Sporting News ranks Grigson the 10th best GM

[RockThatBlue]

http://www.sportingnews.com/list/4652864-nfl-general-manager-gm-rankings-john-schneider-ozzie-newsome-bill-belichick-jerry-jones/slide/347730

Thoughts?

[CR91]

I actually am a fan of grigs. he works tirelessly to find talent in the most remote areas in a conscience effort to make the colts better

[TKnight24]

Colts' Ryan Grigson ranked as the tenth-best general manager in the NFL http://t.co/z9Jt5CgDeA

— Josh Wilson (@JoshWilsonSB)

August 18, 2015

[BOTT]

I stopped reading when I saw who wrote it. If Grigson is 10th then there are a lot of poor GM's in the league.

Now flood me with the usual list of why he is good.

[21isSuperman]

The article says Pagano's contract situation is undeservedly in limbo.  I disagree.  The article also says Loomis is a better GM, despite giving a lack of solid reasons, and John Elway at 5 despite Elway not drafting all that well.  What a weak article.

 

Really, the only thing the article says about Grigson is that he's signed some free agents and extended Hilton.  Extending Hilton was kind of a no-brainer, though it does make you question the selection of Dorsett even more.

 

Look at what he has done with his first round picks since becoming our GM:

Andrew Luck (no-brainer)

Trent Richardson

Werner

Dorsett

 

So outside of Luck, you have a huge bust of a RB, a defender who doesn't fit your defense the way you wanted, and a WR added to a stacked WR group.  You can't throw away first round picks like that.  He's lucky he has Andrew Luck to cover up for a lot of mistakes.  Don't get me wrong, I think Grigson has made some great moves (Vontae trade, bringing in Hasselbeck to mentor Luck, etc.), but he isn't a top 10 GM.

 

GMs I would rather have than Grigson (in no particular order):

Steve Keim

John Schneider

Bill Belichick

Jerry Jones (in his more recent years)

Kevin Colbert

Ted Thompson

Ozzie Newsome

Rick Spielman (possibly the most underrated GM in the league)

 

Then, you could make a strong case for the following guys being better GMs than Grigson:

Rick Smith (has built up the Texans really well, aside from the QB spot)

John Dorsey (the Chiefs have a ton of talent)

Jerry Reese (the Giants have tons of talent, but injuries and bad luck have hurt them a lot.  They also do a really good job of knowing which free agents to pay and which to let go)

Trent Baalke (before this offseason, he had one of the best rosters in football)

Tom Telesco (has quietly added a lot of good talent to the Chargers)

[throwing BBZ]

I actually am a fan of grigs. he works tirelessly to find talent in the most remote areas in a conscience effort to make the colts better

 

 It is kind of like you don`t realize OTHER people tell him to look at these potential players.

 Then he and his people evaluate them. Then a choice is made.

[akcolt]

We have gotten better every year. He hasn't hit on all his picks or trades but he isn't afraid to make a move if he feels like it can help the team. He seems to have a good plan on handling the cap.

 

It looks like another strong group of young players he brought in again this year. The number of players he was able bring in last year with only 3 picks the first 2 days was pretty impressive. Stampede Blue gave him an F for Mewhort and a D for Newsome and a F overall for the draft. He racked in some talent including his UDFA class. He certainly isn't afraid to go with his guy.

 

I think he has done a solid job of working through the draft and sprinkling in FA's to add more talent each year. Has he hit with every move? NO but no one does.

 

I like the guy and think he has done solid job building a team that will be in the Super Bowl conversation for the foreseeable future.

 

Think about this: He took over in 2012 there are only 5 players that will be on the roster this year that Grig's didn't bring to the team in the last 4 years. Mathis Adam Pat Reitz and Castonzo.

 

In four years he has totally revamped the roster and not only stayed relevant but won one more game each year. Luck certainly has a lot to do with our success but Grig's has done a solid job. 

 

To top it off. He is an Indiana boy born in Highland, Indiana and played ball at Purdue. I won't start with the PU jokes. None of that what does NCAA stand for in West Lafayette? No championships at all.  

[Superman]

Sometimes I think people think the only thing GMs do is draft players in the first round.

[akcolt]

 It is kind of like you don`t realize OTHER people tell him to look at these potential players.

 Then he and his people evaluate them. Then a choice is made.

That is how it works with all GM's. They have a staff that they have out combining the country for players. The CFL pipeline has a little to due with the fact the Grig's played in the CFL I believe. It is like some people don't want to

 

The article says Pagano's contract situation is undeservedly in limbo.  I disagree.  The article also says Loomis is a better GM, despite giving a lack of solid reasons, and John Elway at 5 despite Elway not drafting all that well.  What a weak article.

 

Really, the only thing the article says about Grigson is that he's signed some free agents and extended Hilton.  Extending Hilton was kind of a no-brainer, though it does make you question the selection of Dorsett even more.

 

Look at what he has done with his first round picks since becoming our GM:

Andrew Luck (no-brainer)

Trent Richardson

Werner

Dorsett

 

So outside of Luck, you have a huge bust of a RB, a defender who doesn't fit your defense the way you wanted, and a WR added to a stacked WR group.  You can't throw away first round picks like that.  He's lucky he has Andrew Luck to cover up for a lot of mistakes.  Don't get me wrong, I think Grigson has made some great moves (Vontae trade, bringing in Hasselbeck to mentor Luck, etc.), but he isn't a top 10 GM.

