Michael Dickson is coming out. He's considered by some to be one of the greatest punting talents "ever". Dana Holgorsen (who has coached for over 20 years, the last 7 with WVU called Dickson "the greatest punter I've ever seen).
Brad Wing is last in the NFL in Net punting average. Scoff as you may, Little Bill himself went nuts over the impact Hekker has for the Rams... so I ask you BBI 1. What do you think about Dickson? 2. How high would be the highest you would consider a "special" punter?
@nfldraftupdate
21m21 minutes ago
More Dion Caputi Retweeted Michael Dickson
Aussie-born, Texas punter Michael Dickson is entering the 2018 NFL Draft, as well.
The 2017 @RayGuyAward Award winner, Dickson is unquestionably the best punter I've ever seen come out of college and one of the very few I've ever been genuinely excited about. Period.
I'd have a hard time giving up more than a 4th round pick, IMO.
The biggest injury that is barely being talked about right now heading into the playoffs is Greg Zuerlein. I think the Rams' Super Bowl chances went out the window with him.
Someone should be fired for drafting any kicker in the first round.
The biggest injury that is barely being talked about right now heading into the playoffs is Greg Zuerlein. I think the Rams' Super Bowl chances went out the window with him.
I don't know about first round for a player who might be on the field 5 times per game. The Giants are an NFL worst (so they punt more than anyone in the league) and average 5.9 punts per game in 2017.
League average is around 4.5. Best is Atlanta at 3.1.
The impact of punters may be undervalued, but 1st round is silly.
I'd have a hard time giving up more than a 4th round pick, IMO.
Actually you have to double it, because we gain 5 yards on each punt for us or them. Being able to flip field position is important if your offense is having trouble moving the ball. The problem we have had too often this year is that opponents have the ball one first down away from FG range. You cannot consistently put the D in that position because the league rules make it impossible to play defense. I would spend a 3rd round pick on a "special" punter depending on what the quality of the draft is like.
To answer the OP, depends who the GM is. With Reese, I'd invest a 3rd without hesitation as his track record in the mid/late rounds is poor. With a GM that can better find mid round steals, I probably wouldn't spend more than a 5th.
But like I said above a good GM is going to realize that the punter will drop, and you'd take him later.
Also, they tend to be more mental positions, the yips are real. I think taking a specialist that high increases the likelihood of busting. No higher than a 6th rounder.
FP and hidden yardage are very big parts of this game - but punters and kickers can bust just as often as position players - if not more.
If this kid is as good as people say, I'd definitely burn a 4th rounder on him. A 1st round pick? Absolutely not.
The Bucs taking Aguayo in the 2nd round was horrific and everyone knew it the second it happened. Any team willing to spend a premium pick like that on a kicker or punter should seriously re-consider their strategy.
Link - ( New Window )
The game is different now, field position isn't as valuable, so I wouldn't use a first even on a Ray Guy. But if this kid is that good, he'd be worth a late second or a third. The problem is, how do you know if he's really going to be that good, and if he's going to have a long career? The draft is a crapshoot, always.
Actually you have to double it, because we gain 5 yards on each punt for us or them. Being able to flip field position is important if your offense is having trouble moving the ball. The problem we have had too often this year is that opponents have the ball one first down away from FG range. You cannot consistently put the D in that position because the league rules make it impossible to play defense. I would spend a 3rd round pick on a "special" punter depending on what the quality of the draft is like.
Not sure I agree. Assuming your opponent has an average (42 net ypk) punter, if your great punter kicks from your 40, and your opponent gets it at the 13 v 18, the difference will be the same when the opponent punts it back - 5 yards. 42 yards from the 13, you get it at your 45, 42 yards from the 18, you get it at the 40. It's still a 5 yard difference. Am I missing something?
Link - ( New Window )
Excellent post! That is a great way to monetize the value of an average v good punter. Well done.
Was Janikowski a mistake? He was picked 17th overall. For 17 years the Raiders had one of the best kickers in the league. Seems to me a small price to pay to have that.
25 comments in 45 minutes, I'd say it's an interesting topic. Well worthy of discussion.
Quote:
Actually you have to double it, because we gain 5 yards on each punt for us or them. Being able to flip field position is important if your offense is having trouble moving the ball. The problem we have had too often this year is that opponents have the ball one first down away from FG range. You cannot consistently put the D in that position because the league rules make it impossible to play defense. I would spend a 3rd round pick on a "special" punter depending on what the quality of the draft is like.
