Packers Trade Candidates

[Firethorn1001]

If indeed Cleveland decides to trade him they will want a king's ransom.

Yep, they should trade him. With that absolute albatross of Watson's contract tying them down for the next 2 years they aren't going to be that competitive for at least 4-5 unless they start doing a whole lotta things right very quickly and I'm not sure keeping Garrett is their best course of action. They need assets for 2026/2027 which they would probably get since I believe anything prior to June makes it a 36M dead hit as opposed to 18 after June 1 so, then they would be getting 2026/2027 picks.

Do I think the Packers will throw out that much draft capital to get him? No.

 

[Dantés]

Here are a couple names that occur to me as possible trade targets at WR who could help the Packers mitigate their vertical speed problem:

1. Alec Pierce, IND: Pierce has a career 17.6 YPR through 3 seasons and had 22.3 last year. He has the combination of length (6'3", 33" arms), speed (4.41), and ball skills to be a deep threat. He's about to turn 25. The Colts might be willing to trade him because he's entering a contract year and they have other commitments at WR: Pittman is under contract, Downs is probably a guy they want to keep long-term, and they just spent pick #52 on Adonai Mitchell who needs to be in Pierce's role. If they would part with him, he would be an ideal addition.

2. Rashid Shaheed, NO: Shahid has a career 16.6 YPR through 3 seasons and had 17.5 last year. He came out of college at 5'10.5" 185 lbs and was not able to work out. He's had enough time in the league to demonstrate legit speed and playmaking ability. The downside with him is that he isn't very long so he functions as a vertical slot receiver and he's coming off a meniscal repair (injured in October; 4-6 mos recovery timeline). He's 26 years old. The Saints are extremely cap-strapped and there aren't many ways for them to create room, but Shahid is one of them-- they can save 3.7M by trading him and would only incur 750K in dead money. I like his fit less than Pierce, but he's also a more realistic target.

 

[Voyageur]

Who might the Packers traded away this off-season? The most likely answer is "no one," but I've been thinking about who is most probable out of an improbable bunch.

1. Romeo Doubs: Over the next two seasons, the top four WR's on the Packers' roster will hit free agency. They certainly won't extend all of them (nor should they) and they might even look to move a guy early in order to recoup some value, especially if they plan to add at WR. Doubs would be the likeliest candidate for a few reasons. 1- he's entering a contract season and the other guy in that boat is hurt. 2- there were clearly some problems in 2024 that make extension very unlikely. 3- he has been solidly productive, with 43 yds/game and 0.4 TD/game over the past two seasons, which extrapolates to a 700/7 season. At 24, it's not difficult to see a team valuing him as a WR2 or WR3 and perhaps they would trade a conditional mid round pick that can become a day 2 selection based on certain incentives.

2. Malik Willis: Willis is only 25 years old (many rookies are 25 any more) and he showed a lot of progress in 2024. He's entering a contract season and I can imagine a team with a QB problem and no obvious solution (e.g. the Steelers who pick too low) acquiring Willis as part of a plan to take multiple dips at the position this off-season. I wouldn't part with him for anything less than a day 2 pick, given the value of backup QB's.

3. Kingsley Enagbare: Enagbare is entering a contract year and has probably fallen behind Cox in terms of effectiveness. If they Packers add a DE in free agency or in the draft, they would have five guys who deserve some degree of playing time. That's a level of depth that they could choose to trade from if they return is right.

4. Rasheed Walker: This move would be contingent on an internal view that Morgan is best off playing left tackle. I have no idea if the FO sees Morgan that way, but if that's the plan then it's somewhat feasible that they would move Walker a year before he hits free agency. Walker is a viable starter at tackle without being an upper echelon guy. I would want at least a 4th for him.

5. Sean Rhyan: If the Packers see Morgan as a guard, not a tackle, then it could be Rhyan that they look to move a year early.

Interesting perspective and reasons. I do think the real future of the Packers is through the draft, and trades like this would emphasize it by giving the team more draft capital. Adding to it, a multitude of picks is also additional ammunition to add to potential trades to get top level players in-house.

 

[Catamount1971]

Jack Sanborn was let go by the Bears today. Might be a great pickup. Could stick him on the practice squad initially.

 

[tynimiller]

Here are a couple names that occur to me as possible trade targets at WR who could help the Packers mitigate their vertical speed problem:

1. Alec Pierce, IND: Pierce has a career 17.6 YPR through 3 seasons and had 22.3 last year. He has the combination of length (6'3", 33" arms), speed (4.41), and ball skills to be a deep threat. He's about to turn 25. The Colts might be willing to trade him because he's entering a contract year and they have other commitments at WR: Pittman is under contract, Downs is probably a guy they want to keep long-term, and they just spent pick #52 on Adonai Mitchell who needs to be in Pierce's role. If they would part with him, he would be an ideal addition.

