Rank the 32 GM's

[Clayton]

If OAK is not a playoff team by '17...then I think we can point the finger squarely at McKenzie.

This is a massive offseason for Elway and Dorsey. If those two push all of the right buttons, McKenzie and the Raiders are still lacking the depth to compete

 

[PatsFan2003]

The draft is good for obvious stuff.

But they don't draft high enough for the really obvious stuff.

I can already see a couple of "failures" from other teams he will be interested in this year. Several from his own division.

Actually Belichick and company are generally pretty good drafting lineman, linebackers, TEs.

Of course maybe THAT was due to Dante Scarneccia

 

[ATL96Steeler]

Here has been my 2 problems with him. 1) FA wise he has not done good at all. I understand he came into a mess but the last 2 years he has had money to spend and both FA classes have had very little return. They have gotten a little from guys like Crabtree and a couple of others but for the most part not all that impressed with the groups considering the money they have had to spend. 2) Beyond the 1st 3 rounds of the draft he really hasn't done much for the Raiders. Heck even in the 1st 3 rounds he has had a lot of busts so far. I mean Hayden, Watson, and Moore the 1st 3 picks of 2013 could all be gone from the team this year. The last 2 drafts he did much better in those rounds but again very little production from the lower rounds. GM's always say that is where you really build a roster is with finding those late round contributors that really fill out your depth. Well I think we saw with the Raiders this year they started out looking pretty good but really fell off as the year went on. I think part of that is a real lack of depth.

They do lack depth and that does reflect on the GM.

Just my opinion...there are 240 or so drafted players (incl comp picks) as a GM, to win in the NFL, you MUST hit on your picks inside the top 100 picks...that's normally the top 3 rounds...rounds 4 thru 7 are normally developmental players that make up that depth...when you see a team doing well with 5th, 6th, 7th rounders...some coaches somewhere deserve a lot of credit because very seldom does a 1st round talent goes in round 5 or higher.

I think the more things stay the same (HC/OC/DC) the easier it is to know what those guys really need deeper into the draft. But, if you're constantly in a state of change...CLE, how can a GM realistically know what his coordinators really want or need? You might think you know, but a new guy comes in and thinks your treasure is trash for his system.

 

[Fountain City Blues]

I'm torn on a guy like Reggie McKenzie. Yes the Raiders look better and have some promising young players but at the same time when they have been picking Top-5 most years for the past 10-15 years eventually you have to start hitting on some of those players. They are still though considered the 2nd least likely franchise that players have said they would be willing to sign with. Across the league they are still considered a place you never want to go as a FA. Heck they were linked to every top FA this past year with so much money and didn't even bring in a single one to discuss a contract. They don't have the cash flow to sign them which I guess isn't really McKenzie's fault but I just don't know that I have been all that impressed with his work. Heck in FA they already cut one of the biggest FA's they signed last off season because he didn't produce and cut almost every FA they signed from the year before that already.

For me it's been moreso he didn't miss his layups, mostly, and got his franchise QB in Carr on the cheap. A lot of the GM's in the bottom half either are brand new or have one step in the unemployment line; quite a bit of this is subject to survivor bias more than anything. You're right that Reggie has not proven he is able to draft outside of premium draft position, but it's kind of hard to ignore how excellent of a job he has done these past two years in both adding contributors and cheap stars to his team. For a CBA that allows a GM to start extending contracts 3 accrued years in, that's a very meaningful thing to say. The FA's issue is concerning, but I blame ownership and the stadium moreso than anything to do with the GM really. Kind of puzzled as to what their end game even is given there's no way they don't want to remedy their cash flow problem.

The nice thing about inheriting a team so devoid of talent is you can kind of throw cap space at these mid level to reclamation project FA's and see what sticks and what doesn't without any real consequence. Dorsey for instance (another, ironically, GB FO tree member) was rather gungho in the 2013-14 FA signing guys like Dunta Robinson, Hussein Abdullah, Sean Smith, etc. But Dorsey seems to have been more successful than McKenzie was with this "stimulus" strategy for whatever reason.

 

[Clayton]

The nice thing about inheriting a team so devoid of talent is you can kind of throw cap space at these mid level to reclamation project FA's and see what sticks and what doesn't without any real consequence. Dorsey for instance (another, ironically, GB FO tree member) was rather gungho in the 2013-14 FA signing guys like Dunta Robinson, Hussein Abdullah, Sean Smith, etc. But Dorsey seems to have been more successful than McKenzie was with this "stimulus" strategy for whatever reason.