 

GMs I would rather have than Grigson (in no particular order):

Steve Keim

John Schneider

Bill Belichick

Jerry Jones (in his more recent years)

Kevin Colbert

Ted Thompson

Ozzie Newsome

Rick Spielman (possibly the most underrated GM in the league)

 

Then, you could make a strong case for the following guys being better GMs than Grigson:

Rick Smith (has built up the Texans really well, aside from the QB spot)

John Dorsey (the Chiefs have a ton of talent)

Jerry Reese (the Giants have tons of talent, but injuries and bad luck have hurt them a lot.  They also do a really good job of knowing which free agents to pay and which to let go)

Trent Baalke (before this offseason, he had one of the best rosters in football)

Tom Telesco (has quietly added a lot of good talent to the Chargers)

Do you realize there are only 5 players that are in camp that were with the team when Grig's took over in 2012?  Two are kickers.  

 

It easy to point out his mistakes. He has to be doing something right, we have won one more game each year and Grig's is responsible for 48 guys who will be on the 53 man and the other 10 that will be on the PS.

 

Luck is a no brainer looking back on it now but there were plenty of people who felt like RG3 was the way to go.  I always wanted Luck.  There was a choice to make there not quite the no brainer in 2012 as it is in 2015.

 

You don't remember all this nonsense:

But here's why I like RG3 just as much, depending on the scheme you want to run:  He's a hell of a QB, too -- and he's a much better athlete than Luck.

He's Michael Vick -- except he's not a knucklehead off the field coming out of college.  And before Griffin is done, he'll be everything Vick should have been.

RG3 ran a 4.41 at the Combine -- beating all the running backs except one (Lamar Miller, who ran 4.40), and coming within .05 of Stephen Hill (the fastest WR).  That is rare speed -- Vick speed.  And his 39 inch vertical -- insane -- validates that athleticism.

He's got a stronger arm -- not as accurate yet (and that is a big edge for Luck, and very important), but stronger.

He's got better feet than Luck.  He can make plays when the pocket collapses, and he can make every throw in the book on the run.

His speed immediately impacts the way defenses have to play him. 

You'll have to mush rush Griffin, with your ends not getting too far upfield, because if he breaks contain outside, he can go the distance.  Luck isn't that kind of threat.

The NFL is going more and more to mobile QBs. 

[throwing BBZ]

The article says Pagano's contract situation is undeservedly in limbo.  I disagree.  The article also says Loomis is a better GM, despite giving a lack of solid reasons, and John Elway at 5 despite Elway not drafting all that well.  What a weak article.

 

Really, the only thing the article says about Grigson is that he's signed some free agents and extended Hilton.  Extending Hilton was kind of a no-brainer, though it does make you question the selection of Dorsett even more.

 

Look at what he has done with his first round picks since becoming our GM:

Andrew Luck (no-brainer)

Trent Richardson

Werner

Dorsett

 

So outside of Luck, you have a huge bust of a RB, a defender who doesn't fit your defense the way you wanted, and a WR added to a stacked WR group.  You can't throw away first round picks like that.  He's lucky he has Andrew Luck to cover up for a lot of mistakes.  Don't get me wrong, I think Grigson has made some great moves (Vontae trade, bringing in Hasselbeck to mentor Luck, etc.), but he isn't a top 10 GM.

 

GMs I would rather have than Grigson (in no particular order):

Steve Keim

John Schneider

Bill Belichick

Jerry Jones (in his more recent years)

Kevin Colbert

Ted Thompson

Ozzie Newsome

Rick Spielman (possibly the most underrated GM in the league)

 

Then, you could make a strong case for the following guys being better GMs than Grigson:

Rick Smith (has built up the Texans really well, aside from the QB spot)

John Dorsey (the Chiefs have a ton of talent)

Jerry Reese (the Giants have tons of talent, but injuries and bad luck have hurt them a lot.  They also do a really good job of knowing which free agents to pay and which to let go)

Trent Baalke (before this offseason, he had one of the best rosters in football)

Tom Telesco (has quietly added a lot of good talent to the Chargers)

 

 It is like you don`t realize it is the AFC South that makes them All look good so far.

 Grigson and his team have done decent for sure.

 The goal is to build for long term success. And the Coaches and players have to be/become good at what they do.

  What is developed after 5 years will be a much better barometer.

 

[crazycolt1]

 It is like you don`t realize it is the AFC South that makes them All look good so far.

 Grigson and his team have done decent for sure.

 The goal is to build for long term success. And the Coaches and players have to be/become good at what they do.

  What is developed after 5 years will be a much better barometer.

 

So winning the other games out of the division don't mean nothing? Every division has weak teams in it and I am tired of hearing about how weak the Colts division is. AFC east- Jets, Bills and Dolphins. AFC north- Browns. AFC west-Raiders. NFC east-Eagles, Redskins. NFC south- Bucs. NFC north-Bears, Vikings. NFC west- Rams. So each division has had it's share of almost automatic wins for the division leaders over the last few seasons. Those strong divisions do have losses within each other so it works out. Yes the Colts have some tough losses but so have the other teams.

