Lindell- Interesting Bills Daily Reported Stats

[Typical TBD Guy]

Sure, but who specifically is this?  If no one then you keep Lindell.

442943[/snapback]

 

Todd France would be one.

[ricojes]

But that's not what ricojes and RJ want. They want a complete statistical and circumstancial history of the Bills' offensive drives that resulted in 4th downs in opponents' territories since Lindell's first year as a Bill (2003).

 

Ricojes and RJ's demands seem fair, because I too prefer facts over general perceptions, but does anyone else reading this have the time to do such a search?

442949[/snapback]

I don't want all that statistical crap, don't know where you got that from. All I am saying is all the assumptions are just that, and we all know what happens when you assume.

[Typical TBD Guy]

I don't want all that statistical crap, don't know where you got that from.  All I am saying is all the assumptions are just that, and we all know what happens when you assume.

442969[/snapback]

 

Fine with me, but then I guess this is the end of the discussion. Because a lot of people here, like myself and like Matt in DC, can only provide broad memories of plays over the past 2 years where we thought the coaches would have - and should have - kicked the medium to long field goals (about over 40 yds), but instead decided to punt.

 

At the very least, all this says negatively about Lindell is that our coaches had greater confidence in our excellent D than in our kicker. However, in low scoring games, all coaches would prefer 3 points to slightly better field position. Last time the Bills had a great defense (mid to late 90's), we didn't have the same coaching dilemnas with our kicker (Steve Christie).

[ricojes]

Fine with me, but then I guess this is the end of the discussion. Because a lot of people here, like myself and like Matt in DC, can only provide broad memories of plays over the past 2 years where we thought the coaches would have - and should have - kicked the medium to long field goals (about over 40 yds), but instead decided to punt.

 

At the very least, all this says negatively about Lindell is that our coaches had greater confidence in our excellent D than in our kicker. However, in low scoring games, all coaches would prefer 3 points to slightly better field goal position. Last time the Bills had a great defense (mid to late 90's), we didn't have the same coaching dilemnas with our kicker (Steve Christie).

443028[/snapback]

TY, exactly my point. First year coaching mistakes, I think MM learned a lot from last year.

[Typical TBD Guy]

TY, exactly my point.  First year coaching mistakes, I think MM learned a lot from last year.

443036[/snapback]

 

And that's certainly possible. I'm not denying that Mularkey could have been part of the problem, and that he should have gutted it out and attempted more field goals last year instead of punting it or going for it on 4th and medium/long.

 

But having said that, you don't think Lindell's pathetic 3 for 9 performance of 40+ yd field goals in 2003 - under Coach Williams - factored into MM's decisions to only let Lindell attempt THREE 40+ yd field goals in 2004?!

 

It is time to face reality. Only attempting 3 medium/long-range field goals (and only making 1 of 'em) in a full 16-game season is probably a greater indication that MM had little confidence in Lindell's ability than it is an indication of MM's coaching style and of his rookie mistakes in judgement. When ANY NFL coach only lets his kicker attempt a field goal greater in distance than 39 yards once every 5 games, it's a safe bet that something stinks with the kicker!

 

Ricojes, I encourage you to look at the stats on attempts of 40 yd+ FG's made from other kickers around the league last year. You'll see what I mean.

[Alaska Darin]

What is this short leash? I think he is a Bill all season unless he suffers some amazing problems. I think he can blow a game and probably two on placekicks without it costing him his job (I'm not saying this is a good thing i advocate, it just strikes me as the fact). 

 

Lindell will not be cut unless TD sees a better alternative. I have seen no one present a better alternative who has a record which rivals the Lindell success at the kickoff game or doing onsides.  Clearly he has failings placekicking in terms of the missed chipshot and inspiring confidence at a distance.

 

Howevwer, even his placekicking failings are balanced in TD's mind by him having THE BEST success % of any Bills kicker in history.

 

I'd cut him in a NY second if Vinateri or even that weirdo Vanderjagt were available at a good price but outside of flights of fantasy regarding Nugent (I don't see using a 1st day pick on a rookie kicker as agood policy) and folks being impressed with Francis placekicking but having little tangible to say about his kickoffs, I don't see Lindell as being on a short leash at all.

442931[/snapback]

If Lindell misses another late mid-30 yarder that costs us a game against a division or playoff challenger, the line of kickers given a look the following weeks will resemble the Rockettes.

