Negative points for missed kicks?

[Matthias]

I just don't like unneeded rules. This one thoroughly devalues kickers...who already are devalued. If your kicker goes 2/3 with makes of 39,37 and a miss of 51....should you really only get 1 point? That doesn't seem right.

KISS...Keep It Simple, Stupid. Don't add rules that only add complexity and little value. You could add a billion little rules...-1 for incompletions, +1 for a successful handoff, -10 for a botched punt....but we don't...because it doesn't add any value and just serves to further complicate things.

My thoughts exactly. Plus, kicker performance is extremely difficult to predict, and often has nothing to do with the kickers' ability at all. Why magnify the importance of a position like that?

I concur. Say your kicker's longest FG is 55 yards and the team tries a 58 yarder. What are the chances that he makes it? Not good. Is it because he's a bad kicker? No. Who gets screwed? You.

i've never heard of a league where you get penalized for missing a 58-yard kick. like capstone, the leagues i've played in you get penalized for missing a kick under 30 yards, and sometimes -1 for one 30-40. and then you get similarly rewarded for making a longer kick. whereas if you KISS, you would just give 3 pts for each field goal made, giving the guy who hit 4 from under 25 more points than the kicker who nailed 3 54-yarders.

what it comes down to is if you're translating fantasy performance to real game performance (and not just trying to translate fantasy performance to fantasy performance), you want to penalize kickers for missing kicks. i know the teams that they play for do.

one kicker goes 1-1 with a field goal of 45 yards. another goes 2-5, making at 35 & 38, and missing at 30, 25, and 32. which one of those kickers do you want on your favorite nfl team?

granted, there are some stats which aren't reflected in traditional fantasy scoring (completion %age, YPC, RAC, first downs, etc.) but there are negative points for INTs and FUMs and there should be a similar system for missed kicks.

so no, this is not a garbage rule. it's a good one.

[BrutallyHuge]

[i've never heard of a league where you get penalized for missing a 58-yard kick. like capstone, the leagues i've played in you get penalized for missing a kick under 30 yards, and sometimes -1 for one 30-40. and then you get similarly rewarded for making a longer kick. whereas if you KISS, you would just give 3 pts for each field goal made, giving the guy who hit 4 from under 25 more points than the kicker who nailed 3 54-yarders.

Most leagues give 3 points for <39 yarders, 4 points for 40-49 yards and 5pts for over 50 yards. That's standard Yahoo and Sportsline scoring.

Missed kick penalties is not standard.

You could argue that any rule you make up mimics real world performance, but fantasy football is not real football...it's fantasy.

Why not do -7 points if your QB throws an INT and the other team scores on the next possession? Wouldn't that mimic real world performance?

You can make a million rules and have a million biased arguments to back them up. This isn't a standard rule. IMO, it doesn't add anything of value. Someone just got bored and decided to chuck in another rule.

[gablefan]

The rule is good, it makes kickers more valuable. I have never agreed with taking kickers and Def's last, and this rule only magnifies that. If you want to take crap shots at some "sleepers" fine, but let the other people who want a more rounded team proper, this does that. Sorry BH no $5 today.

[Kensat30]

The number of field goals attempts a kicker will make during any given season is almost unpredictable. The percentage of field goals a kicker will make in any given season is predictable.

Having a missed kicks penalty places added value and predictability to the kicker position. Guys who research the high percentage kickers versus big leg kickers, can gain an advantage over owners who don't.

Two similarily drafted kickers:

Janikowski -
.80.8% career percentage
.missed extra point in last 2 consecutive years
.missed extra points in 2 out of 5 seasons

Stover -
.82.7% career percentage,
.missed an extra point over 8 seasons ago
.missed an extra point once in the last twelve seasons.


Drafting Stover over Janikowski could be the difference between a win or loss in a league that penalizes misses.

[BronXBombers51]

We have always played with negative points for kickers. We set accordingly though. I like the rule.

