I didn't pick any options. There needs to be an 'Often unrealistic.'
Too many complain GRIER makes bad picks, as if he's in a steel vault and makes picks, walks in on draft day, shows everyone HIS board, and tells them to like it or turn in their resignation. Some stay within eyesight of reality and state 'the buck stops here' with Grier, ignoring how he's doing in other parts of his job, and changes he's made to help the organization (i.e., draft).
Realistically, Grier has made mistakes - part of dealing with humans. Realistically, it is the job of the HC and staff to have significant input into the board - Grier spends comparatively little time on evaluations. To some, this sounds like those giving this type of critique are apologists, thus a lot of the vitriol. Again, Grier has his flaws. To digress, this reminds me of all the RTan threads. Those arguing RTan had some talent were apoloogists. If, later, those same people argued he had flaws were 'anti-RTan.' The truth is, too few seem to se good AND bad in a target.