Post-draft cuts, and potential GB pick ups

[Deleted member 6794]

Kickers are still very valuable, FB's are not. FB's are a quickly disappearing dinosaur in today's NFL offense. Kuhn has lived longer here than he would in most other places. If we Cut Mason today, regardless of salary, he'd be picked up tomorrow. Kuhn has been available for quite some time and nobody has signed him. I'm not advocating giving guys jobs and money just because, that's not the right message either nor what I was getting at.

According to the Press Gazette the Packers and Kuhn are having conversations about signing him to a new contract.

http://www.packersnews.com/story/sp...ations-ongoing-between-packers-kuhn/84244522/

 

[adambr2]

You have not demonstrated the validity of that belief.

Then I will once again attempt to respond to your points, though I don't think you're giving much of an effort to reciprocate because I do think Captain and myself have brought up plenty of good points.

First, I understand we're all on the same page that Crosby is overpaid. 'Dime a dozen' is a subjective term, so I don't know why you're so intent on trying to disprove it when it really, can't be. But for what I think we're trying to argue, we're saying average kickers are common and easy to come by. You disagree. In fact, you said top 20 kickers are hard to find.

You gave Franks and Lambo as examples, even though that pretty much proves our point, they still were comfortably 80+%, which is fine for 500K, and that was all we were really ever arguing, that PLENTY of these guys (dime a dozen) can come in and give a team what they need.

Do they always get that guy right away? No, but they figure it out fairly quickly, grab another one off the scrap heap, and throw them at the wall til one of them sticks. So it's pretty irrelevant how many on 90 man rosters don't make the 53. I never said they all can make it, just that it's pretty easy to find one that can.

Yes, sometimes you need to cut a dud first or have a camp competition, which is no big deal. That's another hidden luxury of a scrap heap guy. You're not committed to him and can quickly cut him loose if he misses his first 3 kicks and try the next guy. And before you say that's why it's not worth the risk, it could just as easily happen with Crosby. Only difference is, we can't (won't) move on if it does. We committed to him.

So now, let's look at the team's that went into 2015 with no real veteran plan at kicker, just kind of winging it. Since average kickers are so hard to find, I would assume these teams had a rough go of it, right?

Travis *****, Browns, undrafted in 2014, off the scrap heap - 87.5%

Chris Boswell, Steelers - They traded a 7th for Scobee when Suisham went down, he sucked for a couple weeks, they got rid of him for Boswell, who they picked up off his couch in October. He was money, over 90%.

Jason Myers, Jaguars - Some arena league scrub in Jacksonville. 86.7%.

Dustin Hopkins, Redskins - Signed off the street in mid September. 89.3%

Lambo and Franks were 81.3% as you mentioned. Which isn't great, but it's still an immaterial amount of percentage points away from your average kicker, and counting for peanuts against the salary cap, which was the entire point of this argument.

So basically EVERY SINGLE TEAM that went into August or September saying 'Hey, we have no idea who our kicker is going to be this year', turned out just fine.

So what about the teams with established vets? Well, some of them were fine, like Gostowski and Hauschka and Brown. Others were near the bottom of the league, like Janikowski and Bryant, but of course, we can't move on from these well-paid vets. So among vets, you've got a mixed bag, just like the rookies and scrap heap guys.

I know you're a smart guy, and I agree with 90% of what you post, but I really can't understand why you're being this stubborn about this one even with the loads of evidence and statistics presented that basically completely disprove your points.

I mean, honestly, name me one other position in the NFL where you can literally grab a guy off the street, get acceptable production, or if you're fortunate, end up with a top 10 guy at that position. That is NOT 'dime a dozen' to you?

 

[HardRightEdge]

Of the 32 qualifying kickers last year, 8 of them (25%!) were rookies or 2nd year kickers. TWO or less years experience now. I didn't even look at how many had 3, 4, and 5. How exactly is this a trend of fewer?

This goes to my earlier comment to the Captain...you guys did not read my posts, yet you continue to debate me. I provided those numbers.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Do they always get that guy right away? No, but they figure it out fairly quickly, grab another one off the scrap heap, and throw them at the wall til one of them sticks.

Perhaps this is the nub of our disagreement. I don't find this approach acceptable. You wouldn't accept it at any other position.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

You wouldn't accept it at any other position.

Yet there is already talk about letting Bakhtiari walk away in free agency next offseason and start Spriggs there in 2017 because of the implications on the salary cap. Somehow the approach seems to be fine at the position protecting Rodgers blindside but not with the team´s kicker. Extremely tough to understand.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Yet there is already talk about letting Bakhtiari walk away in free agency next offseason and start Spriggs there in 2017 because of the implications on the salary cap. Somehow the approach seems to be fine at the position protecting Rodgers blindside but not with the team´s kicker. Extremely tough to understand.

