Marty Hurney - The Drafting Record

[panther4life]

11 minutes ago, onmyown said:

If you want an ‘all encompassing’ look at a GM I’d say the draft is roughly 25% of that. Free agency, extensions, existing and future contracts, cap management all need to be considered. I think this are the things Tepper is bringing in other people for, because Hurney is god awful at these things.

I think many dismiss how much say J.R made in those decisions, especially free agency. It’s been reported he fired Gettleman for not doing as he wished in his talks to extend Olsen and TD. 

[bobowilson]

14 minutes ago, panther4life said:

I think many dismiss how much say J.R made in those decisions, especially free agency. It’s been reported he fired Gettleman for not doing as he wished in his talks to extend Olsen and TD. 

Eh, even as the resident Hurney apologist, I can concede he's terrible with managing contracts.

JR aside, he just gave Shaq Thompson one of the most worst extensions I've seen in years (non impact player at a non impact position, when we're already paying another non edge linebacker premium money).  I really have no words for how bad the Shaq Thompson deal was, but also understand these things aren't worth jettisoning the league's most consistent drafter of high end talent over the past 20 years.

I'm confident Tepper will create a structure in which Hurney focuses on the draft (where he's one of the best in the NFL), and avoids these mistakes by next year.

 

[imminent rogaine]

Orlando Brown, Mark Andrews, and Ronnie Harrison all went in the third in 2018.  They were all positions of need and, at least on the huddle, there was reasonable interest in all three. Those guys are all starters, Andrews looks like a stud, Brown is holding down RT for one of the best offenses in the league that can just run the ball down anyone’s throat, and we are still lining up dogshit to protect our QB. We could have cashed our picks and taken all three. This could be a very different team. I remember watching the draft go by in disbelief.

its cool, hurney got his patented out-of-position project pick with Rashaun Gaulden.

[Mr. Scot]

28 minutes ago, onmyown said:

If you want an ‘all encompassing’ look at a GM I’d say the draft is roughly 25% of that. Free agency, extensions, existing and future contracts, cap management all need to be considered. I think this are the things Tepper is bringing in other people for, because Hurney is god awful at these things.

Here's something else to think about.

Marty is a "win now" thinker, always has been. A former employee told me the 2003 season made him think the team could be "one or two players away" every year, and it shows. It's why he's perpetually using as much of the cap as possible and pushing things off to the future with restructures.

As of right now, we are not a team that's in any shape to win now. We're looking at a rebuild, and it might take a while. We are anything but "one or two players away".

The question I would then ask: Is there any wisdom whatsoever in handing the reins of a rebuild to a "win now" GM?

[1of10Charnatives]

With regards to players such as Mathis who only found success after leaving us, I've always considered this more an indictment of a coaching staff or at most the player himself, than the GM who drafted him. The GM's job is to identify talent and potential. If the player performs at some point, then the GM has done their job. If that point is after leaving the Panthers, to me it suggests that either the coaching staff failed to develop or tap into that talent, or the player himself was not motivated to achieve until faced with perhaps a failed career. 

I suppose the other possiblity could be a GM who drafts players ill suited for the team's system, but for all the hate on Hurney I've seen around here, I've literally never seen that put forward as a significant criticism. For the record I'm more than ready to be rid of Hurney, I just am disinclined to count players who produce after leaving the team that drafted them against that GM.

[Toomers]

7 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

With regards to players such as Mathis who only found success after leaving us, I've always considered this more an indictment of a coaching staff or at most the player himself, than the GM who drafted him. The GM's job is to identify talent and potential. If the player performs at some point, then the GM has done their job. If that point is after leaving the Panthers, to me it suggests that either the coaching staff failed to develop or tap into that talent, or the player himself was not motivated to achieve until faced with perhaps a failed career. 

I suppose the other possiblity could be a GM who drafts players ill suited for the team's system, but for all the hate on Hurney I've seen around here, I've literally never seen that put forward as a significant criticism. For the record I'm more than ready to be rid of Hurney, I just am disinclined to count players who produce after leaving the team that drafted them against that GM.

If you draft a player, then you cut the player after he’s done nothing for you. You don’t get credit for drafting him if he suddenly plays well after 3 more teams and 6 years. Did we draft him hoping he would play well in his 9th season? For another team? Do we get a comp pick for that? 

[1of10Charnatives]

2 minutes ago, Toomers said:

If you draft a player, then you cut the player after he’s done nothing for you. You don’t get credit for drafting him if he suddenly plays well after 3 more teams and 6 years. Did we draft him hoping he would play well in his 9th season? For another team? Do we get a comp pick for that? 

I'm just saying I'm more inclined to blame the coaching staff for failing to get production out of a player who was clearly capable in retrospect, rather than the GM, whose job is to identify talent, not develop it. A player successful elsewhere later says to me, there was talent, but it was not developed.