[crazycolt1]

The article says Pagano's contract situation is undeservedly in limbo.  I disagree.  The article also says Loomis is a better GM, despite giving a lack of solid reasons, and John Elway at 5 despite Elway not drafting all that well.  What a weak article.

 

Really, the only thing the article says about Grigson is that he's signed some free agents and extended Hilton.  Extending Hilton was kind of a no-brainer, though it does make you question the selection of Dorsett even more.

 

Look at what he has done with his first round picks since becoming our GM:

Andrew Luck (no-brainer)

Trent Richardson

Werner

Dorsett

 

So outside of Luck, you have a huge bust of a RB, a defender who doesn't fit your defense the way you wanted, and a WR added to a stacked WR group.  You can't throw away first round picks like that.  He's lucky he has Andrew Luck to cover up for a lot of mistakes.  Don't get me wrong, I think Grigson has made some great moves (Vontae trade, bringing in Hasselbeck to mentor Luck, etc.), but he isn't a top 10 GM.

 

GMs I would rather have than Grigson (in no particular order):

Steve Keim

John Schneider

Bill Belichick

Jerry Jones (in his more recent years)

Kevin Colbert

Ted Thompson

Ozzie Newsome

Rick Spielman (possibly the most underrated GM in the league)

 

Then, you could make a strong case for the following guys being better GMs than Grigson:

Rick Smith (has built up the Texans really well, aside from the QB spot)

John Dorsey (the Chiefs have a ton of talent)

Jerry Reese (the Giants have tons of talent, but injuries and bad luck have hurt them a lot.  They also do a really good job of knowing which free agents to pay and which to let go)

Trent Baalke (before this offseason, he had one of the best rosters in football)

Tom Telesco (has quietly added a lot of good talent to the Chargers)

So #1 picks is what you judge a GM on? I guess it's all they do.

[wig]

That is how it works with all GM's. They have a staff that they have out combining the country for players. The CFL pipeline has a little to due with the fact the Grig's played in the CFL I believe. It is like some people don't want to

 

Do you realize there are only 5 players that are in camp that were with the team when Grig's took over in 2012?  Two are kickers.  

 

It easy to point out his mistakes. He has to be doing something right, we have won one more game each year and Grig's is responsible for 48 guys who will be on the 53 man and the other 10 that will be on the PS.

 

Luck is a no brainer looking back on it now but there were plenty of people who felt like RG3 was the way to go.  I always wanted Luck.  There was a choice to make there not quite the no brainer in 2012 as it is in 2015.

 

You don't remember all this nonsense:

But here's why I like RG3 just as much, depending on the scheme you want to run:  He's a hell of a QB, too -- and he's a much better athlete than Luck.

He's Michael Vick -- except he's not a knucklehead off the field coming out of college.  And before Griffin is done, he'll be everything Vick should have been.

RG3 ran a 4.41 at the Combine -- beating all the running backs except one (Lamar Miller, who ran 4.40), and coming within .05 of Stephen Hill (the fastest WR).  That is rare speed -- Vick speed.  And his 39 inch vertical -- insane -- validates that athleticism.

He's got a stronger arm -- not as accurate yet (and that is a big edge for Luck, and very important), but stronger.

He's got better feet than Luck.  He can make plays when the pocket collapses, and he can make every throw in the book on the run.

His speed immediately impacts the way defenses have to play him. 

You'll have to mush rush Griffin, with your ends not getting too far upfield, because if he breaks contain outside, he can go the distance.  Luck isn't that kind of threat.

The NFL is going more and more to mobile QBs. 

 

 

Nobody with half a brain had Griffin over Luck.  That was something that became sensationalized by some talking heads to maintain interest, but there wasn't a single GM who wouldn't have picked Luck.

[ruksak]

I rank Sporting News as the tenth best dunno never heard of them. 

[crazycolt1]

I rank Sporting News as the tenth best dunno never heard of them. 

The Sporting News started in 1886. How long have you been asleep?

[crazycolt1]

 It is kind of like you don`t realize OTHER people tell him to look at these potential players.

 Then he and his people evaluate them. Then a choice is made.

He is the one who puts those other people in the places to evaluate players. It is his staff that works for him. You seem to think he does nothing. I guess the other GMs don't have a staff or anything.

[crazycolt1]

I stopped reading when I saw who wrote it. If Grigson is 10th then there are a lot of poor GM's in the league.

Now flood me with the usual list of why he is good.

If you need a list made up for you then you haven't been paying attention since he took the job.

[BOTT]

If you need a list made up for you then you haven't been paying attention since he took the job.

reading comprehension isn't your forte

[SteelCityColt]

The article says Pagano's contract situation is undeservedly in limbo.  I disagree.  The article also says Loomis is a better GM, despite giving a lack of solid reasons, and John Elway at 5 despite Elway not drafting all that well.  What a weak article.

Cut for keeping things tidy. 

 

I don't think it's often we disagree but I'll give it go

 

So looking firstly at the 1st rounders you highlight, now obviously your 1st rounders are important and drafting well there can bring in the true difference makers, but when you're drafting outside the top 15 it does become more of a crapshoot. I'd say too you can't crucify a GM without looking at the entirety of the draft, so to that end:

 

2012 - Luck, Fleener, Allen, Hilton, Chapman, Ballard, Brazill, Anderson, Fugger, Harnish

While personally I agree Luck was a no brainer, as others pointed out there was debate between him and RG3. Thankfully we chose well. Fleener, Allen & Hilton I think speak for themselves, you could argue there were better players available in the 2nd round but while it's tough to do you can't analyse with hindsight goggles on . Chapman represented good value I felt at the time, though he's not developed into the NT we need and Ballard would have been a very good pick I feel if not for injures. I think we can agree anything past the 5th round really is a dice roll so I'm not too unhappy at Anderson and Fugger. Brazill was a stupid boy for getting tossed for drugs but talent wise he could have been worked into a serviceable receiver I feel. 