2. Rashid Shaheed, NO: Shahid has a career 16.6 YPR through 3 seasons and had 17.5 last year. He came out of college at 5'10.5" 185 lbs and was not able to work out. He's had enough time in the league to demonstrate legit speed and playmaking ability. The downside with him is that he isn't very long so he functions as a vertical slot receiver and he's coming off a meniscal repair (injured in October; 4-6 mos recovery timeline). He's 26 years old. The Saints are extremely cap-strapped and there aren't many ways for them to create room, but Shahid is one of them-- they can save 3.7M by trading him and would only incur 750K in dead money. I like his fit less than Pierce, but he's also a more realistic target.

The Alec Pierce idea makes a TON of sense. Indy also needs some defensive help - I wonder if the cost of him might be mitigated some if we do want to move Jaire, having him be part of it.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Metcalf asked for a trade today from Seattle. He won't come cheap. Seattle will want, and get, a first round pick, an ascending player, and maybe another lower draft pick. But like it or not, it's a nonstarter if there isn't a first round pick as part of the trade.

Do the Packers have to make this trade? I'd say no. Too costly as far as what must be given up, and Metcalf is gonna want a new deal in the $25 mil AAV range. I'd rather see them get Darius Slayton in FA for $15 mil AAV and give the WRs still on their rookie deals a chance to show improvement.

That's just one idea. I'm sure there are more.

 

[Dantés]

I think Metcalf will want something more in the 32M AAV range.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Sadly,

I think Metcalf will want something more in the 32M AAV range.

Good wake-up call Dantes. I think you're right and I think that's the disconnect with Seattle. It's not that he's unhappy with the team, he wants more $$$. That's just a guess. (And I think his current contract is $24 mil AAV, so yeah, he'll be looking at $30 mil plus.)

So in addition to at least a 1st round pick and a player like Doubs, the Packers would have to pay Metcalf top WR money. I really like Metcalf, but that's a bridge too far. I don't think Gluten or the FO will go for that. I hope they won't.

So sign a FA like Slayton, draft a speedster, and save some money for Edge or CB. And I've never much cared for trading for a player. The acquiring team almost always has to give up too much. The Packers have options and aren't desperate.

Interested in getting thoughts form people on the forum.

 

[Firethorn1001]

Seattle wants a 1 and a 3 for Metcalf? Then on top of that have to throw maybe $30M/year at a new contract? Pass.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Seattle wants a 1 and a 3 for Metcalf? Then on top of that have to throw maybe $30M/year at a new contract? Pass.

Agreed. Maybe if he were 25 instead of 27 or 28, but even then..... That's just too much to give up for one guy. Find a FA and draft a speedster to partially make up for the loss of Watson, and provide a veteran presence for the talented but inconsistent young WRs.

Gluten should be able to sign FAs at CB (Murphy from MN,for ex), Edge (Sweat from Philly) and or WR (Slayton from NYG). I won't be surprised if one or two of these guys are Packers early next week.

That's a much better use of capital, draft picks and $$$, than chasing a guy who thinks he's one of the top 5 WRs in the NFL. Metcalf is very good, no question. He's not among the top 5 WRs imo. The price is just too high and the Packers aren't desperate.

 

[tynimiller]

I honestly don't care if we trade for DK and he gets a deal worth 32/yr - I care only for the structure and what it actually is.

You could honestly give him a $160M / 5 year deal. and have his 4th and 5th year Cap Hits be $50M....that means you could structure his first three years to be just $20M a year...give him $50-$65M guaranteed and you walk after four years and likely only eat somewhere between $5-$10M...perhaps nearly a clean walk again depending on structure.

Lazard's deal with the Jets like I shared when he signed it is a good example.
He got a 4 year $44M deal so $11M a year.

BUT......his hit in year one was only $3.264M due to his base salary being $1.08M and his signing bonus proration being the balance.

Second year base jumps to $10M plus the proration and his hit was $12.184....

BUT after the first two years and almost $16M of his $22M guaranteed paid out....there's a $6.5M savings if they cut him now or trade him.

 

[Firethorn1001]

I honestly don't care if we trade for DK and he gets a deal worth 32/yr - I care only for the structure and what it actually is.

You could honestly give him a $160M / 5 year deal. and have his 4th and 5th year Cap Hits be $50M....that means you could structure his first three years to be just $20M a year...give him $50-$65M guaranteed and you walk after four years and likely only eat somewhere between $5-$10M...perhaps nearly a clean walk again depending on structure.

When I start throwing out #'s I'm thinking more of actual dollars/cap hits. I definitely shouldn't do that given all the ways teams/agents contort contracts to appear like they want so 30M isn't really 30M... A contract like that I wouldn't be pulling my hair out over. Still not a fan of spending prime draft capital to get the 'honor' of paying top money though save in rare cases. Garrett/Crosby sure... Metcalf? Eh..

