Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Team Discussions regarding games, players, coaches, or anything else related to Buccaneer Football.
post

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby Buc You » Thu Mar 23, 2017 10:27 am

Naismith wrote:
Buc You wrote:Janikowski was the last one I remember being touted like that and his ridiculous leg strength seemed to justify it. People thought he was going to hit 60+ yarders with same consistency as 30 yarders. I think that would be the qualification of a "generational talent" as a kicker, the ability to greatly extend your team's scoring chances/range past general standards.


Yeah, I mean that has been a "generational talent" in the NFL, not just projected out of college.

I don't think there has been one, at least not in the NFL I've known(Mid 90s-Now). TBH, maybe there won't be. Even among the "greats" there has never been a huge(borrowing from MJ here) deviation from them to next few guys in terms of percentage or general distance made. To be a "generational talent" as a kicker, that person would have to be able to consistently hitting field goals from 55 yards+.
Image
Buc You
 
Posts: 529
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:27 am
Has thanked: 123 times
Been thanked: 59 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby MJW » Fri Mar 24, 2017 6:47 am

Buc You wrote:
Naismith wrote:
Yeah, I mean that has been a "generational talent" in the NFL, not just projected out of college.

I don't think there has been one, at least not in the NFL I've known(Mid 90s-Now). TBH, maybe there won't be. Even among the "greats" there has never been a huge(borrowing from MJ here) deviation from them to next few guys in terms of percentage or general distance made. To be a "generational talent" as a kicker, that person would have to be able to consistently hitting field goals from 55 yards+.


I second this. You'd need to be automatic, or near automatic, from distances that would be hail-mary's for an average kicker. I don't think anyone can argue Aguayo was ever seen as that guy. He was seen as a guy who could make 95% of the kicks than an average kicker makes 90% of (the 39 and in kicks.) Even if that was what was happening, I'd still rather have not used a 2nd rounder on that.
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 5716
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 138 times
Been thanked: 256 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby Kress » Fri Mar 24, 2017 6:58 am

He's not a terminator then?
Image
User avatar
Kress
 
Posts: 2707
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:26 pm
Has thanked: 21 times
Been thanked: 185 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby Buc You » Fri Mar 24, 2017 7:38 am

Kress wrote:He's not a terminator then?

You're just hoping to see him naked outside of a biker bar.
Image
Buc You
 
Posts: 529
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:27 am
Has thanked: 123 times
Been thanked: 59 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby Kress » Fri Mar 24, 2017 8:15 am

So?
Image
User avatar
Kress
 
Posts: 2707
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:26 pm
Has thanked: 21 times
Been thanked: 185 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby Doctor » Fri Mar 24, 2017 2:33 pm

You guys are hilarious. We have a long list of bust second rounders, we're lucky if we get a serviceable player, and damn lucky we even get a starter. Any other position is "Meh, we'll see how it goes", but if we draft a kicker "HE BETTER BE THE ALL TIME GOAT!" Someone explain why it's okay to bust or get a JAG in the second round just fine, but trying for a solid career kicker, a guy who single footedly puts ****ing points on the board, is somehow held to this ridiculous standard? Oh, because "kickers can be found anywhere?" Really? Have we found one? Have we found one in the last ten freaking years? No.

If this guy goes on to be Steven Hauschka for us, I'd consider that a major ****ing win. Why? Because I'd much rather have Steven Hauschka than ASJ, Banks, Bowers, Benn, sucky DJax, Sears, Piscatelli, etc etc etc. Becuase Steven Hauschka, Dan Baily, Mason Crosby, and others have gone on to do way more for their teams than any of those ****ing second round twats have for the Bucs. But nooo. If he doesn't end up the GOAT then wasn't worth a freaking second round pick. Yeah, okay. Give me a freaking break with this BS.
Image
User avatar
Doctor
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 6:54 pm
Location: Out of the Office. Will return next Fall.
Has thanked: 167 times
Been thanked: 98 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby BucJordan » Fri Mar 24, 2017 3:06 pm

Doctor wrote:You guys are hilarious. We have a long list of bust second rounders, we're lucky if we get a serviceable player, and damn lucky we even get a starter. Any other position is "Meh, we'll see how it goes", but if we draft a kicker "HE BETTER BE THE ALL TIME GOAT!" Someone explain why it's okay to bust or get a JAG in the second round just fine, but trying for a solid career kicker, a guy who single footedly puts ****ing points on the board, is somehow held to this ridiculous standard?


Many reasons, the first of which you provided while asking the question - he single footedly costs us ****ing points on the board. A positional player bust sucks because you wasted the pick, but the only detriment to your team is a lost roster spot until the GM and coach finally give up on them. But they tend to not even hit the field because coaches realize they suck in practice and make them depth players while hoping they improve. Not so with a kicker. Team don't carry two You either cut your 2nd round pick in TC and deal with that fallout, or your fan base has to watch him try to "figure it out" all season while costing the team points with his mistakes.

