[MSUFAN4320]

[quote author=terry link=topic=9230.msg79406#msg79406 date=1387835645]
I agree with Boston Card. Let me see if I can illustrate the point with some hypothetical numbers.

Spartandawg says Sadler had 22 kicks downed inside the 10 yard line. We know he had 8 touchbacks. So that's 30 punts that ended up inside the 10 yard line. Let's assume that if Sadler had kicked every one of those 30 punts 5 yards shorter, he could have avoided the 8 touchbacks and that those 8 punts would have been downed on the 3 yard line instead of going into the end zone. But he would have lost 5 yards of field position on the other 22 punts.

On balance, Sadler would have been better off kicking all of them 5 yards shorter. He would have gained 17 yards of field position on 8 punts by putting the ball at the 3 yard line instead of having a touchback, for a total of 136 yards gained. He would have lost 5 yards of field position on the other 22 punts, for a total loss of 110 yards. The yards gained would have been more than the yards lost. Sadler's personal stats would be worse -- his gross average would be about 2 yards lower. But the average field position for the team, on balance, would be better.

Of course, it's more complicated. Among other things, you would have to consider the game situation, because yards are not always of equal value. But you can see from the example that shorter kicks can result in better average field position if they prevent touchbacks.

I'm not sure why it's so controversial to say that touchbacks are bad. Sadler is a good punter. I just think he has too many touchbacks.

Well, sure.  If he kicked every punt 5 yards shorter, had zero touchbacks, or pinned every punt on the 1 yard line, that would definitely be an improvement.

I questioned the assertion that MSU's 8 touchbacks to Stanford's 1, without any context, was in some way a relevant statistic and indicative of the strengths and/or weaknesses of each punter.

Son of a bitch.  I just deleted an entire paragraph accidentally.  Basically, I said Sadler's ability to punt inside the 20, 10 and even 5 yard line on so many occasions completely negates the 8 touchbacks from a field position standpoint.  And starting field position seems like the logical, singular measure of success for a pooch punter? 
 
How many touchbacks are too many?  What if a punter has zero touchbacks but struggles to land punts inside the 20 on a consistent basis?  Or if they have 15 touchbacks, yet every other punt sticks at the 5 yard line?[/quote]

We played the majority of our games in nasty conditions. Rain, swirling wind, etc. I'd be curious to go back and look at those touchbacks and see how many were affected by the weather. Don't want to make excuses, but I'm guessing Sadler will enjoy punting in the fair Pasadena conditions.

[MSUFAN4320]

[quote author=terry link=topic=9230.msg79406#msg79406 date=1387835645]
I agree with Boston Card. Let me see if I can illustrate the point with some hypothetical numbers.

Spartandawg says Sadler had 22 kicks downed inside the 10 yard line. We know he had 8 touchbacks. So that's 30 punts that ended up inside the 10 yard line. Let's assume that if Sadler had kicked every one of those 30 punts 5 yards shorter, he could have avoided the 8 touchbacks and that those 8 punts would have been downed on the 3 yard line instead of going into the end zone. But he would have lost 5 yards of field position on the other 22 punts.

On balance, Sadler would have been better off kicking all of them 5 yards shorter. He would have gained 17 yards of field position on 8 punts by putting the ball at the 3 yard line instead of having a touchback, for a total of 136 yards gained. He would have lost 5 yards of field position on the other 22 punts, for a total loss of 110 yards. The yards gained would have been more than the yards lost. Sadler's personal stats would be worse -- his gross average would be about 2 yards lower. But the average field position for the team, on balance, would be better.

Of course, it's more complicated. Among other things, you would have to consider the game situation, because yards are not always of equal value. But you can see from the example that shorter kicks can result in better average field position if they prevent touchbacks.

I'm not sure why it's so controversial to say that touchbacks are bad. Sadler is a good punter. I just think he has too many touchbacks.

Well, sure.  If he kicked every punt 5 yards shorter, had zero touchbacks, or pinned every punt on the 1 yard line, that would definitely be an improvement.

I questioned the assertion that MSU's 8 touchbacks to Stanford's 1, without any context, was in some way a relevant statistic and indicative of the strengths and/or weaknesses of each punter.

Son of a bitch.  I just deleted an entire paragraph accidentally.  Basically, I said Sadler's ability to punt inside the 20, 10 and even 5 yard line on so many occasions completely negates the 8 touchbacks from a field position standpoint.  And starting field position seems like the logical, singular measure of success for a pooch punter? 
 
How many touchbacks are too many?  What if a punter has zero touchbacks but struggles to land punts inside the 20 on a consistent basis?  Or if they have 15 touchbacks, yet every other punt sticks at the 5 yard line?[/quote]

We played the majority of our games in nasty conditions. Rain, swirling wind, etc. I'd be curious to go back and look at those touchbacks and see how many were affected by the weather. Don't want to make excuses, but I'm guessing Sadler will enjoy punting in the fair Pasadena conditions.