 

[tynimiller]

When I start throwing out #'s I'm thinking more of actual dollars/cap hits. I definitely shouldn't do that given all the ways teams/agents contort contracts to appear like they want so 30M isn't really 30M... A contract like that I wouldn't be pulling my hair out over. Still not a fan of spending prime draft capital to get the 'honor' of paying top money though save in rare cases. Garrett/Crosby sure... Metcalf? Eh..

Oh I'd fully support Gute announcing he's signing Adams, Lockett or even Kirk instead of giving up massive assets....okay Kirk I wouldn't necessarily due to he is too pure slot. Adams and Lockett are awesome signings as you don't need to wait, sign right now as they were released and no compensatory impact.

 

[Dantés]

Sadly,

Good wake-up call Dantes. I think you're right and I think that's the disconnect with Seattle. It's not that he's unhappy with the team, he wants more $$$. That's just a guess. (And I think his current contract is $24 mil AAV, so yeah, he'll be looking at $30 mil plus.)

So in addition to at least a 1st round pick and a player like Doubs, the Packers would have to pay Metcalf top WR money. I really like Metcalf, but that's a bridge too far. I don't think Gluten or the FO will go for that. I hope they won't.

So sign a FA like Slayton, draft a speedster, and save some money for Edge or CB. And I've never much cared for trading for a player. The acquiring team almost always has to give up too much. The Packers have options and aren't desperate.

Interested in getting thoughts form people on the forum.

I will be very surprised if the Seahawks get a 1st round pick for Metcalf. Right now the negotiations are happening through the media. First you see the report that a team has offered a 3rd and then you see the report that they want a 1st and a 2nd.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that it shakes out to pick #55 and Romeo Doubs for D.K. Metcalf, a 2025 6th, and a 2026 4th.

In that case, I would actually be fine giving him the contract for 32M AAV for a few reasons:

1) This FA class doesn't have many players worth spending big on; I'm not opposed to signing Darius Slayton, but I would rather spend twice the money on Metcalf.

2) The Packers are unlikely to give big extensions to any of the receivers currently on the roster, so the position can handle a big cap hit for the next ~3 seasons.

3) The role/skillset that Metcalf brings carries outsized value to the offense beyond his actual production; they must find someone who threatens vertically.

4) Goal 1A for the organization is and must-be getting Love's progress back on track; if that doesn't happen, basically nothing else matters.

 

[tynimiller]

OH ****!!!! Bengals cannot afford Trey Hendrickson's future and have granted him permission to seek a trade.

NOW THIS DUDE IS WORTH GETTING RID OF OUR 1st!!!

@Dantés you see that!

 

[Heyjoe4]

I will be very surprised if the Seahawks get a 1st round pick for Metcalf. Right now the negotiations are happening through the media. First you see the report that a team has offered a 3rd and then you see the report that they want a 1st and a 2nd.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that it shakes out to pick #55 and Romeo Doubs for D.K. Metcalf, a 2025 6th, and a 2026 4th.

In that case, I would actually be fine giving him the contract for 32M AAV for a few reasons:

1) This FA class doesn't have many players worth spending big on; I'm not opposed to signing Darius Slayton, but I would rather spend twice the money on Metcalf.

2) The Packers are unlikely to give big extensions to any of the receivers currently on the roster, so the position can handle a big cap hit for the next ~3 seasons.

3) The role/skillset that Metcalf brings carries outsized value to the offense beyond his actual production; they must find someone who threatens vertically.

4) Goal 1A for the organization is and must-be getting Love's progress back on track; if that doesn't happen, basically nothing else matters.

Yeah I read about some potential suitors, and it looks like Seattle has, or will have to, give up on the first round pick demand. That makes the deal much more interesting. And it needs to be because whoever gets him will have to deal with his salary requirements.

 

[Heyjoe4]

OH ****!!!! Bengals cannot afford Trey Hendrickson's future and have granted him permission to seek a trade.

NOW THIS DUDE IS WORTH GETTING RID OF OUR 1st!!!

Don't know much about Hendrickson. Can you expand on what you like about the guy versus Myles Garrett?

 

[tynimiller]

Don't know much about Hendrickson. Can you expand on what you like about the guy versus Myles Garrett?

He is a 30 year old phenom!

Drafted by New Orleans - played there four years and it wasn't until his final year he BROKE OUT with a full 15 games played/started and put up 13.5 sacks

Cinci signed him and he has been arguably the best edge player in the league over the last four seasons.

2024 - 16.1% pressure rate per pass rush snap (INSANE LEVEL) / 18 sacks PFF / 83 pressures/ played 823 snaps

His last 5 seasons his AVERAGES are 16.2 sacks a year and 74.6 pressures - and those figures include a partial year in 2020. If you do the last four he has averaged 16.75 sacks and 80.75 pressures.