The other reason is obvious - a 2nd round pick has significantly more value than a solid starting kicker. He HAS to be generational to be worth it because the difference between kicker #5 and kicker #25 in this league is very small and certainly not worth a 2nd round pick. Now you argue that because our recent history with 2nd round picks is bad, somehow a 2nd rounder has less value for us than other teams. Following that line of faulty logic, we might as well trade all of our second rounders either for proven players or to move up into the first. Taking a kicker is not the way to break the curse. Taking guys like Noah Spence and Ali Marpet is how you do that. You conveniently ignored the more recent (and therefore more pertinent) 2nd round draft history. I'd take either of those guys over any kicker.
BucJordan
 
Posts: 335
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:16 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 17 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby Naismith » Fri Mar 24, 2017 3:55 pm

Doctor wrote:Because I'd much rather have Steven Hauschka


Well, he was a free agent eight different times, so you could have had him!
User avatar
Naismith
 
Posts: 852
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 8:51 pm
Has thanked: 39 times
Been thanked: 49 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby Nano » Fri Mar 24, 2017 4:11 pm

So, because we suck at drafting in the second round, it makes it okay to overdraft a kicker there(Or because we haven't had a good kicker in like 3 years)? You're on your pills again Doc lmao
User avatar
Nano
 
Posts: 5506
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 6:30 pm
Location: Somewhere above Tampa
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 190 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby DreadNaught » Fri Mar 24, 2017 5:55 pm

Naismith wrote:
Doctor wrote:Because I'd much rather have Steven Hauschka


Well, he was a free agent eight different times, so you could have had him!


Why sign a FA kicker when you can trade up into the 2nd round and draft one?!?!























j/k
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 7509
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 312 times
Been thanked: 313 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby Buc2 » Sat Mar 25, 2017 10:16 am

Doctor wrote:Oh, because "kickers can be found anywhere?" Really? Have we found one? Have we found one in the last ten freaking years? No.

You're right. We didn't find one in the last 10 years. We found two. And let them both walk. Conner Barth went 83.8% in 5 seasons with the Bucs (2009-12, 2015) and Matt Bryant went 83.5% in 4 season with the Bucs (2005-08). Last season, Bryant went 91.9% on 34/37 for the Falcons and has hit 88.3% for them over the past 8 season. Barth didn't have a great season in Chicago last year only hitting on 78.3% (18/23), but that was still better than Aguayo's 71.0% (22/31).
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 6176
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 666 times
Been thanked: 204 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby Teitan » Sat Mar 25, 2017 10:35 am

Yeah they screwed up letting Bryant leave.
User avatar
Teitan
 
Posts: 2237
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:07 pm
Has thanked: 108 times
Been thanked: 95 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby DreadNaught » Sat Mar 25, 2017 10:47 am

Teitan wrote:Yeah they screwed up letting Bryant leave.


Bucs have been letting good kickers get away since I started following the team. Longtime Buffalo kicker Steve Christie was a Buc that we let go. But it happens to all teams to an extent with kickers. It's why the phrase 'you can get kickers anywhere' is cliche, it's often true.

Kickers are like QBs in that they're the best around age 30. Veteran kickers have such an advantage over a kid like Aguayo. Hopefully the kid steps up an wins his job. Folk will not make it easy, there is a good chance Folk will not miss a kick in a preseason game. Same can't be said for Aguayo unless this preseason is MUCH improved from last year, which was an embarrassment tbh. We new there was an issue when he shanked half his kicks in the Browns TC split practice. It's technically Aguayo's job to lose. But tbh I'd be surprised if Aguayo wins the job over Folk.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 7509
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 312 times
Been thanked: 313 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby Doctor » Sat Mar 25, 2017 1:58 pm

BucJordan wrote: You conveniently ignored the more recent (and therefore more pertinent) 2nd round draft history. I'd take either of those guys over any kicker.

You mean the guys drafted by Litch? If anything that's a reason to trust IN his judgment, and he drafted Aguayo.

Buc2 wrote: Conner Barth went 83.8% in 5 seasons with the Bucs (2009-12, 2015) and Matt Bryant went 83.5% in 4 season with the Bucs (2005-08). Last season, Bryant went 91.9% on 34/37 for the Falcons and has hit 88.3% for them over the past 8 season. Barth didn't have a great season in Chicago last year only hitting on 78.3% (18/23), but that was still better than Aguayo's 71.0% (22/31).

Bryant was an 83% kicker when he was here. That's not usually the standard you want to settle for. He also went to the UFL after his time here, so don't make it seem like we had a franchise kicker. Present day Bryant is one, sure. But you never know when you'll get that. Today's Bryant wasn't the one we had anymore than the 49ers Young was the one we had. And yeah, Barth wasn't it either.

I'm not saying Aguayo is it or ever will be. He could be a total bust and it'd be a shame like any other. But people making it seem like it's MORE of a shame just because of his position are ridiculous. Litch took a chance (which is all the draft is) on finding a franchise kicker. Maybe he flopped. If he did we'll go back to playing FA kicker roulette again, hoping to catch a FA when he's on his up swing trend instead of the usual we've gotten. Everyone walks around posting as if it wasn't for Aguayo we'd for sure have a probowler on the team right now.

