biloxi-indian

JKool,

When speaking of W/L not being a good measure of performance I am reminded of a discussion I once had with an employee of a company I consult with. The discussion went something like this...money is not the only motivator, but it is one of the biggest, along with recognition and job satisfaction. I am sure you can correlate the same to the Saints organization!

W/L is a measure of success, and one of the most significant measurements. IMO. Additionally, I think we can correlate W/L to the aggregate of the organization. For the players would not be there without the scouts, coaches, management, and owner!

Statistically, the Saints, on the whole, do not have a good record both in FA and the draft. I believe we both agree with this premise.

Insanity=continue doing the same thing over, over, and over again and expect a different outcome!

[Edited on 4/5/2004 by biloxi-indian]

Insanity is defined as doing the same thing over, over, and over again...and expecting a different outcome!

JKool

B-I,

I didn\'t mean to suggest that W/L were not a way to measure performance - I think we agree here. I\'m, however, skeptical that it is even the best measure. I\'m willing to bet the measure of \"goodness\" should be selected based on the goal of the analysis. That is, if we want to know how the team is doing with respect to chances of success in winning the SB, then W/L might be very relevant; but if we want to determine if the draft was a good one or not, then W/L is totally irrelvant (since, as many have pointed out, those players haven\'t even played a down in the NFL).

I have to admit that I don\'t know what IMO stands for, so I\'m having some trouble understanding a few of your points.

I still dispute the insanity claim on the grounds that the organization is not doing the SAME thing over and over again.

"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

biloxi-indian

Jkool,

IMO=in my opinion. Sorry for using code!

As for the draft and correlation to W/L...I use the phrase most commonly used in the media and around these parts...IMPACT player. As I have stated, we have yet to see what type of IMPACT players we drafted this year. However, I still maintain that the Saints organization did a less than admirable job in the draft. They did not fill the VOIDS. For this, they still employ the standard of INSANITY.

I believe we both agree FA is something to behold when it comes to the Saints!

One further example...recently Haz comes out and states his initial intentions for Henderson. Where are the comments for the rest of his \"class\". I only hope his comments are forthcoming and concise to the average reader...as his code is something I really do not understand!


[Edited on 4/5/2004 by biloxi-indian]

Insanity is defined as doing the same thing over, over, and over again...and expecting a different outcome!

JKool

B-I,

Thanks for the code, now I too can employ these fun abbrevations.

I agree, when looking at the draft, we should look at filling of needs, quality of player, and impact (I like your idea there), at least. IMO people get too caught up in evaluating large events - \"the draft\" - rather than looking at SOMETIMES more helpful parts - \"picking Watson\" or something like that. When we say things like, \"our draft sucked\", we are leaving out interesting details that are worth discussing (as you and I seem to have discovered/demonstrated here in this post); don\'t you agree?

I also agree that listening to what Haz says on the face of it is usually useless. If we only had the secret decoder ring... He really is a bit on the frustrating side, isn\'t he?

"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

JKool

Now, THAT was a post.

Thanks for the thoughts Gator. It certainly is my view that FA is where our boys have truly sucked (at least over the last few years) - and I actually think that is a fairly common view here. The draft IMO is overrated (that\'s for you JimBone). It CAN fill needs, but in general it is a craps shoot. I think that our LB position was addressed, even if it is not to everyone\'s liking - they did make moves to get players here. I am still a bit in shock about the decision to deal our 3rd round pick rather than pick up a CB there (with at least a few that will be nickle backs in the NFL - it is not like we\'re stoked at CB and don\'t need even role players).

I think that the focus of our sh-t slinging should be directed at our FA work, rather than at the Draft. In the end, we probably got a handful of good players; however, in agreement with just about everyone here, NOW is the time to make a move for a SB, NOT in a year or two.

"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

biloxi-indian

I have to say the last few posts are some good MUSINGS.

<I think that the focus of our sh-t slinging should be directed at our FA work, rather than at the Draft.>

IMO...there is enough sh-t to go around!

BTW; to post and debate the information contained within seems better than challenging the poster...don\'t you all agree!

JKool, the \"large\" events like \"draft\" do seem to be bundled together. Collectively with FA, as gatorman mused, we begin to understand the flaws of the Saints organization. And, yes, if Haz has a plan, he sure ain\'t sharing it! I know some will muse, \"he cannot share this information for fear of the ENEMY finding out...like it is a big secret!LOLOLOLOLOL

Insanity is defined as doing the same thing over, over, and over again...and expecting a different outcome!

