What is the strength of this team?

Arif: It really would have been fun to have made this a little easier with the receiver group set up the way it was. I think a good litmus test for whether a position group is considered a strength is comparing them to the quarterback. Kirk Cousins seems to be right on that dividing line between a true “strength” at the position and simply being above average. So if a position group makes you feel better about its prospects than Cousins does at QB, then you probably have a strength there.

With that in mind, I think the two position groups that emerge are the two you identify: linebacker and running back. And of course, those positions happen to be the least important positions, analytically speaking, on their respective sides of the ball.

While I think the defensive line has the potential to establish itself as a strength, there are too many unknowns there for me to say that I would comfortably put them ahead of Cousins in terms of reliability and playmaking power. One star can’t lift a unit of four up by himself unless it’s Aaron Donald and as impressive as Hunter is, he hasn’t yet proven he’s an unquestionable leader at his position.

Perhaps the easiest way to decide between the two groups is to match them one-for-one. Given Kendricks’ performance last year as a contender for the crown as the best linebacker in the NFL and his overall ability to stay on the field, I would take him over Dalvin Cook. With Barr — a linebacker seemingly perpetually underrated by Vikings fans because of his onerous contract — I’d say his capabilities exceed Mattison’s by a fair amount despite Mattison’s excellent year. With the addition of the depth the Vikings boast at the position, with either Eric Wilson or Ben Gedeon stepping up and a few mid-round picks behind them, it’s tough to say the Vikings feature anything but a top-tier linebacker group.

Chad: I don’t think you’ll get much pushback for lauding the linebackers the Vikings have, specifically Kendricks and Barr. But let’s dig in for a moment on what you wrote about linebackers generally — that they’re the least important position on the defense.

For years, linebackers were thought of as the tone-setters, the physical, punishing players with more responsibility than about any other on the defense. Even as recently as the last decade, the Baltimore Ravens stuck out as a team that was always good at the position.

So when and why did it start to change for linebackers? Is it because of the shift to more of a passing game? And how valuable (or not) is a great middle linebacker like Kendricks? Who would provide more value in a single season — Kendricks or a good No. 2 corner like Trae Waynes?

Arif: I’m not sure how long it’s been since linebackers led defensive corps in terms of true importance, but given that historical research indicates the passing game has always been more important than the running game — so long as we’re talking post-merger, anyway — I’m not sure linebackers ever contributed as much as their status as faces of the franchise would dictate. Ray Lewis was still probably the most important member of that 2000 Ravens defense, but he probably wasn’t as important as we remember.

That said, I’d argue a significant change likely occurred in the mid-to-late 2000s as teams became more comfortable with three-receiver sets and more dynamic tight ends to attack downfield. If we look at some of the best defenses in that span — the 2008-2011 Steelers, the 2008-2011 Ravens, 2009-2010 Jets, the 2011-2013 49ers, the 2012-2015 Seahawks, 2015 Broncos, 2017 Vikings, 2017 Jaguars and 2019 Patriots — you find many more talented cornerbacks than you do off-ball linebackers. When you do find legitimately great linebackers, you often find even better corners or safeties.

For every Bobby Wagner, there are multiple Richard Shermans. In the few circumstances you see a linebacker outpace his secondary — like the combination of Patrick Willis and Navorro Bowman, they still had a secondary that produced 18 interceptions for the 2011 49ers. And you find many more circumstances where you see situations like Darrelle Revis and Antonio Cromartie boosting players like Bart Scott and Calvin Pace for the 2009-10 Jets.

In those defenses, there were 20 All-Pros among defensive backs and eight among off-ball linebackers. There were 34 Pro Bowls for defensive backs and 16 for off-ball linebackers. If you expand the list to include other good defenses, like the 2008 Titans, 2009 Cowboys, 2010 Packers, 2010-2012 Bears, 2013 Panthers, 2013 Patriots and 2017 Chargers, the difference continues to expand — with defensive backs winning in All-Pros 22 to nine and Pro Bowls 47 to 22.

While there are more defensive backs than linebackers on the field, defensive backs still outpace linebackers when accounting for that. Four teams had All-Pro linebackers without All-Pro defensive backs, but 14 teams had All-Pro defensive backs without All-Pro linebackers. The pattern holds at Pro Bowl selections with two teams featuring lone Pro Bowlers at linebacker but 12 featuring lone Pro Bowlers at defensive back.

I think the shift isn’t just a result of the emphasis on the passing game, but rather a personnel approach that enabled better passing, with more three-receiver sets and tight ends better capable of exploiting mismatches.

As for how valuable Kendricks is — well, he’s certainly much more valuable now than he was two years ago given how he is one of the few accomplished players left on the defense. If I were forced to choose between Kendricks and Waynes in a vacuum, I’d have to fight every bare instinct I have on this but I would have to argue that Waynes does more for a defense if the replacement player is an average second-stringer at their position.

And maybe that establishes what it means to be “more important” — if a linebacker at the top of the position is potentially less important than an above-average corner (and, interestingly, their salaries reflect that — Waynes is being paid $4 million more per year), then that might help define priorities for fans and analysts.