Full AFC East Grades (Plus NY Giants) | Page 15 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Full AFC East Grades (Plus NY Giants)

No, really. You didn't. The illustration had nothing to do with the workings and accountability of a hedge fund to their investors. You took my statement and implied something incorrectly. The statement was simple: Spending money, time or anything that can be quantified does not guarantee success. It had nothing to do with the underperformance of said hedge fund (or current regime). It had to do with the fact that even these big hedge funds (hell, even the HFT systems) don't hit on every one. Just like the Dolphins don't, won't, and will never hit on every one. But looking back, sometimes you say, "Crap. Why didn't I invest in AAPL when it was sitting in the $80s instead of MCD when it was in the $50s?" Both would have made you some good money, but one would have made you a lot more. That's how I see the Ryan vs. Long pick.

Besides, they could have drafted Gholston (Lehman Brothers)...

This statement in particular has absolutely, positively nothing to do with what I said.

The $5 million paid on evaluating a draft is not supposed to be taken as guaranteeing success. Nobody ever made that argument and nobody ever would and I think it's naive to assume so. The $5 million paid on evaluating a draft illustrates ACCOUNTABILITY.

The accountability is not washed away simply by saying "Hindsight is 20/20..."

The $5 million and the accountability means you're supposed to have foresight in your decisions, and you're supposed to consistently display that foresight especially as it relates to the most important decisions. No fund manager will hit on every stock pick.

But we're not talking about something akin to holding a 3% position in Sprint for a few of the bad years and having to explain that one stock. We're talking about something more akin to having 40% of your portfolio invested in Technology stocks in the 1st quarter of 2000. That's what not having a franchise quarterback and then having the 2008 thru 2010 record Miami has had is akin to. This regime went 11-5 on the back of a soft schedule, went to the playoffs and were firmly escorted out the door by a team that told us "You don't belong" and then proved it. Then they've gone 7-9 both 2009 and 2010. You can say that Matt Ryan's success in Atlanta might not have been repeated in Miami. But, that's a pretty convenient dodge. It's a stretch. If you've actually watched Matt Ryan play you know the guy would play well regardless because he's a special player.

So you can use the "Hindsight is 20/20..." excuse to explain why we don't have a quarterback today. And I'm going to tell you, you don't spend $5 million of the owner's money evaluating every draft to cower behind a hindsight excuse. You spend $5 million of the owner's money evaluating every draft in order to develop consistent foresight, the lack of which you should be held accountable for.

And you don't notice Jeff Ireland saying "Hindsight is 20/20..." He knows damn well that wouldn't play out well with Stephen Ross. He straight up disputes that Matt Ryan would be a more valuable asset to the Dolphins than Jake Long, insisting that Jake Long is a Hall of Fame caliber left tackle, been to the Pro Bowl all three years in the league, etc. That's not bothering with a "Hindsight is 20/20..." excuse.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm way ahead of you finfanjay... I've already taken the "holistic view".. and did so with my first post in this thread noting that I think Miami selected some good football players despite not addressing the quarterback position.

However, I think their strategy for acquiring the players they did, and their plan of attack working the draft was absurd.

If they're going to try to make Miami a "better" football team by exhausting every resource available upgrading everything except the quarterback position, it's only prolonging the inevitable... which is failure.

...while failing. Failing while prolonging failure. I mean let's face it, zero playoff wins, one playoff appearance on the back of an easy schedule, two losing seasons..."the future is now" as far as the prolonged failure goes.
 
...while failing. Failing while prolonging failure. I mean let's face it, zero playoff wins, one playoff appearance on the back of an easy schedule, two losing seasons..."the future is now" as far as the prolonged failure goes.


Absolutely... but as long as the team isn't going 1-15, the fanboys view that as success. They'll repeat that to you over and over and over again...

It's no coincidence the lone playoff appearance for these bozos also came on the back of... you guessed it... MVP level play at the Q-U-A-R-T-E-R-B-A-C-K position..

These guys can say whatever in the hell they want, but I know what their real priority is. They're not interested in acquiring a legitimate quarterback, nor building an offensive line to protect a legitimate quarterback.

They're interested in sinking everything they have into an offensive line that run blocks so they can run the football 50 times a game and keep their scrub quarterbacks hid for as long as possible.. they're not fooling this ol' buzzard...

And that philosophy will get them 8, 9, 10 wins or so a year... but when they run up against a quarterback like Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, etc. who can hang more points on them in 15 minutes than Miami can put up in 45 minutes, it's back to praising these morons for how good their field goal kicker is and rooting against the Jets in the playoffs...
 