 

I guess you don't know it.

[ricojes]

Ricojes, I encourage you to look at the stats on attempts of 40 yd+ FG's made from other kickers around the league last year. You'll see what I mean.

443114[/snapback]

No thanks, I do know his stats are poor from 40+ over the past few years. But I find it incomprehensible that the Bills would jeopardize an entire season on a kicker they have no faith in, that just doesn't make sense to me and that's why I am sticking to my theory. If it happens more times than not this year, then I will eat crow and admit I was wrong. But I just can't buy into the confidence factor.

[1959BillsFan]

There are two camps on this topic:

1) Stats

2) Anti-stats

 

Personally, I actually believe in what Troy Vincent said about stats:

"Stats are for loosers. The only stat that counts is in the wins column." It may not be word for word, but very close.

 

There will be a time this season when there are close games. That is the style being dictated by the offensive personnel and play calling. History says that in close games, FG kickers either win it or loose it.

 

Two questions remain that will answer the Lindell issue:

1) Is Lindell confident, period???

2) Are the coaches confident, period???

 

I define "clutch" much differently than an NFL coach. EVERY FG success, to me, is clutch because, not only are you putting points on the board, but the Kicker is also giving confidence to his team mates that he can do it at any time.

 

It really is all about confidence and preparation. Something Bobby April said about Lindell after the 3rd preseason game: "Lindell is more prepared mentally this year tahn he was at this time last year." Again, not a direct word for word quote, but the words are close and the meaning is there. My point here is: what makes Lindell ready now, but not last year at this time???

 

I don't have confidence in his "clutch" abilities because my definition of "clutch" is anytime from places including 40+. I don't believe he has that, BUT what I believe vs what MM believes doesn't really matter. IT IS MULARKEY THAT NEEDS TO BE HELD RESPONSIBLE, not me.

[nobody]

Last year Lindell would have been 3-5 from 40+ but Mularkey called TO a split second before the snap.

[1959BillsFan]

Last year Lindell would have been 3-5 from 40+ but Mularkey called TO a split second before the snap.

443172[/snapback]

 

To me that says, last year, Mularkey was not comfortable being held accountable.

 

Is he this year???

 

That remains to be seen on the game situation and MM's apparent belief in Lindell's confidence.

[RJ (not THAT RJ)]

And that's certainly possible. I'm not denying that Mularkey could have been part of the problem, and that he should have gutted it out and attempted more field goals last year instead of punting it or going for it on 4th and medium/long.

 

But having said that, you don't think Lindell's pathetic 3 for 9 performance of 40+ yd field goals in 2003 - under Coach Williams - factored into MM's decisions to only let Lindell attempt THREE 40+ yd field goals in 2004?!

 

It is time to face reality. Only attempting 3 medium/long-range field goals (and only making 1 of 'em) in a full 16-game season is probably a greater indication that MM had little confidence in Lindell's ability than it is an indication of MM's coaching style and of his rookie mistakes in judgement. When ANY NFL coach only lets his kicker attempt a field goal greater in distance than 39 yards once every 5 games, it's a safe bet that something stinks with the kicker!

 

Ricojes, I encourage you to look at the stats on attempts of 40 yd+ FG's made from other kickers around the league last year. You'll see what I mean.

443114[/snapback]

 

 

For the record, I am not asking for detailed stats either. My only point is that the impression that the Bills do not have confidence in Lindell and have altered game strategy as a result is just that, an impression, and a not-particularly well-founded one at that. The number of kicks tells us nothing because there is no context. FFS suggested that the game situations did not leave the Bills with many such chances, and I agree with him.

 

The confidence thing is too intangible. Fans think that way, MM never has said it. While we are discussing impressions and what-ifs, remember that Lindell twice made 49-yarders last year that were wiped out by time outs. Of course if he misses a lot of key kicks he is gone, but the hand-wringing along the lines of "I'm sick of seeing the Bills forego figgies from outside 40 yards" is based on a mirage. All kickers can only be judged on what they do, and none are perfect. Heck, anyone remember Steve Christie missing a 42-yarder in 1998 on opening day in SD? Lindell is not perfect, but it is not as if the Bills are keeping him around for no reason either....

[nobody]

 

I'd be willing to trade Lindell's 100% on PAT, 80.7% on overall field goals, and piss-poor ability beyond the 40 yard line for a kicker who is 98-99% PAT, only 70-75% on overall field goals, but who gives our coaching staff much more confidence in the medium to long range field goals.