Not sure I agree. Assuming your opponent has an average (42 net ypk) punter, if your great punter kicks from your 40, and your opponent gets it at the 13 v 18, the difference will be the same when the opponent punts it back - 5 yards. 42 yards from the 13, you get it at your 45, 42 yards from the 18, you get it at the 40. It's still a 5 yard difference. Am I missing something?
I must have calculated the difference as if your opponent had a great punter versus your average punter as compared to us having the great punter and them having the average punter.
40 yard line to their 18 to your 35 verus 40 yard line to their 18 to your 45
Was Janikowski a mistake? He was picked 17th overall. For 17 years the Raiders had one of the best kickers in the league. Seems to me a small price to pay to have that.
Yes, drafting Janikowski first was a mistake. A very good kicker who would have been there in later rounds. Again, it's not how good a kicker is, it's how much better he is than everyone else. His career FG% is 80%, good, not great. His 50 yd + % of 55% is very good, but that accounts for 3 FG's made per year. Not worth a first rounder.
The issue with specialists is that the very best are worth it (if you are talking about a pick after approximately top 20), but unless you are in that level it is a major waste of a high draft pick. Another problem is often the player who ends up being that guy was not the one in that position prior to the draft. Zeurlein was a late pick. Tucker was undrafted.
Nope.
Because there's not enough of a disparity between guys like that and some others to warrant burning through that type of asset.
You can find players who impact the game far more than kickers in the 1st round.
Matt Bryant has been around forever at this point and he's still one of the better kickers in the league at age 42.
Quote:
Not because he's a kicker.
Was Janikowski a mistake? He was picked 17th overall. For 17 years the Raiders had one of the best kickers in the league. Seems to me a small price to pay to have that.
Yes, drafting Janikowski first was a mistake. A very good kicker who would have been there in later rounds. Again, it's not how good a kicker is, it's how much better he is than everyone else. His career FG% is 80%, good, not great. His 50 yd + % of 55% is very good, but that accounts for 3 FG's made per year. Not worth a first rounder.
It is not just the 3 extra FG's made per year. If you have a K with a higher % from long rage, opposing D's have to be more aggressive in that borderline FG area because they want to push the team out of FG range. That likely means a blitz with more players than OL can handle which means single coverage on Engram or OBJ and we know what they can do with single coverage.
And, I got to see it live.
Having said that, sure, a great punter makes a big difference but I'm not giving up anything more than a 5th for him unless of course the other parts of the team are in place- which they are not.
Was Janikowski a mistake? He was picked 17th overall. For 17 years the Raiders had one of the best kickers in the league. Seems to me a small price to pay to have that.
Yes it was a mistake. What about all the other undrafted and late round kickers whove been in the league 10+ years?
Drafting a kicker or a punter in the first is criminal. Their overall cost in FA is minuscule compared to the value youd get hitting on a player at any other position. This goes against everything you usually harp on when it comes to value and cost analysis.
If you want to evaluate draft value of a kicker, I wouldn't be looking at Al Davis, I'd look at Bill Belichick. He had the best kicker in the game in Vinatieri, and replaced him with a 4th round pick in Gostkowski. If Gostkowski isn't the best kicker in the game, he's one of the best, so 4th round sounds about right.
Everyone will remember the kick he missed against the Eagles in the Divisional game - but he was excellent otherwise that year.
There's just no reason to burn a 1st round pick on a kicker or a punter... ever.
The Jets wasted a 2nd rounder on Mike Nugent years ago and he couldn't even beat out Aldrick Rosas for our kicking job this year.
Compare that to the other extreme, QB, and it's very rare you find a starter, let alone a top 3-5 QB outside of the first round.
They were also both UDFAs...
I get the field position argument. But that's many times in concert with the other 10 guys on the punt team. So my rule would be free agency only - and likely lean on finding a player who is currently in the NFL...
I wouldn't use anything higher than a 5th rounder on a kicker or punter. A 4th I could live with I guess...but I wouldn't do it.
That's really not the right way to look at this. Justin Tuck was a 3rd. Bavaro was a 4th.
The biggest injury that is barely being talked about right now heading into the playoffs is Greg Zuerlein. I think the Rams' Super Bowl chances went out the window with him.
A first round pick????? No...cmon already.