 

2013 - Werner, (Davis), Thornton, Holmes, Hughes, Boyett, Williams, Cunningham 

Werner.. ahhh Werner. I strongly disagree that he was a "project" player. He was from a major program and had decent success at the collegiate level and I don't buy all this 4-3DE to 3-4OLB outcry. A edge rusher is an edge rusher, it's not like players have never made this switch coming into the NFL and succeeded. The problem is more he's not a very good edge rusher, without going off on a tangent I strongly agree with Dustin's take that you can project a pass rusher's effectiveness bases on certain physical metrics and Werner is just too darn slow and agile to be a good pass rusher.  Throw in injury and not having very good pieces around him and he's been exposed. I still do think he can be a decent Sam backer because that plays to his strengths. If you has another down year than yeah I'll buy the bust talk. Davis speaks for himself, one of the best trade steals in the last 10 years I'd say. Thronton, Holmes, Hughes could all still develop into decent players. 

 

2014 - (Richardson), Mewhort, Moncrief, Newsome, Jackson, John 

Probably his biggest mistake was the Richardson trade and I don't think anyone can ever defend it with hindsight, the only thing I will say is he thought it was the piece to put us over the top and went for it, I can't fault the ambition but I will fault the assessment of Richardson. Aside from that it was actually a very solid draft. Still early days of course, but if Mewhort turns out to be our RT of the future, Moncrief develops to take over the Johnson spot and Newsome continues his fine work from his 1st season it's a very good draft.

 

I won't go into depth on 2015 as analysing a draft before anyone's even played a snap is an exercise in futility. I will say though that I don't agree with the premise of WR being stacked. If Dorsett is the best player on your board by far, as we are led to believe, you pull the trigger. Ignoring a player because you think you're stacked at that position (QB aside) is almost like the inverse of drafting for need and that's a baaaad long term strategy. It's the NFL, things change in a heartbeat, drafting the best talent available is the safest and surest way to go for sustained roster development.

 

His FAs have been more of a mixed bad, some very bad moves and some solid ones but nothing spectacular. I'm kinda ok with that though as FA shouldn't be the root source of your talent, and even with the more expensive mistakes the contracts haven't been all that damaging. 

 

The funny thing though is, bearing all that in mind when I start looking at your list of names of alternate GMs, I start to nod my head in agreement. The only name I don't agree with on the initial group is Jones, I think we give him too much credit and it's more a case of he's been willing to heed the advice of others. As for the 2nd list though I would only really want Telesco (who I really rate). 

 

I guess than I didn't do that good a job of disagreeing with you, I'd put Grigson in the 10-15 range of GMs, this season is an important one for him without doubt though. 

[SOMDColtsfan]

That is how it works with all GM's. They have a staff that they have out combining the country for players. The CFL pipeline has a little to due with the fact the Grig's played in the CFL I believe. It is like some people don't want to

 

Do you realize there are only 5 players that are in camp that were with the team when Grig's took over in 2012?  Two are kickers.  

 

It easy to point out his mistakes. He has to be doing something right, we have won one more game each year and Grig's is responsible for 48 guys who will be on the 53 man and the other 10 that will be on the PS.

 

Luck is a no brainer looking back on it now but there were plenty of people who felt like RG3 was the way to go.  I always wanted Luck.  There was a choice to make there not quite the no brainer in 2012 as it is in 2015.

 

You don't remember all this nonsense:

But here's why I like RG3 just as much, depending on the scheme you want to run:  He's a hell of a QB, too -- and he's a much better athlete than Luck.

He's Michael Vick -- except he's not a knucklehead off the field coming out of college.  And before Griffin is done, he'll be everything Vick should have been.

RG3 ran a 4.41 at the Combine -- beating all the running backs except one (Lamar Miller, who ran 4.40), and coming within .05 of Stephen Hill (the fastest WR).  That is rare speed -- Vick speed.  And his 39 inch vertical -- insane -- validates that athleticism.

He's got a stronger arm -- not as accurate yet (and that is a big edge for Luck, and very important), but stronger.

He's got better feet than Luck.  He can make plays when the pocket collapses, and he can make every throw in the book on the run.

His speed immediately impacts the way defenses have to play him. 

You'll have to mush rush Griffin, with your ends not getting too far upfield, because if he breaks contain outside, he can go the distance.  Luck isn't that kind of threat.

The NFL is going more and more to mobile QBs. 

That all sounds great until he gets tackled and one of his skinny baby giraffe legs gets cracked. Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Andrew Luck keeps motoring along and does these same things very well. Luck IS a mobile QB when he NEEDS to be.

[Dustin]

Laron Landry agrees.

[Narcosys]

I actually am a fan of grigs. he works tirelessly to find talent in the most remote areas in a conscience effort to make the colts better

I am too, but what i find ironic is that he's good at finding and evaluating talent everywhere but the position he played.

