Quote
max
Quote
PHDram
prior to 2017 he probably would have been considered inconclusive at best as he started 2 games in 3 years. admittedly he looked good in a sample of 5 games in 2017, but he could flop in 2018 much like rg3 was great as a rookie but not so much afterwards. is it premature to call him a hit? or is it ok to have a hit rate that is dynamic (i.e., changes over time)?
Garoppolo is a hit because we are counting just drafting proficiency, not overall GM proficiency. The fact that Belichick sheds Pro Bowl players is another discussion.
Belichick apparently is a firm proponent of lower priced contracts. He dumps a lot of guys before he has to pay them the big buck, regardless of their level of play. Anyone who thinks Belichick let Cooks go because of performance doesn't get it. It was all about the money and how Belichick values the WR position. He only traded for Cooks because he had planned to keep Garoppolo and assumed Brady would be retiring or leaving soon. But Kraft and Brady had other plans. He wanted Cooks to make Garoppolo's transition to starter easier.
Yeah hit rate can change. Generally when someone becomes a starter, there are indicators telling you whether he's struggling and basically on probation, of if he is expected to be--and IS being---at least solid at the position. So for example with Quick, all the indicators showed that he was struggling and had not turned the corner into being considered "starting caliber." With the SF JG, a quality offensive coach wanted him to remain in place which led to a 2nd contract which nearly equaled the one Cousins got. Now if he crashes and burns and does not meet those expectations (which are to be at least solid), you have to revise his assessment and he's no longer a "hit."
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/07/2018 12:28PM by zn.
