Yes, I would be open to taking a kicker on Day 2. A second-round pick only has a 50 percent chance of starting within four years. A third-round pick only has a 30-33 percent chance to start within four years. If you are sure he is the guy, the percentages say to take him. The kicker can win games for you and affect field position with his kickoff ability.

The reason to not take him is only nine of the 32 primary kickers in the NFL last season were drafted at all (the others originally entered the league as undrafted free-agent signees). It is clearly an area where you can find a solution without expending any draft capital. I knew a team that hired a coach whose sole job was to concentrate on finding a punter and kicker without drafting one. It can be done and can save you money/draft picks.

Usually the team that drafts a kicker high is either a good team that can afford to use a second- or third-round pick on a specialist instead of a position player. The other scenario where a kicker could be taken high in the draft is when a team has extra picks. The compensatory picks start in the third round -- a round where you might see a team take Roberto Aguayo. I simply couldn't pull the trigger on a kicker with a pick that high. I think Roberto Aguayo is a valuable player and I could see him coming off the board by sometime in the third round. But unless my kicking situation was an absolute mess last season and I had an extra middle-round pick, I don't think I would be willing to draft Aguayo that early. That's just a personal philosophy, I suppose. Unless I've missed something, there's never a good reason to use a high draft pick on a kicker. Teams can find plenty of viable options at that position in free agency, and other spots simply bring more value to an organization. Just look at the decision by late Raiders owner Al Davis to select Sebastian Janikowski with the 17th overall pick in the 2000 draft. Janikowski has made one Pro Bowl in 16 seasons, while the Raiders haven't had a winning campaign in the last 13 years. You can't blame all that futility on one man, but this much we do know: It's highly unlikely any kicker taken so high will ever change a franchise's fortunes. It depends on the draft class, but if the kicker is proven, then yes: I'd 100 percent take a kicker in Round 2 or 3. If a guy can go a season and do his job consistently -- which is what coaches want at every position -- then he is a valuable commodity. Sometimes people think that kickers aren't players that teams want to waste money on, but it's not a bad investment.

In the third, fourth or fifth rounds, teams are often shaking the dice and hoping their draft picks pan out. If you have a guy who is a proven kicker in college and that's your team need, then you should take that risk because he'll most likely be used right away. The only way I would take a kicker that early is if he was a dual-threat. Priority No. 1 is he would have to be a really good field-goal kicker -- because points are involved there -- and he has to be able to execute a kick when the game is on the line. Secondly, the kicker would have to have an exceptional, booming leg, like Sebastian Janikowski had when he entered the league. Then I would say yes. But if the kicker is just an average cat making 70 percent of field goals, then no way. Definitely not. The importance of a good kicker isn't going anywhere, but neither is the availability of one. There's a reason kickers don't break the bank at contract time. Finding a reliable guy isn't impossible after the draft, much less during it.