[Defjamz26]

I like Grigson. But I don't think he's a top 10 GM. My knock on him would be not drafting any great defensive line talent when stopping the run was a top priority when he came in. Newsome and Anderson are promising but not proven yet.

I would put him at 12-15.

[crazycolt1]

reading comprehension isn't your forte

My reading forte? You ask for a list and now you want to insult me? Typical you.

[jskinnz]

The article says Pagano's contract situation is undeservedly in limbo.  I disagree.  The article also says Loomis is a better GM, despite giving a lack of solid reasons, and John Elway at 5 despite Elway not drafting all that well.  What a weak article.

 

Really, the only thing the article says about Grigson is that he's signed some free agents and extended Hilton.  Extending Hilton was kind of a no-brainer, though it does make you question the selection of Dorsett even more.

 

Look at what he has done with his first round picks since becoming our GM:

Andrew Luck (no-brainer)

Trent Richardson

Werner

Dorsett

 

So outside of Luck, you have a huge bust of a RB, a defender who doesn't fit your defense the way you wanted, and a WR added to a stacked WR group.  You can't throw away first round picks like that.  He's lucky he has Andrew Luck to cover up for a lot of mistakes.  Don't get me wrong, I think Grigson has made some great moves (Vontae trade, bringing in Hasselbeck to mentor Luck, etc.), but he isn't a top 10 GM.

 

GMs I would rather have than Grigson (in no particular order):

Steve Keim

John Schneider

Bill Belichick

Jerry Jones (in his more recent years)

Kevin Colbert

Ted Thompson

Ozzie Newsome

Rick Spielman (possibly the most underrated GM in the league)

 

Then, you could make a strong case for the following guys being better GMs than Grigson:

Rick Smith (has built up the Texans really well, aside from the QB spot)

John Dorsey (the Chiefs have a ton of talent)

Jerry Reese (the Giants have tons of talent, but injuries and bad luck have hurt them a lot.  They also do a really good job of knowing which free agents to pay and which to let go)

Trent Baalke (before this offseason, he had one of the best rosters in football)

Tom Telesco (has quietly added a lot of good talent to the Chargers)

 

Dear God...

 

Absolutely mind-numbing in so many ways

[Steamboat_Shaun]

The article says Pagano's contract situation is undeservedly in limbo.  I disagree.  The article also says Loomis is a better GM, despite giving a lack of solid reasons, and John Elway at 5 despite Elway not drafting all that well.  What a weak article.

 

Really, the only thing the article says about Grigson is that he's signed some free agents and extended Hilton.  Extending Hilton was kind of a no-brainer, though it does make you question the selection of Dorsett even more.

 

Look at what he has done with his first round picks since becoming our GM:

Andrew Luck (no-brainer)

Trent Richardson

Werner

Dorsett

 

So outside of Luck, you have a huge bust of a RB, a defender who doesn't fit your defense the way you wanted, and a WR added to a stacked WR group.  You can't throw away first round picks like that.  He's lucky he has Andrew Luck to cover up for a lot of mistakes.  Don't get me wrong, I think Grigson has made some great moves (Vontae trade, bringing in Hasselbeck to mentor Luck, etc.), but he isn't a top 10 GM.

 

GMs I would rather have than Grigson (in no particular order):

Steve Keim

John Schneider

Bill Belichick

Jerry Jones (in his more recent years)

Kevin Colbert

Ted Thompson

Ozzie Newsome

Rick Spielman (possibly the most underrated GM in the league)

 

Then, you could make a strong case for the following guys being better GMs than Grigson:

Rick Smith (has built up the Texans really well, aside from the QB spot)

John Dorsey (the Chiefs have a ton of talent)

Jerry Reese (the Giants have tons of talent, but injuries and bad luck have hurt them a lot.  They also do a really good job of knowing which free agents to pay and which to let go)

Trent Baalke (before this offseason, he had one of the best rosters in football)

Tom Telesco (has quietly added a lot of good talent to the Chargers)

 

3 out of those 4 first rounders are still on the team, so I don't begrudge Grigson for those as much as other people. Richardson was a panic move, as they were very thin at RB, and desperately needed to pick up someone, and if I remember correctly, everyone on this forum was pretty excited at Trent's potential. It didn't work out, too bad. Luck was a no-brainer, as we all know, homerun of a pick. And after the first preseason game, it sure seems like Dorsett is the real deal, and i have a feeling that we're all going to love that guy very soon. As far as Werner goes, he can be good at his new position I think. Trying to make him a pass rush specialist was the biggest mistake made with him. Taking him in the first round was questionable, but I'll chalk it up to growing pains and a 2nd year GM that just out-thought himself.

 

In regards to the Giants GM: everything that I've read since training camp started suggests that that defense just might be the worst in the league. Even after trading up to get Landon Collins (who currently has as sprained MCL by the way), they're still terrible. Our D is definitely in better shape than theirs, so in that particular instance, I'll say Grigs has the edge on Reese.

 

Overall, I'd say Grigson is in the top 11-15 range, depending on what style of football you're looking for. Sure, we could have a defense loaded with 1st round picks like the Texans, but where has that gotten them?

[ruksak]

The Sporting News started in 1886. How long have you been asleep?

Like I know every rag in existence. Just saying....never heard of 'em. 

