He doesn't play for at least a year or two. he is very athletic, but he is raw and needs to add some bulk and strength. Newhouse is a much better option for the next year or two.Yea the Sherrod injury has to be serious. Hopefully this means the end of marshall newhouse at LT.
I need to vent:
Hated this pick. Not because I dislike Tretter or think he won't make it on our roster. I hated this one because it represented poor value. This guy was graded as a 6th or 7th round pick. There is no need to use a fourth round selection on a player that can be obtained later, using one of our numerous remaining picks.
We give up value by missing the chance to kick the tires on another player high on our draft board, when we reach for a guy that isn't so highly thought of by other franchises. For example, there's no reason we couldn't have given Quinton Patton or Jesse Williams a good look in camp and still obtained Tretter in the 5th or 6th round. There's no reason we should've needed to trade back into the 4th in order to grab Franklin, when we could've used this pick on him. We could have traded back for someone else.
I understand that Ted has a board and sticks to it and I respect Ted's eye for talent but by failing to adjust for the objective value of a player like Tretter, we miss on value. You're paying a greater cost in order to obtain a player that would probably be available for less later on.
You're basing your entire argument based off the fact that he was graded as a "6th or 7th" rounder. How do you know that? What if TT had him as a 4th? You don't know what they had him graded as.
Absolutely. Ted is drafting for 2014, not for guys that he expects to be stars in 2013. Newhouse's contract expires after the 2013 season. He's looking for a potential replacement.He doesn't play for at least a year or two. he is very athletic, but he is raw and needs to add some bulk and strength. Newhouse is a much better option for the next year or two.
The consensus is that he is something of a project at a relatively low-value position in today's NFL (OG). Most services had him going in the sixth or later. He would have been available with one of our three fifth round picks at the time.
Look, I'm sure Thompson thinks very highly of Tretter, hence the selection. But what if TT had him as a first-rounder? -Would that make sense? If you think so, I have a $12 dollar banana for sale that you might want to buy.
Opportunity cost is a pretty basic economics concept and it's a legitimate gripe with regards to using a forth round pick on Tretter. Part of the draft process is gauging market value. By reaching here we lose value.
The consensus is that he is something of a project at a relatively low-value position in today's NFL (OG). Most services had him going in the sixth or later. He would have been available with one of our three fifth round picks at the time.
Look, I'm sure Thompson thinks very highly of Tretter, hence the selection. But what if TT had him as a first-rounder? -Would that make sense? If you think so, I have a $12 dollar banana for sale that you might want to buy.
Opportunity cost is a pretty basic economics concept and it's a legitimate gripe with regards to using a forth round pick on Tretter. Part of the draft process is gauging market value. By reaching here we lose value.
First of all, I understand the term opportunity cost, I'm a college student who is currently in a sports economics class, and I can assure you I have an A. Besides the term (opportunity cost), this has nothing to do with economics. You're still making an assumption. "He would have been available with one of our three fifth round picks at the time." How do you know that? What if there were a few other teams who were interested in him in the 4th round? You're not in the war room and you're not their scout, you're merely a fan of the team. It's great that everyone has their opinion and you're entitled to yours but you can't form an argument based off assumption.
BOTTOM LINE
Tretter is an athletic offensive lineman, who will likely have to move to the inside at the next level. He plays the game with good balance and coordination. However there will be questions about his length, strength, and the competition he played. Tretter looks to be a nice long-term upside type.
The consensus is that he is something of a project at a relatively low-value position in today's NFL (OG).
Consensus of what? NFL GMs? Or talking head know-it-alls like Mel Kiper? Those same talking heads put Lacy in the 1st round and many of them put Franklin in the 2nd round.
Many times through the years I've read after the draft of the team or teams interested in the player the Packers "reached for" shortly after the Packers' pick.
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.Please link to any such reports regarding Tretter with a friendly "told you so."
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
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.