This statement in particular has absolutely, positively nothing to do with what I said.

The $5 million paid on evaluating a draft is not supposed to be taken as guaranteeing success. Nobody ever made that argument and nobody ever would and I think it's naive to assume so. The $5 million paid on evaluating a draft illustrates ACCOUNTABILITY.

The accountability is not washed away simply by saying "Hindsight is 20/20..."

The $5 million and the accountability means you're supposed to have foresight in your decisions, and you're supposed to consistently display that foresight especially as it relates to the most important decisions. No fund manager will hit on every stock pick.

But we're not talking about something akin to holding a 3% position in Sprint for a few of the bad years and having to explain that one stock. We're talking about something more akin to having 40% of your portfolio invested in Technology stocks in the 1st quarter of 2000. That's what not having a franchise quarterback and then having the 2008 thru 2010 record Miami has had is akin to. This regime went 11-5 on the back of a soft schedule, went to the playoffs and were firmly escorted out the door by a team that told us "You don't belong" and then proved it. Then they've gone 7-9 both 2009 and 2010. You can say that Matt Ryan's success in Atlanta might not have been repeated in Miami. But, that's a pretty convenient dodge. It's a stretch. If you've actually watched Matt Ryan play you know the guy would play well regardless because he's a special player.

So you can use the "Hindsight is 20/20..." excuse to explain why we don't have a quarterback today. And I'm going to tell you, you don't spend $5 million of the owner's money evaluating every draft to cower behind a hindsight excuse. You spend $5 million of the owner's money evaluating every draft in order to develop consistent foresight, the lack of which you should be held accountable for.

And you don't notice Jeff Ireland saying "Hindsight is 20/20..." He knows damn well that wouldn't play out well with Stephen Ross. He straight up disputes that Matt Ryan would be a more valuable asset to the Dolphins than Jake Long, insisting that Jake Long is a Hall of Fame caliber left tackle, been to the Pro Bowl all three years in the league, etc. That's not bothering with a "Hindsight is 20/20..." excuse.

CK: I'm not excusing "hindsight" as not having a QB today. I'm saying that nobody knows how Matt Ryan would have panned out in Miami. Do I wish that Miami drafted Matt Ryan over Jake Long? Yes. I do. Do I know that he would have been successful here? I would like to think so, but I don't know. But what I do know is that Jake Long has turned out okay, and it could have been far worse.

That is what my hindsight argument is: You have *no* idea how something is going to pan out. Even if you spend a bunch of cash on the "foresight", you still don't know. That is what I meant.

To stick with our stock porfolio theme, Miami drafting Jake Long was like building a dividend portfolio. It's conservative, has a good chance of making you money, but won't get you that house in Florida for a while. Drafting Matt Ryan was like investing in growth stocks. If the momentum continues, you crush it. However, we're already having a high valuation on the asset, so there is a little more risk involved, but with that risk comes the potential for a huge reward.

The regime was new and they knew they had at least a couple of years, so I would have preferred them go with the growth stocks over the dividend. But in the end: they still made some money with the pick.

Now, in regards to some of their other picks: they should have been canned last year. I've already said that plenty of times, and I'm sure we agree with that. I'm not being an apologist for this regime. I'm really not. I want fresh meat just like we all do. But I think using Matt Ryan as the primary example is a weak argument. I'd prefer using Pat White (x1000000), Patrick Turner, Shawn Murphy, etc.

Have to run now. Nice chatting.
 
I can accept one 7-9 season en route to a better future, but two in a row with a QB not showing any improvement after three years in the league and two as a starter? That's a stretch.

That's why I never really criticized A.J. Smith when he went ahead and drafted Phil Rivers after Drew Brees struggled as long as he did. By doing that you've made the chances of a worst case scenario of both sucking...very slim IMO. Now, as it happens, they couldn't have gotten a pick for Brees because he totally and completely wrecked his shoulder. Bad luck. Otherwise they get a pick for Brees and roll right on with Rivers, just as Green Bay got a pick for Favre and rolled right on with Rodgers.

If Chad Henne does the extremely unlikely, great. But I still think they should have hedged him. Wasn't smart not to hedge him, IMO.
 
Agree with that point as well. In other words, suggesting that the Dolphins didn't draft Mallett because of Marshall is as messed up as the possibility that the Dolphins avoided Andy Dalton because of the results of that whacky clown-ish performance by Daboll where he pretended to be a diva WR. Wrong, for so many reasons.