Spriggs will have a year of experience. With kickers you're hoping to get one off the street, in mid-season, if your guy blows up. That's a panic move.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Spriggs will have a year of experience. With kickers you're hoping to get one off the street, in mid-season, if your guy blows up. That's a panic move.

It´s possible that Spriggs won´t play a single down during the regular season in 2016. Just because he will be practicing with the team for a year doesn´t mean he will succeed. I´d rather have to search for a kicker in mid-season than for a left tackle.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Even better 17 of 38 kickers (44.7%) attempting a field goal last season were still playing under their rookie contract.

Two points:

1) Neither you nor adambr2 read post #123.

2) As illustrated in that post, of the top 32 kickers, 5 were first year players. So, it is not possible for 17 rookies out of 38 to have attempted a FG. Recheck your query.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

As illustrated in that post, of the top 32 kickers, 5 were first year players. So, it is not possible for 17 rookies out of 38 to have attempted a FG. Recheck your query.

You obviously didn´t read post #150 precisely. I said that 17 out of 38 kickers still on their rookie contract, meaning cheap kickers either in the first, second, third or fourth season, attempted a field goal last season.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Of the 32 qualifying kickers last year, 8 of them (25%!) were rookies or 2nd year kickers. TWO or less years experience now. I didn't even look at how many had 3, 4, and 5. How exactly is this a trend of fewer?

Again, you did not read my posts.

 

[HardRightEdge]

You obviously didn´t read post #150 precisely. I said that 17 out of 38 kickers still on their rookie contract, meaning cheap kickers either in the first, second, third or fourth season, attempted a field goal last season.

Fine.

As noted in post #123 there were 14 kickers out of the top 32 last season who were in years 1- 5. That means the league has produced 14 kickers over the previous 5 years, or about 3 per year, out of the 100's upon 100's coming out of college football. And the trend suggests that of the 5 first year kickers in the top 32 last season, they will not all survive to their 5th. year. Somewhere along the line a couple, if not most, will blow up.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

As noted in post #123 there were 14 kickers out of the top 32 last season who were in years 1- 5. That means the league has produced 14 kickers over the previous 5 years, or about 3 per year, out of the 100's upon 100's coming out of college football. And the trend suggests that of the 5 first year kickers in the top 32 last season, they will not all survive to their 5th. year. Somewhere along the line a couple, if not most, will blow up.

That doesn´t mean there wouldn´t have been more than 14 kickers capable of making above 80% of their field goal attempts at the pro level though. There are only 32 jobs available and a lot of teams make the mistake of spending too much money on a veteran kicker, not even bringing in a rookie to compete.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Travis *****, Browns, undrafted in 2014, off the scrap heap - 87.5%

Jason Myers, Jaguars - Some arena league scrub in Jacksonville. 86.7%.

Dustin Hopkins, Redskins - Signed off the street in mid September. 89.3%

Lambo [San Diego] and Franks [Miami] were 81.3% as you mentioned.

Do you notice a pattern here? None of these teams made the playoffs in 2014.

They were throwing a number of things against the wall to get over the hump.

If you have championship pretentions, you don't guess on a kicker and if he blows up go scrounging. One kick, one game, can make the difference.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Do you notice a pattern here? None of these teams made the playoffs in 2014.

They were throwing a number of things against the wall to get over the hump.

If you have championship pretentions, you don't guess on a kicker and if he blows up go scrounging. One kick, one game, can make the difference.

Adambr´s numbers were from 2015 and the Redskins made the playoffs last season. In addition it´s hardly the kickers fault the other teams didn´t make the playoffs last year. It´s true that one kick can make a difference, like Crosby´s terrible miss on a potential game winning field goal against the Lions last season.

 

[HardRightEdge]

That doesn´t mean there wouldn´t have been more than 14 kickers capable of making above 80% of their field goal attempts at the pro level though.

Of course. The problem is you don't know which ones.

Many are physically capable of doing the job. Touchbacks are fairly routine in college football. Lots of guys have the leg. But FG kicking is mental. The pressure in the NFL is at a whole other level. Who will keep his head together and who will crumble? You can have a guy kick in practice all you like, but you just don't know what you'll get until you put him in money games.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Adambr´s numbers were from 2015 and the Redskins made the playoffs last season.

I mentioned 2014 because these guys were hired for 2015 when there were throwing stuff against the wall. See the point?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Of course. The problem is you don't know which ones.

Many are physically capable of doing the job. Touchbacks are fairly routine in college football. Lots of guys have the leg. But FG kicking is mental. The pressure in the NFL is at a whole other level. Who will keep his head together and who will crumble? You can have a guy kick in practice all you like, but you just don't know what you'll get until you put him in money games.

