How Much is Justin Tucker Actually Worth?

[bigbadbuff]

2 hours ago, rich homie said:

I will say if you use a first round pick to acquire a kicker in any way then you deserve everything that happens to you.

Yet people out here drafting EJ Manuel in the first round 

[Forge]

14 minutes ago, diamondbull424 said:

Whats more in your example that simply proves Tucker’s additional worth, not the opposite. Most kickers can’t do it, how is that a bad thing? What’s more if our punter had to do it, he doesn’t have the leg... meaning we’d have to replace him. He’s one of the most consistent holders in the league. He’s still a precision punter and the best punting QB in the league.

 

I didn't say its a bad thing, just not sure it holds much value if you have someone who already does the job and does it well enough. I mean, the difference between Tucker and #10 on that list is less than a yard. Do I think those teams would find that skill set of Tucker's to be particularly valuable? Not really. Some of the guys / teams at the bottom of the list may find it valuable, so best case scenario, it's case by case on whether or not it would have value (I have no idea which teams use kickers or punters for that particular action). I think things like "he's a great kicker which can help you on onside kicks (which, btw, has Tucker ever had a successful onside kick? I'm thinking he hasn't) or "he may give you a very little something extra on starting field position" are really reaching to extricate value and I just don't know if NFL teams think in that kind of micro evaluation 

 

[diamondbull424]

54 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

Le sigh.

1. I didn't call him a name.

2. I'm not stuck on the one scenario that provides Diggs. I am using Diggs as an example of the sort of established player a first round pick will land you in a trade. I already explained that very clearly. We're not talking about drafting with the pick.

But why aren’t we. This is a scenario where we’re determining value. Would you say that Diggs is ‘only’ worth a 1st round pick if you know he’s going to succeed like he did, probably not. He’s probably worth more. But the fact remains that their are enough trade busts like Randy Moss and the like that teams are going to play it safe. Just like Nuk isn’t only worth a 2nd round pick or prime Moss worth a 4th round pick. But teams pay varying values because no player when traded is a ‘sure thing’ because you generally have to worry about different systems and language, etc.

But this thread asks what is Tucker’s true value. If this same question was asked of Mahomes true value in draft picks, I’m sure it’d be like 10-15 1st round picks or something insane, yet the Chiefs got him with only a single 1st round pick. Does that assume he’s only worth a single 1st round pick?

Lamar Jackson is playing on the worst value for a 1st round QB (for a player anyway) considering his draft position, does that mean his “true value” is less than $10m? Circumstance does not necessarily equate to ‘actual value’ IMO. I think you’re arguing what Tucker’s value is in respect to the value of a kicker (thus his market value) and conflating that with ‘real value’.

If I build a $2 million home in a neighborhood where the average home sells for $350k, my home is not going to possess a market value of $2m. Same as Tucker being an elite kicker isn’t going to afford him the opportunity to make $15m realistically because the market value for a kicker ultimately lowers his own unique value as an all time player.

Kickers aren’t traded for 1st round picks because they aren’t typically as good as Tucker. But if a team in the bottom portion of the draft offered a 1st for Tucker, I’m not taking it if I’m EDC... and that’s even now. Let alone 5 years ago when he was even more dangerous. If i built my $2m home foolishly in a 350k type neighborhood and someone was willing to offer me $1m for it, that’s far more than the average home, but I’m still not taking it because the market value doesn’t reach what I contend to be the ‘real value’ of my home. Tucker is very similar IMO and that’s why I believe some guys are willing to provide his value at $15m because they are going off of his ‘real value’ in comparison to the real value provided by other players. Thus it’s two different concepts being argued.

Im sort of in the middle, I recognize that Tucker’s real value is certainly above the $5.7m he makes while his market value also means that just because other guys have $15m wasted on them, doesn’t mean that we should put that money into Tucker in an ideal scenario. Which is why I personally split the different with real value of $10-11m or so.

[jrry32]

1 hour ago, Ray Reed said:

It’s insane that you present yourself as this nuanced, well put together poster and whenever you get called out for your homerism and inconsistencies you instantly resort to the “HURR DURR” “ARE YOU HIGH BRO” stuff. 

I said I get the “Tucker isn’t worth a first round pick” take in one of my first posts in this thread.

If you want to pretend like I didn’t to get the steam off your charlatan football takes, so be it.

What I took issue with was your inconsistent first round pick takes based off your random hypotheticals you presented when called out for said inconsistency. Still do. 