Look all this debatable and is just opinions but its just not about how well Marshal would get along with Mallet it how well Sporano could control Marshal which he sure didn't last year. You talk about some sort of holoistic view which I interpret means long term. Thats a great approach but unless Tony S learns to control Marshal he is running Henne to the bench if you have Mallet or any rookie QB on the roster. One of the common themes around here is many posters invinsion that if Mallets not ready to play Henne is just going to stick around and be happy. That could happen but not with Marshall yapping at his heels. I guess Ted Slimm was being a bit sarcastic about trading Marshall to the Pats for Mallett and a 2nd rounder I sure wasn't. There lots of reasons Tony S is on the hot seat and IMO Marshall is high on the list. Tony S lost control of the team toward the end of last year and the very last thing you can do as a head coach is loose control of your team. That has sealed his fate IMO and it is goiing to be very interesting to see how long he can hang around. I personally just do not want to see Ireland go in the process. His job as he descibes it is to find the players his coaches want. You knew going into this draft what Tony S wanted like every draft offensive linemen.
You want heads to roll it is very apparent and maybe they should I am just darn tired of the rebuilding processes around here just to wait and finish at 500 or worse after grabbing some big name coach.
Talent wise (minus your QB) I believe we are closer than we have been in a very long time. I keep making this compairison too the Jets won and made it deep into the playoffs with Sanchez who could barely connect with his recievers during the last half of the season while Henne was being asked to frow 30 to 40 times a game and carry the offense on his shoulders. He certianly did not get it done but he made Sanchez performance look like sand lot play.
So my opinion is we can get by with Henne (not that we need to) my real question can Tony pull out another wildcat season or find the Mike Nolan for the offensive side of the ball to save his job. I do not think so.
 
Absolutely... but as long as the team isn't going 1-15, the fanboys view that as success. They'll repeat that to you over and over and over again...

It's no coincidence the lone playoff appearance for these bozos also came on the back of... you guessed it... MVP level play at the Q-U-A-R-T-E-R-B-A-C-K position..

These guys can say whatever in the hell they want, but I know what their real priority is. They're not interested in acquiring a legitimate quarterback, nor building an offensive line to protect a legitimate quarterback.

They're interested in sinking everything they have into an offensive line that run blocks so they can run the football 50 times a game and keep their scrub quarterbacks hid for as long as possible.. they're not fooling this ol' buzzard...

And that philosophy will get them 8, 9, 10 wins or so a year... but when they run up against a quarterback like Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, etc. who can hang more points on them in 15 minutes than Miami can put up in 45 minutes, it's back to praising these morons for how good their field goal kicker is and rooting against the Jets in the playoffs...

Beleive me that 8, 9, 10 wins a season did not protect Shula around here and it certainly will not protect these guys either. A QB is about all this team needs now and we will get one it just will not be Mallet this year.
 
CK: I'm not excusing "hindsight" as not having a QB today. I'm saying that nobody knows how Matt Ryan would have panned out in Miami. Do I wish that Miami drafted Matt Ryan over Jake Long? Yes. I do. Do I know that he would have been successful here? I would like to think so, but I don't know. But what I do know is that Jake Long has turned out okay, and it could have been far worse.

That is what my hindsight argument is: You have *no* idea how something is going to pan out. Even if you spend a bunch of cash on the "foresight", you still don't know. That is what I meant.

Sticking with the stock theme, I see what you're saying as akin to an asset manager having to defend his 40% sector weighting in Technology stocks as late as March 31, 2000...by saying "Well, if we decided to take money out of Tech stocks...we don't KNOW that the stocks we put the money in instead wouldn't have fallen just as hard or just as fast as those..."

You only "don't know" by the barest technicalities in the definition of the word "know". But in reality, ya damn well do know and it's highly argumentative to insist that we don't.


To stick with our stock porfolio theme, Miami drafting Jake Long was like building a dividend portfolio. It's conservative, has a good chance of making you money, but won't get you that house in Florida for a while. Drafting Matt Ryan was like investing in growth stocks. If the momentum continues, you crush it. However, we're already having a high valuation on the asset, so there is a little more risk involved, but with that risk comes the potential for a huge reward.

The regime was new and they knew they had at least a couple of years, so I would have preferred them go with the growth stocks over the dividend. But in the end: they still made some money with the pick.