Miss:
XP -5
0-19 -4
20-29 -3
30-39 -2
40-49 -1
50+ 0

EXACTLY.

You don't make -5 for a missed 50 yarder. That's stupid. You make short field goals more devastating because they shouldn't be missed. The long field goals you give leeway to the kickers.

[Teh Jury]

Garbage rule.

Say a team attempts a 50 yarder right before the half, should you lose 5 points for that? I don't think so.

I just don't like unneeded rules. This one thoroughly devalues kickers...who already are devalued. If your kicker goes 2/3 with makes of 39,37 and a miss of 51....should you really only get 1 point? That doesn't seem right.

KISS...Keep It Simple, Stupid. Don't add rules that only add complexity and little value. You could add a billion little rules...-1 for incompletions, +1 for a successful handoff, -10 for a botched punt....but we don't...because it doesn't add any value and just serves to further complicate things.

It doesnt normally work that way - typically long field goal misses dont lose that many points - its the missed chip shots that should and do affect your team the most in this type of format. Personally I like the rule.

It's simply unnecessary to me. The goal in both H2H and roto is to have the highest total of points by a set deadline. If your kicker does not add to that total, then you are missing out and other teams get an advantage over you if their kickers are adding points to their totals. The double negative is uncalled for, IMO.

[Cornbread Maxwell]

I understand what you are saying - it just gives a different element to how Ks are chosen. Instead of banking on the fact that IND and KCs Ks will get tons of opportunities, you actually have to pay attention to what Ks are more accurate.

[Matthias]

It's simply unnecessary to me. The goal in both H2H and roto is to have the highest total of points by a set deadline. If your kicker does not add to that total, then you are missing out and other teams get an advantage over you if their kickers are adding points to their totals. The double negative is uncalled for, IMO.

you can make that argument against any negative point stat in the game. why penalize fumbles? isn't it enough that the running back didn't get a td? why penalize someone scoring against your defense? isn't it enough that they didn't get enough INTs or sacks? in roto baseball, why penalize walks or hits? isn't it enough that you didn't get a strikeout?

if you're looking to keep everything status quo, you're not going to like anything. and really that's what all the against arguments come down to. "it's not how things were. and i don't like it." which is something you can't argue against. but really isn't an argument itself, either.

[Timbathia]

IMO you have a league that penalizes bad play or you dont.

If you have negative points for fumbles lost, ints for QBs, then of course you should penalize the stupid kicker for missing easy stuff. Conversely if you dont have neg points for any other position, then why would you for the kicker?

[Teh Jury]

It's simply unnecessary to me. The goal in both H2H and roto is to have the highest total of points by a set deadline. If your kicker does not add to that total, then you are missing out and other teams get an advantage over you if their kickers are adding points to their totals. The double negative is uncalled for, IMO.

you can make that argument against any negative point stat in the game. why penalize fumbles? isn't it enough that the running back didn't get a td? why penalize someone scoring against your defense? isn't it enough that they didn't get enough INTs or sacks? in roto baseball, why penalize walks or hits? isn't it enough that you didn't get a strikeout?

if you're looking to keep everything status quo, you're not going to like anything. and really that's what all the against arguments come down to. "it's not how things were. and i don't like it." which is something you can't argue against. but really isn't an argument itself, either.

You're taking too much of an extremist point of view. FYI, we don't penalize fumbles or defences in our league. Instead, points are REWARDED for good things, such as more points being rewarded for a DEF allowing fewer points against. A fumble doesn't need to be penalized, because the RB already loses touches (which = yards, and potential TD drive), and to some extent frustrates/loses some of the coach's confidence.

A kick is all or nothing. Just because a player fumbled, doesn't mean he didn't his TD. The TD was not guaranteed. But if you miss your field goal, then you a guaranteed to be missing those points.

You are not understanding my point of view. My point of view is that I prefer to reward the good, so whoever does the most good will win. The opposite of this is punishing for the bad, thus all things being equal, the team that does the least "bad" wins.