View Single Post
  #40  
Old 11-02-2018, 05:47 PM
omahacolt's Avatar
omahacolt omahacolt is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 8,623
Thanks: 1,695
Thanked 4,829 Times in 1,978 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaka View Post
Two points in response:

1) Whether Ballard’s situation was unusual or not isn’t really the point. The fact remains that he had to utilize Grigson’s scouting staff to prepare for the 2017 draft, instead of his own preferred staff (which he put in place after the draft). While I’d agree that it’s not fair to totally excuse Ballard for any mistakes in the 2017 draft – obviously he was heavily involved in the player choices – but at least those mistakes deserve an asterisk.

2) Setting all of this aside, the 2017 draft was still pretty decent. We picked mid-round, and obtained several starters from that draft (Hooker, Mack and Walker), and several backups (Wilson, Hairston, Stewart). True, there have been a couple of flame-outs (Basham and Banner), but is that really all that unusual in any draft? Yes, they were gone quickly, but I personally think that’s a function of Ballard’s approach. Other teams may have kept those guys on their roster for another season or two to avoid admitting their mistakes.
No. It doesn’t get an asterisk. That is just how things work. Sure it is somewhat of a handicap but it is his draft.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to omahacolt For This Useful Post:
Pez (11-02-2018)