I think we're speaking different languages in terms of what is actually safer and what isn't, with respect to football. Failing to get a quarterback is among the most risky strategies any football regime can undertake. You have to get EVERYTHING right, if you don't bother trying to get a quarterback. You have to build the Ravens' defense of 2000, or the Buccaneers' defense of 2002. That's a LOT harder than just nailing on a QB that you LIKE (they liked Matt Ryan, thought he was a franchise quarterback), in an area of the draft where your chances are at worst 50/50. And once you get that QB, you have a long time to try and build the rest of the story, because the regime that brings a successful quarterback to a franchise usually buys himself a LOT of rope to hang himself with.

And I think it's safe to say that I can be spared the Intro to Public Finance lecture on what risk profiles an Equity Income strategy carries versus a Large Cap Growth strategy.
 
There is no debate, without a QB, you are going nowhere in this league.

To have your GM state that we are not desperate for a QB when our QB position has been so poor for so many years now, is just ridiculous and no longer palatable.
 
An earlier poster said that Mallet reminded GM's of Matt Jones. That is a great comparison. He looked awful sitting with Gruden. Bad posture, bad english, slow, country as hell. His agent should have never let him get on that show or should have at least put him in a suit, told him to sit up straight, and prepared him for some of Gruden's questions (which was probably impossible as Gruden is so enigmatic and just pulls thins out of the sky). Mallet lost a lot of cash screwing around with Gruden. He should have let his game film and Pro Day speak for him.

Teams that watched that show saw a former (alleged) drug user, with an aloof attitude, who appeared dumb as a box of rocks (Cam didn't do any better.) However, the tape showed the kid can ball. Matt Jones switched positions, so his situation cannot be compared. Matt Jones was also super tall, lanky, and and no idea how to run the WR tree. Mallet can make every throw.

I was shocked we didn't take Mallet when we moved up - I believe he would have been a great pick, but I do like this draft. Pouncey should give his brother his bonus though because his body of work did not signify a #15 pick in my opinion.

I think the Fins will be more fun to watch next year, but Henne just doesn't do it for me...hopefully, behind a solid O-line and a running game, he can throw for 3200 yards and 32 TD's.
 
Sticking with the stock theme, I see what you're saying as akin to an asset manager having to defend his 40% sector weighting in Technology stocks as late as March 31, 2000...by saying "Well, if we decided to take money out of Tech stocks...we don't KNOW that the stocks we put the money in instead wouldn't have fallen just as hard or just as fast as those..."

You only "don't know" by the barest technicalities in the definition of the word "know". But in reality, ya damn well do know and it's highly argumentative to insist that we don't.

It's also argumentative to insist that we do. So to me: it's moot based on perspective.


I think we're speaking different languages in terms of what is actually safer and what isn't, with respect to football. Failing to get a quarterback is among the most risky strategies any football regime can undertake. You have to get EVERYTHING right, if you don't bother trying to get a quarterback. You have to build the Ravens' defense of 2000, or the Buccaneers' defense of 2002. That's a LOT harder than just nailing on a QB that you LIKE (they liked Matt Ryan, thought he was a franchise quarterback), in an area of the draft where your chances are at worst 50/50. And once you get that QB, you have a long time to try and build the rest of the story, because the regime that brings a successful quarterback to a franchise usually buys himself a LOT of rope to hang himself with.

I agree that you need a quarterback to go all the way (I've already said, for the 100th time, that I wanted Miami to draft Mallett). But I'm of the opinion that most quarterbacks are 50/50 (not at worst), with few exceptions. For every Peyton Manning, there's a Ryan Leaf.

And I think it's safe to say that I can be spared the Intro to Public Finance lecture on what risk profiles an Equity Income strategy carries versus a Large Cap Growth strategy.

Implied snarkiness aside (I'm guessing Georgetown grad), I wasn't "lecturing". I expanded beyond the general terminology for the *other* people who read this thread and may not know as much about stocks and their classifications. Unfortunately, I feel the sense that you are aware of that and wanted to use it as an opportunity to toss in a thinly veiled jab. Oh well.
 
It's also argumentative to insist that we do. So to me: it's moot based on perspective.

Ok, but go ahead and ask people if they think Matt Ryan would be successful in Miami or anywhere else. See what they tell you.

Implied snarkiness aside (I'm guessing Georgetown grad), I wasn't "lecturing". I expanded beyond the general terminology for the *other* people who read this thread and may not know as much about stocks and their classifications. Unfortunately, I feel the sense that you are aware of that and wanted to use it as an opportunity to toss in a thinly veiled jab. Oh well.

Or I was telling you to spare me the Intro to Public Finance lecture because as this is my profession, I don't liked to be talked to like I know absolutely nothing about it. Imagine that, saying what you mean. Such a novel idea, accepting what someone says as what they mean rather than reading ten levels into it.
 
