Whether Or Not Brandon Banks Deserves A Roster Spot

[1niksder]

"Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics" The New Kickoff Rule And Whether Or Not Brandon Banks Deserves A Roster Spot

There seems to be no issue debated more among Redskins fans and media, than the status of Brandon Banks in light of the new kickoff rules. Now I know it is a sensitive issue for fans, and I'm really not trying to add fuel to the fire, but rather present the facts and let them speak for themselves.

Now in an effort of full disclosure, I will say that I have been on both sides of the Brandon Banks camp. Last season I was a major supporter for Banks to be on the team and given a chance to see if he can play in this league. On the flip side, I've been among the loudest voices questioning whether or not he has a spot this year. What's changed, you might ask? Well a lot actually. While Banks showed extremely well as a return man last year, he also failed to do much of anything as an offensive weapon. While last year he was fighting with Roydell Williams, Joey Galloway, Bobby Wade and a host of other retread receivers for a roster spot, this year he is competing against three rookies and a much improved Terrence Austin. Finally, with the new kickoff rule, Banks's value to the team is going to be even less than it was last season.

Now I'm going to focus on the impact of the kickoff rule as well as looking at how Banks fits in to this roster. As a companion piece to this I wrote a similarly themed article for my own blog. While there is some overlap, my other piece focuses a bit more on the history from when the last time the NFL kickoffs were from the 35, and the effect it had on Brian Mitchell. The focus here will be more on stats and comparing the Redskins situation with others like it around the league. Finally I wanted to say ahead of time that I realize a lot of the points that I'm offering counterpoints to are from comments, posts and articles, some of which have been written by fans and bloggers on this site. I'm not 'calling anyone out' or trying to 'knock anyone's opinion', rather I just want to show the other side to the story.

Impact Of The New Kickoff Rule:

Let's knock the big one out of the park right now. The new kickoff rule will without a doubt have a pretty significant impact on return men this year. Through three weeks in the preseason we have seen a staggering 40.7% (167 of 412 kickoffs) go for touchbacks. That is up from 16.4 % of kicks that went for touchbacks last season. That is essentially a 150% increase in touchbacks through three preseason games. And even that might be low balling the number once the regular season hits.

Three major factors could make the percentage of touchbacks even higher once the regular season kicks off. First we have seen return men (in hopes of making the team) take the ball out four to nine yards deep in the end zone. Although that will still occur somewhat during the regular season, it is likely that the green light won't be given nearly as much as when the games count. Second, teams have admitted to kicking the ball short in an effort to work on their coverage teams some this preseason. During the regular season, teams will likely focus more on kicking it deep and forcing an automatic 80 yard field. Finally, we have seen a number of teams use 2nd string kickers, who won't be on the roster by the time the regular season comes around. Now it is hard to say for sure what the overall impact will be, but it is a fairly safe assumption that the touchback rate is probably a little low.

So what does that mean in terms of a season though?......

Brandon Banks Is A Threat To Score Every Time He Touches The Ball:

Yes there is no doubt that Brandon Banks is an electric player, but is he going to be this scoring threat that people really believe? Last year there were over 2,100 non-touchback kickoffs. If you take away another 300 specialty kicks, you end up with about 1,800 actual kick returns (the actual number is probably slightly more). Of those 1,800 kick returns, just 23 went for touchdowns. That is roughly 1.4% of kickoff returns that go for scores. And while Banks might be more likely than most kick returners, he is far from guaranteed to take one to the house, especially with the new kickoff rules. Historically in the past when kickoffs have been from the 35 yard line, there have been on average between 6-10 returns for a TD, so your chances for a score will probably be under 1%. As for punt returns the percentage isn't much better as the league scored just 13 TD's on 1,149 returns, for a 1.1% scoring rate.....

Why Is Brandon Banks Given Special Treatment?:

Every team is facing this return issue this season, but it seems like Redskins fans are the most concerned about their guy Banks not making the final roster. Now the fact is that most return men have at least some utility role that help ensures a roster spot so not everyone is on the 'bubble', but with Banks people are desperate to hang on to him.

I get that returns are flashy, but ....

Click link for full blog

[frankcal20]

They didn't even go into the fact that he's had knee issues this year and last year.

I can't justify losing Austin who offers more as a WR than banks or Hankerson who has a lot more size than Banks.

[The Hogster]

We will see how this plays out. All of the anti-Banks articles cite his lack of productivity on Offense as justification for releasing him. But, none of them address the reality that (i) no teams 6th or 7th receiver is contributing much at all on Offense--they are usually special teams guys (gunners, returners, etc) and (ii) of the top return men who handle both Kickoffs and Punts--very few of them are major contributors on Offense or Defense. And, even those guys have seen their Special Teams roles limited to situational returns rather than full-time duties. (See Josh Cribbs & Devin Hester)

The major question in Banks' case should be specific to his situation. With that said, the question would be does keeping Brandon Banks for his return ability, outweigh the potential value that keeping Niles Paul would have on Offense?