You can in fact find punters and kickers ANYWHERE. This is NOT a myth. Go look. The best [punters and kickers, shit 90% of every punter and kicker in the league went undrafted.
Was Janikowski a mistake? He was picked 17th overall. For 17 years the Raiders had one of the best kickers in the league. Seems to me a small price to pay to have that.
That pick was typical raiders. It was in fact a bad pick. What did the Raiders win over that 17 year period of FG bliss? Jack SQUAT.
The Raiders passed on Chad Pennington and Shawn Alexander and others for a kicker. A kicker!
Was Janikowski a mistake? He was picked 17th overall. For 17 years the Raiders had one of the best kickers in the league. Seems to me a small price to pay to have that.
There's a lot of value to be had in zigging where others zag. But, no, a 1st round pick is not a small price to pay, regardless. 17 years of solid kicker play is basically just living up to the upside, maybe exceeding it just slightly. The marginal value just isn't that significant (compare him to Gostkowski, for example, both in terms of performance and draft position).
If you want to make the case that you can steal some points and yards by taking a more aggressive approach toward drafting kickers and punters, I'd be willing to listen. But if you're trying to justify 1st round picks for either, I think you're just being different for the sake of being different.
For the most part, most teams won't even consider specialists until day 3. Knowing that, and applying even basic game theory, you can zig against the zag and still beat your competition to those players late in the 3rd round. And if you miss out by being even slightly too patient, so be it. It's about marginal value, not absolute value.
Quote:
Not because he's a kicker.
Was Janikowski a mistake? He was picked 17th overall. For 17 years the Raiders had one of the best kickers in the league. Seems to me a small price to pay to have that.
There's a lot of value to be had in zigging where others zag. But, no, a 1st round pick is not a small price to pay, regardless. 17 years of solid kicker play is basically just living up to the upside, maybe exceeding it just slightly. The marginal value just isn't that significant (compare him to Gostkowski, for example, both in terms of performance and draft position).
If you want to make the case that you can steal some points and yards by taking a more aggressive approach toward drafting kickers and punters, I'd be willing to listen. But if you're trying to justify 1st round picks for either, I think you're just being different for the sake of being different.
For the most part, most teams won't even consider specialists until day 3. Knowing that, and applying even basic game theory, you can zig against the zag and still beat your competition to those players late in the 3rd round. And if you miss out by being even slightly too patient, so be it. It's about marginal value, not absolute value.
That's really all it is at this stage.
You can find a decent kicker on the couch. You can find great kickers after the draft. If you replaced Greg the Leg with a slob that can't kick to save his life? Yes, you're going to suffer. Thing is, you can swap out Greg with a slight downgrade and not skip a beat. Ok you can't kick 60 yard FGs anymore. So what.
How high were the top 42 drafted?
I don't see anyone drafting a gunner/special team cover specialist...
I would, however, draft a long-snapper. Lots of excellent value for those guys...
Quote:
In comment 13750019 Go Terps said:
Quote:
Not because he's a kicker.
Was Janikowski a mistake? He was picked 17th overall. For 17 years the Raiders had one of the best kickers in the league. Seems to me a small price to pay to have that.
There's a lot of value to be had in zigging where others zag. But, no, a 1st round pick is not a small price to pay, regardless. 17 years of solid kicker play is basically just living up to the upside, maybe exceeding it just slightly. The marginal value just isn't that significant (compare him to Gostkowski, for example, both in terms of performance and draft position).
If you want to make the case that you can steal some points and yards by taking a more aggressive approach toward drafting kickers and punters, I'd be willing to listen. But if you're trying to justify 1st round picks for either, I think you're just being different for the sake of being different.
For the most part, most teams won't even consider specialists until day 3. Knowing that, and applying even basic game theory, you can zig against the zag and still beat your competition to those players late in the 3rd round. And if you miss out by being even slightly too patient, so be it. It's about marginal value, not absolute value.
That's really all it is at this stage.
Well theres that, but more importantly, Terps wouldnt have to pay the kicker/punter as much when it came time for his second contract, which is likely his main motive here.
Its not about importance, its about value. You literally talk about that in every we overpaid for X thread and then post stats about X player compared to that if their cheaper peers, most of them being on rookie contracts. So instead of taking a top pass rusher now we are taking a punter in the first round when signing the best one would cost under $4 million per year and on average around $2 million per year?
Come on man, you arent living up to your own parameters.