Oregon Ducks Posted August 12, 2017 Share Posted August 12, 2017 1 hour ago, HorizontoZenith said: I wish he would have done better. It would have compelled more teams to try to take a kicker higher. Wouldn't be surprised to see him have a good career still. Maybe even a great one. 71% really isn't horrible for a rookie kicker. Gostkowski had 77% his rookie year. So did Vinatieri. Vinatieri had a year where he had 73.5% made and 97% on extra points when extra points were a chip shot. Mason Crosby had a year where he was 63% on field goals. Sebastian Janikowski was picked in the first round, 17th overall, and he was 68% on field goals his rookie year. I think it was a really stupid mistake for the Buccaneers to waive Aguayo. What was an even bigger mistake was constantly saying that there was an open competition for the kicking position. There really isn't much physical disparity between most NFL kickers. It's mostly mental. There's enough pressure with being a second round pick, just as there was pressure for Janikowski to be a 17th overall pick. The Buccaneers compounded that pressure by constantly saying there was an open competition instead of putting the requisite faith in Aguayo and letting him overcome his own mental hurdles. They spent a second round pick on him, so they must have been confident in his ability, and yet they weren't confident enough to put all their faith in him and let him get over his bad year. As I've already shown, his rookie year wasn't even a historically awful year when compared to some of the very very best in the league and their rookie years. Just to put a final stamp on my argument, Good Kicker careers with bad/worse starts: Graham - 75% first year, 72% second year Bryant - 81, 78, 75% first three years Gould - 77% first year Gostkowski - 77% first year Hauschka - 50%, 69% first two years Dawson - 66% first year, 96% EP with chip shots Vinatieri - 77% first year, 93% chip shot EP Suisham - 75% first year Barth 74% second year Josh Brown - 73% first year Matt Stover -73, 72, 73% first three years Matt Prater - 25%, 25%, 74% first three years John Carney - 40% first year John Kasay - 63% second year Janikowski - 68% first year Morten Anderson - 40, 75, 74% first three years The Buccaneers made a bad choice taking a kicker in the second year. They made a worse choice applying extra pressure on Aguayo to start off well. They made their worst mistake when they gave up on him too soon. Good post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footbull3196 Posted August 12, 2017 Share Posted August 12, 2017 Writing was on the wall when they brought in Nick Folk to compete with him. Still think he gets another shot within the season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmad Posted August 12, 2017 Share Posted August 12, 2017 I don't care how high he was drafted or how awful he was, cutting him after 1 year is just stupid. You invested in him, let him try and return on that investment even if he sucks it's not like Nick Folk is gonna do any better. But this is hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Ramster Posted August 12, 2017 Share Posted August 12, 2017 1 hour ago, Gmen said: If you draft a kicker in the second round, you expect him to be on the team for 20 years like a Sebastian Janikowski. He'll still catch on somewhere if he regains his confidence. Terrible comparison.. Sebas has had his fair share of accuracy issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted August 12, 2017 Share Posted August 12, 2017 3 hours ago, SpacemanSpiff said: I actually thought Aguayo would be a stud kicker in the pros. Who knows? Maybe getting cut will be good for him. Maybe he'll get his head right and catch on somewhere else, but for Tampa, watching that draft capital they spent on him evaporate has got to hurt. The problem with Aguayo is that all of his hype was tied to his accuracy. However, he was only accurate in college from less than 40 yards. From over 40 yards, he was nothing special. There are tons of kickers in the NFL who almost never miss from inside 40 (see Travis Coons). It's from outside 40 that defines you. Of course, Aguayo hasn't even been accurate from inside 40 in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted August 12, 2017 Share Posted August 12, 2017 2 hours ago, HorizontoZenith said: I wish he would have done better. It would have compelled more teams to try to take a kicker higher. Wouldn't be surprised to see him have a good career still. Maybe even a great one. 71% really isn't horrible for a rookie kicker. Gostkowski had 77% his rookie year. So did Vinatieri. Vinatieri had a year where he had 73.5% made and 97% on extra points when extra points were a chip shot. Mason Crosby had a year where he was 63% on field goals. Sebastian Janikowski was picked in the