[Toomers]

6 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

I'm just saying I'm more inclined to blame the coaching staff for failing to get production out of a player who was clearly capable in retrospect, rather than the GM, whose job is to identify talent, not develop it. A player successful elsewhere later says to me, there was talent, but it was not developed.

6 years after leaving the team, 3 more teams, and 9 years after being drafted. Maybe if Hurney injected Mathis himself he could take some credit. That’s like Amini starting on another team. Would that suddenly make him a good pick? 
 

 

[1of10Charnatives]

1 minute ago, Toomers said:

6 years after leaving the team, 3 more teams, and 9 years after being drafted. Maybe if Hurney injected Mathis himself he could take some credit. That’s like Amini starting on another team. Would that suddenly make him a good pick? 
 

 

I'm pretty sure you're missing the overall point I'm making. It's not about particularly giving credit to a GM for a player who does well after leaving so much as not blaming that GM for their lack of production here, since player development isnt their responsibility. You keep referencing Mathis's specific situation, but I only cited him as an example, I'm not making an argument with regards to Mathis specifically.

[bobowilson]

Here's what it comes down to for Tepper, for those of you who are still confused

Marty Hurney has drafted 13 guys in the 1st round.  Leaving aside Otah (who was poised to be an All Pro before injuries), his worst 1st round pick in 2 decades was Jonathan Stewart (and Jonathan Stewart made a Pro Bowl).

It's the best record of any GM in the 1st round, in the history of the NFL.  Given over half of 1st rounders are busts, the statistical likelihood of a manager drafting for two decades and literally never busting on a pick is hard to quantify.    There's a common canard out there that Hurney was always drafting in the top 10 because the Panthers were bad, but in fact, he's only had 4 top 10 picks in his enture tenure (Gross, Peppers, Cam, Luke).  And 2 out of those 4 top 10 picks were his first couple of years as GM inheriting a terrible team.  The Panthers were actually never that awful besides the Clausen/Kyle Allen years.  We were usually drafting somewhere in the middle of the 1st round, which is perilous breeding grounds for potential busts.

Even the greatest comprehensive drafter of all time, Ozzie Newsome, drafted countless 1st round busts.   Now look at the trade value chart that GMs use to quantify how many points each pick is worth, and you'll see a 1st rounder is worth 10 times the value of a third rounder (if you had the 100th pick for instance that we used on Will Grier, you would need to trade 15 of these to move up to #7).  The most important role of a GM is to find high end talent in the first round, and Hurney is better at it than any manager in NFL history.

If you have the best and most consistent drafter of high end talent (in NFL history) on your pay roll, and your most creative solution is just to fire him - you're grossly mismanaging your assets as an owner and not a very creative thinker.  It's not the type of thinking that gets you to 12 billion dollars as a hedge fund manager who identifies value.  

We have a #7 pick coming up, and you're going to fire the guy who draft Hall of Famers every single time he ever had a top 10 pick (to gamble on some new executive who would give you a 50% chance of busting on the pick?).

Another benefit to Hurney is that he's actually quite humble and willing to delegate to other people if he's asked, so you can arrange for creative solutions to bypass his flaws.

If you step away from your emotions on this issue, and look at the situation at hand in a sober manner, you'll see how obvious Tepper's decision was.

 

 

 

[Toomers]

Just now, 1of10Charnatives said:

I'm pretty sure you're missing the overall point I'm making. It's not about particularly giving credit to a GM for a player who does well after leaving so much as not blaming that GM for their lack of production here, since player development isnt their responsibility. You keep referencing Mathis's specific situation, but I only cited him as an example, I'm not making an argument with regards to Mathis specifically.

You chose him. But use any player. You get value from their play here, and anything you might get when they leave(trade or comp pick). That’s it. 
 

 If Daeshan Hall makes a Pro Bowl, does that make him a good pick. What value does that bring? 

[1of10Charnatives]

Just now, Toomers said:

You chose him. But use any player. You get value from their play here, and anything you might get when they leave(trade or comp pick). That’s it. 
 

 If Daeshan Hall makes a Pro Bowl, does that make him a good pick. What value does that bring? 

yeah, we're not on the same wavelength here and I'm not interested in going around in circles about this with you. Happy New Years.

[Matt62881]

1 hour ago, onmyown said:

If you want an ‘all encompassing’ look at a GM I’d say the draft is roughly 25% of that. Free agency, extensions, existing and future contracts, cap management all need to be considered. I think this are the things Tepper is bringing in other people for, because Hurney is god awful at these things.

So like I said earlier bring in other people to do everything else and let Hurney handle the draft, like put the whole year into it lol! Maybe he can replicate his first rd success in later rounds!

[Toomers]

2 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

yeah, we're not on the same wavelength here and I'm not interested in going around in circles about this with you. Happy New Years.

That’s probably for the best.