His PFF grades are ELITE LEVEL

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Schultz]

It seems Kirk is no longer an option.

 

[McKnowledge]

Oh I'd fully support Gute announcing he's signing Adams, Lockett or even Kirk instead of giving up massive assets....okay Kirk I wouldn't necessarily due to he is too pure slot. Adams and Lockett are awesome signings as you don't need to wait, sign right now as they were released and no compensatory impact.

Lockett?!!! Absolutely not.

Revamp the WR room!!!

Sign Adams, sign Slayton, feature Reed in the slot.

Everyone falls in line or can go.

Surround Love with consistent weapons, help him...help the team.

Let him play like a superstar within the system.

Enough of RAS projects, who can play, willing to learn and improve and contribute to the success of the team.

 

[tynimiller]

Lockett?!!! Absolutely not.

Revamp the WR room!!!

Sign Adams, sign Slayton, feature Reed in the slot.

Everyone falls in line or can go.

Surround Love with consistent weapons, help him...help the team.

Let him play like a superstar within the system.

Enough of RAS projects, who can play, willing to learn and improve and contribute to the success of the team.

The way you essentially say high RAS guys aren’t willing to learn or improve and contribute is funny.

You do realize Lockett isn’t some piece of trash?

Adams and Slayton together are going to cost $30-$35M a year…pass BUT I love the idea of one of them.

 

[McKnowledge]

The way you essentially say high RAS guys aren’t willing to learn or improve and contribute is funny.

You do realize Lockett isn’t some piece of trash?

Adams and Slayton together are going to cost $30-$35M a year…pass BUT I love the idea of one of them.

Lockett played for Seattle for 10 years. He was All-Pro as a rookie. He is not trash.

He was a leader on the team, he's taken pay cuts, restructures, and been a consummate professional on and off the field.

However, Seattle still released him...there's a reason...he's washed!!!

He will more than likely retire and remain in Seattle as a part of the organization.

Davante Adams will not command anything more than 25M if he's serious about contending for a title. He's still getting paid by the Jets via Raiders.

Slayton doesn't have a market after playing in Siberia with a defunct Daniel Jones and a pedestrian Tommy DeVito.

He is talented, but he has to prove himself.

A 1-year deal is best for both sides.

 

[Schultz]

I am a big no on Metcalf also. For what it would cost in totality is too much for a guy who IMO is not even the best receiver on his team.

 

[tynimiller]

Lockett played for Seattle for 10 years. He was All-Pro as a rookie. He is not trash.

He was a leader on the team, he's taken pay cuts, restructures, and been a consummate professional on and off the field.

However, Seattle still released him...there's a reason...he's washed!!!

He will more than likely retire and remain in Seattle as a part of the organization.

Davante Adams will not command anything more than 25M if he's serious about contending for a title. He's still getting paid by the Jets via Raiders.

Slayton doesn't have a market after playing in Siberia with a defunct Daniel Jones and a pedestrian Tommy DeVito.

He is talented, but he has to prove himself.

A 1-year deal is best for both sides.

Slayton easily will command over $10m/yr and market indicates more like $15m/yr. Dude has been a consistent producer on a weak team and terrible QB play.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Lockett played for Seattle for 10 years. He was All-Pro as a rookie. He is not trash.

He was a leader on the team, he's taken pay cuts, restructures, and been a consummate professional on and off the field.

However, Seattle still released him...there's a reason...he's washed!!!

He will more than likely retire and remain in Seattle as a part of the organization.

Davante Adams will not command anything more than 25M if he's serious about contending for a title. He's still getting paid by the Jets via Raiders.

Slayton doesn't have a market after playing in Siberia with a defunct Daniel Jones and a pedestrian Tommy DeVito.

He is talented, but he has to prove himself.

A 1-year deal is best for both sides.

You and Ty are both making good points.

I do like Slayton, but he's gonna cost about $15 mil AAV and he'll want and get a 3 year deal, somewhere.

My preference is doing a deal for Metcalf. Ty rightly points out that this takes Slayton off the table, as the Packers can't/won't pay two receivers approx $45 mil AAV with some worthy players of their own coming up for second contracts.

It sounds like a deal for Metcalf won't require a 1st rounder. I like that better, and now that Metcalf has publicly asked for a trade, Seattle might have lost leverage to get a #1. We just need to realize that Metcalf is gonna get $30 mil or so AAV.

Absent Metcalf, I'd like to see a deal for Slayton. The Giants seem to be a team where very good players go to languish.

And whether it's Metcalf or Slayton or some other mix of guys, Gluten should take a speedy WR late day 2, early day 3.

Im not crazy about Lockett, but if Gluten runs out of options, he could be a decent one-year rental.