Tory Taylor 46.3 avg, Trenton Gill 46.1 avg - What will Bears do with the extra 0.2 yards of field position?

[Toast88]

This was already explained.

See above. Again a list of punters drafted was provided and I presume the poster provided it to explain in part that it was not unheard of for teams to draft punters.


If you can prove it sure but I suspect we have different ideas of proof. Also I did not disagree with you.


Do I need to explain what a question mark is? I asked for your evidence because up to that point you only provided anecdotes which gave the impression it was just your opinion or speculation that you seemed to be passing off as objective fact.

Oh, I just figured you disagreed because you quoted it twice and had a negative reaction to the statement each time. So, do you agree or disagree? If you don’t disagree, why react negatively twice to it?

If you don’t disagree, why are you being so antagonistic against the idea that punters picked high just aren’t worth it?

In any case, yes, history shows that picking a punter before the 6th-7th round just isn’t worth it.

If I’ve learned anything from this thread, it’s that net average and punts inside the 20 are the actual indicators of a great punter, right?

So let’s look at those two stats.

Of the top 10 punters in net average last year:

One was picked in the 3rd round.
One was picked in the 4th round.
One was picked in the 5th round.
One was picked in the 6th round.
One was picked in the 7th round.
Five were undrafted.

Of the top 10 punters in Inside-20 last year:

Three were 4th round.
One was 7th round.
Six were undrafted.


The numbers are clear. Most good punters are undrafted. Many more are either undrafted or 6th-7th rounders.


Ok, but maybe if you pick a punter in the 5th round or better, they’re more likely to be in that top 3rd of the league?

Not so, according to statistics.

In that same list that shows it’s not unusual for teams to take a chance on a 4th or 5th round punter, let’s take all those punters drafted in the 5th or better over the last Decade+.

How did it turn out for those punters drafted relatively high?

Jordan Stout - Below average statistically

Jake Camarda - One of the worst punters in the league, statistically

Mitch Wishnowsky - Average. 15th in net, 16th in Inside-20%

Jake Bailey - Ranked in the 20s - Below average

Michael Dickson - Legitimately good - 3rd and 9th

JK Scott - Average statistically, consistently in the teens

Johnny Townsend - Only lasted a few seasons. Out of the league.

Bradley Pinion - 21st in net, 15th in Inside-20%

Jeff Locke - Out of the League pretty quickly

Sam Martin - Consistently well below average statistically (most recently 29th & 21st)

Bryan Anger - 1st in net (great), 29th in Inside-20 (abysmal)


Go back even farther, you get guys like Zoltan Mesko (bad), Adam Podlesh (we know his story), BJ Sander (out of the league after 1 season) and other guys who clearly weren’t worth the 3rd-5th round selection.

But hey, at least there was Kevin Huber & Dustin Colquitt!! That’s….something?


I get it. You want to defend the Bears and Poles, and you think punting is an under-appreciated part of the game. That’s totally cool. I’ll be cheering like hell for this guy. And if he’s good, I’ll be the first to admit we won’t truly care that the Bears over-drafted him.

But facts are stubborn things. Punters aren’t worth 4th round picks. History & the current game both prove it.


@Bronek @RubberBanMan @BearDown104 , is this sufficient evidence?

It’s ok to like the pick and still admit it’s going against history and statistical likelihood.

 

[Toast88]

View attachment 38368

Not really. I always figure CCS will white-knight for the Bears organization no matter what.

Man, Ego Ferguson & Will Sutton were an ABSOLUTE STEAL in the draft, am I right?!? And anyone who disagrees is an idiot, because the Bears deserve the benefit of the doubt for some reason, or something.

 

[Spitta Andretti]

Maybe not a great example, considering Jordan Stout is 13th-19th in every major punting category (avg, inside 20 %, etc), except net average—He’s 33rd in that.

So Baltimore spent a 4th round pick on an average-to-below-average punter, which they could’ve gotten in a later round or as an UDFA. Look at where the players ahead of Stout were (or weren’t) drafted.

Also Jake Camarda—Oh boy, statistically one of the worst punters in the league.

If they could do it all over again, those teams probably wouldn’t have used a 4th rounder on a punter.

Think that just proves how much of a better prospect Tory is

Tory





Stout



Carmada

 

[GoBears]

Original poster doesn't seem to understand football and, instead, focused on a single stat.

 

[PrideisBears]

I finally came into this thread and I’m happy to see y’all realize that @BaBaBlacksheep is the evil mod now

 

[BaBaBlacksheep]

I finally came into this thread and I’m happy to see y’all realize that @BaBaBlacksheep is the evil mod now

^^^^this guy….. even bullies us other mods.

 

[Washington]

Saw this from the Trib today. Gill's stats were quite abysmal. Love the pick!

