|
whiteyfats posted:Now I'm wondering how amazing a kicker would have to be to go top ten, and have it be worth it. A theoretical kicker that was over 90% from 60+ yards out would be well worth a first. If you had a guy who was money from that distance it would be a huge advantage. If your offense was functional at all you would barely punt.
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2017 10:44
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 1, 2024 01:09 |
|
|
TheChirurgeon posted:The idea that you'd ever be justified taking a kicker in the top 10, or that one would ever actually be "the best player available" is completely loving bonkers, but you've raised an interesting math problem. Yeah, it's pretty much never going to be worth it. Even if you had a bionic kicker available to draft super high you'd basically always rather draft players to theoretically fix your team's other problems (probably offense since you're kicking from so far out all the time) rather than taking the kicker who'll let you cash in on all your bad drives. Mathematically though, I feel like there's got to be a point at which never having to punt is more valuable than say, drafting a really good guard at #10 or something. Maybe I am over-valuing field goals.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2017 16:50
|
|
|
An NY Daily News writer being an unprofessional hack??? Surely you jest!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2017 07:14
|
|