If the answer is yes, then he stays. If the answer is No, then he goes. It's somewhat of a stretch to think that Paul--a rookie--is going to get enough opportunities at this stage of his career to produce very much on Offense. For every play he's on the field, someone has to sit down. Who sits? Moss? Gaffney? Armstrong? Hankerson? Austin? Go through the league, the 6th WR rarely is on the field enough to catch more than single digits in passes on the entire year. Why are we so convinced that 1-9 catches from Paul would outweigh 20-30 KOR and 20-40 PR from Banks?

I just don't get it. But, we shall see.

[The Hogster]

They didn't even go into the fact that he's had knee issues this year and last year.

I can't justify losing Austin who offers more as a WR than banks or Hankerson who has a lot more size than Banks.

If Banks makes it, that doesn't mean that Austin or Hankerson won't. If anything, Stallworth is the odd man out. Every year fans get enamored with backup WRs who won't see the field in place of established players. See Marko Mitchell. He was Randy Moss and is out of the league mysteriously.

[frankcal20]

I don't think that we keep more than 5 WR's only b/c of needing depth at other positions. Check this out. http://www.the-hogs.net/blogs/2011/08/3 ... rediction/

[The Hogster]

I don't think that we keep more than 5 WR's only b/c of needing depth at other positions. Check this out. http://www.the-hogs.net/blogs/2011/08/3 ... rediction/

We will see.

[Deadskins]

Brandon Banks Is A Threat To Score Every Time He Touches The Ball:

Yes there is no doubt that Brandon Banks is an electric player, but is he going to be this scoring threat that people really believe? Last year there were over 2,100 non-touchback kickoffs. If you take away another 300 specialty kicks, you end up with about 1,800 actual kick returns (the actual number is probably slightly more). Of those 1,800 kick returns, just 23 went for touchdowns. That is roughly 1.4% of kickoff returns that go for scores. And while Banks might be more likely than most kick returners, he is far from guaranteed to take one to the house, especially with the new kickoff rules. Historically in the past when kickoffs have been from the 35 yard line, there have been on average between 6-10 returns for a TD, so your chances for a score will probably be under 1%. As for punt returns the percentage isn't much better as the league scored just 13 TD's on 1,149 returns, for a 1.1% scoring rate.....

He doesn't have to score to make it a good return. Great field position, even if you don't go all the way, is still a boon to the offense's chances of scoring on any particular drive.

[Deadskins]

We will see how this plays out. All of the anti-Banks articles cite his lack of productivity on Offense as justification for releasing him. But, none of them address the reality that (i) no teams 6th or 7th receiver is contributing much at all on Offense--they are usually special teams guys (gunners, returners, etc) and (ii) of the top return men who handle both Kickoffs and Punts--very few of them are major contributors on Offense or Defense. And, even those guys have seen their Special Teams roles limited to situational returns rather than full-time duties. (See Josh Cribbs & Devin Hester)

The major question in Banks' case should be specific to his situation. With that said, the question would be does keeping Brandon Banks for his return ability, outweigh the potential value that keeping Niles Paul would have on Offense?

If the answer is yes, then he stays. If the answer is No, then he goes. It's somewhat of a stretch to think that Paul--a rookie--is going to get enough opportunities at this stage of his career to produce very much on Offense. For every play he's on the field, someone has to sit down. Who sits? Moss? Gaffney? Armstrong? Hankerson? Austin? Go through the league, the 6th WR rarely is on the field enough to catch more than single digits in passes on the entire year. Why are we so convinced that 1-9 catches from Paul would outweigh 20-30 KOR and 20-40 PR from Banks?

I just don't get it. But, we shall see.

Great point, Hogster!

[The Hogster]

Brandon Banks Is A Threat To Score Every Time He Touches The Ball:

Yes there is no doubt that Brandon Banks is an electric player, but is he going to be this scoring threat that people really believe? Last year there were over 2,100 non-touchback kickoffs. If you take away another 300 specialty kicks, you end up with about 1,800 actual kick returns (the actual number is probably slightly more). Of those 1,800 kick returns, just 23 went for touchdowns. That is roughly 1.4% of kickoff returns that go for scores. And while Banks might be more likely than most kick returners, he is far from guaranteed to take one to the house, especially with the new kickoff rules. Historically in the past when kickoffs have been from the 35 yard line, there have been on average between 6-10 returns for a TD, so your chances for a score will probably be under 1%. As for punt returns the percentage isn't much better as the league scored just 13 TD's on 1,149 returns, for a 1.1% scoring rate.....