"They ranked 25th in gross yardage (46.1 yards per punt), 31st in net (38.0), 30th in touchback percentage (11.9%), 30th in punts inside the 20-yard line (26.9%) and 25th in return yards allowed (381). Not all of that is a function of Gill’s ability. There are 10 other players on the field, but he took a step backward after his rookie season and the Bears had a clear weakness whether you want to acknowledge it as such."

 

[modo]

I assumed Poles would improve the punter position. Even after last year I knew Gill's stats were fool's gold.

 

[vabearsfan15]

Tory Taylor is an upgrade for his ability to pin teams deep inside their own territory. Gill has only averaged 28.5% of his punts inside the 20. On the other hand, Taylor's carreer average is 43%. One stat is top 10 in the NFL, the other is near the bottom of the league.

Also, the net return yardage should be factored into the equation. Both may average around 46 yards punting, but becuase of hangtime and placement, Gill's ounts tend to allow for more return yardage. Gill has averaged 38.8 yrd net punts while Tory averaged 42.7...so about a 4 yard advabtage with Taylor.

 

[Toast88]

Tory Taylor is an upgrade for his ability to pin teams deep inside their own territory. Gill has only averaged 28.5% of his punts inside the 20. On the other hand, Taylor's carreer average is 43%. One stat is top 10 in the NFL, the other is near the bottom of the league.

Also, the net return yardage should be factored into the equation. Both may average around 46 yards punting, but becuase of hangtime and placement, Gill's ounts tend to allow for more return yardage. Gill has averaged 38.8 yrd net punts while Tory averaged 42.7...so about a 4 yard advabtage with Taylor.

Gill's hang time is better than Taylor's. There are reasons for that, but just clarifying.

I don't think anyone's arguing that Trenton Gill is better than Tory Taylor, or that the only two options were keep Trenton Gill or draft a punter in the 4th.

 

[Bust]

. . . draft a punter in the 4th.

so a punter slot drafted that high by the bears happens once every 20+ seasons? (too lazy to look it up). sounds like low risk to me

these are wut bear fans have on their must watch list and somewhere there will be Hard Knocks as well, WOWOOW!

Rookie minicamp: May 10-13​

NFL Schedule release: May​

OTA offseason workouts: Late May​

Mandatory minicamp: June​

Training camp: Mid-July​

 

[pseudonym]

He was the top player on their board. A blue chip punter. You take him. And then I like it even better trading back in to to get Booker. Pretty much getting "A" grades all around the league.

 

[remydat]

Oh, I just figured you disagreed because you quoted it twice and had a negative reaction to the statement each time. So, do you agree or disagree? If you don’t disagree, why react negatively twice to it?

If you don’t disagree, why are you being so antagonistic against the idea that punters picked high just aren’t worth it?

In any case, yes, history shows that picking a punter before the 6th-7th round just isn’t worth it.

If I’ve learned anything from this thread, it’s that net average and punts inside the 20 are the actual indicators of a great punter, right?

So let’s look at those two stats.

Of the top 10 punters in net average last year:

One was picked in the 3rd round.
One was picked in the 4th round.
One was picked in the 5th round.
One was picked in the 6th round.
One was picked in the 7th round.
Five were undrafted.

Of the top 10 punters in Inside-20 last year:

Three were 4th round.
One was 7th round.
Six were undrafted.


The numbers are clear. Most good punters are undrafted. Many more are either undrafted or 6th-7th rounders.


Ok, but maybe if you pick a punter in the 5th round or better, they’re more likely to be in that top 3rd of the league?

Not so, according to statistics.

In that same list that shows it’s not unusual for teams to take a chance on a 4th or 5th round punter, let’s take all those punters drafted in the 5th or better over the last Decade+.

How did it turn out for those punters drafted relatively high?

Jordan Stout - Below average statistically

Jake Camarda - One of the worst punters in the league, statistically

Mitch Wishnowsky - Average. 15th in net, 16th in Inside-20%

Jake Bailey - Ranked in the 20s - Below average

Michael Dickson - Legitimately good - 3rd and 9th

JK Scott - Average statistically, consistently in the teens

Johnny Townsend - Only lasted a few seasons. Out of the league.

Bradley Pinion - 21st in net, 15th in Inside-20%

Jeff Locke - Out of the League pretty quickly

Sam Martin - Consistently well below average statistically (most recently 29th & 21st)

Bryan Anger - 1st in net (great), 29th in Inside-20 (abysmal)


Go back even farther, you get guys like Zoltan Mesko (bad), Adam Podlesh (we know his story), BJ Sander (out of the league after 1 season) and other guys who clearly weren’t worth the 3rd-5th round selection.

But hey, at least there was Kevin Huber & Dustin Colquitt!! That’s….something?