 

Would you?

 

 

 

No.

 

Let's see - Matt in DC says there were about 3-4 times the Bills went on 4th or punted. Let's take that number 4. So the Bills attempted 28 FGs last year. Add those other 4 to get a possible 32. A 75% kicker would have been good on 24 kicks, a 70% kicker would have been good on 22.4 (will round up to 23). Last year Lindell made 24. So the 75% kicker would have missed those 4 extra kicks which would have given the opposing team better field position. Oh - and the Bills would have lost at least 1 extra point in your scheme.

[Yoho]

One other very important factor-- the weather

 

I can think of two home games last year (Miami and Arizona) where the wind was blowing over 30 mph. I watched in warm ups as kicks actually started blowing backwards toward the kicker. Last year was especially windy for home games. If I had time I would do an analysis of how visiting kickers did in that weather.

 

It is impossible to compare a kicker in Buffalo with a dome kicker or kicking at altititude in Denver.

 

Last week-- the weather was calm. Lindell was 5-5. When watching on television, you can often lose sight of the wind factor, but it can be real and it can be very important.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

If Lindell misses another late mid-30 yarder that costs us a game against a division or playoff challenger, the line of kickers given a look the following weeks will resemble the Rockettes. 

 

I guess you don't know it.

443120[/snapback]

 

If this is what it takes for the Bills to give other kickers a look see while this may be described as a leash it certainly is not a short one. As I said, Limdel may be gone if misses one like this possibly two, but messing up like this probably has no effect on the job status of the Vinateri's and Carney's of the world but many kickers would get treated like Doug O'Brien and be gone if they failed in this way (regsrdless of the fact his kick won the game against the Bills earlier in the season.

 

What I do not get or am too stupid to figure out is that IF Lindell being on the shortest leash possible means something like:

 

1. His departure is eminent.

2. If he misses any makeable kicks (I consider anything with 50 yards makeable unless the wind and weather interfere) he is gone. Norwood for example missed a makeable kick when he went wide right but he was correctly forgiven and did not lose his job for missing this most important makeable kick. If Lindell is in fact on a short leash he would inspire us looking elsewhere if he misses any makeable kick. I do not think his leash is that short.

3. The Bills coaching staff have no confidence in him on even average kicks.

 

Then I am simply just too stupid.

 

I think the Bills have a clear awareness of the limitations (and they are real and important) of Lindell's game, but i argue that they also have an awareness of the positives in Lindell's game.

 

 

Perhaps I am foolish to:

 

1. Think TD is aware of and places importance on the Lindell never having missed a PAT and him being #1 in career success after 2+ seasons simply because these are the facts and TD has refereced this. I really wish I was smart enough to know reality makes no difference.

2. Think that the Bills kick civerage game always initiated by a Lindell kick which goes in a direction and with the designated hang time that the coverage team did not give up a TD or many long returns last year is relevant in any way. I really wish I was smart enough to know that kickers who can be part of this are a dime a dozen like TD says and that Lindell's short leash can be jerked as soon as e fails in some other part of the game and this can easily be replaced.

3. Think that being able to do your job adequately in 2 of 3 onside tries last year and extraordinarily well once is at all relevant to the Bills or the GM.

 

Look, it woild be foolish to argue Lindell is great at all facets of the game or that he does not have something to show in terms of distance kicks and crunch time consistency. I simply argue there is more to the game that this, that TD/MM are aware of this and it impacts their decisions.

 

Their commitment to work to improve Lindell is not infinite, but the Bills did not do more than flirt with kickers this off-season when it would seem a short-leash would have at least brought serious kicking competition to camp. It would seem a short leash would have created actions beyond the fantasy ranting on fan bulletin boards. What I don't know is what tangible signs there have been on this short-leash and I look forward to being educated by you or others.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

Todd France would be one.

442953[/snapback]

 

Thank you for answering, but two questions?

 

1. What are the tangible signs (or even intangible beyond wishful thinking) that he would be good or better than Lindell at the kickoff game?

 

This is tough because there are not direct stats persee, but even a stat like a K producing more touchbacks than the norm is one tangible sign (though it is a sign of less import since theNFL moved the kickoff back so even a leg like Janakowwski cannot reliably kick it deep everytime. The tangible signs which Lindell shows are that the Bills gave up no TDs last year with him kicking and even few long returns. This does not happen without good tackling by his teammates, but good tackling often depends on a kicker who sends it in the agreed upon side of the field with the agreed upon hang time from a squib or distance kick.

