Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="HardRightEdge" data-source="post: 660105">There's another stat to consider side-by-side with the FC %.  A guy could generate a low FC % and a good net if he was kicking a lot of balls 40 - 45 yds. out of bounds.  If a guy was doing this regularly we'd expect a low % of punts returned.  Masthay does not score well on this count.   50.6% of his punts were returned, ranking 23rd. in the league.  It's possible he generated a low FC% while contributing to the low return yd. average without kicking the ball out of bounds by regularly putting the ball between the numbers and sidelines, aiding the coverage team. The inside 20 number could be a function of a high percentage of punts from his own 35 back to the goal line.  Or if a team was inclined to go for it on 4th. down around mid-field, give or take, then prime inside 20 opportunities do not present themselves.  I don't know if the Packers were above or below average in these circumstances. However, the fact the Packers were 28th. in the league in 3rd. down conversions may have limited his inside 20 opportunities.The eye test says Masthay wasn't very good, and the very low, and league leading, 4.2 yds. per return is primarily attributable to good coverage.  However, without more advanced analytics relating to field position and punt location, it's hard to assess how bad he was.  I don't think there's much question the shanks in close games were pretty painful.</blockquote>

No members online now.

Total: 1,122 (members: 0, guests: 1,122)