How Do You Evaluate GM Performance?

[Scott Campbell]

There's plenty of threads around here centered around the merits of Ted's job performance. And there's plenty of heated opinions on both sides with many on the fence, and a loose network of "facts" being used to support the pros and cons of Ted's performance, or lack of performance as some would say.

So how should a GM truly be judged? What criteria do you use? How much time should be given to adequately judge whether a guy has "it" or not?

[CaptainKickass]

That's a great f-ing question.

[The Shadow]

You ask yourself 1 question : Is the team on the way up or down?
I think the evidence points to a Packer team on the way up.

[packinpatland]

Don't you think he should be given the same consideration as a player or a coach? If there's no production, then there's no contract renewal.

Sherman was given 5 years. TT's clock is ticking.

[retailguy]

You ask yourself 1 question : Is the team on the way up or down?


I think the evidence points to a Packer team on the way up.

I think the evidence points to the way down....

At least in the short term. But, that's why they play the games. :P

[Bretsky]

1. Draft (overall above average here)

2. Free Agency (average at best)

3. Trades (average here- Non existent in acquiring short term help or making bold decisions to move up in the draft, but effective in gathering up a gross of draft picks every year to increase our odds of finding players)

4. Personnell Decisions and Hires (to be determined)

5. Wins and Losses (to be determined, 12-20 so far)


To me those are the main points of judgment.

Truly, there is no way to judge the Turtle yet, but the above points are my current take)

As much as many try to call me a TT hater, I'd still give the Snapper a C+
I'd have given him a better grade right after the 2006 season ended.


Cheers,
B

[MJZiggy]

TT's rope is as long as the Board gives him. They may lose patience or decide that they like his style and keep him forever to the horror of many of the folks around here.

I think you judge a GM by the manner in which he handles the circumstances he is given, how he manages the roster and the financial details of that roster and whether the team shows the potential to be a contender and the growth and improvement to back it up.

[packinpatland]

1. Draft (overall above average here)

2. Free Agency (average at best)

3. Trades (average here- Non existent in acquiring short term help or making bold decisions to move up in the draft, but effective in gathering up a gross of draft picks every year to increase our odds of finding players)

4. Personnell Decisions and Hires (to be determined)

5. Wins and Losses (to be determined, 12-20 so far)


To me those are the main points of judgment.


Bottom line still has to be whether or not we're in the playoffs or not.

Truly, there is no way to judge the Turtle yet, but the above points are my current take)

As much as many try to call me a TT hater, I'd still give the Snapper a C+
I'd have given him a better grade right after the 2006 season ended.


Cheers,
B

[Bretsky]

TT's rope is as long as the Board gives him. They may lose patience or decide that they like his style and keep him forever to the horror of many of the folks around here.

I think you judge a GM by the manner in which he handles the circumstances he is given, how he manages the roster and the financial details of that roster and whether the team shows the potential to be a contender and the growth and improvement to back it up.

Pretty general recipe for trying to keep a guy around forever

After about 4-5 years it's about wins and losses. Bring us a Super Bowl or get the hell out of here

[packinpatland]

1. Draft (overall above average here)

2. Free Agency (average at best)

3. Trades (average here- Non existent in acquiring short term help or making bold decisions to move up in the draft, but effective in gathering up a gross of draft picks every year to increase our odds of finding players)

4. Personnell Decisions and Hires (to be determined)

5. Wins and Losses (to be determined, 12-20 so far)


To me those are the main points of judgment.


Bottom line still has to be whether or not we're in the playoffs or not.

Truly, there is no way to judge the Turtle yet, but the above points are my current take)

As much as many try to call me a TT hater, I'd still give the Snapper a C+
I'd have given him a better grade right after the 2006 season ended.


Cheers,
B

Where'd my post go???
What I wanted to say is this:
The bottom line is whether the team makes it into the playoffs and beyond.

[MJZiggy]

TT's rope is as long as the Board gives him. They may lose patience or decide that they like his style and keep him forever to the horror of many of the folks around here.

I think you judge a GM by the manner in which he handles the circumstances he is given, how he manages the roster and the financial details of that roster and whether the team shows the potential to be a contender and the growth and improvement to back it up.