BucJordan wrote: a 2nd round pick has significantly more value than a solid starting kicker.

No it's not. That's where you're wrong. A 2nd round pick is NOTHING. It's a pick. A CHANCE to roll the dice. It's "potential". It could turn into something or nothing, but it itself has no value and doesn't help you win games. I'd trade our second rounder right now for Stephen Gostkowski, but the Pats would laugh. Everyone likes to play draft hindsight when it comes to draft picks that get traded like "look who we could have gotten!" as if that was who we were going to draft for sure. Same with picks we did used but missed on. Like I said, eeryone walks around posting as if it wasn't for Aguayo we'd for sure have a probowler on the team right now.
Image
User avatar
Doctor
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 6:54 pm
Location: Out of the Office. Will return next Fall.
Has thanked: 167 times
Been thanked: 98 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby ImAWalkingCorpse » Sun Mar 26, 2017 5:51 am

Doctor wrote:
BucJordan wrote: You conveniently ignored the more recent (and therefore more pertinent) 2nd round draft history. I'd take either of those guys over any kicker.

You mean the guys drafted by Litch? If anything that's a reason to trust IN his judgment, and he drafted Aguayo.

Buc2 wrote: Conner Barth went 83.8% in 5 seasons with the Bucs (2009-12, 2015) and Matt Bryant went 83.5% in 4 season with the Bucs (2005-08). Last season, Bryant went 91.9% on 34/37 for the Falcons and has hit 88.3% for them over the past 8 season. Barth didn't have a great season in Chicago last year only hitting on 78.3% (18/23), but that was still better than Aguayo's 71.0% (22/31).

Bryant was an 83% kicker when he was here. That's not usually the standard you want to settle for. He also went to the UFL after his time here, so don't make it seem like we had a franchise kicker. Present day Bryant is one, sure. But you never know when you'll get that. Today's Bryant wasn't the one we had anymore than the 49ers Young was the one we had. And yeah, Barth wasn't it either.

I'm not saying Aguayo is it or ever will be. He could be a total bust and it'd be a shame like any other. But people making it seem like it's MORE of a shame just because of his position are ridiculous. Litch took a chance (which is all the draft is) on finding a franchise kicker. Maybe he flopped. If he did we'll go back to playing FA kicker roulette again, hoping to catch a FA when he's on his up swing trend instead of the usual we've gotten. Everyone walks around posting as if it wasn't for Aguayo we'd for sure have a probowler on the team right now.

BucJordan wrote: a 2nd round pick has significantly more value than a solid starting kicker.

No it's not. That's where you're wrong. A 2nd round pick is NOTHING. It's a pick. A CHANCE to roll the dice. It's "potential". It could turn into something or nothing, but it itself has no value and doesn't help you win games. I'd trade our second rounder right now for Stephen Gostkowski, but the Pats would laugh. Everyone likes to play draft hindsight when it comes to draft picks that get traded like "look who we could have gotten!" as if that was who we were going to draft for sure. Same with picks we did used but missed on. Like I said, eeryone walks around posting as if it wasn't for Aguayo we'd for sure have a probowler on the team right now.

Someone that doesn't understand the value of the draft.... we get it, you think Aguyao was the correct pick. But he wasn't. NOTHING about his college performance said he was anything other than a late day 3 pick. Deal with it, he sucks and was a terrible pick, even worse than the clowns you talked about. The ONLY guy that is even on the same level of him is the crap Djax.
ImAWalkingCorpse
 
Posts: 201
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 5:56 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby Doctor » Sun Mar 26, 2017 11:22 pm

ImAWalkingCorpse wrote:
Doctor wrote:You mean the guys drafted by Litch? If anything that's a reason to trust IN his judgment, and he drafted Aguayo.


Bryant was an 83% kicker when he was here. That's not usually the standard you want to settle for. He also went to the UFL after his time here, so don't make it seem like we had a franchise kicker. Present day Bryant is one, sure. But you never know when you'll get that. Today's Bryant wasn't the one we had anymore than the 49ers Young was the one we had. And yeah, Barth wasn't it either.

I'm not saying Aguayo is it or ever will be. He could be a total bust and it'd be a shame like any other. But people making it seem like it's MORE of a shame just because of his position are ridiculous. Litch took a chance (which is all the draft is) on finding a franchise kicker. Maybe he flopped. If he did we'll go back to playing FA kicker roulette again, hoping to catch a FA when he's on his up swing trend instead of the usual we've gotten. Everyone walks around posting as if it wasn't for Aguayo we'd for sure have a probowler on the team right now.