first round, 17th overall, and he was 68% on field goals his rookie year. I think it was a really stupid mistake for the Buccaneers to waive Aguayo. What was an even bigger mistake was constantly saying that there was an open competition for the kicking position. There really isn't much physical disparity between most NFL kickers. It's mostly mental. There's enough pressure with being a second round pick, just as there was pressure for Janikowski to be a 17th overall pick. The Buccaneers compounded that pressure by constantly saying there was an open competition instead of putting the requisite faith in Aguayo and letting him overcome his own mental hurdles. They spent a second round pick on him, so they must have been confident in his ability, and yet they weren't confident enough to put all their faith in him and let him get over his bad year. As I've already shown, his rookie year wasn't even a historically awful year when compared to some of the very very best in the league and their rookie years. There's good reason to be patient with a guy like Janikowski. He had one of the strongest legs of all time. Aguayo doesn't. I doubt he's even average in today's NFL in terms of power. So the Bucs can continue to wait around to see if Aguayo figures out how to be accurate and develops into an above average kicker, or they can sign Nick Folk who is already there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelcurtain29 Posted August 12, 2017 Share Posted August 12, 2017 I can't understand how you give up on this kid so quickly. Especially when you used a 2nd rounder on him. He wasn't BAD last year. He still hit 73% of his FG. I can't imagine there's a better option long term right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakuvious Posted August 12, 2017 Share Posted August 12, 2017 2 hours ago, HorizontoZenith said: I wish he would have done better. It would have compelled more teams to try to take a kicker higher. Wouldn't be surprised to see him have a good career still. Maybe even a great one. 71% really isn't horrible for a rookie kicker. Gostkowski had 77% his rookie year. So did Vinatieri. Vinatieri had a year where he had 73.5% made and 97% on extra points when extra points were a chip shot. Mason Crosby had a year where he was 63% on field goals. Sebastian Janikowski was picked in the first round, 17th overall, and he was 68% on field goals his rookie year. I think it was a really stupid mistake for the Buccaneers to waive Aguayo. What was an even bigger mistake was constantly saying that there was an open competition for the kicking position. There really isn't much physical disparity between most NFL kickers. It's mostly mental. There's enough pressure with being a second round pick, just as there was pressure for Janikowski to be a 17th overall pick. The Buccaneers compounded that pressure by constantly saying there was an open competition instead of putting the requisite faith in Aguayo and letting him overcome his own mental hurdles. They spent a second round pick on him, so they must have been confident in his ability, and yet they weren't confident enough to put all their faith in him and let him get over his bad year. As I've already shown, his rookie year wasn't even a historically awful year when compared to some of the very very best in the league and their rookie years. Just to put a final stamp on my argument, Good Kicker careers with bad/worse starts: Graham - 75% first year, 72% second year Bryant - 81, 78, 75% first three years Gould - 77% first year Gostkowski - 77% first year Hauschka - 50%, 69% first two years Dawson - 66% first year, 96% EP with chip shots Vinatieri - 77% first year, 93% chip shot EP Suisham - 75% first year Barth 74% second year Josh Brown - 73% first year Matt Stover -73, 72, 73% first three years Matt Prater - 25%, 25%, 74% first three years John Carney - 40% first year John Kasay - 63% second year Janikowski - 68% first year Morten Anderson - 40, 75, 74% first three years The Buccaneers made a bad choice taking a kicker in the second year. They made a worse choice applying extra pressure on Aguayo to start off well. They made their worst mistake when they gave up on him too soon. Almost all of those kickers started their careers in a very different era for kicking, though. No other rookie kicker in the last decade has had a rookie season with a field goal % under 74%. You have to go back to Lawrence Tynes in 2004 to find one, and he still had a higher %, and that's not exactly a player you want to be in line with. If you go back further than that, league success rates on field goals were completely different, so the standards were completely different as well. An average K right now is around 85% in FG%. Go back to 2000 and an average K would get you around 80%. Multiple kickers would kick under 