as risk reduction and scarcity capture, not efficiency maximization.

  • Efficiency is negatively correlated with Contract_APY
  • Best value often found in mid-tier contracts
  • Portfolio construction beats star chasing

This is why ImpactCap frames contracts like portfolio construction — not star chasing.

How We Model Fair Market Value

Key Takeaways
  • Most players cluster near the median — breakout NIL outcomes are exceptions, not the rule
  • Impact alone does not predict NIL; visibility and position determine upside
  • Position defines ceilings — not all impact is rewarded equally
  • High NIL spend reduces risk, but efficiency is found lower in the market
  • Undervalued players exist because markets price attention faster than performance
  • Smart NIL strategy looks like portfolio construction, not betting on stars