Official T J.C. Tretter thread

[TJV]

I'll keep my eyes peeled for such reports about Tretter.

And you probably won't see any because such reports usually appear regarding first or second rounders, because more controversy surrounds those picks. So you'll have your opinion about Tretter and those who disagree will have theirs. The difference is the collective opinions of Thompson and his staff, who have a history of success in the draft, also disagree with your opinion.

 

[jaybadger82]

The difference is that Thompson and his staff are in a position to act on their opinions and this has yielded both successes and failures in past drafts. We'll see how this turns out.

 

[13 Times Champs]

Revisting down the road may show us a Josh Sitton or Allan Barbre pick. I say that because both were also 4th round picks. But I'm in the crowd that doesn't like this pick so much now.

 

[mayo44]

Yep, and the value we obtained by holding off on Lacy and Franklin has been widely lauded.

Are you arguing that Tretter was widely perceived as a mid-round talent amongst NFL scouts?

I'm arguing that you don't know either way.

Suppose he was at the very top of our draft board and we selected him in the first round. Most fans would be furious- and rightfully so. Even if Tretter becomes a starting guard for us, that's terrible value, and I don't think using a forth rounder on him made great sense either.

There's no reason to use a 4th round pick on what you can acquire with a 5th or 6th rounder.

And how do you know they could have gotten him in the 5th or 6th round? What information from general managers around the NFL do you possess that qualifies you to make that claim? For all you know, the Seahawks might have been looking to pick him at #123. I'm sure if Ted thought he could get him later, then he would have drafted him later. Most likely, he had knowledge that some teams that were coming up soon were fairly high on him and he pulled the trigger because there is something very specific about Tretter that he liked.

I'm not sure you're aware of this or not, but NFL general managers don't get their scouting information from the Walter Football website, or Bleacher Report, or NFLDraftGuru.com, or DraftTek.com. And they certainly don't get it from idiots like Mel Kiper either.

You can spend hundreds of hours scouring every mock draft on the Internet and memorizing every scouting report on cbssports.com, but in the end, you still don't know half of what the guys who actually do the drafting know.

 

[TJV]

The difference is that Thompson and his staff are in a position to act on their opinions and this has yielded both successes and failures in past drafts.

All of this paragraph is stating the obvious IMO so I’ll only type it once: Every GM and staff have successes and failures in the draft but overall Thompson and his staff are viewed by many as being successful vs. their peers in the NFL in conducting a draft. Thompson is much more knowledgeable and experienced than you are regarding the NFL draft. The chance he is correct regarding a particular draft decision is much much greater than you being correct.

We'll see how this turns out.

Actually with regard to whether Tretter would have been available later in the draft no, we won't know how this turns out. For example the fact that Ryan Leaf turned out to be a bust doesn’t mean picking him second in the 1998 draft was a reach. The issue is how the other teams in the league view that player’s value on draft day. And that is very difficult for fans to know. Whether Tretter turns out to be an all pro or a bust or something in between is very important to the Packers, but it is irrelevant to this discussion.


And with that I’ve said all I have to say on the issue of whether or not Tretter was a reach. You can have the last word if you want it.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Do you really think a fair reading of "Many times through the years..." sounds like I was referring to Tretter? And while you are "just of the opinion that Tretter would have PROBABLY been available..." - and of course you're entitled to your opinion - you should understand how many of us trust Thompson and his staff's opinion more than yours.

Here's an example of "many times through the years": First it's just an example - an analogy - so it should go without saying that Nick Collins does not equal JC Tretter. When Collins was picked in the second round many Packers fans and national "experts" yelled "reach". Collins was viewed as being too raw and he went to a small school so of course he would have been available later in the draft. But some time after that draft I remember reading that there was another team very interested in taking Collins, so the Packers probably wouldn't have landed him if they had followed what passes as conventional wisdom.

Here is part of what SI had to say after the Packers picked him:
NEGATIVES: Hesitant, indecisive and not an efficient defender. Too quick up the field and takes himself out of the action. Slow locating the ball. Tackles high, which results in players picking up yardage off initial contact.

ANALYSIS: Possessing outstanding computer numbers, Collins is a prospect who must start to translate his athletic skills onto the football field. A little small for safety, he has potential to slide over at cornerback and at the very least, a practice squad player potentially a team's dime back next September.

