Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

MIs it more proper to judge based on results or on reactions based on information we knew at the time?
Caldwell was generally lauded for each of his drafts by fans and experts. Because things don’t turn out how is universally expected is that a fair way to judge someone?

 
 

(12-31-2018, 02:29 AM)JNev Wrote: [ -> ]MIs it more proper to judge based on results or on reactions based on information we knew at the time?
Caldwell was generally lauded for each of his drafts by fans and experts. Because things don’t turn out how is universally expected is that a fair way to judge someone?

 
 

You judge them on both. 

Evaluating a GM means you have to be careful to examine the decision making that led to a pick and also evaluating the results of the pick. 

For example , Luke Joeckel. He was a great LT prospect, widely considered to be one of most bust proof prospects in the draft. I can't fault Caldwell for drafting him based on everything they knew at the time. Now if we go back and look at him we might say the style of offense at Texas A and M was always gonna make his adjustment tough and he was more of a finesse tackle than most high end tackles to come out so there were a few red flags but that's with the benefit of hindsight. 

He ended up busting big time despite flashes of good play but I'm not gonna hold that against Caldwell. His decision making prior to the pick was sound and sometimes these guys just can't make jump.   


An example on the other end of things is Leonard Fournette. 

The key fault with this decision stemmed from trusting Blake Bortles after a disastrous 2016 season to be your franchise QB for the next 5+ years. They felt it was better to make Blake's job as easy as possible Vs drafting someone with far greater ability (even if there was risk) like Watson/Mahomes/Trubisky. So they took a power back with some vision and agility issues at #4 to fit in with the old school style over some great QB prospects and the rest is history. 

That was a bad decision prior to the draft despite and the results speak for themselves. 2017 was amazing , no doubt , but we currently have no QB , Fournette is close to being off the team and Watson+Mahomes have turned out to be the amazing QBs many thought they'd be, Trubisky to a lesser extent but he's better than Blake for sure..

Fournettes draft pick was bad process, bad self evaluation and god awful results. Arguably the worst non Gabbert pick in Jaguars history when you consider the ramifications.

(12-31-2018, 04:01 AM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-31-2018, 02:29 AM)JNev Wrote: [ -> ]MIs it more proper to judge based on results or on reactions based on information we knew at the time?
Caldwell was generally lauded for each of his drafts by fans and experts. Because things don’t turn out how is universally expected is that a fair way to judge someone?

 
 

You judge them on both. 

Evaluating a GM means you have to be careful to examine the decision making that led to a pick and also evaluating the results of the pick. 

For example , Luke Joeckel. He was a great LT prospect, widely considered to be one of most bust proof prospects in the draft. I can't fault Caldwell for drafting him based on everything they knew at the time. Now if we go back and look at him we might say the style of offense at Texas A and M was always gonna make his adjustment tough and he was more of a finesse tackle than most high end tackles to come out so there were a few red flags but that's with the benefit of hindsight. 

He ended up busting big time despite flashes of good play but I'm not gonna hold that against Caldwell. His decision making prior to the pick was sound and sometimes these guys just can't make jump.   


An example on the other end of things is Leonard Fournette. 

The key fault with this decision stemmed from trusting Blake Bortles after a disastrous 2016 season to be your franchise QB for the next 5+ years. They felt it was better to make Blake's job as easy as possible Vs drafting someone with far greater ability (even if there was risk) like Watson/Mahomes/Trubisky. So they took a power back with some vision and agility issues at #4 to fit in with the old school style over some great QB prospects and the rest is history. 

That was a bad decision prior to the draft despite and the results speak for themselves. 2017 was amazing , no doubt , but we currently have no QB , Fournette is close to being off the team and Watson+Mahomes have turned out to be the amazing QBs many thought they'd be, Trubisky to a lesser extent but he's better than Blake for sure..

Fournettes draft pick was bad process, bad self evaluation and god awful results. Arguably the worst non Gabbert pick in Jaguars history when you consider the ramifications.

That’s a very good analysis.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You always take hindsight into account when judging people. Can you imagine walking into your boss' office for a performance review and him telling you you were awful at your job and your retort is "well yeah but I looked good at the time". A GMs job isn't to get accolades and high fives when he makes the picks, it's his job to be right 3 years down the road.

The absolute bottom line is we need a franchise QB.

Was Fournette chosen by Dave or Tom?

(12-31-2018, 08:50 PM)3/4 Back Wrote: [ -> ]Was Fournette chosen by Dave or Tom?

The conventional hierarchy would suggest that Dave arrived at the pick and Coughlin agreed with it, but there is really no way of knowing how that went down. 

Of course there are a number of talking heads that have speculated it was a TC-esque selection, but there is no evidence that he superseded Caldwell to select the now-struggling RB. 

Regardless of where one lands on that debate -  there have already been quite a few questionable picks, bad signings, and an ugly QB extension since Tom came back to town. He's the man at the top of the personnel decision making totem pole - and if the team doesn't find a quality QB this offseason - his tenure as VP will be looking pretty ugly IMO.

We have two GMs, lol.

Results-based judgment is a lazy shortcut that avoids any deep thinking or mental effort.

(12-31-2018, 03:50 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]You always take hindsight into account when judging people. Can you imagine walking into your boss' office for a performance review and him telling you you were awful at your job and your retort is "well yeah but I looked good at the time". A GMs job isn't to get accolades and high fives when he makes the picks, it's his job to be right 3 years down the road.

(Emphasis added)

Agreed in principle, though on the message boards, it doesn't work that way.

How much flak does a GM get if his picks don't have immediate impact?  (See this board's reaction to Taven Bryan and D.J. Chark)

(12-31-2018, 03:50 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]You always take hindsight into account when judging people. Can you imagine walking into your boss' office for a performance review and him telling you you were awful at your job and your retort is "well yeah but I looked good at the time". A GMs job isn't to get accolades and high fives when he makes the picks, it's his job to be right 3 years down the road.

Good bosses will also evaluate the decision and process that led to bad results. In an imperfect science like football evaluation that's important. Even good GMs miss a lot

(01-02-2019, 08:08 AM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-31-2018, 03:50 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]You always take hindsight into account when judging people. Can you imagine walking into your boss' office for a performance review and him telling you you were awful at your job and your retort is "well yeah but I looked good at the time". A GMs job isn't to get accolades and high fives when he makes the picks, it's his job to be right 3 years down the road.

Good bosses will also evaluate the decision and process that led to bad results. In an imperfect science like football evaluation that's important. Even good GMs miss a lot

Yeah, and good luck trying to explain the decisions and process that went into passing on a Mahomes or Watson because you were so hellbent on trying to salvage your legacy that you took a glorified short yardage back top 5 instead.

(01-02-2019, 03:34 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-02-2019, 08:08 AM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]Good bosses will also evaluate the decision and process that led to bad results. In an imperfect science like football evaluation that's important. Even good GMs miss a lot

Yeah, and good luck trying to explain the decisions and process that went into passing on a Mahomes or Watson because you were so hellbent on trying to salvage your legacy that you took a glorified short yardage back top 5 instead.

Yes that would be an example of bad decisions, process and results.

One thing for sure....The Khan is giving Tom...who in turn is giving Caldwell and Marrone
another bite at the apple.
This time they better get it right and back to at least a team that competes and makes a decent accounting of themselves rather than pouting
on the sidelines.
That was totally embarrassing .....totally.