Trade Rumors...

wrong our tightends don't have the it factor and will not be a factor so we still need help even f we could use clay at full back t would not hurt to fnd another tight end or even two of them especially if we only have one playmaker at wr .

 

Whats the balance? What is an average balance for NFL GMs?

 

Fair enough.

 

Be more specific with your questions.

 

On average, after the third round about two of those four picks make your team per year. That's not that they become stars or even starters, that's just be good enough to be retained beyond their rookie contract. That's the reality of the draft. As a GM, I know I would be doing excellent if 50% - 60% of my picks in the top three rounds made the team, I picked up a couple of depth players in the later rounds and then supplemented that with FAs, UDFAs and trades. Obviously some have to be stars. IMO you want to get stars at QB, pass rusher, WR, C, S and TE. I would also include DT to a lesser degree. (I used to have LT and CB in there, but don't believe they should be anymore). So I would concentrate my top three round selections in those positions.

 

That's the same position I held 3 years ago when we drafted Clay. I had no problem with the pick, but was upset that they hadn't used any significant resources on the position. Reality is that most of those late picks have very little chance of ever being your answer at the position.

 

Whats the standard we are holding the team to for 6th round picks? Is there any evidence that finding good players in the 6th round is anything but luck?

 

I think there has to be a standard that is less opaque than just making the team. Making the team is not just a function of the talent of the player that made it or didn't make it. It's also a function of what you already have on roster.

Now, as for the other topic, I stated my opinion. I'm done feeding into question after question of puerile attempts to create some kind of "got ya" moment that is imagined in the heads of everyone who disagrees with that opinion. This is why I don't talk about Jeff Ireland anymore.

 

great post I would agree with you and its not a give our offense wont take another blow so with us having only one playmaker in Mike Wallace we don't have another wr that will make defenses gasp . Our runningbacks might not get the job done either so we shouldn't be picky about bringing in a player .

 

There is way to much panic over a TE position whose best service to this particular team, could be pass protection. If they waste draft picks or any future resources whatsoever on a TE this season, it is a mistake.

Clay/Sims/Egnew and anyone they are lucky to find off the waiver wire come cut day will serve. Clay back to H-Back, add a waiver TE.

 

Did you really just manage to use the term Packers, tight ends and nuts in the same statement?

 

Which was exactly my point.

 

How is a 6th round a resource like any other? Maybe you worded that wrong.

If not I find it argument "convenient".

I think of a 6th round pick like spending a dollar on a scratch off. Sure I wasted that $1 resource if its not a winner. But it's not near the same as if I buy five $20 scratch offs.

And I think it's clear already that the 6th round we are talking about is already proving to not be a wasted resource. He's made the team. He will have contributed most likely this season and last. That's already like winning $10 on that $1 resource. Your talking as if it wasn't even a ticket.

 

I trust Tanny enough now to just add an Offensive Linemen in pass Pro and keep Clay running out as a H-back.

With Pass Protection, I think we got our +85 QB Rating. and with that...we get 10 wins.

 

Sorry. Not as fast on a dry run.

 

With legitimate NFL Pass Pro - he might exceed 85. He really has looked that good in both practice and the Tampa game.

 

Half the NFL is 85+ now. Not sure that is enough for 10 wins unless Lamar Miller really pans out and this defense is near the top, especially in take aways.

 

A good GM should hit over 50% of his draft picks, with QB being the most important. And if the GM is involved in hiring the coach then that coach should be skilled at developing players and putting them in a position to succeed. If both those things happen then you should win more game then you lose and everybody is happy. A good GM should probably also hit on 75% plus on free agents signed since you have reams of NFL film on them.

You can pick out any one season where any GM has a bad eyar. It happens. but the overall player acquisition record should bear out over a longer sample size.

There is other stuff that makes a good GM. How you allocate resources in a roster for one. Take our o-line. We've poured significant resources into it for 5 years and still can barely field a competent starting 5. We have a surplus of d-linemen but can't find a backup linebacker worth a damn.

 

I'm not sure how you reached that conclusion, but considering 50% of first-rounders fail, I'm not sure its realistic.

Also prudent to point out that finances were not mentioned once.

 

The less opaque standard would probably relate to how good the players are and whether they play impact positions. In very simple terms, if you hit on QB and pass rushers your team will probably have some on field success and you'll be considered a good GM. If you hit on all or at least most of the impact positions then you'll probably be a SB contender and be considered a very good GM.