But keep hitting those all caps bro, by all means. You’re a great poster man everyone loves you, no one sees through the facade.

There's no inconsistency. Justin Tucker isn't worth a first round pick. Established studs at more valuable positions are. It's simple. Keep digging your hole deeper.

In fact, find me one time I said that kickers are worth first round picks. If you want to show my inconsistency, do it. But whatever this silly little crusade you're pursuing is, just give it up. You're embarrassing yourself. 

EDIT: And to make things even more clear, first round picks can be both overvalued and still too valuable to trade for Tucker. When we're talking about players like Jalen Ramsey, Khalil Mack, Jamal Adams, DeForest Buckner, Stefon Diggs, etc., yes, I believe that first round picks tend to be overvalued by a lot of fans. If you can get that sort of player at a position of need, you should strongly consider it. First round picks are not guaranteed to pan out.

But Tucker isn't worth what those guys are. So when you trade a first for him, that's the opportunity cost. You can't trade it for a guy like DeForest Buckner or Stefon Diggs, and you can't use it in the draft. Value is relative. If Tucker isn't worth nearly as much as the established players I consider to be worth a first round pick, then it's not a good move to trade one for him. Do you get my point?

Edited December 15, 2020 by jrry32

[jrry32]

10 minutes ago, diamondbull424 said:

But why aren’t we. This is a scenario where we’re determining value. Would you say that Diggs is ‘only’ worth a 1st round pick if you know he’s going to succeed like he did, probably not. He’s probably worth more. But the fact remains that their are enough trade busts like Randy Moss and the like that teams are going to play it safe. Just like Nuk isn’t only worth a 2nd round pick or prime Moss worth a 4th round pick. But teams pay varying values because no player when traded is a ‘sure thing’ because you generally have to worry about different systems and language, etc.

Feel free to weigh it against drafting. I don't care. That's not relevant to Ray Reed's little crusade, though. He's upset because I have advocated trading first round picks for established veterans. He feels that by not considering it a smart move to do the same with Tucker, I am being inconsistent. It's a value proposition. Justin Tucker isn't worth a first round pick.

Quote

Lamar Jackson is playing on the worst value for a 1st round QB (for a player anyway) considering his draft position, does that mean his “true value” is less than $10m? Circumstance does not necessarily equate to ‘actual value’ IMO. I think you’re arguing what Tucker’s value is in respect to the value of a kicker (thus his market value) and conflating that with ‘real value’.

I'm arguing that no Kicker is worth a first round pick, not even Justin Tucker. I've made that quite clear. I've explained why. You can talk about his value to the Ravens. That's your prerogative. I'll talk about his value as a fan of another team. My team has had issues at Kicker all year long. I wouldn't trade a 1st for Tucker (if we had one).

[jrry32]

1 hour ago, Forge said:

I know this is a bit of a different argument, but....I completely understand the idea / concept behind Tucker "being worth" a first...but I also understand that he would never be worth a first because let's be real, if you had to give up a first to get him and you were a team with kicking problems, wouldn't you just go to a team like the 49ers and be like, "hey, we'll give you a comp third rounder for Gould" and use him for a couple of years? While you can support the idea behind Tucker being so much better than an average or bad kicker being worth the pick, how much can you support that he's worth a first over other good kickers? Wouldn't you just exhaust all your other options of good kickers before even thinking of going that route with Tucker? 

Tucker's a guy who's value is much greater to the team that holds him than it is the actual value coming back in any trade. 

That is also part of the problem. If you can acquire a kicker who isn't much of a step down for a 3rd or 4th or draft one in the 4th or 5th, why would you consider a 1st for Tucker? That's the reality of value. It's relative. I'd trade a first without thinking twice for DeForest Buckner if I needed DL help. He's worth that. The impact he has is worth that. Tucker isn't.

1 hour ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

It's not just 6 points per season, it's the consistency and the knowledge that if I get within a certain range, we win. No other kicker has that. We literally just last night witnessed the difference between a league average kicker (or a JAG, rather) and Justin Tucker, and people are still here arguing over whether he provides more value than a league average kicker lol

Who?