[21isSuperman]

That is how it works with all GM's. They have a staff that they have out combining the country for players. The CFL pipeline has a little to due with the fact the Grig's played in the CFL I believe. It is like some people don't want to

 

Do you realize there are only 5 players that are in camp that were with the team when Grig's took over in 2012?  Two are kickers.  

 

It easy to point out his mistakes. He has to be doing something right, we have won one more game each year and Grig's is responsible for 48 guys who will be on the 53 man and the other 10 that will be on the PS.

 

Luck is a no brainer looking back on it now but there were plenty of people who felt like RG3 was the way to go.  I always wanted Luck.  There was a choice to make there not quite the no brainer in 2012 as it is in 2015.

 

You don't remember all this nonsense:

But here's why I like RG3 just as much, depending on the scheme you want to run:  He's a hell of a QB, too -- and he's a much better athlete than Luck.

He's Michael Vick -- except he's not a knucklehead off the field coming out of college.  And before Griffin is done, he'll be everything Vick should have been.

RG3 ran a 4.41 at the Combine -- beating all the running backs except one (Lamar Miller, who ran 4.40), and coming within .05 of Stephen Hill (the fastest WR).  That is rare speed -- Vick speed.  And his 39 inch vertical -- insane -- validates that athleticism.

He's got a stronger arm -- not as accurate yet (and that is a big edge for Luck, and very important), but stronger.

He's got better feet than Luck.  He can make plays when the pocket collapses, and he can make every throw in the book on the run.

His speed immediately impacts the way defenses have to play him. 

You'll have to mush rush Griffin, with your ends not getting too far upfield, because if he breaks contain outside, he can go the distance.  Luck isn't that kind of threat.

The NFL is going more and more to mobile QBs. 

I disagree here.  I think the gap between RG3 and Luck was bigger than what most media outlets want to say.  When you have a prospect like Luck, where he has almost no flaws in his game coming out of college, I don't think it's that hard of a decision.  RG3 had questions about whether he could run an NFL offense, how his fundamentals/technique were, etc.  Luck had very few flaws in his game, so I don't think the gap between Luck and RG3 was that close.  I also don't think the NFL is going more towards mobile QBs.  I think the college game is, but we've seen how mobile QBs get hurt very easily in the NFL.  Defenders are bigger, faster, and stronger.  The ideal is to have a guy like Luck or Rodgers who has the ability to scramble, but doesn't use it that often, so his body doesn't take as many hits.  When you have guys for whom running is a big part of their game (Kaep, RG3, Vick), you see how they don't have a lot of success if you take away their running ability. 

 

So #1 picks is what you judge a GM on? I guess it's all they do.

It's not all they do, but it's a major part.  If you look at Grigson's 2013 draft and free agent class, it was really ugly.

 

I don't think it's often we disagree but I'll give it go

 

So looking firstly at the 1st rounders you highlight, now obviously your 1st rounders are important and drafting well there can bring in the true difference makers, but when you're drafting outside the top 15 it does become more of a crapshoot. I'd say too you can't crucify a GM without looking at the entirety of the draft, so to that end:

I disagree here to some extent.  I don't think it's that big a crapshoot after 15.  You can find Pro Bowl level talent at the back end of the first half.  If you take a look at who we could have taken instead of Richardson and Werner, we could have had Xavier Rhodes, or Travis Frederick (who, in all fairness, was projected as a 3rd round pick), and Joel Bitonio, all of whom are very good starters.

 

2012 - Luck, Fleener, Allen, Hilton, Chapman, Ballard, Brazill, Anderson, Fugger, Harnish

While personally I agree Luck was a no brainer, as others pointed out there was debate between him and RG3. Thankfully we chose well. Fleener, Allen & Hilton I think speak for themselves, you could argue there were better players available in the 2nd round but while it's tough to do you can't analyse with hindsight goggles on . Chapman represented good value I felt at the time, though he's not developed into the NT we need and Ballard would have been a very good pick I feel if not for injures. I think we can agree anything past the 5th round really is a dice roll so I'm not too unhappy at Anderson and Fugger. Brazill was a stupid boy for getting tossed for drugs but talent wise he could have been worked into a serviceable receiver I feel. 

I have no problems with the 2012 draft.  I think it was a really good draft.  With that said, there's one thing you've got to wonder.  We went almost entirely offense in that draft, and all the guys got to benefit from having Luck play with them.  If we didn't have Luck, would we still have had such a good draft?

 

2013 - Werner, (Davis), Thornton, Holmes, Hughes, Boyett, Williams, Cunningham 

Werner.. ahhh Werner. I strongly disagree that he was a "project" player. He was from a major program and had decent success at the collegiate level and I don't buy all this 4-3DE to 3-4OLB outcry. A edge rusher is an edge rusher, it's not like players have never made this switch coming into the NFL and succeeded. The problem is more he's not a very good edge rusher, without going off on a tangent I strongly agree with Dustin's take that you can project a pass rusher's effectiveness bases on certain physical metrics and Werner is just too darn slow and agile to be a good pass rusher.  Throw in injury and not having very good pieces around him and he's been exposed. I still do think he can be a decent Sam backer because that plays to his strengths. If you has another down year than yeah I'll buy the bust talk. Davis speaks for himself, one of the best trade steals in the last 10 years I'd say. Thronton, Holmes, Hughes could all still develop into decent players. 