He doesn't have to score to make it a good return. Great field position, even if you don't go all the way, is still a boon to the offense's chances of scoring on any particular drive.

+1

He didn't "score" on that 58 yarder against Pittsburgh, but starting at the opponents 42 is a lot different than starting at your own 20 or less.

[frankcal20]

I agree with that 100% but you have to ask if you can get the same production in the return game from another player who may offer more as a Wr should someone go down with injury.

[The Hogster]

I agree with that 100% but you have to ask if you can get the same production in the return game from another player who may offer more as a Wr should someone go down with injury.

If that were the case then cut Banks. But, who on our roster has shown anything close to his ability in the return game?

Does anyone remember Antwan Randel El? KO and PR is not something everyone can do.

[The Hogster]

For those with short memories. This is just part of 1 year:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbG_Xx8f7YI

[The Hogster]

This is what the anti-Banks argument sounds like in Living Color. This guy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8bZN9Nlpu4

[frankcal20]

Terrance Austin is pretty good and has shown some flashes. They lined AA up there last week but I don't see him returning kicks.

[frankcal20]

I must say that if we keep 6 WR's, Banks is on the team.

[redskinz4ever]

TA has done a solid job at PR and played well at WR .....banks you have to mention injury im sure he would be solid as PR but not sure about his ability at the WR position.

[The Hogster]

Although I personally believe that the Anti-Banks arguments are essentially ridiculous, I am glad that for once, we are debating whether this team is deep enough to release a good player who could play on someone else's roster.

That said, I think the theory that Niles Paul will not make it to the PS is overblown. I hope I'm right. He's perfect for the PS until injury or performance proves that he's ready to be a major factor. (SN: He reminds me of Jerry Porter) but he's got to prove he's better than the guys on the field before you let proven guys go. Terrence Austin is an example of a guy who played himself onto the roster. IMO he has proven he can make Stallworth expendable. Paul may do that, but he hasn't done enough to knock off Brandon Banks in my opinion.

[Skeletor]

somebody posted in another thread about the possibility of keeping Stallworth for the first four weeks during Buchanon's suspension, and allowing him to prove his worth to the team as a sort of extended tryout. Seems like that could apply to Banks as well.

If in 4 weeks, Banks is healthy and effective, cut Stallworth. If not cut Banks.

[crazyhorse1]

We will see how this plays out. All of the anti-Banks articles cite his lack of productivity on Offense as justification for releasing him. But, none of them address the reality that (i) no teams 6th or 7th receiver is contributing much at all on Offense--they are usually special teams guys (gunners, returners, etc) and (ii) of the top return men who handle both Kickoffs and Punts--very few of them are major contributors on Offense or Defense. And, even those guys have seen their Special Teams roles limited to situational returns rather than full-time duties. (See Josh Cribbs & Devin Hester)

The major question in Banks' case should be specific to his situation. With that said, the question would be does keeping Brandon Banks for his return ability, outweigh the potential value that keeping Niles Paul would have on Offense?

If the answer is yes, then he stays. If the answer is No, then he goes. It's somewhat of a stretch to think that Paul--a rookie--is going to get enough opportunities at this stage of his career to produce very much on Offense. For every play he's on the field, someone has to sit down. Who sits? Moss? Gaffney? Armstrong? Hankerson? Austin? Go through the league, the 6th WR rarely is on the field enough to catch more than single digits in passes on the entire year. Why are we so convinced that 1-9 catches from Paul would outweigh 20-30 KOR and 20-40 PR from Banks?

I just don't get it. But, we shall see.

Excellent point. It's tremendously more important to have a KR and PR of excellence than a No. 6 receiver who will spend most of the season on the pine. Cutting Banks, unless he's injured, is one of the most ridiculous ideas I've seen on the board this season.

[frankcal20]

Keeping Banks means that you're most likely going to have 6 receivers. With that being said, who's not going to make the team at another position. Still can only have 53 players.

[KazooSkinsFan]

Keeping Banks means that you're most likely going to have 6 receivers. With that being said, who's not going to make the team at another position. Still can only have 53 players.

Yes, that is the issue. In discussing specific positions everyone wants to keep an extra player, but it adds up to over 53 as you say. #6 isn't competing against the top 5, they are competing against the other position bubbles.