[diamondbull424]

42 minutes ago, Forge said:

I didn't say its a bad thing, just not sure it holds much value if you have someone who already does the job and does it well enough. I mean, the difference between Tucker and #10 on that list is less than a yard. Do I think those teams would find that skill set of Tucker's to be particularly valuable? Not really. Some of the guys / teams at the bottom of the list may find it valuable, so best case scenario, it's case by case on whether or not it would have value (I have no idea which teams use kickers or punters for that particular action). I think things like "he's a great kicker which can help you on onside kicks (which, btw, has Tucker ever had a successful onside kick? I'm thinking he hasn't) or "he may give you a very little something extra on starting field position" are really reaching to extricate value and I just don't know if NFL teams think in that kind of micro evaluation 

Well then you better be consistent because a guy who provides an additional 5-10 yards/game also is reaching. We’re talking replacing Terry McLaurin with Amari Cooper or replacing Stefon Diggs with Justin Jefferson.

I’d MUCH rather have Tucker/Jefferson over Fairbarn/Diggs. I think most would agree.

edit: which is relevant because of the context of why I said what I said there. Specifically that if he’s going to include value “all over the field” than he has to also include the additional things Tucker does and not just the one portion of his value being measured.

Edited December 15, 2020 by diamondbull424

[jrry32]

9 minutes ago, diamondbull424 said:

Well then you better be consistent because a guy who provides an additional 5-10 yards/game also is reaching. We’re talking replacing Terry McLaurin with Amari Cooper or replacing Stefon Diggs with Justin Jefferson.

I’d MUCH rather have Tucker/Jefferson over Fairbarn/Diggs. I think most would agree.

edit: which is relevant because of the context of why I said what I said there. Specifically that if he’s going to include value “all over the field” than he has to also include the additional things Tucker does and not just the one portion of his value being measured.

Well, that's not exactly a fair comparison. Fairbairn is an average kicker. Would you rather have Tucker/Jefferson or Butker/Diggs? That's a tougher question.

[diamondbull424]

2 hours ago, Daniel said:

You see, the problem with your argument is that you're equating only things that happen at the end with "winning the game."  Ngakoue has six sacks for you so far.  Did any of those end a drive?  What about all of his tackles?  Or pressures?  None of those ever took place in a close game, at a critical time?

The problem with your argument is that it hinges on a logical fallacy.  You're only equate the very last seconds with winning, when you need the efforts of guys like Ngakoue to get your team in a position to win with a field goal.  That's why it's not really 1-2 wins extra you're getting.

And on the subject of the field goal, Gostkowski nailed a 55 yard game winner against Minnesota, and is 7 of 8 for field goals over 50 yards this season.  And we got him from free agency a few days before the season started.

Interesting that Yannick suddenly has six sacks for the Ravens. Interesting. Must be near the league leader in sacks by this point, considering he had 5 with the Vikings prior to the trade.

[Forge]

1 hour ago, bigbadbuff said:

Yet people out here drafting EJ Manuel in the first round 

That's just playing results

[DannyB]

Okay I'm not reading 10 pages of kicker talk, but here's my main takeaway from the first few pages...

Baltimore fans' opinion can be summed up as thus: "Yeah Tom Brady is great and all, but imagine how many more Super Bowls Bill Belichick could've had with Justin Tucker instead?"

[Soko]

I would much rather have street-FA Nick Folk and a first round pick than I would Justin Tucker and no first round pick. Value is always situational but I imagine most teams would probably say the same.

[TitanLegend]

As a fan of a team who has had a kicker who at his best could rival Tucker(Rob Bironas), and also someone who has seen how bad an awful kicker can impact a team(Titans the past two seasons), no I would not trade a first round pick for one or spend 15-20 million.

[TecmoSuperJoe]

Tucker is probably the GOAT kicker, but even so he's probably not worth a first round pick. Kickers just don't have the impact you could get taking essentially anyone else that high in the first round. Like an OT or EDGE. I wish the 49ers had him though. Great player, and I think he should already be Canton-bound. He makes their other kicker in Ravens franchise history Matt Stover, a good player, look like a half-measure by comparison. 

Edited December 16, 2020 by TecmoSuperJoe

[RandyMossIsBoss]

If kickers got paid $15-20M, we'd see a flood of more talented kickers IMO, at which point they'd become dime a dozen like RBs and that value would then go right down the toilet. This isn't a pass rusher or tackle, which requires rare genetics (generally 6'3+) to go along with freakish athleticism, or QB, which simply requires a skillset so specific and elite that so few are capable. This is kicking the ball through uprights, of which the talent pool is probably enormous, just obviously not much gets directed into the NFL because who grows up aspiring to be a kicker?

 

Tucker is the GOAT kicker, but he's still just a kicker... and the gap between his impact on the game vs a league average kicker is TINY compared to the gap between an elite QB, WR, pass rusher, blocker, etc. etc. and their league average counterpart. That is the real key here.