This draft (aside from the trade for Davis) was almost all projects, in my opinion.  Werner played 4-3 DE, and as you and Dustin have said, didn't/doesn't show the required athleticism to make a transition to a good 3-4 OLB.  Thornton, Holmes, and Hughes have all shown some ability when healthy, but still need more refining.

 

2014 - (Richardson), Mewhort, Moncrief, Newsome, Jackson, John 

Probably his biggest mistake was the Richardson trade and I don't think anyone can ever defend it with hindsight, the only thing I will say is he thought it was the piece to put us over the top and went for it, I can't fault the ambition but I will fault the assessment of Richardson. Aside from that it was actually a very solid draft. Still early days of course, but if Mewhort turns out to be our RT of the future, Moncrief develops to take over the Johnson spot and Newsome continues his fine work from his 1st season it's a very good draft.

When you look at Richardson's tape from Cleveland, it isn't really that impressive.  It makes you wonder what they saw when they decided to trade for him.  Otherwise, I agree that this was a good draft.  Those first round picks being thrown away/used to acquire subpar talent hurts though.

 

I won't go into depth on 2015 as analysing a draft before anyone's even played a snap is an exercise in futility. I will say though that I don't agree with the premise of WR being stacked. If Dorsett is the best player on your board by far, as we are led to believe, you pull the trigger. Ignoring a player because you think you're stacked at that position (QB aside) is almost like the inverse of drafting for need and that's a baaaad long term strategy. It's the NFL, things change in a heartbeat, drafting the best talent available is the safest and surest way to go for sustained roster development.

That's another interesting topic.  I have no doubt that Dorsett has all the tools to be a great player.  There were reports that the Colts didn't view Goldman or Malcolm Brown as first round picks.  If that's true, it again makes you wonder what they were watching on film.  Dorsett gives you talent.  Goldman, Brown, or even Collins would have given you talent and filled a need.  If you always go BPA, would you take a WR in the first round next year in the 2016 draft if he's BPA?  What if a WR is the BPA in the 2017 draft, would you take him?  I can appreciate going BPA, but I think you need to also look at your roster.  If a QB was BPA, would you have wanted us to take a QB in the first round?  I don't think you can blindly go BPA.

 

His FAs have been more of a mixed bad, some very bad moves and some solid ones but nothing spectacular. I'm kinda ok with that though as FA shouldn't be the root source of your talent, and even with the more expensive mistakes the contracts haven't been all that damaging. 

 

The funny thing though is, bearing all that in mind when I start looking at your list of names of alternate GMs, I start to nod my head in agreement. The only name I don't agree with on the initial group is Jones, I think we give him too much credit and it's more a case of he's been willing to heed the advice of others. As for the 2nd list though I would only really want Telesco (who I really rate). 

Jones in the middle to late 2000s was brutal.  But recently, he's made some really good decisions and they've built that team up really well.  As you said, that might be because he is getting advice from some smart people, so it might not be Jerry that's making the good decisions.  But whoever is making the calls in Dallas has done a good job the last few years.  The second group wasn't a list of guys who are definitely better, but guys I think you could make a strong case for over Grigson

 

I guess than I didn't do that good a job of disagreeing with you, I'd put Grigson in the 10-15 range of GMs, this season is an important one for him without doubt though. 

Thanks for the comments, buddy!  I'm not saying Grigson is a terrible GM, but I don't think he's a top 10 guy.  I think he's more in the 14-17 range, right in the middle of the pack.

 

Dear God...

 

Absolutely mind-numbing in so many ways

Cool story, bro.

[21isSuperman]

3 out of those 4 first rounders are still on the team, so I don't begrudge Grigson for those as much as other people. Richardson was a panic move, as they were very thin at RB, and desperately needed to pick up someone, and if I remember correctly, everyone on this forum was pretty excited at Trent's potential. It didn't work out, too bad. Luck was a no-brainer, as we all know, homerun of a pick. And after the first preseason game, it sure seems like Dorsett is the real deal, and i have a feeling that we're all going to love that guy very soon. As far as Werner goes, he can be good at his new position I think. Trying to make him a pass rush specialist was the biggest mistake made with him. Taking him in the first round was questionable, but I'll chalk it up to growing pains and a 2nd year GM that just out-thought himself.

 

In regards to the Giants GM: everything that I've read since training camp started suggests that that defense just might be the worst in the league. Even after trading up to get Landon Collins (who currently has as sprained MCL by the way), they're still terrible. Our D is definitely in better shape than theirs, so in that particular instance, I'll say Grigs has the edge on Reese.

 

Overall, I'd say Grigson is in the top 11-15 range, depending on what style of football you're looking for. Sure, we could have a defense loaded with 1st round picks like the Texans, but where has that gotten them?

Well said.  In terms of Richardson, you have to wonder what Grigson saw on film to make such a bold trade for him.  Same with Werner.  And interestingly, those guys were both inactive for the most important Colts game since 2012, the AFCCG against the Pats.  It doesn't look too good if you have 2 first round picks inactive for your most important game in 3 years.

