One of my pet peeves when observing a draft is seeing someone draft a kicker or defense after their initial roster is filled. In other words, after fulfilling their minimum requirements for QB/TE/WR/RB, they decide that it's a "wise" idea to draft the best possible kicker/defense. The main problem with this particular logic is that the performance of defenses and kickers are notoriously difficult to gauge. Remember Neil Rackers and his monstrous kicking year with the Cards? Well, his fantasy scoring drastically dropped the following year (the same thing could be said for Adam Vinatieri). On the other hand, it can be argued that drafting good defenses are a good investment. Well, I tend to belong on the other side of the spectrum. Instead of relying on 1 or 2 defenses for the entire year (even if they are stellar defenses like Baltimore or Minnesota), I tend to play the matchups when it comes to picking a defense to start each week.
Last year, I pretty much picked the defense that was playing the worst possible offenses in the NFL every week. You can't imagine how many points I racked up each time Marc Bulger and his porous O-line gave up sacks like it was federal bailout money. Some offenses are just destined to turn the ball over because of their shaky QB situation or unfavorable weather. It's just a matter of picking the right matchups based on what's available on the waiver wire (or free agency).
So that's my rant for the day. Don't draft a kicker/defense unless you have solidified the rest of your roster with quality backups. You never know when your stud player will go down in preseason or in a freak injury.
