Where would you draft a K that could do this??

[SBK]

Talking about Medlock got me thinking about a discussion I once had. Let's say there's a K available who will kick touchbacks 65% of the time, and will hit 75% accuracy from 65 yards.

Where does a prospect like that rate for you?

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

A stud kicker will score more points by himself than any other single player on the team. A lockdown kicker is INFINITELY more valuable than a guy like Curry.

So Lawrence Taylor or the guy the theoretical 75% kicker guy? You're telling me you take the kicker?

[DTLB58]

Originally Posted by SBK

Talking about Medlock got me thinking about a discussion I once had. Let's say there's a K available who will kick touchbacks 65% of the time, and will hit 75% accuracy from 65 yards.

Where does a prospect like that rate for you?

With all the others.

Kickers

[MoreLemonPledge]

Originally Posted by Nightfyre

65 yard kicks have occured at the college level.
Posted via Mobile Device

The NFL record is 63 yards, by Tom Dempsey and Jason Elam. To hit a 65 yard field goal with any consistency would be an incomparable achievement.

[CoMoChief]

"How big of a cock does this kicker guy have"?

- Carl Peterson

[CoMoChief]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

So Lawrence Taylor or the guy the theoretical 75% kicker guy? You're telling me you take the kicker?

Aaron Curry is NOT Lawrence Taylor by any means.

But you still take the kicker......why?

Because everytime you pass the 50yd line you can get 3 pts (at least)

You could easily add aboput 12 pts to your total score.

You think Lawrence Taylor consistantly scored 2 TD's a game??? Nope.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

So Lawrence Taylor or the guy the theoretical 75% kicker guy? You're telling me you take the kicker?

Curry = Lawrence Taylor? I'm doing the best I can not to laugh.

You can't be freaking serious.

LT was a DE in college and had 16 sacks his senior year.

I didn't say K over LT. I said K over CURRY. And I stand by it.

[Rain Man]

Just to throw a little contrarian thought in here, think about this.

If you put him at your own 45 and he makes 75% of his kicks, that means that he produces 2.25 points on average whenever you stall out at your 45. (75%*3 points).

But of the 25% of the time he misses, the opponent will now have the ball at YOUR 45. How likely is it in that case that they'll score? There's some expected value to giving up field position on the misses, too, though I don't have the initiative to calculate it.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Curry = Lawrence Taylor? I'm doing the best I can not to laugh.

You can't be freaking serious.

LT was a DE in college and had 16 sacks his senior year.

I didn't say K over LT. I said K over CURRY. And I stand by it.

That's fine. I wasn't comparing Curry to LT, I just thought you meant, generically, an elite LB type.

I'm not a draftnik, so I don't know how elite (or not) Curry is projecting to be, really.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

Don't get me wrong, he's the greatest kicker ever, but even that guy is NOT a HOF QB or RB in terms of his impact on the game.

But he's more impactful on wins and losses, by a WIDE MARGIN, than a solid MLB. Even a HOF MLB, which Curry isn't.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

That's fine. I wasn't comparing Curry to LT, I just thought you meant, generically, an elite LB type.

I'm not a draftnik, so I don't know how elite (or not) Curry is projecting to be, really.

You have to make distinction between OLB that were college DE's and can rush the passer vs. a MLB that is all-around solid, but has never rushed the passer or shown a propensity to create turnovers.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

Here's the problem. Even if you assume 75% of the time is in ALL conditions (because if it's just a generic 75% of the time, then I gotta assume he's a dome guy, and he ain't kicking no 75% from your own 45 in New England or Green Bay in January), then 25% of the time you're setting the other team up on your own 45. Chances that the other guys get at least 3 are very high, and 7 aren't that bad.

Don't get me wrong, he's the greatest kicker ever, but even that guy is NOT a HOF QB or RB in terms of his impact on the game.

That's actually a really good point. I was thinking that guy is a top 10 pick based on his ability to directly impact the game (same line of thought I use when I'm talking about picking up Pat White).

But then you have to ask yourself how often he'd actually be used. Even if he hits 3/4, I gotta believe that in any close game, the head coach would probably call for the punt if he's in his own territory as there's a 25% chance that he'll be giving the opposition excellent field position. Granted, that's a Herm way of viewing it, but I think we underestimate how conservative most NFL head coaches are.

I'd still probably take him very high up in the first because I think anytime you can get a weapon that gives you a direct advantage on the scoreboard, you have to do it. At the same time, props on an interesting wrinkle that I hadn't considered.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

Here's the problem. Even if you assume 75% of the time is in ALL conditions (because if it's just a generic 75% of the time, then I gotta assume he's a dome guy, and he ain't kicking no 75% from your own 45 in New England or Green Bay in January), then 25% of the time you're setting the other team up on your own 45. Chances that the other guys get at least 3 are very high, and 7 aren't that bad.

Don't get me wrong, he's the greatest kicker ever, but even that guy is NOT a HOF QB or RB in terms of his impact on the game.

Dammit, that was MY idea. You just wrote it first because you're in the eastern time zone.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

But he's more impactful on wins and losses, by a WIDE MARGIN, than a solid MLB. Even a HOF MLB, which Curry isn't.

eh....maybe. Depends on alot of variables. Is the guy a 0% FG chance from 66 yards out, like eveyr other NFL kicker, ro does it step down from 75%. If the guy is a 60% chance from 70 yards out and 50 from 75 yards, etc., then you're probably right.

Otherwise, it will affect the game quite alot, but you've got the swing of what happens to the other team's offense on the 25% of misses. How often does missing from the 45 result in a TD?

But yes, it's clearly a first round kicker. Heck, just have 65% touchback ability is probably good for at least third round right there, maybe 2nd.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

That's actually a really good point. I was thinking that guy is a top 10 pick based on his ability to directly impact the game (same line of thought I use when I'm talking about picking up Pat White).

But then you have to ask yourself how often he'd actually be used. Even if he hits 3/4, I gotta believe that in any close game, the head coach would probably call for the punt if he's in his own territory as there's a 25% chance that he'll be giving the opposition excellent field position. Granted, that's a Herm way of viewing it, but I think we underestimate how conservative most NFL head coaches are.

I'd still probably take him very high up in the first because I think anytime you can get a weapon that gives you a direct advantage on the scoreboard, you have to do it. At the same time, props on an interesting wrinkle that I hadn't considered.

Right. If it's a minute or two to go and the game is tied and you're at teh 50 on 4th down, then you kick, b/c it's a 75% of success.

But what if there is 2 minutes left and you're up by THREE and you're at the 50? 75% or not, you might lean heavily towards punt. If you miss, the other team is damn near certain to tie, and might get the winning TD.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

Dammit, that was MY idea. You just wrote it first because you're in the eastern time zone.

Well.....then I'm glad I had the opportunity to agree with your idea before you posted it.