Or I was telling you to spare me the Intro to Public Finance lecture because as this is my profession, I don't liked to be talked to like I know absolutely nothing about it. Imagine that, saying what you mean. Such a novel idea, accepting what someone says as what they mean rather than reading ten levels into it.

And again, I expanded upon the general terminology for the other people that read these boards and may not understand stocks and classifications. Such a novel idea, reading comprehension.

EDIT: Furthermore, I fail to see where I talked to you like you knew nothing about your profession (I also find it laughable that I should have known you work in finance, on a football forum). Looks like you read into things a little deep yourself. Pot, meet kettle.
 
While we have all the emotions flowing I just have to add this.
Shula got canned after delivering all those winning season by going out and swinging for the fences with all those former first round draft picks his last year.
Jimmy Johnson the savior (the original drafter backer) came in rebuilt the phins made one playoff apparance and was out of town in 3 years.
Dave W. (the coach everyone loves to hate) took that foundation that Jimmy built gave away those two rounders for Rickey Williams we finally won a playoff game but when it came time to reload instead of retool the team he left town.
Next savior in line Nick Saban shows up from the college ranks rebuilds the team again and much like Jimmy Johnson could not handle the pressure and in three years was out of town too.
Stuck between a rock and a hard place we got to endure one of Randy Mueler and Cam in yet another rebuilding project and were the laugh of the league for the year.
The latest savior is summoned in Bill Parcells and company pull a miracle out the butt with the wild cat and had a miracle type season.
Everthing appears to be jolly in dolphin land except the defense falls apart in the second season along with some special teams play early in the year.
Enter this past year defense problems suddenly appeared solved, special teams again lets us down early in the season and then the offense suddenly in the morgue.
Why am I rambling on about all this well I have seen Marinio even in his prime try and carry this team and could not get the job done becuase of lack of a running game and a defense that was never fixed until too late in his career.
The next guy up fixed the running game and defense but the quarterback position was lacking in fact that was bascially the same issue for JJ, Dave W, Nick S, Cam and now we are now saying Tony S.
You know what they all also have in common except for Shula and Dave W they were all here short term because eventually the media and fans ran them out of town. IMO what they all also had in common except Tony S is that they bascially had the same problems every year and never corrected them. Tony S has addressed the issues from the year before so he has least made it interesting.
But it is tiresome to see the same merry go round around here with the same fan base and media doing the same thing, So while I realize Tony S chances to stick are very very slim I really do hope we can improve enough for him to stick around because I do know one thing changing these coaches and rebuilding every three years has "not" worked and the only WINNING seasons I have been part of the past forty years have come from the coached that have been able to stick around longer than three years.
Yes we can use better QB play and Tony S has to upgrade his coaching skills if at all possbile if he is to stick
 
An earlier poster said that Mallet reminded GM's of Matt Jones. That is a great comparison. He looked awful sitting with Gruden. Bad posture, bad english, slow, country as hell. His agent should have never let him get on that show or should have at least put him in a suit, told him to sit up straight, and prepared him for some of Gruden's questions (which was probably impossible as Gruden is so enigmatic and just pulls thins out of the sky). Mallet lost a lot of cash screwing around with Gruden. He should have let his game film and Pro Day speak for him.

Teams that watched that show saw a former (alleged) drug user, with an aloof attitude, who appeared dumb as a box of rocks (Cam didn't do any better.) However, the tape showed the kid can ball. Matt Jones switched positions, so his situation cannot be compared. Matt Jones was also super tall, lanky, and and no idea how to run the WR tree. Mallet can make every throw.

I was shocked we didn't take Mallet when we moved up - I believe he would have been a great pick, but I do like this draft. Pouncey should give his brother his bonus though because his body of work did not signify a #15 pick in my opinion.

I think the Fins will be more fun to watch next year, but Henne just doesn't do it for me...hopefully, behind a solid O-line and a running game, he can throw for 3200 yards and 32 TD's.

I didn't see anything wrong with Mallett with Gruden. He was very polite "yes sir-no-sir" and had football knowledge oozing out everywhere...in fact he impressed Gruden. As for the "country" part...since when does how you talk have a damn thing to do with playing QB??? I guess Terry Bradshaw was "too country" to be successful in the NFL?? All I know is he has FOUR more SUPER BOWL rings than the idiots who passed on Mallett will ever have. We passed on the top runner in this draft and arguably the best QB in this draft for a center who can't snap a shot gun and an upright runner who fumbles too much! After almost a week..I am still sick about it!
 
Back
Top Bottom