TT vs Sherman

[pbmax]

Sean Gilbert (sat out a year), Steelers wide receiver Andre Hastings. How could I forget Bubba Franks missing all of camp in 2005?

[mraynrand]

I think of GM performance in terms of roster trajectory. Sherman took a roster that was high, and pointed high, and set its course on a downward slope. Ted took that downward slope - flattened it out very quickly to stop the bleeding, and turned it around and got it pointed very high once again.

Rosters don't turn on a dime. They move more like a battleship.

I agree with your overall assessment about trajectories, but I disagree a bit with Sherman. Three factors: 1)He was GM only 3 years 2) He had the 'win now' approach, which led him to spend picks for guys who could play now - trading up for Walker, trading a #2 for Harris 3) He had one terrible draft - 2004 -otherwise he was pretty good - Two probowlers in 2002, and two very good starters in 2003 (Harris and Barnett)

Ron Wolf had a pretty thin draft in 1999, ultimately getting two good starters in McKenzie and Driver. In 2004, Sherman got Williams and Wells - not anywhere near as good as 1999, but similar in being thin. Wolf Followed 1999 up with possibly his best GM year ever in 2000 drafting 4 very strong players and trading for Green. He changed the trajectory in one draft. Since Sherman had but three drafts and showed he was building for 'this year' there's no reason to think that he would have changed in 2005, but it's not certain, and with one draft, he could have changed that trajectory.

[retailguy]

One more time, Corey Williams would not have played for his tender offer.

Name one guy who wouldn't play for the tender offer that didn't show up when the games started?

Terrell Suggs reported three weeks late this year.

3 whole weeks huh? But he played after that? So how does this prove he "wouldn't play" for the tender offer? Was he a pain in the ass? YES. Did he play? YES. So would have Williams, had Ted decided that was what he wanted.

Walter Jones. Lance Briggs. I am sure there are more. They miss camp and come in late. That doesn't do much for the team, puts the player behind and increases the chance of injury.

Isn't this what I said? Didn't they play? Even Lance "I'll NEVER play for the Bears again?" Briggs. That Lance Briggs? Walter Jones played on the damn tag for three seasons. But he played. Every game.

[mraynrand]

How could I forget Bubba Franks missing all of camp in 2005?

How could you? And it worked out so well for Bubba, didn't it?

Thanks for all the examples, BTW. We're all shitting our pants waiting for Grant to go in the tank now.

[mraynrand]

One more time, Corey Williams would not have played for his tender offer.

Name one guy who wouldn't play for the tender offer that didn't show up when the games started?

Terrell Suggs reported three weeks late this year.

3 whole weeks huh? But he played after that? So how does this prove he "wouldn't play" for the tender offer? Was he a pain in the ass? YES. Did he play? YES. So would have Williams, had Ted decided that was what he wanted.

Walter Jones. Lance Briggs. I am sure there are more. They miss camp and come in late. That doesn't do much for the team, puts the player behind and increases the chance of injury.

Isn't this what I said? Didn't they play? Even Lance "I'll NEVER play for the Bears again?" Briggs. That Lance Briggs? Walter Jones played on the damn tag for three seasons. But he played. Every game.

I'm not getting into this debate, because I think the whole thing is stupid, however....

[retailguy]

Sean Gilbert (sat out a year), Steelers wide receiver Andre Hastings. How could I forget Bubba Franks missing all of camp in 2005?

So you got two. Out of potentially 32 per season....

Bubba missed CAMP. But he played in the games. Which is what I said.

Williams would've played. The tag was more money than his ENTIRE rookie contract. He'd have been there. Just as I said.

[mraynrand]

Sean Gilbert (sat out a year), Steelers wide receiver Andre Hastings. How could I forget Bubba Franks missing all of camp in 2005?

So you got two. Out of potentially 32 per season....

Bubba missed CAMP. But he played in the games. Which is what I said.

Williams would've played. The tag was more money than his ENTIRE rookie contract. He'd have been there. Just as I said.

I'm not getting into this debate, because I think the whole thing is stupid, however....

[retailguy]

I'm not getting into this debate, because I think the whole thing is stupid, however....