 

Reese has made a lot of good decisions, in my opinion.  Let's also not forget that he has 2 Super Bowl rings.  Take a look at his 2007 and 2008 drafts

 

If you take the current Texans roster and add a good QB, they'd be near the top of the conference.  Most GMs don't have the luxury of having the first overall pick when the best QB prospect in 15 years is coming out.  Just because they haven't figured out the QB position, doesn't mean Smith is a bad GM.

[bababooey]

 It is like you don`t realize it is the AFC South that makes them All look good so far.

 Grigson and his team have done decent for sure.

 The goal is to build for long term success. And the Coaches and players have to be/become good at what they do.

  What is developed after 5 years will be a much better barometer.

 

I guess beating the Packers one year removed from their championship (4 games into the new regime) and beating the Seahawks, Broncos, and Niners who all finished in the final four in 2013 with Seattle beating Denver in the SB - in the same month, and advancing one game farther into the playoffs since starting from scratch w a brand new team minus five players (2 of them being special teams players) isn't too bad.

Edited August 19, 2015 by 21isSuperman

[CR91]

I am too, but what i find ironic is that he's good at finding and evaluating talent everywhere but the position he played.

 

mewhort looks good so far

[Gavin]

If I was to make a list of GM's who I thought were better then Grigson at this point:

 

1.Bill Belichick

2.Kevin Colbert

3.John Schneider

4.Ted Thompson

5.Trent Baalke(Though Im going to be paying attention to how he reacts to all the great players the 49ers had retiring or leaving)

6.Ozzie Newsome

 

He is certainly top 10. I know the natural inclination is to say that if Luck goes down then our roster is going to be exposed and we will find out how good the team is without Luck....Which is true almost certainly(But we have a better back up QB situation then almost any other team in the league)......But that can be said about just about every team I have listed above as well as others not listed

[ColtRider]

There are a number of teams in the NFL that would take Grigson in a heartbeat. I'll take the Colts' position, the way they sit today, and the outlook for the next several years without one iota of doubt or hesitation. And, I'll take it every day of the week and twice on Game(Sun)day!

[Flash7]

Why I think he is a top-10 GM:

 

1. He walked into a very difficult situation in 2012. The cap situation was a disaster and he handled it with ease.

 

2. He made tough personnel decisions right away, turning over the roster and electing to let many players walk, while keeping guys like Wayne and Mathis.

 

3. Yes, he had the fortune of drafting Luck, but he also made bold decisions to draft Fleener and Allen, back-to-back TEs. He moved up to draft T.Y. Hilton and looked to Canada to find a starting LB.

 

4. He has never had a losing season here and if you compare the roster today to the roster in 2012, you will see vast improvement.

 

5. Unlike other GMs, (Reese, K. Colbert, Schnieder) Grigson has not had back-to-back losing seasons and has not had the luxury of building a team with high draft picks in successive years. Seattle was a mess in 2010 and 2011. Pittsburgh had a couple of average years in 2012, 2013 (8-8) and the Giants had a rough time in 2012 and 2013. It's easy to rank GMs with high draft picks over a guy that continuously picks late in the 20's. The one time he did have a high draft picks, he hit a home run.

[21isSuperman]

If I was to make a list of GM's who I thought were better then Grigson at this point:

 

1.Bill Belichick

2.Kevin Colbert

3.John Schneider

4.Ted Thompson

5.Trent Baalke(Though Im going to be paying attention to how he reacts to all the great players the 49ers had retiring or leaving)

6.Ozzie Newsome

 

He is certainly top 10. I know the natural inclination is to say that if Luck goes down then our roster is going to be exposed and we will find out how good the team is without Luck....Which is true almost certainly(But we have a better back up QB situation then almost any other team in the league)......But that can be said about just about every team I have listed above as well as others not listed

Rick Spielman?  Steve Keim?

[aaron11]

sure 10th is nothing special anyway

[Superman]

Rick Spielman?  Steve Keim?

 

What has Steve Keim done? 

 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/crd/draft.htm

His 2013 draft was awful. Best player is either Mathieu (who really hasn't done much, but was a third rounder), and Ellington (a sixth rounder). Talk about blowing a first rounder, they missed at #7. Grigson missed at #22, and Werner has done more for us than Cooper has done for them. His 2014 draft wasn't much better; John Brown is pretty good, and that's about it. He did a no-brainer trade for Carson Palmer, when the Raiders were probably going to cut him.

 

Using your 'look at his first rounders' criteria, how is Keim any better than Grigson? Using your 'that move was a no-brainer' criteria, he shouldn't get credit for the Palmer trade.

[Superman]

Rick Spielman?  Steve Keim?

 

I won't ask what Spielman has done; he's had some good years. Yet he blew #4 on Kalil. They gave Linval Joseph more guaranteed money than we gave Arthur Jones. They paid Greg Jennings $9m/year. 

[Superman]

It's also impressive to me how people determine that any #1 pick was a no-brainer. Luck was obviously the best choice, but why shouldn't Grigson get credit for making that choice?

 

Wasn't Jamarcus Russell the best QB in the 2007 draft? How did that work out? Vince Young and Matt Leinart were top 10 picks. Alex Smith went ahead of Aaron Rodgers, and then 22 more picks passed before Rodgers got picked. Dallas passed on him twice.

[ruksak]

It's also impressive to me how people determine that any #1 pick was a no-brainer. Luck was obviously the best choice, but why shouldn't Grigson get credit for making that choice?

 

 

Because it wasn't his choice.