[SKINFAN]

I'll throw a penny in the hallway =)

To me it looks like we don't need him. Sure he has speed, but (arguably) he is not durable because of size. One flush hit and off to IR he goes. It looks to me that he is a one dime guy, but he does it real well. Unfortunately, this team needs more than what he can give right now. Specially with the new kickoff rule. We have a couple of young guys that can do a Spec Teams that are good not great, but they also help in the rotation at WR. Banks, if I remember right, he disappeared in coverage for the most part when put in as a WR. If we have a proven Offense, a good solid WR corps then I say Yeah, let's see what he can do in ST, but the O needs all hands on deck, sorry Brandon but we have a few guys we may need at RB.


Edit: Banks is a need, I know it's preseason, but the new kickoff rule helps a guy like him, 1 cut, 1 miss and he's off to the races.

[The Hogster]

I am not sure which NFL we are all watching, but this notion that your 6th WR produces on Offense is a fan fallacy.

Let's take the Patriots for example. (I'm using them because they carried 6 WRs last year AND they pass a lot)

Their 6th WR was Taylor Price, a rookie who caught....wait for it.....3 passes for 41 yards on the year.

Their 5th WR was Julian Edelman. Now Edelman was also their Punt Returner. And, he caught.....wait for it....12 passes on offense on the year.

I'll even go a step further. Ben Tate was their 4th WR last year. He also returned their Kickoffs. He caught 24 passes. Now, keep in mind, Tate was basically 2nd Team. As a result, hecaught most of his balls when Randy Moss was traded and he got more opportunities. His productivity went back to normal once Branch came back in.

The Patriots actually spread the ball more than most teams.

The Point is. If you people think that our 6th WR is going to contribute on offense, you're not paying attention to the league and are holding unrealistic expectations for what the 4th-6th WRs do on NFL teams. They are Special Teams guys for the most part or used in emergency situations.

Add in the fact that Banks returns both Kicks and Punts (basically what Tate and Edelman both did) and this is really a fan-inspired debate over things that don't prove to be true in real life.

And FrankCal, the roster projection you linked allows for 5 WRs but you also include Stallworth. Some of us don't think he makes this roster. I expect one of the linemen on that list not to make it. Probably Maurice Hurt. Or maybe LB Markus White sneaks onto our PS.

Whoever our 5th or 6th WR is will mainly play on Special Teams. Ask Danny Smith which special teams WR is most valuable. I think he'd say Banks before you finished asking the question.

[mastdark81]

We will see how this plays out. All of the anti-Banks articles cite his lack of productivity on Offense as justification for releasing him. But, none of them address the reality that (i) no teams 6th or 7th receiver is contributing much at all on Offense--they are usually special teams guys (gunners, returners, etc) and (ii) of the top return men who handle both Kickoffs and Punts--very few of them are major contributors on Offense or Defense. And, even those guys have seen their Special Teams roles limited to situational returns rather than full-time duties. (See Josh Cribbs & Devin Hester)

The major question in Banks' case should be specific to his situation. With that said, the question would be does keeping Brandon Banks for his return ability, outweigh the potential value that keeping Niles Paul would have on Offense?

If the answer is yes, then he stays. If the answer is No, then he goes. It's somewhat of a stretch to think that Paul--a rookie--is going to get enough opportunities at this stage of his career to produce very much on Offense. For every play he's on the field, someone has to sit down. Who sits? Moss? Gaffney? Armstrong? Hankerson? Austin? Go through the league, the 6th WR rarely is on the field enough to catch more than single digits in passes on the entire year. Why are we so convinced that 1-9 catches from Paul would outweigh 20-30 KOR and 20-40 PR from Banks?

I just don't get it. But, we shall see.

Great point. To add, typically if your not a top 3 WR now you most likely will never be a number 1. I take Bank's rare return ability compared to the potential of a #2 receiver in Paul (if that).

[mastdark81]

I'll throw a penny in the hallway =)

To me it looks like we don't need him. Sure he has speed, but (arguably) he is not durable because of size. One flush hit and off to IR he goes. It looks to me that he is a one dime guy, but he does it real well. Unfortunately, this team needs more than what he can give right now. Specially with the new kickoff rule. We have a couple of young guys that can do a Spec Teams that are good not great, but they also help in the rotation at WR. Banks, if I remember right, he disappeared in coverage for the most part when put in as a WR. If we have a proven Offense, a good solid WR corps then I say Yeah, let's see what he can do in ST, but the O needs all hands on deck, sorry Brandon but we have a few guys we may need at RB.


Edit: Banks is a need, I know it's preseason, but the new kickoff rule helps a guy like him, 1 cut, 1 miss and he's off to the races.

Speed kills. I think people discount Banks as a receiver but given the opportunity I'm sure he can perform. I haven't seen him drop a pass since he's been here. I just think they don' t like putting him out there at WR for injury purposes. He's more valuable on special teams then on the field, considering we have other options at WR.