Not counting desperate situations where they were trying to come from behind, the Lions had 26 fourth-down plays between their own 48 and the opponents’ 34 YL – a range in which they never attempted a field goal. I chose this range based on the potential kicking ability of Jake Bates, because I was wondering if it would make sense for the Lions to go for field goals in these situations instead of what they did last year.
If we assume that Bates can hit 5/6 from this range, we would get 65 points scored. The expected value here is 2.5 points.
However, last year, the Lions punted 15 times, and went for it 11 times. We averaged about 31 yards of improved field position when punting, but obviously we never score, with an expected value of 0 points. When going for it, we ending up scoring 5 touchdowns and 1 field goal, at the expense of field position when failing, for an expected value of 3.4 points. (Interestingly, none of the failures resulted in the opponents scoring on their subsequent drive.)
Based on this data, the best strategy for the Lions on 4th down in these situations is not to kick a field goal, nor to punt, but to go for it. And it makes me wonder what value Jake Bates would really provide, even if he were perfect.
When you’re at the end of a game with 3 seconds to go and you can kick a 60 yard field goal to win the game, do you want Badgley out there or someone like Jake Bates?
I think the question he’s asking is less about whether or not Bates would be an improvement, because he obviously would be.
I think the point is discussing whether we’d use him enough to justify spending the resources to win what looks like is going to be a pretty competitive bidding war for his services.
All it takes is one win/loss to dramatically change the landscape of your season. One more win would’ve given us a bye last season. I’d hate to see the Lions be in a situation where they lose a game because of kicking and have them miss a first round bye. If he makes a kick that changes the outcome of a game that Badgley wouldn’t of, he’s paid for himself already.
The value in Bates isn’t removing Dan’s 4th down aggressiveness, it’s the fact that he can simply hit consistently from places Badgley couldn’t dream of. Like I said, back to the example: Imagine we’re in the NFCCG and there’s 3 seconds left and we’re in position to attempt a 63 yard field goal. If we hit, we win. If we miss, we lose. Badgley will never hit that. Bates can. And that’s why he’s worth paying for.
Well, for game-winning situations, having Bates would be fantastic, I certainly agree! He might win a game or two per year. That’s still tremendous value.
My point is rather one of general strategy. On 4th down, from midfield to the 35, the Lions shouldn’t kick field goals, and they shouldn’t punt. They should go for it. Which means that the vast majority of the time, a long-range field goal kicker doesn’t provide that much value for this team. We didn’t have a situation last year where the long-range last-second field goal is what we needed to win a game.
I would hate it if the Lions abandoned their aggressive 4th down strategy for kicking field goals. If anything, they aren’t aggressive enough.
I agree with you 100%. I love the aggressiveness and don’t want that to change. At the same time, I still think you go after Bates because he is THAT much of an upgrade over Badgley. He can win games for you that no one else available can. I think when you’re a team like the Lions, which will be playing close, tough games in January, having someone like Bates who can potentially win/seal a game for you from 60+ is a major advantage.
And sure, the Lions didn’t need that last year. But they might this year. You never know.
This is it 100%
In the NFL you push the limits in all areas. To not pursue a FG kicker that could win 1 game for you in a 2-3 season stretch would be dumb. Wins are just too valuable. And 1 win makes a huge difference.
Having the best kicker would be best. No argument.
It’s just important to realize that the value of a great kicker is still limited to particular situations. We’ll win more games by going for it every time in the yellowish zone, which will further reduce the number of times we need a long FG to win a game… because we’ll already be ahead.
There will be 10+ teams trying to sign him when the UFL season ends. The Lions have no priority access and he’s not some great secret only Brad Holmes knows about.
There’s a reason he’s playing the UFL. He kicked one FG in HS and none in college. His sample size is impossibly small and could very easily not be reflective of his overall level of talent.
So I do agree conceptually in your approach. And I love the data you crunched. My only thought on this topic is that this is a 17 game season and not a 162 game baseball season. So there is a balance in there somewhere that would infer that long stats have to be ignored somewhat. And I am not disagreeing with you. I am merely pointing out that with so few games the long stats can sometimes not be in your favor. Or maybe better stated sometimes you got to try to time the market.
Kurt Warner was a third string QB at Northern Illinois until his senior year, didn’t get a job in the NFL for four seasons until after playing in the AFL and NFL Europe.
Having a general strategy – go for it in the Yellowish zone! – doesn’t preclude other strategies in unusual situations, particularly end-of-half decisions. If there’s a minute left in the game, and you have 4th and 10 at the 50 with a 2-pt lead, maybe that situation demands punting inside the 20. Or 20 seconds left in the first half, knock in that field goal 'cause there’s no time to get the TD.
Likewise, there are psychological factors to consider. If the offense needs a reset, or the defense just had a short field. But, again, these are not the norm. Then again, unusual situations are often quite relevant, especially with a 17-game season, so you’re right that there’s reason for being… judicious.
I really really want Bates on the team, BTW. I want all the weapons, and I want them utilized correctly. Which starts with MCDC being MORE aggressive!
He didn’t start playing football until his senior season of HS. He joined as the backup kicker. He played soccer before that.
He played college soccer at Arkansas State. He decided he wanted to move to football, but the only team that was willing to give him a shot was Texas State - and as a kick off specialist since he had never kicked a field goal before.
After his season at Texas State, he wanted to have a shot at being a FG kicker and started looking at other colleges. He ultimately decided to go to Arkansas, despite knowing he would be behind Cam Little, over a FG kicking offer at Mississippi State because “If football doesn’t work out and I’m working a normal job, I would like to have the ability to come back to Arkansas and be a Razorback fan over anywhere else,” Bates said. “That weighed heavy in my head and in my heart.”
He was an 1st team All-SEC KOS for Arkansas in his only season at Arkansas. He never kicked FGs because Arkansas had Cam Little, who was one of 3 kickers taken in this years draft and the youngest FG kicker ever taken.
Teams miss and can struggle with player evaluation. The Lions flopping back and forth between Riley Patterson and Badgley should be all the evidence needed. And it’s not like the Texans had a Badgely or Patterson at the FG position. They had Fairbairn who was coming off a season which he went 9-10 from 40-49 and 6-6 from 50+. The chances of a guy coming in and displacing him were pretty slim - especially one with limited FG experience.
All I’m saying is that it’s pretty easy to dismiss Bates, but he has a pretty interesting history and journey to where he is now. We’re talking about replacing Badgley, a guy who is 5-13 from 50+ his entire NFL career, with a guy who has already kicked six 50+ FGs in 7 games, including a couple from 60+.
The talent gap between Badgley and Bates isn’t even close. At any level, getting MVP talk as a KICKER is some crazy shit:
Would a long range weapon like Bates change how Campbell coaches on 4th down?
I’ve wondered about that myself, but I’d rather have the long range weapon than not.
In a tight game, having someone who can reliably hit from 55-61 yards (like Prater did), could be a big advantage and mean the difference between wins and losses, Super Bowl or not.