Agreed. In my opinion it´s pretty easy to replace a struggling kicker with a better one during a season though.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I mentioned 2014 because these guys were hired for 2015 when there were throwing stuff against the wall. See the point?

A lot of teams holding on to veteran kickers didn´t make the playoffs either.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Agreed. In my opinion it´s pretty easy to replace a struggling kicker with a better one during a season though.

Oh, if a guy is blowing up, replace him by all means.

I would not have tolerated Crosby through 16 games in 2012 given his career up to that point was mediocre-to-poor. It's not like he was a Vinatieri in a slump.

I did not want him back for 2013, and wanted the Packers to sign Carpenter, who's still working on a $2.5 mil per year contract.

And I would not have Crosby $4 mil per year in this most recent contract, even if that contract might look average by the time year 3 or 4 rolls around.

What I would not do, given championship pretentions, is bring in some so-called "dime a dozen" unproven college kicker. I sure wouldn't have spent the #59 pick on Aguayo as Tampa did; the guy has funny looking mechanics which may or may not break down under pressure.

The alternative: there were better free agents than Crosby who signed for less.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

What I would not do, given championship pretentions, is bring in some so-called "dime a dozen" unproven college kicker. I sure wouldn't have spent the #59 pick on Aguayo as Tampa did; the guy has funny looking mechanics which may or may not break down under pressure.

Absolutely agree that spending a second round pick on a kicker is a stupid move. I would have preferred the Packers to go with a cheap rookie at the position. Guess we won´t agree on this topic though.

 

[HardRightEdge]

A lot of teams holding on to veteran kickers didn´t make the playoffs either.

You'd have to break that down in terms of the quality of the kicker, how much they're paid, and what the dead cap might be.

The relevant question is how many top-of-the-heap teams going into 2015 rolled the dice on a rookie kicker vs. those who went with a vet.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The relevant question is how many top-of-the-heap teams going into 2015 rolled the dice on a rookie kicker vs. those who went with a vet.

The Steelers were the only top team to go with a rookie kicker most of last season in Chris Boswell. They signed him in week 5 after Josh Scobee, the veteran they acquired in a trade with the Jaguars during the offseason, struggled mightily making only six of 10 attempts and was released resulting in $2.5 million of dead cap.

This should serve as an example that bringing in a veteran doesn´t work out all the time either.

 

[HardRightEdge]

According to the Press Gazette the Packers and Kuhn are having conversations about signing him to a new contract.

http://www.packersnews.com/story/sp...ations-ongoing-between-packers-kuhn/84244522/

Yes, I think we've exhausted the "kickers are a dime a dozen" issue. Perhaps we should turn our attention to other positions that may more likely be accorded that description...punters, centers and maybe even fullbacks!

Seriously, though, the Packers brought in one UDFA TE with a college reputation as a run blocker and then released him. They "replaced" him with another, if we want to use that term, with a guy scouted as more of a pass blocker than run blocker that I would guess their looking at as an H-back/FB type.

There really isn't a TE on this roster that you can point to as a run blocker except maybe Cook, and I base that on your having quoted a decent PFF blocking grade for him without having seem him do it.

Trying to get away from a true fullback has been a Packer annual event for a few years running. They've tried a variety of TEs at the H-back position, none of whom could get it done. Then the stretch run comes along and back comes Kuhn to positive affect.

Something must be done about the Packers lousy short yardage performance. It's not like the backs are not pounding it. If you can't line up two decent blocking TEs in the short yardage 7 man line, then Kuhn is an alternative. He's been a security blanket in the past. I would not be a surprise if he's back one more time.

 

[adambr2]

I would be happy to have Kuhn back, but these conversations should be short ones.

'Hey John, will you come back for the veterans minimum? Great, welcome back.'

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Seriously, though, the Packers brought in one UDFA TE with a college reputation as a run blocker and then released him. They "replaced" him with another, if we want to use that term, with a guy scouted as more of a pass blocker than run blocker that I would guess their looking at as an H-back/FB type.

There really isn't a TE on this roster that you can point to as a run blocker except maybe Cook, and I base that on your having quoted a decent PFF blocking grade for him without having seem him do it.

Trying to get away from a true fullback has been a Packer annual event for a few years running. They've tried a variety of TEs at the H-back position, none of whom could get it done. Then the stretch run comes along and back comes Kuhn to positive affect.

Something must be done about the Packers lousy short yardage performance. It's not like the backs are not pounding it. If you can't line up two decent blocking TEs in the short yardage 7 man line, then Kuhn is an alternative. He's been a security blanket in the past. It would not be a surprise if he's back one more time.

With Pierce being a long shot to make the team the coaching staff will have to decide if Ripkowski is capable of making a significant jump in his second season to justify getting more snaps. If he hasn´t developed to that point yet I would be fine with re-signing Kuhn to a veteran minimum deal.