WhoDat

The problem is, in part, vision... or lack thereof. If Haslett had said - here\'s my vision for this franchise 4 years ago when he got here, and worked consistently to get there, then that would be one thing. However, the tune that our front office sings is about as inconsistent as the team\'s play on the field.

We need to build on offense.
Now we need to get bigger up front on defense.
Oops, I mean we need to get faster on defense.
Our WRs are a major strength.
Our WRs are a disappointment.
CB is an area of concern - that\'s why we didn\'t address that need seriously for two years.
We\'re rebuilding the defense from the ground up.
Consistency is the key, don\'t look for big changes this year.

My point is, every year the \"plan\" changes, and I don\'t see any continuity or underlying theme that extends from year to year. First they want to attack, attack, attack. Then they want to load up to stop the run, then they want to add speed, then they don\'t want to change anything.

I feel the \"plan\" is always short-sighted. They seem not to be able to see the forrest for the trees... and often times they miss some trees. This team, from top to bottom, is lacking vision, leadership, and quality management. That\'s why we always seem undisciplined, inconsistent, and discombobulated. Of course, that\'s just one man\'s opinion.

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse


\"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"

biloxi-indian

<This team, from top to bottom, is lacking vision, leadership, and quality management. That\'s why we always seem undisciplined, inconsistent, and discombobulated.>

You will get no argument from me on that quote. In fact, very well said.

We will await the musings of others to the valid point of changes have occurred within the organization from Zook to Venturi...change in GM, change, change, and more change.

My question is when will will Benson make a change with Haz and then HIMSELF?

JKool

The FO always reminds me of a volunteer position I held for a long time. It was with one of our fine universities, but the group I worked as a part of wasn\'t clearly under one deparment, so every year we were run by a different group of \"managers\". Every year you would hear the following statement several times: \"this is a new and exciting time to be a member of our group.\" Now, I did this job for 5 years, for six different \"managers\" - what this phrase meant was this: \"I\'m your new manager and I\'m going to tell you what we\'re going to do, AND I DON\'T WANT ANY SH-T FROM THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE BEEN HERE LONG ENOUGH TO KNOW EVERY IDEA I HAVE HAS BEEN TRIED AND FAILED.\"

There are three possible lessons to be drawn from my experience:
1. Change is not always good - it leads to people who think they know what they\'re doing not listening to the people who do.
2. Not changing is not always good - imagine I got stuck with my first \"manager\" who was truly an idiot and probably would never have changed.
And/or
3. At least each new manager tried new things - if we\'d hit on something good, we might have kept it.

Here is an argument that I don\'t know what to think of yet, given my analogy: perhaps is excited about a \"new and exciting time\" in NO because every year he has a new plan (as WhoDat points out)? If that is so, perhaps he will hit on a good plan soon. Of course, you want a HC who has a good plan from the start (like Parcells perhaps), but if you don\'t have one of those, you don\'t want the guy who sticks to the bad plan (which it seems Haz has not).

Of course, here is another possible argument that could be made from the same facts: Haz likes to be an idea man, but doesn\'t listen to people with good experience. Thus, he fails to let anyone question the poor decisions and he\'s made and goes on making new ones.

If I though Haz were reinventing the wheel every year, then I guess I\'d be inclined to think the second was the more likely argument. However, Haz does persue roughly proven strategies (like build a faster defense) employed to great success by other teams. Thus, I\'m not sure which argument I think is more likely to be true at this moment.

"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

WhoDat

We had a very good defense when Haslett came to NO. Zook was a big part of that, and when he left we got hurt - no question.

Since then, Haslett has tried three different \"plans\" - get bigger, get faster, do nothing and let them learn to play together. None of these in and of themselves is a bad plan. In fact, I\'d bet there have been many successful teams to have employed each over the years.

Here\'s the kicker. You employ ONE. You know when you make a change, nine times out of ten you aren\'t going to have immediate success. Like any startup business, you lose money in year one. However, if you stick to your plan (and it\'s a good one), over time your profits grow and your plan pays off. If you start a business as a high-end luxury retailer and after one year of losses drop everything and switch to being a deep-discount bargain store you will certainly fail.

The latter is what Haslett has done. Each year\'s \"plan\" is not bad standing alone. However, you cannot make change something every year and expect it to ever work well.

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse


\"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"