No it's not. That's where you're wrong. A 2nd round pick is NOTHING. It's a pick. A CHANCE to roll the dice. It's "potential". It could turn into something or nothing, but it itself has no value and doesn't help you win games. I'd trade our second rounder right now for Stephen Gostkowski, but the Pats would laugh. Everyone likes to play draft hindsight when it comes to draft picks that get traded like "look who we could have gotten!" as if that was who we were going to draft for sure. Same with picks we did used but missed on. Like I said, eeryone walks around posting as if it wasn't for Aguayo we'd for sure have a probowler on the team right now.

Someone that doesn't understand the value of the draft.... we get it, you think Aguyao was the correct pick. But he wasn't. NOTHING about his college performance said he was anything other than a late day 3 pick. Deal with it, he sucks and was a terrible pick, even worse than the clowns you talked about. The ONLY guy that is even on the same level of him is the crap Djax.

I don't think he was. I wouldn't have picked him there. That's not what I'm saying at all. So no, clearly you don't get it.
Image
User avatar
Doctor
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 6:54 pm
Location: Out of the Office. Will return next Fall.
Has thanked: 167 times
Been thanked: 98 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby ImAWalkingCorpse » Mon Mar 27, 2017 12:08 am

Doctor wrote:
ImAWalkingCorpse wrote:Someone that doesn't understand the value of the draft.... we get it, you think Aguyao was the correct pick. But he wasn't. NOTHING about his college performance said he was anything other than a late day 3 pick. Deal with it, he sucks and was a terrible pick, even worse than the clowns you talked about. The ONLY guy that is even on the same level of him is the crap Djax.

I don't think he was. I wouldn't have picked him there. That's not what I'm saying at all. So no, clearly you don't get it.

Picking a bust of a kicker AND trading up to pick him is worse than the garbage players you are talking about. You should expect your 2nd round picks to work, they aren't really "roll the dice" picks. Those are 5th, 6th and 7th round picks.
ImAWalkingCorpse
 
Posts: 201
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 5:56 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby Doctor » Mon Mar 27, 2017 11:55 am

ImAWalkingCorpse wrote:
Doctor wrote:I don't think he was. I wouldn't have picked him there. That's not what I'm saying at all. So no, clearly you don't get it.

Picking a bust of a kicker AND trading up to pick him is worse than the garbage players you are talking about. You should expect your 2nd round picks to work, they aren't really "roll the dice" picks. Those are 5th, 6th and 7th round picks.

Coin flip if you prefer? The last numbers I saw had the first rounders being successful about 56% of the time. Roughly half of all first rounders will go on to do nothing noteworthy in the NFL. And it only gets worse from there. IIRC, by the end of the 3rd your chances of finding a contributing starter has fallen to about 30% or so.

Also, a lot of you seem to have made up your mind on Aguayo already too, yet another double standard. Sure, for every other rookie it's "too soon to tell", but for kickers, nahhh. Because no kicker has ever gone on to kick better....
Image
User avatar
Doctor
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 6:54 pm
Location: Out of the Office. Will return next Fall.
Has thanked: 167 times
Been thanked: 98 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby MJW » Mon Mar 27, 2017 3:40 pm

"Things might not work out the way you want if you invest, so feel free treat your capital as if it has no value" is my favorite chapter in "Rich Dad, Poor Dad."
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 5716
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 138 times
Been thanked: 256 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby Naismith » Mon Mar 27, 2017 4:09 pm

MJW wrote:"Things might not work out the way you want if you invest, so feel free treat your capital as if it has no value" is my favorite chapter in "Rich Dad, Poor Dad."


Okay, that was funny.
User avatar
Naismith
 
Posts: 852
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 8:51 pm
Has thanked: 39 times
Been thanked: 49 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby Doctor » Mon Mar 27, 2017 4:30 pm

MJW wrote:"Things might not work out the way you want if you invest, so feel free treat your capital as if it has no value" is my favorite chapter in "Rich Dad, Poor Dad."

Ha. Problem is your metaphor is way off. For starters, unlike capital, there's nothing else you can do with your draft pick. Second, when you lose your capital it's gone, here you get a brand new set of draft picks every year. Ironically, the worse you "invest" the BETTER your capital for next years draft, so it's quite the opposite. Lastly, you are treating the draft like it's a stock exchange when it's much more like a casino. And each year you play with house money.
Image
User avatar
Doctor
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 6:54 pm
Location: Out of the Office. Will return next Fall.
Has thanked: 167 times
Been thanked: 98 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby ImAWalkingCorpse » Mon Mar 27, 2017 9:19 pm

Doctor wrote:
MJW wrote:"Things might not work out the way you want if you invest, so feel free treat your capital as if it has no value" is my favorite chapter in "Rich Dad, Poor Dad."

Ha. Problem is your metaphor is way off. For starters, unlike capital, there's nothing else you can do with your draft pick. Second, when you lose your capital it's gone, here you get a brand new set of draft picks every year. Ironically, the worse you "invest" the BETTER your capital for next years draft, so it's quite the opposite. Lastly, you are treating the draft like it's a stock exchange when it's much more like a casino. And each year you play with house money.