 

The tangible sign that Lindell can do this is the Bills kick return record last year.

 

What are the tangible signs that Francis can do this>

 

2. Francis is not on any NFL roster right now and was cut from his past team.

 

What are the tangible signs that another team's reject is able to achieve the placekicking standard you set beyond wishful thinking?

[eball]

Personally, I actually believe in what Troy Vincent said about stats:

"Stats are for loosers. The only stat that counts is in the wins column." It may not be word for word, but very close.

 

There will be a time this season when there are close games. That is the style being dictated by the offensive personnel and play calling. History says that in close games, FG kickers either win it or loose it.

443147[/snapback]

dan, allow me.

 

the word is LOSE, not LOOSE. it's LOSER, not LOOSER.

 

there -- thank you for allowing me to get that off my chest.

[Alaska Darin]

dan, allow me.

 

the word is LOSE, not LOOSE.  it's LOSER, not LOOSER.

 

there -- thank you for allowing me to get that off my chest. 

443309[/snapback]

Thank you. I was going to do that too. Pet peeve.

[JinVA]

If Lindell misses another late mid-30 yarder that costs us a game against a division or playoff challenger, the line of kickers given a look the following weeks will resemble the Rockettes. 

 

I guess you don't know it.

443120[/snapback]

I wonder how long it will take for that to become someones sig line.

[Typical TBD Guy]

I have no problem defending Lindell on the basis of:

 

1. The possible effect of Dorenbos on his field goal kicks over the last 2 years.

2. RWS naturally being a tough place for kickers, in terms of weather.

3. No definitively viable alternatives at K have surfaced since 2003.

4. Lindell had a great game Sunday and may have his confidence back.

5. His kickoffs are pretty good (thank you, FFS, for this point).

 

But nevertheless, it is completely asinine to suggest that Lindell was a good (let alone "clutch") field goal kicker during his first 2 seasons in Buffalo. Stats by themselves may not mean much. And general fan perceptions/memories by themselves may not either. But combine these two measures, and you can start to paint a more accurate picture.

 

And please don't use the two TO field goals to inflate Lindell's stats. As far as any of us fans could ever know, Lindell may have already known that MM was going to call TO's and that they were going to be free practice kicks.

 

In "clutch" situations, Lindell failed miserably last year. Same with Drew. And look what happened to Drew. Same could unfortunately happen to Lindell. Like it or not, Lindell is on a short leash. Just as Doug Brien was on a short leash last year for the Jets. But unlike Lindell, Brien at least had a fairly solid regular season under his belt.

[RJ (not THAT RJ)]

I have no problem defending Lindell on the basis of:

 

1. The possible effect of Dorenbos on his field goal kicks over the last 2 years.

2. RWS naturally being a tough place for kickers, in terms of weather.

3. No definitively viable alternatives at K have surfaced since 2003.

4. Lindell had a great game Sunday and may have his confidence back.

5. His kickoffs are pretty good (thank you, FFS, for this point).

 

But nevertheless, it is completely asinine to suggest that Lindell was a good (let alone "clutch") field goal kicker during his first 2 seasons in Buffalo. Stats by themselves may not mean much. And general fan perceptions/memories by themselves may not either. But combine these two measures, and you can start to paint a more accurate picture.

 

And please don't use the two TO field goals to inflate Lindell's stats. As far as any of us fans could ever know, Lindell may have already known that MM was going to call TO's and that they were going to be free practice kicks.

 

In "clutch" situations, Lindell failed miserably last year. Same with Drew. And look what happened to Drew. Same could unfortunately happen to Lindell. Like it or not, Lindell is on a short leash. Just as Doug Brien was on a short leash last year for the Jets. But unlike Lindell, Brien at least had a fairly solid regular season under his belt.

443390[/snapback]

 

 

Fair enough. I for one was not trying to say that Lindell was "clutch," but I still think it is not the same thing to say Lindell looked shaky at times (true) and that his shakiness actually led the Bills to alter their game day strategy (not true... or at least, not proven). Of course Rian Lindell will not keep his job one moment longer than the Bills leadership thinks he deserves it. But that does not mean that the Bills leadership has or must have the same apocalyptic view of Lindell that many on this board do.