DG a bad drafter? Fox sports says otherwise.

[Guest Lasus83]

I'm sorry, what? I'm arguing that Gettleman has been a great evaluator of talent and has had a lot of success in the draft. My original comment was at those who nit pick over every single player ever drafted. 

Sorry... wife is pissing me off this AM...

Ill go now...

Sent from my SM-G930P using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

[AU-panther]

10 minutes ago, AceBoogie said:

We're calling Boston a hit while the majority of this forum is filled with threads debating who we should draft to replace him?

That is part of the problem in itself of judging GMs.  Hard to even decide on a metric to grade them on that you can apply across the league. 

Judging a GM in a vacuum is kind of pointless.  You might think your GM is terrible but if he is  better then 20 other GMs he is actual above average.

Here is an article that I found awhile back that I kind of use as a personal guideline:

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2015/3/16/8135197/2010-2014-nfl-drafts-team-by-team-draft-success-in-first-three-rounds

Basically it looked at all the drafts between 2010 and 2014 and tried to determine the success rate by round and in total.  Their definition of success was finding a "primary starter", the definition of such was a player that started 8 games in the past 5 years.  Even with that pretty low standard the success rate was only 2.7 players per draft. 

Is the study perfect?  Of course not.  Under their definition a player like Luke and a player like Boston would both count the same.  Also a backup that gets to start because of an injury might end up counting, maybe someone like Klein.   Either way situations like this probably happen on most teams so they tend to cancel out when looking at everyone.

Using the metric I would say DG is above average when compared to the league as a whole.  I would love to see the same kind of study done but where the "hits" were broken down in categories such as below average, average, above average, elite.

Personally I think if you can get 3 "primary starter"  types a year you are doing good. Hopefully a couple of them are above average starters.  Also I think "elite" type of players should carry extra weight. By elite I mean players that are probably top 3-5 at their position. Those type of guys are hard to find even in FA and on a rookie wage scale present major value for a team.  In any given year there probably aren't that many of those guys that come out of the draft.

 

 

[Mother Grabber]

DG needs to step up and make some more starting quality LT available. he did a terrible job last offseason by forcing them all to re-sign with their teams.

[MV%doe]

Hitting on 50% of your draft is insanely great and very rare. Depends on your definition of "hit" too. Dave has taken a much different approach to the draft than most. Rather than stockpile picks, he's focused on trusting his staff to find 3 talented players. Panthers have a bizarre ratio of very few picks and high hits. Most say you need as many picks as possible cause it's a inexact science, so you need to improve your chances of finding these "hits". I believe the 2013 draft had a part in this theory. Good old hurney not only leftd Dave with serve cap issues, but only 5 total draft picks.

That draft yielded star, KK and aj. In turn each year after he's gotten similar results. Funny cause until last year the panthers got two "first rounders" in each draft form 13-15, when using their borad. Dave also has a unique approach to undrafted free agency. He focuses on a small group and is very aggressive. Truly there's little to no difference between rounds 6/7 and undrafted. Basically trust your staff to find 3 "hits" and two depth form the UDFA pool. Then you have added 5 young talented players at "cheap" four years contracts. Then hopefully a few will resign once they get accustom to NC/panthers.