Omfg!!! Wow

 

Good move- Franks cost us two games last year. Kid has a huge leg but not the accuracy to back it up.

 

...So we replace him with Parkey?

 

Parkey single handedly won the game against the Browns last year!

 

Totally agree. Franks was a below average kicker accuracy-wise, while Parkey is an average kicker. This is a good move.

Here are the league-wide stats for various distances and types of kicks from 2015-2016:
0-19 yards: 19/19 = 100%
20-29 yards: 472/486 = 97.12%
30-39 yards: 535/576 = 92.88%
40-49 yards: 469/605 = 77.52%
50+ yards: 189/310 = 60.97%
Overall: 1684/1996 = 84.37%
Extra points: 2261/2408 = 93.9%

You can compare Franks and Parkey to those stats:
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/F/FranAn01.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/ParkCo03.htm

Franks:
0-19: 100%
20-29: 84.62%
30-39: 100%
40-49: 55.56%
50+: 50%
Overall: 78.38%
Extra Pts: 94.87%

Parkey:
0-19: no attempts
20-29: 100%
30-39: 91.3%
40-49: 60%
50+: 100%
Overall: 84.62%
Extra Pts: 98.78%

I think it's pretty clear Parkey is an upgrade.

 

So, as a "Thanks" for helping us get the win versus Cleveland last year he gets signed? Parkey is playing the long game here. :)

 

Exactly, it's only fair we pay him back for helping us make the playoffs last season.

 

Yes, parkay has better stats overall, and especially better at 50+ yards. Franks also had the problem of line driving kicks at long distances which made it easy to block his kicks. We had a couple of blocked kicks last year because of that.

 

It's a slight upgrade. Worth the trouble.

 

Should have signed Aguayo but apparently the NFL is blackballing him for taking a knee on his long term career.

 

The Bengals had a really nice 2 kicker thing going on. Would be wise to get the guy that is cut

 

So disappointed...*shaking my head*

 

Even looking at the numbers, you cannot see the logic?
Franks:
0-19: 100%
20-29: 84.62%
30-39: 100%
40-49: 55.56%
50+: 50%
Overall: 78.38%
Extra Pts: 94.87%

Parkey:
0-19: no attempts
20-29: 100%
30-39: 91.3%
40-49: 60%
50+: 100%
Overall: 84.62%
Extra Pts: 98.78%

 

Nope! Besides, your "numbers" are skewered anyhow and I'll illustrate why...Exactly HOW MANY FG's of...

0-19 did AF attempt/make? 0 attempts
20-29 did AF attempt/make? 8-10
30-39 did AF attempt/make? 6-6
40-49 did AF attempt/make? 1-3
50+ did AF attempt/make? 1-3

16 FG made, 41XPM, 89 points total.

Parkey on the other hand? Well, the only stats I found on Parkey...

0-29: 6-6
30-39: 6-6
40-49: 7-12
50+: 1-1

That's right guys, for those of you so anti-Franks, Parkey was 7-12 from 40-49 yards...which means there was 15 points left out on the filed somewhere throughout the season and that dreaded 50+ category, he only made ONE attempt.

You guys have demonstrated no legitimate reason why waving Franks and claiming Parkey was such a better choice. You all pulled up percentages, I pulled hard numbers.

So again...so disappointed

 

Read post #8. I even gave you the links so you can pull up hard numbers and not have to say "Well, the only stats I found on Parkey..." And then you'd see that in the 50+ category he was 5/5 instead of "he only made ONE attempt". Here are the links again:
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/F/FranAn01.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/ParkCo03.htm

More importantly, why would you NOT look at percentages? You're telling us you'd rather have a guy who has a lower probability of making a FG but "leaves fewer points on the field" because he doesn't have as many attempts? LOLOL

Parkey > Franks at every distance except in the 30-39 category. He's better at extra points and he's better overall. Franks was simply a below average kicker at every distance except the 30-39 category as you can see in post #8 (probably due to sample size because combining categories into larger bins makes that go away, even in comparison to Parkey).

 

Here's I think a better way to compare kickers. Use a "sliding window" that smooths out sample size issues you encounter when you just list how many, or what percent of, FG's a kicker made from say 20-29 yards or 30-39 yards, etc..

For example, if the "window" is a 25 yard bin, then the first bin could be from 15-40 yards, the second bin from 20-45 yards, the third from 25-50 yards, etc.. These bins overlap and smooth out the data so that you see the expected trend of lower percentage success for FG attempts at farther distances.

PFR has all kicks of Parkey and Franks making this possible:
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tiny.fcgi?id=VCD0p
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tiny.fcgi?id=c8G93

In the graph below, the top two graphs show the raw data, this time binned every 5 yards. Not so easy to compare, but then look at the sliding window approach at the bottom. It shows the trend of increasing FG miss probability as distance increases and makes for easier comparison.

I think I'll do this in the future. It's much easier to see who's better. The approach should also work for other position players when sample size is small.

 

Have the Dolphins had a kicker that you were 100% confident in all the time since Olindo Mare?

 

Mare was great for us early in his career but he was pretty bad from 2002-2006 where he averaged 76.7% on FG's. The guy that replaced him, Jay Feely, was fantastic in 2007 having a career year with 91.3% average:
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/marexoli01.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/F/feelyjay01.htm

We shouldn't have gotten rid of Feely. He averaged 84.7% from 2008 until he retired which was better than the guys we signed after him (Carpenter: 81.9%, Sturgis: 77.5%, Franks: 78.4%, and even the 80% from 5 FGA of Shane Graham).

 

Anyone miss Franks now?

All hail the great Parkey!

 

Clutch. This game had me hiding my eyes on like 3 field goals.

 

He's won us 2 games and has only played 1 game for us. That's a HOF ratio