70% on the season, so have a kicker in the 70s wasn't so bad. Now, if you're kicking under 80%, there are multiple guys on the street who can out perform you. In Janikowski's rookie season, when he kicked 68.8%, 5 guys had a lower FG% than he did. No one was worse than Aguayo last year. You're also using statistics in a really misleading way by not having a minimum number of attempts. John Carney had a 40% rookie year because he attempted only 5 FGs. Hauschka 50% because he attempted 4. And there's several guys up there like that, who didn't get a full season of field goals to create an accurate sample size. He was the worst kicker in the league last year. If he hasn't shown improvement in camp, you absolutely cut him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted August 12, 2017 Share Posted August 12, 2017 Just now, Jakuvious said: He was the worst kicker in the league last year. If he hasn't shown improvement in camp, you absolutely cut him. Kinda like the Packers cut Mason Crosby after kicking under 65%? Patience with kickers pays off. It's just foolish to cut a kicker who has the ability, and the Buccaneers have to have thought he had the ability. Blair Walsh was cut by the Vikings after missing 4 extra points and 4 field goals. He had a better kicking percentage the year he was cut than he did two years earlier. He went from 74.3% season to an 87.2% season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakuvious Posted August 12, 2017 Share Posted August 12, 2017 2 minutes ago, steelcurtain29 said: I can't understand how you give up on this kid so quickly. Especially when you used a 2nd rounder on him. He wasn't BAD last year. He still hit 73% of his FG. I can't imagine there's a better option long term right now. 71%. Worst in the league by 4%. 35 kickers last year attempted at least 9 field goals and had a better FG% (that's also all of them.) So yes, there are better options right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakuvious Posted August 12, 2017 Share Posted August 12, 2017 Just now, HorizontoZenith said: Kinda like the Packers cut Mason Crosby after kicking under 65%? Patience with kickers pays off. It's just foolish to cut a kicker who has the ability, and the Buccaneers have to have thought he had the ability. Blair Walsh was cut by the Vikings after missing 4 extra points and 4 field goals. He had a better kicking percentage the year he was cut than he did two years earlier. He went from 74.3% season to an 87.2% season. Mason Crosby had also kicked around 86% the year prior. It was easy to see that Crosby's year was a hiccup, not a trend. After the Vikings cut Walsh, they then signed Kai Forbath who didn't miss a single FG the rest of the season. I would say that's worked out well for them so far. Kicker isn't a position you develop. It isn't a position that needs time to adjust to the speed of the game or learn the playbook or grow out of bad habits from college. Perhaps Aguayo can break out of the struggle he's been in for the last year, perhaps not. But why wait when you have someone who is already better on the roster? Sure, Aguayo has the ability. So does Nick Folk. Like you say, there isn't much physical disparity in kickers in the NFL, it's mostly mental. They have one who is more mentally sound right now. The only reason to keep Aguayo is to try to save face for the mistake of picking him in the first place, and all that does is prolong the suffering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Nix Posted August 12, 2017 Share Posted August 12, 2017 Bengals will be releasing one of Randy Bullock/Jake Elliot (most likely Bullock). Could find a home with the Bucs at that point. He's been solid so far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgarrett12486 Posted August 12, 2017 Share Posted August 12, 2017 3 hours ago, ttitansfan4life said: Arguably the worst pick in history lmao Not even close... It was a wasted pick, but no where near the worst... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRider Posted August 12, 2017 Share Posted August 12, 2017 I really like the idea of using a second round pick to acquire a kicker who will be 80%+ and gold from 50-55 yards. Problem is that it seems highly drafted kickers have no more chance to be great than a low drafted or UDFA kicker does. And in this scenario as another poster mentioned, they gave up a 2nd, 3rd, and 4th... pretty brutal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broncofan Posted August 12, 2017 Share Posted August 12, 2017 23 minutes ago, kgarrett12486 said: Not even close... It was a wasted pick, but no where near the worst... Giving up the 3rd/4th has to be factored in. Could be the worst 2nd round pick someone traded up for, if you want to get specific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.