Sounds like something a GM that didn't do a good job would say....
ImAWalkingCorpse
 
Posts: 201
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 5:56 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby Caradoc » Tue Mar 28, 2017 8:03 pm

Buc You wrote:
Kress wrote:He's not a terminator then?

You're just hoping to see him naked outside of a biker bar.



Useless trivia, In that scene, one of the "punks" was recent Grim victim Bill Paxton.
Caradoc
 
Posts: 2108
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:30 pm
Has thanked: 119 times
Been thanked: 77 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby sonofg » Wed Mar 29, 2017 12:05 pm

Doctor wrote:
MJW wrote:"Things might not work out the way you want if you invest, so feel free treat your capital as if it has no value" is my favorite chapter in "Rich Dad, Poor Dad."

Ha. Problem is your metaphor is way off. For starters, unlike capital, there's nothing else you can do with your draft pick. Second, when you lose your capital it's gone, here you get a brand new set of draft picks every year. Ironically, the worse you "invest" the BETTER your capital for next years draft, so it's quite the opposite. Lastly, you are treating the draft like it's a stock exchange when it's much more like a casino. And each year you play with house money.


That's not accurate. You can trade it for proven players instead of "gambling" in the draft.
There's also a financial reason why teams try to hit on players in the draft. If you find a great pass rusher in the 2nd round, you get 4 years of cheap production compared to an established player. Kickers, on the other hand, don't make that much (relatively speaking) anyway, so the financial benefit of drafting one instead of signing a FA isn't really there.

Also, sure Aguayo can get better, and he probably will. And then he will probably get worse for a season or two, and then maybe better again. Kickers appear to fluctuate more in performance than any other position, and seemingly pretty randomly. That's another reason why using high-end draft capital (or chips if you like) is a risky, even unnecessary, strategy.
sonofg
 
Posts: 372
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 2:18 am
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby BucJordan » Thu Mar 30, 2017 7:53 am

Doctor wrote:
BucJordan wrote: You conveniently ignored the more recent (and therefore more pertinent) 2nd round draft history. I'd take either of those guys over any kicker.

You mean the guys drafted by Litch? If anything that's a reason to trust IN his judgment, and he drafted Aguayo.


You can't even figure out your own argument. First it's that we never make good 2nd round picks anyway, so why not blow it on a kicker. Now it's "Well fine, Licht's made some good picks, so we have to trust him on this!" You can't have it both ways.


Doctor wrote:
BucJordan wrote: a 2nd round pick has significantly more value than a solid starting kicker.

No it's not. That's where you're wrong. A 2nd round pick is NOTHING. It's a pick. A CHANCE to roll the dice. It's "potential". It could turn into something or nothing, but it itself has no value and doesn't help you win games. I'd trade our second rounder right now for Stephen Gostkowski, but the Pats would laugh. Everyone likes to play draft hindsight when it comes to draft picks that get traded like "look who we could have gotten!" as if that was who we were going to draft for sure. Same with picks we did used but missed on. Like I said, eeryone walks around posting as if it wasn't for Aguayo we'd for sure have a probowler on the team right now.


The potential IS value. Good players are traded every year for chances to roll the dice - players that help teams win games.

MJW's metaphor is apt, you're just too blind to see it. You get a finite number of draft picks each year to invest, just as you receive a salary each year. Using it as pure cash is equivalent to working out trades for proven talent, but making those investments is the best way to build a team. Investing on a kicker with premium draft capital is NOT. We just signed an average kicker in Nick Folk for nothing. The only way a kicker has real value is if they're top 5 guys - thus your Gostkowski example. You think the Rams wouldn't give up Greg the leg for a 2nd? Chandler Catanzaro? Dustin Hopkins? Cairo Santos? Please.
BucJordan
 
Posts: 335
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:16 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 17 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby Caradoc » Thu Mar 30, 2017 6:16 pm

First off, let's level-set here - I was not an advocate of drafting Aguayo (at least earlier than the 5th or 6th). When we traded up I felt certain, like many others, that we would draft Vonn Bell, and thought that was the smart move there.

Now:

Watching you numbskulls arguing this over and over and repeatedly missing the point is depressing. Doctor is making a very simple point, which you are missing so completely that it almost seems like some form of "community Bootzing."

The first mistake you are making is you need to work on your English skills. Specifically the fact that there is a significant difference between the word "CAN", and the word "WILL". Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you will. Just because something is POSSIBLE does not mean it is GUARANTEED. But you all say "you can get a good kicker in FA", but what you are really insisting is that you WILL get one in FA. If that was the case, every team would have a good kicker because "you can get them in FA". You all seem to refuse to acknowledge that you also CAN get a really crappy kicker in FA. This is an extremely important point that you totally dismiss as irrelevant, or a minor concern at best. Also note that the only position that you generally CAN'T get a good player in FA is at QB, so saying "you can get a kicker in FA" as some kind of unique positional trait is bunk You can get a good DE in FA, you can get a good WR, etc..

