Many of my readers will be familiar CPP's favorite training analogy, relating academics to baseball. I think, however, that there is another sports analogy that applies to PIs, and that is of a NFL quarterback.
Besides the obvious management stuff, a really critical skill to learn is having a short memory for bad plays. This is particularly true in the granting game with present funding levels, where you need to shake off a bad review pretty rapidly. Learn from it and move on, striving to not make the same mistake twice. In particular with NSF, where the panels are constantly changing, it is critical to take the main points from a review and incorporate them, but dwelling on the minutiae and each negative comment is a waste of time.
Hit the main points of the summary statement (since the next panel will be given just that document) and identify the places where "that reviewer didn't know what they were talking about" and clarify them. Above all, don't get down on yourself about a bad review, keep churning out the data to show you can do it and get ready for the next series with a clear head.