[B_&_B]

These threads are hilarious! WHAT IF we would have drafted so and so.... what if so and so would have passed the ball to so and so instead of so and so... what if the refs wouldnt have screwed up the Super Bowl... what if it doesnt matter, we did what we did, and now we have to live with the good and bad of it all, regardless of what the question is.

 

[B_&_B]

So, we shouldn't post about anything that already happened? I guess that would leave more room for threads about who we should draft...

No, I just think unfair to second guess decisions made by GM's etc , based on what we know now. They dont have a crystal ball.

 

[B_&_B]

How do you tell whether a GM has done a good job?

I'm asking that in all honesty. Without the benefit of hindsight, how can we tell if Nash, or Walker, or whomever is doing a good job?

Ed O.

I guess you kinda got me on that one. But what I base my opinion of a GM on is how the move looked at the time it was made.

 

[B_&_B]

When evaluating a single decision, I agree with you. One should evaluate it based on what was known at the time.

However, when evaluating an overall body of work, results are what matter. If a GM, or any other executive, is successful over a significant amount of time, that matters more than understanding why he chose to do what he did. If an executive is unsuccessful over a significant amount of time, that matters more than whether the decisions seemed rational at the time.

That's how executives are always judged, by results. Not by what made sense at the time.

True.