Second thing is, you are vastly over simplifying the draft. It is not as simple as "you have to draft here to get a good safety/LB/CB." Or "This position is the best bet in Round X". While when we talk about the draft we tend to make those oversimplifications, but once you get past the very beginning of the draft, those generalizations become less and less accurate very very quickly. You draft people not just on the positional value, but also on what you think their ceiling is, and the probability they will reach that ceiling. (To be sure there are many other things, but these are the big ones for this particular discussion).

So, how to explain? Well, since there are so many fans of PFFs "magical math" here I'll use some arbitrary math here (but I won't pretend the numbers are accurate or have any real meaning other than to illustrate a point).

Lets look at 1) Vonn Bell, who I think everyone would have been OK with had we moved up there and was expecting us to, and 2) Aguayo, who we did draft. When you are looking at building your team, you have a certain valuation at different positions. You may have a number or just a general sense, but you value positions differently. So lets say that Licht values an "average" player at the safety position as an 6, and at the kicking position as a 4. Nothing unusual. But then he looks at the players available and grades what they think their ceiling might be, and he grades out Bell as having a ceiling of being "good to very good" and that gives him a new value of 8. He grades Aguayo's ceiling as "perennial All-pro to HOF" Which shoots him up to 8 as well. Now they are both looking about equal value to him as far as the future success of the team. Then he looks at whether he thinks someone will actually hit that ceiling. We all know he loved Aguayo's personality ho he gives him a close to 100% chance there, keeping him at 8. Bell he likes, but doesn't have that all-in confidence so he says 75%, and now Bell is a 6. (this scenario would theoretically play out with every other player on the board at the time with Aguayo 'winning' every time, draft choices are not solid numbers on a chart, they are relative to all the other options available at that moment.) So he chooses to go with what he thought was a "Sure thing, great player" at a lesser positional value, rather than "possibly very good but possibly not so good" player elsewhere.

Now obviously these numbers are not real or used they just serve to illustrate the weighing of different factors, (I'm sure there is no "Percent likeliehood of hitting ceiling conversion table"), and this is still an oversimplification , but this is generally along the lines of what has to be considered. When Licht picked, he felt he had among the highest ceilings and highest likelihood of hitting it. We are talking late second round here, so this is beyond a crapshoot. Having a great kicker is a huge boon to a team. Yes, so is having a great safety. But it's clear he was confronted with choices that he didn't feel super confident would excel, but he absolutely believed Aguayo was a lock to be special. So rather than **** around with various kickers until he got the right one, he wanted to lock that in. And theoretically then, the drafting was sound. What sucked was the execution, as Aguayo had already shown he was regressing. Had Aguayo been 100% inside 40 for us this season, and average beyond that, we would have been in the playoffs and would never be worrying about kicker again, which would be absolutely worth it.

[TL;DR]Licht thought he saw something special, and took a guy at an arguably "less value" (though I'd argue that) position because he thought he had an incredibly high ceiling, and was a guarantee to hit it and not bust over guys he thought had lower ceilings with lower chances to hit them. That's the point you are missing. A guaranteed stud at one spot, vs a maybe, possibly, above average guy elsewhere.
Caradoc
 
Posts: 2108
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:30 pm
Has thanked: 119 times
Been thanked: 77 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby Naismith » Thu Mar 30, 2017 7:50 pm

Please describe with numbers and/or player comparisons a very high ceiling for a kicker.
User avatar
Naismith
 
Posts: 852
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 8:51 pm
Has thanked: 39 times
Been thanked: 49 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby threadkiller » Thu Mar 30, 2017 10:34 pm

Damn it, how did I miss Doc ranting that he'd trade our 2nd round pick for a 33 year old kicker coming off a worse season than Connor Barth had for us in 2015?
threadkiller
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2016 8:53 am
Has thanked: 89 times
Been thanked: 35 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby MJW » Thu Mar 30, 2017 11:52 pm

Caradoc wrote:First off, let's level-set here - I was not an advocate of drafting Aguayo (at least earlier than the 5th or 6th). When we traded up I felt certain, like many others, that we would draft Vonn Bell, and thought that was the smart move there.

Now:

Watching you numbskulls arguing this over and over and repeatedly missing the point is depressing. Doctor is making a very simple point, which you are missing so completely that it almost seems like some form of "community Bootzing."

The first mistake you are making is you need to work on your English skills. Specifically the fact that there is a significant difference between the word "CAN", and the word "WILL". Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you will. Just because something is POSSIBLE does not mean it is GUARANTEED. But you all say "you can get a good kicker in FA", but what you are really insisting is that you WILL get one in FA. If that was the case, every team would have a good kicker because "you can get them in FA". You all seem to refuse to acknowledge that you also CAN get a really crappy kicker in FA. This is an extremely important point that you totally dismiss as irrelevant, or a minor concern at best. Also note that the only position that you generally CAN'T get a good player in FA is at QB, so saying "you can get a kicker in FA" as some kind of unique positional trait is bunk You can get a good DE in FA, you can get a good WR, etc..

