re. the question of full-backs/wing-backs, surely you'd take two categories, just as with wingers and wing-forwards?
If you want this thing to be definitive, categorisation is important, moreso than desired, but 'lumping' in poses so many questions of its own as people then ask: 'but what makes this ball-playing CB comparable to A,B or C when what they did and what they're in the team for is so different?'
I wouldn't say a bit of breakdown is micro-management, rather acknlowedging the different roles players have flourished in and become the top of their particular tree in. If you lump a top tier attacking wing-back in with an expemplary, super defensive full-back and say one is better than the other, where is the distinction? that they start the game in roundabout the same area of the pitch? That player A's attacking credentials are better than player B's defensive ones? Surely like-for-like generates fair and correct compare and contrast elements?