Chiefs have more depth from being a better drafting team than the Raiders over the long haul. Derrick Johnson, Eric Berry, Kelce, Charles, etc have helped the team be a lot deeper than the Raiders.

 

[cdumler7]

For me it's been moreso he didn't miss his layups, mostly, and got his franchise QB in Carr on the cheap. A lot of the GM's in the bottom half either are brand new or have one step in the unemployment line; quite a bit of this is subject to survivor bias more than anything. You're right that Reggie has not proven he is able to draft outside of premium draft position, but it's kind of hard to ignore how excellent of a job he has done these past two years in both adding contributors and cheap stars to his team. For a CBA that allows a GM to start extending contracts 3 accrued years in, that's a very meaningful thing to say. The FA's issue is concerning, but I blame ownership and the stadium moreso than anything to do with the GM really. Kind of puzzled as to what their end game even is given there's no way they don't want to remedy their cash flow problem.

The nice thing about inheriting a team so devoid of talent is you can kind of throw cap space at these mid level to reclamation project FA's and see what sticks and what doesn't without any real consequence. Dorsey for instance (another, ironically, GB FO tree member) was rather gungho in the 2013-14 FA signing guys like Dunta Robinson, Hussein Abdullah, Sean Smith, etc. But Dorsey seems to have been more successful than McKenzie was with this "stimulus" strategy for whatever reason.

Well there is something about not missing on the obvious picks. Plenty of teams see those top-5 picks bust so shouldn't downgrade him too much for that but to me the GM's that I put in the top half are the guys that have shown they can pick late and their team can still find success and see those players be contributors. This off season to me will be his most important. If he can put together a very competitive team and actually have a winning record then I think he stays another year but to me 7 or less wins he is gone. He has had a lot of time to put together a roster and to me if you are not winning by year 4 or so then probably not going to happen.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

It's hard to say. Every year, the Jets, Bills and/or Miami are supposed to be better but who knows.

It's been a slow go, but yes, all 3 seem to be gaining traction now. IMO MIA is going to have the toughest time unless they start knocking the ball out of the park in the draft and jumping up to get picks that can't play is not my idea of knocking it out of the park.

Spending so much on an interior DL has pretty much made that mandatory...they've got to hit in the draft or b/c level FAs.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

Well there is something about not missing on the obvious picks. Plenty of teams see those top-5 picks bust so shouldn't downgrade him too much for that but to me the GM's that I put in the top half are the guys that have shown they can pick late and their team can still find success and see those players be contributors. This off season to me will be his most important. If he can put together a very competitive team and actually have a winning record then I think he stays another year but to me 7 or less wins he is gone. He has had a lot of time to put together a roster and to me if you are not winning by year 4 or so then probably not going to happen.

Depending on how deep a hole you're in, I think it can takes longer than 4 yrs. OAK had 11 wins in 3 season or something crazy...3 HCs, 3 or 4 starting QBs. McKenzie has to own that, but I'm calling them on the rise...if that stops for whatever reason and they start regressing again...McKenzie has to go.

 

[Rockinkuwait]

I'd agree with Oakland. Definitely on the right path... but a lot more to go yet for me to call that at the top there. See what he can get under contract there before Carr's extension.

Kinda where Denver and Seattle are with the pinch, he's sitting in the opposite booth, a pile of cash to change up the makeup of that team.

 

[Brees#1]

Nope. 17-2 in the division, 18-20 outside of it under Luck. Sure they have a few hand selected quality wins. But the numbers don't lie, if they weren't in the worst division in the league year after year they would be lucky to be .500.

Let's not count last year
They are 10-10(5-5 each) the two fully healthy Luck years.
And in his rookie year they are 7-3

 

[SonnyCID]

Let's not count last year
They are 10-10(5-5 each) the two fully healthy Luck years.
And in his rookie year they are 7-3

Maybe if Grigson built a better team you wouldn't need to try and skew the numbers.

The fact is that Luck is the only thing that Grigson has done right. A 45% winning mark outside of that horrific division whenever his golden goose is on the field is more than enough evidence for that.

 

[Brees#1]

We'll see this offseason

 

[Rockinkuwait]

Maybe if Grigson built a better team you wouldn't need to try and skew the numbers.

The fact is that Luck is the only thing that Grigson has done right. A 45% winning mark outside of that horrific division whenever his golden goose is on the field is more than enough evidence for that.

Yeah not much at all to like there other than a couple skill position guys. They don't look a whole lot better than the roster that drafted Luck.

 

[SonnyCID]

We'll see this offseason

Youre right, We'll see if Grigson can finally do something significant after 5 short years.

Besides his world class layup of course.