Pretty general recipe for trying to keep a guy around forever

After about 4-5 years it's about wins and losses. Bring us a Super Bowl or get the hell out of here

Go back to the "growth and improvement" part. If each year is an improvement over the last, then the wins will come.

[Merlin]

In today's world, patience for anything by anyone just doesn't happen. The NFL with free agency is designed to keep teams competitive, especially small market teams like Green Bay. Unfortunately we have not seen that success because of the philosophy of TT. I think the number of wins has a lot to do with how "well" they do their job. It's measurable, it's real and it's the focus of the fans. The questions is, how long do we give him? Sherman got 4 years and had good records but choked in the playoffs. Wolfe had 9 years and produced 2 Super Bowl teams after 5 years of "building". Wolfe also got solid free agent pickups to address the immediate needs of the team. But, his coaching mistake with Rhodes cost him the last two seasons of his career with the Packers.

Will we endure 4 ~ 8-8 (if we can do that of course) type seasons before we end up a serious super bowl threat? Or do we take a serious look at the performance of this year and make the call when it's all said and done?

Ron Wolfe started in Green Bay in late 1991 during a dismal 4-12 season.

Record by years:
1992: 9-7 (Trades for Favre, Hires Holmgren) No Playoffs
1993: 9-7 (Reggie White is signed) Playoffs
1994: 9-7 (Sterling Sharpe's Career is over) Playoffs
1995: 11-5 NFC Championship Loss
1996: 13-3 Super Bowl Champs
1997: 13-3 Super Bowl Runner Up
1998: 11-5 Playoffs
1999: 8-8 (Ray Rhodes era)
2000: 9-7 Playoffs (Mike Sherman Hired - Wolfe's last year as GM)

Wolf: Never a losing season

Mike Sherman:
2001: 12-4 Playoffs
2002: 12-4 Playoffs
2003: 10-6 Playoffs
2004: 10-6 Playoffs

Sherman: Never a losing season

Ted Thompson
2005: 4-12
2006: 8-8 (McCarthy Hired)

Ted Thompson: Awaiting first winning season.

[Bretsky]

1. Draft (overall above average here)

2. Free Agency (average at best)

3. Trades (average here- Non existent in acquiring short term help or making bold decisions to move up in the draft, but effective in gathering up a gross of draft picks every year to increase our odds of finding players)

4. Personnell Decisions and Hires (to be determined)

5. Wins and Losses (to be determined, 12-20 so far)


To me those are the main points of judgment.


Bottom line still has to be whether or not we're in the playoffs or not.

Truly, there is no way to judge the Turtle yet, but the above points are my current take)

As much as many try to call me a TT hater, I'd still give the Snapper a C+
I'd have given him a better grade right after the 2006 season ended.


Cheers,
B

Where'd my post go???
What I wanted to say is this:
The bottom line is whether the team makes it into the playoffs and beyond.

AGREE completely

He gets a free pass for 2-3 years

After that it's just win

[The Leaper]

I think you have to give a guy 4 years minimum to put his own team on the field. In Thompson's case, he is in a difficult situation...because Favre will leave right about the time people start to try to evaluate his work.

A GM needs to show his abilities from day one. Many of Ron Wolf's boldest moves were made in the first 2-3 years he was in place in Green Bay. What bold moves has Thompson made?

Championship caliber GMs...or any position for that matter...must be able to make bold moves when necessary. As Lombardi stated, in great efforts it is glorious even to fail. Right now, I haven't seen any great efforts taken on by Thompson...which makes me wonder if he is capable of taking one on.

[Bretsky]

I think you have to give a guy 4 years minimum to put his own team on the field. In Thompson's case, he is in a difficult situation...because Favre will leave right about the time people start to try to evaluate his work.

A GM needs to show his abilities from day one. Many of Ron Wolf's boldest moves were made in the first 2-3 years he was in place in Green Bay. What bold moves has Thompson made?

Championship caliber GMs...or any position for that matter...must be able to make bold moves when necessary. As Lombardi stated, in great efforts it is glorious even to fail. Right now, I haven't seen any great efforts taken on by Thompson...which makes me wonder if he is capable of taking one on.

I wonder the same thing; I need a clapper emoticon. Lots of good posts lately in these debates.