[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

As someone who would have given Cleveland a passing grade on draft day 2007, they still had Quinn hold out and not play at all as a rookie. And two years in, their return on that draft class looked...a lot like it does right now. Our eyes weren't lying to us there.

There's nothing wrong with waiting 5 years to come up with an opinion on someone's draft. It's nothing if not careful judgment. But by the time you've arrived at your opinion, everyone else has already beat you there. By two years in, you pretty much know what you're going to know about a draft, and the questions you still have will be minor and very specific.

Two years in, it's totally non-controversial to think Robert Griffin is a really good player, who is a electric runner, a nice-but-developing pocket passer, and has some warts on his game particularly once he breaks the pocket, and a fumble problem he needs to clean up.

Do I know if the rest of the Redskins team is going to grow with him and support a great career? I do not. But I'm also not exactly judging the 2012 draft when I ask if the Redskins can get enough talent around him to win consistently. What I'm doing is judging the 2014-15 drafts and then pretending to bring it back to 2012 under the principle of prudence.

-EDIT-
Something occurred to me after my post...why did the Ricky Williams trade strike you as such an obviously flawed trade if you aren't going to say the same about the RG3 trade? Hindsight tells me Williams had a pretty darn accomplished NFL career. You're at least suggesting that New Orleans' process was so horribly flawed that Williams was going to be helpless to justify it.

Washington more or less pulled the same thing here. Maybe not exactly the same, but my original point was pretty self evident: you can't make bad decisions and expect good results. You can get good results from bad decisions, but if that happens, you don't double down on bad decisions, right? Right?

My other point is also pretty self-evident: if two years after a decision you can't justify the decision as good...then the alternative has to be true.

Maybe I am stupid, but how can you not justify the decision on both sides as being good??