I get it. You want to defend the Bears and Poles, and you think punting is an under-appreciated part of the game. That’s totally cool. I’ll be cheering like hell for this guy. And if he’s good, I’ll be the first to admit we won’t truly care that the Bears over-drafted him.

But facts are stubborn things. Punters aren’t worth 4th round picks. History & the current game both prove it.


@Bronek @RubberBanMan @BearDown104 , is this sufficient evidence?

It’s ok to like the pick and still admit it’s going against history and statistical likelihood.

You figured wrong. I dont agree or disagree because I dont have any data. You made the statement so I asked you for the data. As to your argument.

1. Net average and inside the 20 are not the only indicators. There is also hang time and % of punts returned. Part of Taylor's appeal would be only 25% of the time are his kicks returned.

2. Trying to judge based on how punters fared last year is lazy analysis. I wouldnt decide who the best QB was based on just how they performed in 2023 so no idea why you think it is appropriate for Punters.

3. Your argument is that it is best to draft them in the 6th and 7th if at all but your lazy analysis shows that 3 were 5th round or better and only 2 were 6th or 7th round. So even by your lazy analysis you are wrong. Your lazy analysis shows it is better to draft them in the 5th round or earlier if at all. That is of you arent drafting them early then best to pick them up as UDFAs.

 

[Toast88]

You figured wrong. I dont agree or disagree because I dont have any data. You made the statement so I asked you for the data. As to your argument.

1. Net average and inside the 20 are not the only indicators. There is also hang time and % of punts returned. Part of Taylor's appeal would be only 25% of the time are his kicks returned.

2. Trying to judge based on how punters fared last year is lazy analysis. I wouldnt decide who the best QB was based on just how they performed in 2023 so no idea why you think it is appropriate for Punters.

3. Your argument is that it is best to draft them in the 6th and 7th if at all but your lazy analysis shows that 3 were 5th round or better and only 2 were 6th or 7th round. So even by your lazy analysis you are wrong. Your lazy analysis shows it is better to draft them in the 5th round or earlier if at all. That is of you arent drafting them early then best to pick them up as UDFAs.

That literally backs up my claim. You're trying to co-opt the undrafted punters now, even though they back up my claim that history and current football show that it's not worth it to draft a punter before the 6th or 7th round, if at all.

1) Most top 10 punters from last year were drafted in the 6th round or worse. This is a statistical fact.

Only 3 of the top 10 punters in either of the two categories everyone here loves were drafted in the 5th or earlier. Again, a statistical fact.

2) The vast majority of punters drafted in the 5th round or earlier are average or below average over the years in net yards & inside-20. Again, a statistical fact.

 

[Toast88]

This thread be like:

“Don’t use average yards. Use hang time.”

“Ok, Tory Taylor’s hang time is less than 4 seconds.”

“No, no, don’t use average or hang time. Use net yards and inside-20.”

“Ok, most highly drafted punters aren’t among the league leaders in either of those categories, and most of the best punters in those categories are undrafted.”

“You’re stupid and lazy!”


Damn, guys, what stats are we supposed to use? Lol

 

[remydat]

No, sir, it doesn’t. It shows that:

1) Most top 10 punters from last year were drafted in the 6th round or worse. This is a statistical fact.

Only 3 of the top 10 punters in either of the two categories everyone here loves were drafted in the 5th or earlier. Again, a statistical fact.

2) The vast majority of punters drafted in the 5th round or earlier are average or below average over the years in net yards & inside-20. Again, a statistical fact.


Like I said, history and current football show that it’s not worth it to draft a punter before the 6th or 7th round, if at all.

By the way, undrafted good punters (most of the good punters) back up my claim, yet you’re acting like undrafted punters being good somehow backs up your claim about drafting a punter 5th or higher. What’s the reason for that?

1. Again your metrics are flawed. PFF grades punters and a guy like Pinion who you judged as being bad actually graded out as the top punter at 88 because it isnt just about net or inside the 20. You actually have no expertise to determine how best to judge punters.

2. No you havent proven that because again yout metrics are flawed. Brady Pinion again was the top punter per PFF.

3. Your statement was that you shoud draft punters in the 6 or 7th if at all. By your lazy analysis this again is wrong. Only 2 punters in the top 10 were drafted in the 6 or 7 bit 3 were drafted in the 5th or better. 3 > 2 so if you are going to bother drafting punters it is much better to draft them in the 5th or better. Otherwise dont draft them. The 6 or 7 by your metrics is the worst place ro draft because both undrafted (5) and guys drafted in the 5th or better (3) beat them out.