Sometimes you can be an ass... :P

This thread is about Sherman Vs. Ted.. AGAIN. Where did I say anything about that? Hmmm. :P

BTW - Hoosier and Tyrone are sounding off again in the romper room. Your ass is needed over there...

[mraynrand]

I'm not getting into this debate, because I think the whole thing is stupid, however....

Sometimes you can be an ass... :P

Agreed.

[Scott Campbell]

I think of GM performance in terms of roster trajectory. Sherman took a roster that was high, and pointed high, and set its course on a downward slope. Ted took that downward slope - flattened it out very quickly to stop the bleeding, and turned it around and got it pointed very high once again.

Rosters don't turn on a dime. They move more like a battleship.

I agree with your overall assessment about trajectories, but I disagree a bit with Sherman. Three factors: 1)He was GM only 3 years 2) He had the 'win now' approach, which led him to spend picks for guys who could play now - trading up for Walker, trading a #2 for Harris 3) He had one terrible draft - 2004 -otherwise he was pretty good - Two probowlers in 2002, and two very good starters in 2003 (Harris and Barnett)

Ron Wolf had a pretty thin draft in 1999, ultimately getting two good starters in McKenzie and Driver. In 2004, Sherman got Williams and Wells - not anywhere near as good as 1999, but similar in being thin. Wolf Followed 1999 up with possibly his best GM year ever in 2000 drafting 4 very strong players and trading for Green. He changed the trajectory in one draft. Since Sherman had but three drafts and showed he was building for 'this year' there's no reason to think that he would have changed in 2005, but it's not certain, and with one draft, he could have changed that trajectory.

My gripe with Sherman is that he worked the GM job as if he were also the coach. He gambled alot and fell in love with too many players on his draft board that he had to trade up for. I understood why he did it. But he missed, and decimated the roster in doing so. I didn't like the way Sherman managed the salary cap either. Though I think Ted has swung too far to the other extreme in that regard. I'd like to see him going for one Pickett or Woodson type player each year.

[HarveyWallbangers]

TT is taking the Packers a step back this year so they can move two steps ahead in the next two years.

Welcome back. We missed you. We might be able to get along--now that I don't have to defend Brett anymore.

[pbmax]

There is a cost to holding out, whether its injuries (Bubba, Grant, Woodson) or concessions (Haynesworth, Briggs). Unless you are willing to pay the freight for the player, the tag is a game of chicken and it affects play on the field. Even Briggs was affected.

Jones might be the exception, but even he, by missing camp for 2 plus years likely was hurt by it. The concession is that you will get nothing for the player next year.

Taking this chance on a player who was not worth the contract he was going to get. He wasn't that good.

Isn't this what I said? Didn't they play? Even Lance "I'll NEVER play for the Bears again?" Briggs. That Lance Briggs? Walter Jones played on the damn tag for three seasons. But he played. Every game.

[retailguy]

There is a cost to holding out, whether its injuries (Bubba, Grant, Woodson) or concessions (Haynesworth, Briggs). Unless you are willing to pay the freight for the player, the tag is a game of chicken and it affects play on the field. Even Briggs was affected.

Jones might be the exception, but even he, by missing camp for 2 plus years likely was hurt by it. The concession is that you will get nothing for the player next year.

Taking this chance on a player who was not worth the contract he was going to get. He wasn't that good.

Yes, there is a cost. I think if we asked Sean Gilbert today about that cost, he'd tell us he would have made a different decision.

Ultimately I think that's why Ted let Williams go. He didn't think the battle was worth it.

But none of this proves that Williams wouldn't have played. Plenty of evidence suggests the opposite. There is also plenty of evidence that had he played on the tag and not been as effective, he'd have still been better than the depth we currently have. I think there is merit to THAT point. Others don't, but again, that doesn't prove he wouldn't have played.

[mraynrand]

My gripe with Sherman is that he worked the GM job as if he were also the coach. He gambled a lot and fell in love with too many players on his draft board that he had to trade up for. I understood why he did it. But he missed, and decimated the roster in doing so.

I completely agree. That's why I always cite that 30-40% success rate for any pick at any point in the draft. Combining picks to move up results in a thin roster, and when you put your eggs in smaller baskets, they are still going to stink 60-70% of the time.

[RashanGary]

The last 3 years set the table for Thompson. The next 5 years will define him.