Posted by damag on 2/3/2017 4:11:00 PM (view original):
Like I said, to me it feels like a make-work project. You can bust your *** trying to do the "best" at something, and there's no tangible evidence that doing the "best" at it has substantial benefit. Lots of owners punt the minors because they don't win anything for the minors. Well, what do you win for coach hiring?
You don't have to have the "best" coaches. You just need to have good coaches.
My goal is to try to be no worse than top half in the world for each role and level, based on primary discipline IQ, with a couple of other factors considered.
For example, if the third best HC at AAA is a 75, and the 12th best is a 71, I'm fine with getting a 71. I'm assuming that the difference between a 71 and a 75 is going to be marginal. I just don't want to get stuck with a 47.
Once you level-set your wants and expectations, the stress/work to get there is greatly reduced, and coach hiring is just a minor irritant.
I'll also add that a suggestion that I've made in the Suggestions Forum was for WIS to provide a "report card" for coaches at the end of coach hiring. Whether it be an individual grade for each coach based on his ratings and the level he's at, a grade for all your coaches together at each level, or an overall grade for all your coaches throughout your entire organization, that could be helpful. Some feedback would be better than no feedback at all.