Name one decision this FO has made that worked

[Kevinicus]

Again, you are judging an individual by a team stat. Not a fair standard. And, again, there are a ton of variables that go into a team stat, so because a team stat didn’t improve doesn’t mean the individual didn’t improve the team.

By your standard we could bring in Aaron Donald to replace Chris Covington, but if team stats based on all 11 positions don’t improve then Donald can’t be considered an upgrade over Covington.

I am not judging an individual...I am judging the move. But there is no indication the individual added a benefit either.

 

[Kevinicus]

but was Bennett the only variable? That’s the flaw in your argument. A lot of variables go ino opponent scoring, and you are only looking at one and treating it as a stand alone variable.

It's not a flaw in my argumemt because it is not my argument.

 

[EST_1986]

Why stop there. Let's have women in lingerie everywhere!! Omg a woman in lingerie. How hot! You sound like some geeky high school nerd who discovered his first magazine and can't control himself. Dork.

Just a man who doesn’t hate a woman’s sexuality. Sorry if that’s not your cup on tea.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

Again, you are judging an individual by a team stat. Not a fair standard. And, again, there are a ton of variables that go into a team stat, so because a team stat didn’t improve doesn’t mean the individual didn’t improve the team.

By your standard we could bring in Aaron Donald to replace Chris Covington, but if team stats based on all 11 positions don’t improve then Donald can’t be considered an upgrade over Covington.

Not sure what you guys are actually arguing about.....(color me surprised)....but if you sign a guy like Donald...and the team doesn't improve....would you consider your move a success?

Really? You would? Weird.

 

[OmerV]

I am not judging an individual...I am judging the move. But there is no indication the individual added a benefit either.

That makes no sense. You can’t evaluate a move without judging whether the individual was an improvement over who would have handled the role otherwise.

 

[OmerV]

Not sure what you guys are actually arguing about.....(color me surprised)....but if you sign a guy like Donald...and the team doesn't improve....would you consider your move a success?

Really? You would? Weird.

First, we were talking about whether it was a good move, not whether the team subsequently did as well as hoped. Those are different things.

Second, the way you presented it is an oversimplification because that move alone doesn’t determine the success of the team. There are 11 positions on defense and between starters and role players maybe 16-18 players manning those positions, and all play a part, plus there are all sorts of other factors like level of the opponent and injuries, and game plans, and how well the offense does at keeping possession of the ball to limit the opponents offense, and schemes and any number of things that all play into how the defense as a whole performs.

If some of those variables cause problems it doesn’t mean an individual deal was bad.

Teams don’t get the hindsight benefit of knowing If the entire team or entire defensive unit is going to holds their end of the bargain when they make a deal. They can, however, improve the talent level and add tools. They did that with Bennett.

 

[TwentyOne]

Just give me one decision this team has made in the last 5 years, that was brilliant?

Letting Mickey Spagnola creep deep into their buttholes and stick around. WIN WIN for all three of them.

 

[Kevinicus]

That makes no sense. You can’t evaluate a move without judging whether the individual was an improvement over who would have handled the role otherwise.

Yes you can. The player could be a great improvement over who was there and still be a bad move.

 

[OmerV]

Yes you can. The player could be a great improvement over who was there and still be a bad move.

If they overspent, but they didn’t. They improved by using a 6th round draft pick.

 

[PAPPYDOG]

Zeke and Collins.....

 

[john van brocklin]

Just give me one decision this team has made in the last 5 years, that was brilliant?

can you trust this clown show with the upcoming decisions

1. what to do with the Clapping Carrot
2. the Dak contract
3. the Cooper contract
4. the Byron Jones contract

Cant think of any good decision since the hire of parcels on 2003.

 

[john van brocklin]

Hiring Jimmy Johnson

One good decision!!!

 

[Kevinicus]

If they overspent, but they didn’t. They improved by using a 6th round draft pick.

There are more variables than that.

 

[john van brocklin]

Hiring Jimmy Johnson—all of Jerry’s subsequent “marketing genius” is a direct result of the massively successful team Jimmy built.

They were a good team, Jerry and Jimmy.

 

[OmerV]

There are more variables than that.

Lol, all of a sudden you are considering variables after completely ignoring them before?

In the end, if the talent level and ability to impact plays clearly improved, and the cost to get that clear improvement was minimal, there really aren’t a lot of other variables to bother with. The fact that he wasn’t so dominant he could compensate for every other issue with the defense doesn’t change that.

 

[Kevinicus]

Lol, all of a sudden you are considering variables after completely ignoring them before?

In the end, if the talent level and ability to impact plays clearly improved, and the cost to get that clear improvement was minimal, there really aren’t a lot of other variables to bother with. The fact that he wasn’t so dominant he could compensate for every other issue with the defense doesn’t change that.

Everything you just said is wrong.

 

[garyv]

Just give me one decision this team has made in the last 5 years, that was brilliant?

can you trust this clown show with the upcoming decisions

1. what to do with the Clapping Carrot
2. the Dak contract
3. the Cooper contract
4. the Byron Jones contract

Getting rid of Garrett will be a good start

 

[nobody]

It's funny just how many people reply without even reading the OP's post...just the thread title.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

First, we were talking about whether it was a good move, not whether the team subsequently did as well as hoped. Those are different things.

Second, the way you presented it is an oversimplification because that move alone doesn’t determine the success of the team. There are 11 positions on defense and between starters and role players maybe 16-18 players manning those positions, and all play a part, plus there are all sorts of other factors like level of the opponent and injuries, and game plans, and how well the offense does at keeping possession of the ball to limit the opponents offense, and schemes and any number of things that all play into how the defense as a whole performs.

If some of those variables cause problems it doesn’t mean an individual deal was bad.

Teams don’t get the hindsight benefit of knowing If the entire team or entire defensive unit is going to holds their end of the bargain when they make a deal. They can, however, improve the talent level and add tools. They did that with Bennett.

Yes...ohm....I get it...and so does everyone else...it;s a TEAM game. Of course.

But I did specifically say a "guy like Donald"...as mentioned by YOU earlier. You go out and sign a guy like that? And your team doesn't improve? Why sign him then? Because you made an expensive decision to improve the team and failed.

You just keep making things so dang complicated. I think you really do enjoy argument. In this one...you are trying to break it down into little bits and pieces. But just for once, look at the BIG picture. Note that I didn't say who would be to blame in the scenario. Just keeping it VERY simple. You signed Donald to improve the team, and it didn't. Your decision failed. Maybe for one reason maybe for many. But it SHOULD be very simple. Big picture, not minute details. Breaking it way down into tiny bits and pieces and then arguing those? Madness.