So relative to this thread, that's been my complaint for the last four years. I've maintained that the TE position had become a high impact position and that it should be addressed in the first three rounds so that you have a realistic chance of getting a good to very good player at the position. (I had a similar complaint about S, but hitting on Jones has appeased me some). Those picks in the last four rounds are hail marys. If you hit it big on some then great you have less pressure to fill the impact positions with your significant resources, but in general those picks are going to provide depth players, STs players, basically the cheap labor. So I'm not going to complain that we used too many late picks at TE especially if they become backups. But I am going to complain that we haven't used any significant resources in an attempt to find the answer at an impact position.

 

How about a good GM has his teams in contention competing for Superbowls, year in and year out. Take the rest of it and throw it out.

 

Assuming that we have a + TO ratio (which is likely since the +85 probably means a low number of INTs) then yes, a +85 QBR and good D probably translates to about 9 or 10 wins.

 

Agreed. That 50% standard is unrealistic. And obviously finances are a factor. I think a key is to not spend big money on busts or even low impact positions. Even more simplistic, if you hit on the QB you're probably considered a good GM. If you don't hit on the QB you're probably considered a failure. For example, IMO the Pats have been horrible in the draft of late, but since they have a great QB, people still hail them as one of the best FOs since having a great QB generally means success on the field.

 

Jeff Ireland has had what, 40 draft picks since he's been here? Asking that at least 20 of those guys be contributing to the team in some way seems reasonable to me.

And frankly, as a fan, I could care less about Ross's financials. I want moves made to benefit the team. And if you are constricted by finances then do a better job in other areas. Billy Beane and the Tampa Rays GM somehow manage to put a good product on their respectives fields with very limited budgets compared to others in that sport. In the NFL, with the ahrd cap system, everyone is working from the same basic playing field.

 

Pretty much. And when I said finances, I wasn't even necessarily referring to how the money is allocated, just the fact that it is allocated at all. The reality is that if a GM is working $10M under the cap, thats $10M in the owner's pocket. That counts for a lot. An NFL owner doesn't want a GM that doesn't value his money as much as he does.

 

Then if Tannehill turns out to not be a great QB the you'd be in agreement that Ireland should be let go, right?

 

The next time cap space wins a game in the NFL, let me know.

 

Thats pretty much contrary to the evidence we have on how draft picks work out. I mean you can ask for that, but you're going to end up disappointed.

Right, but you aren't in charge of an NFL team. The guys in charge of NFL teams are the ones that care about the financials.

Baseball is not an analogous comparison.

The NFL has a hard cap, but there is plenty of opportunity to work well under the cap. When was the last time Miami spent all the way up to the cap?

 

There's a lot there, so let's start with, what constitutes a hit? Please be specific, ie don't just say "good starter" or "elite player". Also, how long does the player have to reach this metric you're placing on them...immediately, 1 year, 3 years? How do injuries factor in (for the draft and FA)?

As an example, is Jake Long a win because he was top of the league or a failure because he had injuries that no one saw coming? (FTR, I don't attribute Long to Ireland, so this isn't a gotcha, I'm genuinely trying to understand your thought process.)

 

There is a hell of a lot more to the Miami Dolphins than winning games. I understand the desire to see someone spend millions to make you happy, but thats not how business works.

 

But that is how business works - you invest in your business and make it a better business. You don't think Ross wants to sell out home games?

Take the Miami Heat for example - You think this franchise is making more money now or when they didn't pony up for Lebron and rim the Salary Cap every season?

The GM's job is to put a winning team on the field. That is Irelands job. He was given the resources and the wallet was opened to do that.

 

...since Parcells left, you mean.

 

He will be. That's the nature of the business. There's always the question of how much time is given for that determination to be reached of course, but if RT is a bust then Ireland and most likely Philbin are gone.

 

I don't credit or blame Ireland for any player moves while Parcels was in Miami. I'm no fool, that guy is a ego-maniac and had total control of the final decisions.

I'm not ready to kick Ireland to the curb either, I don't long to start over yet AGAIN. Lets see how this plays out thru next season. I believe he has made some good decisions here and some bad ones. One more year to build the Offensive Line and get some solid depth in key areas and this team will be competing for championships. I'm willing to ride Ireland out on that.

 

You may be right that not spending to the cap is a plus for Ireland in ross's mind, but that doesn't matter to me. I'm a fan. I'm rooting for the team and spending money on season tickets to see the team hopefully win. I'm not there cheering on Ross's balance sheet.

And I tell you, if I see evidence that ross is a cheapskate (I really haven't yet) then I'm out of there with my hard earned money.

 

Sooo...

Randy Starks for Jarius Byrd?