Second thing is, you are vastly over simplifying the draft. It is not as simple as "you have to draft here to get a good safety/LB/CB." Or "This position is the best bet in Round X". While when we talk about the draft we tend to make those oversimplifications, but once you get past the very beginning of the draft, those generalizations become less and less accurate very very quickly. You draft people not just on the positional value, but also on what you think their ceiling is, and the probability they will reach that ceiling. (To be sure there are many other things, but these are the big ones for this particular discussion).

So, how to explain? Well, since there are so many fans of PFFs "magical math" here I'll use some arbitrary math here (but I won't pretend the numbers are accurate or have any real meaning other than to illustrate a point).

Lets look at 1) Vonn Bell, who I think everyone would have been OK with had we moved up there and was expecting us to, and 2) Aguayo, who we did draft. When you are looking at building your team, you have a certain valuation at different positions. You may have a number or just a general sense, but you value positions differently. So lets say that Licht values an "average" player at the safety position as an 6, and at the kicking position as a 4. Nothing unusual. But then he looks at the players available and grades what they think their ceiling might be, and he grades out Bell as having a ceiling of being "good to very good" and that gives him a new value of 8. He grades Aguayo's ceiling as "perennial All-pro to HOF" Which shoots him up to 8 as well. Now they are both looking about equal value to him as far as the future success of the team. Then he looks at whether he thinks someone will actually hit that ceiling. We all know he loved Aguayo's personality ho he gives him a close to 100% chance there, keeping him at 8. Bell he likes, but doesn't have that all-in confidence so he says 75%, and now Bell is a 6. (this scenario would theoretically play out with every other player on the board at the time with Aguayo 'winning' every time, draft choices are not solid numbers on a chart, they are relative to all the other options available at that moment.) So he chooses to go with what he thought was a "Sure thing, great player" at a lesser positional value, rather than "possibly very good but possibly not so good" player elsewhere.

Now obviously these numbers are not real or used they just serve to illustrate the weighing of different factors, (I'm sure there is no "Percent likeliehood of hitting ceiling conversion table"), and this is still an oversimplification , but this is generally along the lines of what has to be considered. When Licht picked, he felt he had among the highest ceilings and highest likelihood of hitting it. We are talking late second round here, so this is beyond a crapshoot. Having a great kicker is a huge boon to a team. Yes, so is having a great safety. But it's clear he was confronted with choices that he didn't feel super confident would excel, but he absolutely believed Aguayo was a lock to be special. So rather than **** around with various kickers until he got the right one, he wanted to lock that in. And theoretically then, the drafting was sound. What sucked was the execution, as Aguayo had already shown he was regressing. Had Aguayo been 100% inside 40 for us this season, and average beyond that, we would have been in the playoffs and would never be worrying about kicker again, which would be absolutely worth it.

[TL;DR]Licht thought he saw something special, and took a guy at an arguably "less value" (though I'd argue that) position because he thought he had an incredibly high ceiling, and was a guarantee to hit it and not bust over guys he thought had lower ceilings with lower chances to hit them. That's the point you are missing. A guaranteed stud at one spot, vs a maybe, possibly, above average guy elsewhere.


This is a good write-up, but there are two key points that invalidate it.

One, when you consider all the factors you're using to defend the decision (theoretically), and then remember how often "special" kickers turn into fool's gold in the NFL, it makes it harder to operate from the "he saw something special" defense. Evaluating kickers SHOULD be straight-forward, but any study of the position yields it's even harder than position players.

Two, even if everything else you're saying is true, the margin between "a great kicker" and "a good kicker" is nominal. Depending on how you want to define these terms, I'd argue you're talking about changing the outcome of a few snaps a year out of thousands. And that's again, keeping in mind point #1 - Licht should have been LESS sure he was getting a "special" talent at kicker than he could reasonably be at any other position.

On the other hand, the difference between an "above average" safety and an "average" safety is going to subtly and directly influence every single defensive snap if you think about it. It's going to change what an offense is comfortable running against us, and what we're comfortable calling against them.

So...stupid pick...for so many reasons. My hope is that Jason Licht talked it over with Wilma and Barney and agreed not to let Gazoo make any more decisions for the franchise.
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 5716
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 138 times
Been thanked: 256 times

Re: Buccaneers signing Nick Folk

Postby Buc2 » Fri Mar 31, 2017 12:58 pm

MJW wrote:
Caradoc wrote:First off, let's level-set here - I was not an advocate of drafting Aguayo (at least earlier than the 5th or 6th). When we traded up I felt certain, like many others, that we would draft Vonn Bell, and thought that was the smart move there.

Now:

Watching you numbskulls arguing this over and over and repeatedly missing the point is depressing. Doctor is making a very simple point, which you are missing so completely that it almost seems like some form of "community Bootzing."