4. The other flaw in your logic is percentages. If there are 32 punters and 5 of them were drafted in the 5th or better and 5 in the 6th or 7 and 22 undrafted. Then that would me 60% of the ones drafted in the 5th or better were in the top 10, 40% in the 6th or 7th were in the top 10 and only 22% of undrafted were in tbe top 10. So your whole analysis is garbage because you havent accounted for what % of the punter population these groups make up. It is should be obvious that most punters are undrafted and very few are drafted in the 5th so it skews the raw numbers in favor of the group with the higher population. That is why percentages exist.

 

[Toast88]

1. Again your metrics are flawed. PFF grades punters and a guy like Pinion who you judged as being bad actually graded out as the top punter at 88 because it isnt just about net or inside the 20. You actually have no expertise to determine how best to judge punters.

2. No you havent proven that because again yout metrics are flawed. Brady Pinion again was the top punter per PFF.

3. Your statement was that you shoud draft punters in the 6 or 7th if at all. By your lazy analysis this again is wrong. Only 2 punters in the top 10 were drafted in the 6 or 7 bit 3 were drafted in the 5th or better. 3 > 2 so if you are going to bother drafting punters it is much better to draft them in the 5th or better. Otherwise dont draft them. The 6 or 7 by your metrics is the worst place ro draft because both undrafted (5) and guys drafted in the 5th or better (3) beat them out.

4. The other flaw in your logic is percentages. If there are 32 punters and 5 of them were drafted in the 5th or better and 5 in the 6th or 7 and 22 undrafted. Then that would me 60% of the ones drafted in the 5th or better were in the top 10, 40% in the 6th or 7th were in the top 10 and only 22% of undrafted were in tbe top 10. So your whole analysis is garbage because you havent accounted for what % of the punter population these groups make up. It is should be obvious that most punters are undrafted and very few are drafted in the 5th so it skews the raw numbers in favor of the group with the higher population. That is why percentages exist.

Remy, I never claimed drafting them in the 6th or 7th is the magic formula. I said they aren't worth drafting before the 6th or 7th, if at all. That "if at all" is undrafted punters. Undrafted punters back my claim up.

In any case, help me understand what you're arguing for or against. What exactly is your argument?

I've been clear that my argument is, "History and current football show that punters aren't worth drafting before the 6th or 7th round, if at all."

Are you now saying your argument is simply that you disagree with that? Or do you have a particular statement you're trying to back up?

Also, are you now wanting to use PFF grades? I've used net average & inside-20, the two stats everyone in this thread agrees are the real stats to look at for punters.


What do you think the PFF grades would show if I broke them down the way I broke down net average & inside-20?

 

[TL1961]

This thread be like:

“Don’t use average yards. Use hang time.”

“Ok, Tory Taylor’s hang time is less than 4 seconds.”

“No, no, don’t use average or hang time. Use net yards and inside-20.”

“Ok, most highly drafted punters aren’t among the league leaders in either of those categories, and most of the best punters in those categories are undrafted.”

“You’re stupid and lazy!”


Damn, guys, what stats are we supposed to use? Lol

Here’s a wacky idea, and I’m just spitballing here, but perhaps we could see him play before reaching conclusions.

 

[Toast88]

Here’s a wacky idea, and I’m just spitballing here, but perhaps we could see him play before reaching conclusions.

Agreed. I haven't made any predictions about how good Tory Taylor will or won't be, unlike others in this thread.

 

[remydat]

SMH, I already told you my argument. You just cant comprehend it. My argument is neither of us have sufficient data to determine because your analysis is flawed. It is flawed for the following reasons.

1. I told you pages ago there is more to kicking than net avg and inside the 20. I also told you PFF grades for punters pages ago. I also gave examples of what data you are not accounting for such as % of punts not returned that PFF does account for.

2. You are using raw numbers which is stupid because the number of starting punters is not equally split among the groups. Again if only 5 punters were 5th or earlier, 5 were 6th/7th and 22 were UDFA then the flaw in your logic is obvious. The reason more UDFA punters are in the top 10 is because there are more of them in the population. Hence why people use percentages. In the above only 5 out of 22 UDFA made the top 10. That again is only 23% success. By contrast 3 out of 5 made it in those drafted in the 5th or earlier so that is 60% success and 2 of 5 in the 6/7th which is 40% success. Get it yet?

3. Finally even if I ignore the above your logic is still flawed. Since more 5th or earlier punters are in the top 10 (3) vs only 2 for 6/7th, the correct statement is, it is better to draft them in the 5th or earlier if at all becausee more guys in the 5th or earlier are in the top 10 than 6th or 7th. You dont seem to get that your statement is an either or ie either draft them in the 6/7th or not at all. But no it is either draft them in the 5th or earlier because 3 > 2 or not at all because 5> 3> 2.

Lets make this simple. Go find out what rounds the 32 starting punters were drafted in as you need to figure out how many exist in each demographic so as not to get results skewed by whichever demo is larger in the population.