Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

NFL.com's GM List of Highest Success with Rookies

Frizzy350

By Frizzy350,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Frizzy350 Apprentice

Frizzy350

Posted
Posted

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000481917/article/which-gms-have-the-best-success-rate-with-rookies

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

 

"Carolina has to be excited about the future. Dave Gettleman, a long-time disciple of Ernie Accorsi -- who built two Super Bowl teams of his own -- has had a strong first two drafts highlighted by the talented Kelvin Benjamin. Can he build a team around Cam Newton?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lumps Newbie

Lumps

Posted
Posted

So this is based of rookie years rather than careers? This really doesn't mean anything.

It'd be nice to see ranking GMs in order of overall success of the player based on other factors other than an all-rookie year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rmoneyg35 Proficient

rmoneyg35

Posted
Posted

Gettleman has done well the past two years, especially with UDFA rookies. I hope it wasn't luck and it continues.

Last year we had Horton, Lester and White contribute as UDFA rookies

This season we had Philly Brown, Darrin Reaves and Norwell contribute as UDFA rookies.

If Gettleman keeps finding UDFA rookies to contribute we will be very successful in the future especially when we have to sign guys like Cam, Luke, Star and KB to long term deals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
t96 Grand Master

t96

Posted
Posted

The only two knocks I still have on Gettleman were picking Boston (just too early for me), though he may turn out well and I'll eat my crow. And also for not drafting Hurst late. Hard to fault much of his drafting or UDFA pick-ups so far, though. 

 

 Tre played ridiculously well already for a 4th rounder and that was after missing all of the offseason. Not sure how he hasn't already made you eat crow... As for Hurst, it would've been nice if he could've gotten him and tried to develop him here, but he was actually pretty damn bad last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CarolinaNCSU Proficient

CarolinaNCSU

Posted
Posted

 Tre played ridiculously well already for a 4th rounder and that was after missing all of the offseason. Not sure how he hasn't already made you eat crow... As for Hurst, it would've been nice if he could've gotten him and tried to develop him here, but he was actually pretty damn bad last year.

 

Hurst had stretches he played well I thought, against us for instance. Then teetered off into poo it seems, my bad. Boston played well, and also struggled at times, but it's a small sample size. I just personally thought it was too high in the draft for such an up and down player (though UNC's secondary may have been to blame). But, I'm not the GM. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
t96 Grand Master

t96

Posted
Posted

Hurst had stretches he played well I thought, against us for instance. Then teetered off into poo it seems, my bad. Boston played well, and also struggled at times, but it's a small sample size. I just personally thought it was too high in the draft for such an up and down player (though UNC's secondary may have been to blame). But, I'm not the GM. 

 

I wasn't happy with the Bene or Boston pick at the time, but after this year I think we got steals in both of them. Some re-drafts have had Boston going in the 1st round to the Eagles and pretty much all of them have Bene in the 1st. Boston definitely struggled, particularly against the Seahawks, but overall I think he definitely outplayed his draft position. Literally the only pick of Gettleman's that I don't like at this point is Barner. And that was a 6th rounder, so no big loss. Kugbilla has been injured his entire career so we can't really evaluate that pick, and Gaffney was hurt and then stolen so once again, can't evaluate. The rest were all ridiculously good picks in my opinion. Still a fairly small sample size, but I'm really confident in Gettleman as our GM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Squirrel Collaborator

Squirrel

Posted
Posted

So this is based of rookie years rather than careers? This really doesn't mean anything.

It'd be nice to see ranking GMs in order of overall success of the player based on other factors other than an all-rookie year.

If they did that, you would have half the gm's off the list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
L-TownCat Grand Master

L-TownCat

Posted
Posted

So this is based of rookie years rather than careers? This really doesn't mean anything.

It'd be nice to see ranking GMs in order of overall success of the player based on other factors other than an all-rookie year.

Well yeah that was the premise behind the article. You just changed the subject completely nullifying the legitimacy of your argument. WTF?

Hey guys how has g-mans record been for the guys he didn't draft? That's the burning question we all want to know.

Pep had a good career, does Gets get credit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lumps Newbie

Lumps

Posted
Posted

Well yeah that was the premise behind the article. You just changed the subject completely nullifying the legitimacy of your argument. WTF?

Hey guys how has g-mans record been for the guys he didn't draft? That's the burning question we all want to know.

Pep had a good career, does Gets get credit?

I have no idea what you're talking about. I just don't see the point in ranking a GM based on whether their picks make 'all-rookies'. I get that was the basis of the article in just a not sure it means all that much.

And I was suggesting perhaps there is a different way to 'rank' GMs that might be a bit more meaningful, I'm not entirely sure how, but I'm sure there's a more interesting way. As squirrel pointed out some might not be on the list...

As I said, this article and ranking really doesn't mean anything. Despite sample size there's a lot of misleading issues with it, so I don't really understand the value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
L-TownCat Grand Master

L-TownCat

Posted
Posted

I have no idea what you're talking about. I just don't see the point in ranking a GM based on whether their picks make 'all-rookies'. I get that was the basis of the article in just a not sure it means all that much.

And I was suggesting perhaps there is a different way to 'rank' GMs that might be a bit more meaningful, I'm not entirely sure how, but I'm sure there's a more interesting way. As squirrel pointed out some might not be on the list...

As I said, this article and ranking really doesn't mean anything. Despite sample size there's a lot of misleading issues with it, so I don't really understand the value.

the point is the point. He took an angle at how to judge a GMs success by how their draft class can contribute immediately. Why would that not be a good barometer of how good of a talent evaluator is? Gets is smashing drafts and this author think that may be a tell-tale sign of a good GM. Why is that hard?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • strato
      2027 superbowl odds

      By strato · Posted

      Lol Atlanta looks to have lost their young edge rusher, has no 1st round pick, a complete mess at QB, a new coaching staff… And we swept them this year. Says what they think of us. 
    • LinvilleGorge
      PFF Best Deep Ball Thrower Award

      By LinvilleGorge · Posted

      I mean, you can only go so far with the propping up. When a guy's numbers are as bad overall as Bryce's you have to try to find specific niches to sell. It's just funny that they're honing in on where he's probably weakest to try to prop him up. Whether it's a pro-Bryce conspiracy or not, it echos my chief complaint about PFF's analysis for years. When your purely statistical analysis badly skews from the eye test of actually watching the games, it should be screaming at you that you need to modify your system not double down on it. PFF is awesome at compiling stats but their grade systems are highly flawed and they never seem to try to improve them.
    • ForJimmy
      PFF Best Deep Ball Thrower Award

      By ForJimmy · Posted

      Then why is Byce also last in other PFF stats?  The deep ball thrower stat by PFF can simply be flawed vs some conspiracy trying to prop up a QB on a team that a former employee now works for.  Both of these guys were also hired AFTER the Panthers had already drafted Bryce.  Trying to prop him up with a made up stat while he struggled would be a detriment to their own team honestly.  
×
×
  • Create New...