Quote:
Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule
How can 2 years be plenty when you can't even judge one draft in 3 years?
Not to mention how subjective early evaluation of draft picks are to begin with, right now we have ROY campaign and one average campaign for Griffin, weighed against a lackluster performance by Tannehill (presumed qb with no trade) and good dealing by St.Louis that we would not have done anyway (not trading our pick to Dallas and they aren't offering us what they gave St Louis) .
I would think you could legitimately need 5 years from the date of the trade barring a SB or an incredible bust for Griffin.
|
Waiting three years (or five years) to judge a draft is basically waiting for revisionism to judge a draft.
Some prefer that methodology, I understand. Less risk of being wrong. You can fit narratives to everything after x about of time. Matt Leinart -> parties too much. Etc.
But there's a difference between writing a post-mortem on someone's career and judging assets in a trade, or judging a move in context.
Example: we didn't need the last two seasons to judge the validity of the Mike Shanahan hire. All the information we needed to conclude that it was a bad hire was available two years ago. But since then, he had his best and worst season here. Those events are part of the Mike Shanahan story, but contained no new information about the joke of a coaching search the team ran in 2009.
I'm not necessarily against revisionism in any form, but I don't think waiting until hindsight is 50/50 makes a ton of sense.