PROJECTION: Undrafted Free Agent

Collins was a representative TT high pick. Outstanding athletic measurables...first and foremost...then coach up the rest. Collins ran in the 4.3's (with one clocking at 4.28), 40" vertical, 4.16 short shuttle. He was getting bad grades as a corner; we got a Pro Bowl safety.

Here's a guy from a small school with some bad tape, illustrating how productivity can be secondary.

You don't have to look far to see high productivity college guys with unimpressive measureables top out at age 21 or 22. They are just good enough to be great...in college. That's why guys with big junior years followed by a fall off in their senior years plunge in the draft...there is fear the guy has already maxed out his upside.

If you're looking for playmakers in the early rounds (which is what it's all about), you'd prefer to see that playmaker athleticism. It's no guarantee, but it increases the odds substantially.

 

[jaybadger82]

I'm arguing that you don't know either way.

And how do you know they could have gotten him in the 5th or 6th round? What information from general managers around the NFL do you possess that qualifies you to make that claim? For all you know, the Seahawks might have been looking to pick him at #123. I'm sure if Ted thought he could get him later, then he would have drafted him later. Most likely, he had knowledge that some teams that were coming up soon were fairly high on him and he pulled the trigger because there is something very specific about Tretter that he liked.

I'm not sure you're aware of this or not, but NFL general managers don't get their scouting information from the Walter Football website, or Bleacher Report, or NFLDraftGuru.com, or DraftTek.com. And they certainly don't get it from idiots like Mel Kiper either.

You can spend hundreds of hours scouring every mock draft on the Internet and memorizing every scouting report on cbssports.com, but in the end, you still don't know half of what the guys who actually do the drafting know.

There's no need to be insulting with your tone (re: GMs getting their information from Bleacher Report, etc.). I possess average to above-average intelligence and I think my outsider's understanding of the draft process isn't significantly better or worse than your own.

Nobody, including the guys that actually do the drafting, know anything with certainty during the draft. It's a cloak and dagger environment of incomplete and misinformation. What's actually relevant to my criticism of this pick are two items: (1) the likelihood that Tretter would be available later and (2) whether another prospect of similar profile could be substituted for him later. You can gather my view with regard to these items based on my posts above criticizing the value of this pick.

If you disagree and view Tretter as a solid value where he was chosen, then it stands to reason you believe (1) that Tretter was unlikely to be available later in the draft and (2) Tretter is a special talent that could not be substituted by other available guard prospects. Otherwise you're losing out on value by taking a player earlier than necessary to secure him, which was the thrust of my original criticism.

Tretter measured well, but not exceptionally, at the combine and I have a difficult time evaluating his abilities against Ivy League competition. Perhaps Ted sees something I don't. It doesn't look like he'll be ready to contribute right away next year but we'll see what happens. Tretter might become a ten-year starter for us in the future. Nonetheless, the value still doesn't seem right using the above criteria, but that's just me.

Either way, America's a great place: people can disagree with one another and still coexist.

 

[mayo44]

If you disagree and view Tretter as a solid value where he was chosen, then it stands to reason you believe (1) that Tretter was unlikely to be available later in the draft and (2) Tretter is a special talent that could not be substituted by other available guard prospects. Otherwise you're losing out on value by taking a player earlier than necessary to secure him, which was the thrust of my original criticism.

Not quite. There's also (3) that I'm humble enough to recognize that TT knows a heck of a lot more than I (or any of us armchair GMs) know about these players and how other GMs around the league view them.

 

[jaybadger82]

Well, I don't think your third point really goes to the syllogisms described by items (1) and (2) above. Rather, it colors your conclusion with regard to these, influencing the value you perceive in the pick.

You make a good point, though. Thompson is the expert and there's nobody else I would rather have run my franchise. But if I can't question a Thompson decision based on available information, then I might as well stop thinking altogether. Apart from the issue of value, I'm confident that Tretter is a quality prospect and I'm glad we added depth to the o-line. Rooting for him to work out with us.

 

[Poppa San]

Former Packers center JC Tretter retiring from NFL

JC Tretter, a fourth-round pick of the Packers in 2013, is retiring from the NFL.

packerswire.usatoday.com

 

[tynimiller]

Former Packers center JC Tretter retiring from NFL

JC Tretter, a fourth-round pick of the Packers in 2013, is retiring from the NFL.

packerswire.usatoday.com

Was an excellent 4th rounder - above average center in the league for quite a few of his years.

 

[PikeBadger]

Very good pick. True to form by staying tight to your draft board. Scouts did another excellent job of assessing talent.