The first mistake you are making is you need to work on your English skills. Specifically the fact that there is a significant difference between the word "CAN", and the word "WILL". Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you will. Just because something is POSSIBLE does not mean it is GUARANTEED. But you all say "you can get a good kicker in FA", but what you are really insisting is that you WILL get one in FA. If that was the case, every team would have a good kicker because "you can get them in FA". You all seem to refuse to acknowledge that you also CAN get a really crappy kicker in FA. This is an extremely important point that you totally dismiss as irrelevant, or a minor concern at best. Also note that the only position that you generally CAN'T get a good player in FA is at QB, so saying "you can get a kicker in FA" as some kind of unique positional trait is bunk You can get a good DE in FA, you can get a good WR, etc..

Second thing is, you are vastly over simplifying the draft. It is not as simple as "you have to draft here to get a good safety/LB/CB." Or "This position is the best bet in Round X". While when we talk about the draft we tend to make those oversimplifications, but once you get past the very beginning of the draft, those generalizations become less and less accurate very very quickly. You draft people not just on the positional value, but also on what you think their ceiling is, and the probability they will reach that ceiling. (To be sure there are many other things, but these are the big ones for this particular discussion).

So, how to explain? Well, since there are so many fans of PFFs "magical math" here I'll use some arbitrary math here (but I won't pretend the numbers are accurate or have any real meaning other than to illustrate a point).

Lets look at 1) Vonn Bell, who I think everyone would have been OK with had we moved up there and was expecting us to, and 2) Aguayo, who we did draft. When you are looking at building your team, you have a certain valuation at different positions. You may have a number or just a general sense, but you value positions differently. So lets say that Licht values an "average" player at the safety position as an 6, and at the kicking position as a 4. Nothing unusual. But then he looks at the players available and grades what they think their ceiling might be, and he grades out Bell as having a ceiling of being "good to very good" and that gives him a new value of 8. He grades Aguayo's ceiling as "perennial All-pro to HOF" Which shoots him up to 8 as well. Now they are both looking about equal value to him as far as the future success of the team. Then he looks at whether he thinks someone will actually hit that ceiling. We all know he loved Aguayo's personality ho he gives him a close to 100% chance there, keeping him at 8. Bell he likes, but doesn't have that all-in confidence so he says 75%, and now Bell is a 6. (this scenario would theoretically play out with every other player on the board at the time with Aguayo 'winning' every time, draft choices are not solid numbers on a chart, they are relative to all the other options available at that moment.) So he chooses to go with what he thought was a "Sure thing, great player" at a lesser positional value, rather than "possibly very good but possibly not so good" player elsewhere.

Now obviously these numbers are not real or used they just serve to illustrate the weighing of different factors, (I'm sure there is no "Percent likeliehood of hitting ceiling conversion table"), and this is still an oversimplification , but this is generally along the lines of what has to be considered. When Licht picked, he felt he had among the highest ceilings and highest likelihood of hitting it. We are talking late second round here, so this is beyond a crapshoot. Having a great kicker is a huge boon to a team. Yes, so is having a great safety. But it's clear he was confronted with choices that he didn't feel super confident would excel, but he absolutely believed Aguayo was a lock to be special. So rather than **** around with various kickers until he got the right one, he wanted to lock that in. And theoretically then, the drafting was sound. What sucked was the execution, as Aguayo had already shown he was regressing. Had Aguayo been 100% inside 40 for us this season, and average beyond that, we would have been in the playoffs and would never be worrying about kicker again, which would be absolutely worth it.

[TL;DR]Licht thought he saw something special, and took a guy at an arguably "less value" (though I'd argue that) position because he thought he had an incredibly high ceiling, and was a guarantee to hit it and not bust over guys he thought had lower ceilings with lower chances to hit them. That's the point you are missing. A guaranteed stud at one spot, vs a maybe, possibly, above average guy elsewhere.


This is a good write-up, but there are two key points that invalidate it.

One, when you consider all the factors you're using to defend the decision (theoretically), and then remember how often "special" kickers turn into fool's gold in the NFL, it makes it harder to operate from the "he saw something special" defense. Evaluating kickers SHOULD be straight-forward, but any study of the position yields it's even harder than position players.

Two, even if everything else you're saying is true, the margin between "a great kicker" and "a good kicker" is nominal. Depending on how you want to define these terms, I'd argue you're talking about changing the outcome of a few snaps a year out of thousands. And that's again, keeping in mind point #1 - Licht should have been LESS sure he was getting a "special" talent at kicker than he could reasonably be at any other position.

On the other hand, the difference between an "above average" safety and an "average" safety is going to subtly and directly influence every single defensive snap if you think about it. It's going to change what an offense is comfortable running against us, and what we're comfortable calling against them.

So...stupid pick...for so many reasons. My hope is that Jason Licht talked it over with Wilma and Barney and agreed not to let Gazoo make any more decisions for the franchise.


And let me add just one more thing...please don't ever lecture anyone about their English skills again.
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 6176
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 666 times
Been thanked: 204 times

PreviousNext

post

Return to Team Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: acmillis, Deja Entendu, Google [Bot], Naismith, Noles1724, RedLeader, Teitan, VauntedTampa2 and 6 guests