Packers 2026 Offseason

[OldHeidelberg]

Willis signs with Dolphins 3 years $67.5 with 45 guaranteed. I think that should net us a 3rd?

[homer]

2 minutes ago, OldHeidelberg said:

Willis signs with Dolphins 3 years $67.5 with 45 guaranteed. I think that should net us a 3rd?

Good for Malik. I will be rooting for him.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

2 minutes ago, homer said:

Good for Malik. I will be rooting for him.

Same. I wish it wasn't with that hot mess of a franchise but I suppose any starting QB vacancy is going to be for a hot mess. At least Miami is a nice place to be. 

[homer]

Dang, Enagbare signed with the Jets. Well, another comp pick for 2027 I guess.

[JosephC]

overthecap is projecting a 4th round pick for Willis and a 6th round pick for Enagbare.  One would think the 6th rounder for Enagbare will get cancelled by a free agent signing.  As far as the Willis pick, that depends on how high Gutekunst plays in the market.  When people were talking about 2 3rds and 2 4ths, I had figured the team was guaranteed to have at least one of the 4th round picks cancelled.  I was thinking that the lower end free agent losses would offset many of the signings, but one of those lower end free agent losses would have been Rhyan, and now that he is back, that changes the lower end cancellation part somewhat.  It's all really dependent on if Gutekunst approaches free agent signings.  Will he just go for two high end guys and then maybe one lower end guy?  Or does he just go with one high end guy and then four or five lower end guys.  All this changes when the Packers start signing free agents.

https://overthecap.com/compensatory-formula

[CheezWizHed]

2 hours ago, JosephC said:

This really hasn't come up on this board, but I've seen it mentioned on other websites how the Packers need to avoid certain free agent signings so they don't compromise possible compensatory picks for the 2027 draft.

I don't get it.

Everybody celebrates giving up 2 first round picks for an edge rusher in a clear "go for it" move in 2025.  So the team starts off well and then completely flops down the stretch, one reason being is that the edge rusher got hurt.  So then we move into season #2 with the edge rusher and all of a sudden we are worried about losing a fourth round pick?  It's pretty unlikely the Packers will be playing in 20+ million APY territory, so in terms of the cancellation chart, a third round pick should be pretty safe no matter what they do in free agency.  I don't know if Packer fans are gun-shy with free agents after Banks and Hobbs, but if there is a good free agent cornerback or offensive lineman or nose tackle that looks like he can help in 2026, it doesn't seem like the time the team should be worrying about losing a late fourth round pick.

Because draft picks are a team's lifeblood while FA is a double-edged sword.  FA are picking through other team's leftovers while paying for a full price meal.  Yes, you can find good players (McKinney, Jacobs), but also find out why teams didn't spend all the money on that player (Hobbs, Banks).  In all cases, they tend to be expensive.  

It's fine to dip into the FA market to fill your gaps, but if you can't draft well and are constantly filling your roster with expensive FAs, you tend to be one of the worst teams in the league.  And after giving up two 1st round picks, making sure we have more draft picks (even lower ones) is important.  In fact, given Gute's history with 1st round picks, we might make out better with 3rd and 4th rounders. 

[CheezWizHed]

12 minutes ago, JosephC said:

overthecap is projecting a 4th round pick for Willis and a 6th round pick for Enagbare.  One would think the 6th rounder for Enagbare will get cancelled by a free agent signing.  As far as the Willis pick, that depends on how high Gutekunst plays in the market.  When people were talking about 2 3rds and 2 4ths, I had figured the team was guaranteed to have at least one of the 4th round picks cancelled.  I was thinking that the lower end free agent losses would offset many of the signings, but one of those lower end free agent losses would have been Rhyan, and now that he is back, that changes the lower end cancellation part somewhat.  It's all really dependent on if Gutekunst approaches free agent signings.  Will he just go for two high end guys and then maybe one lower end guy?  Or does he just go with one high end guy and then four or five lower end guys.  All this changes when the Packers start signing free agents.

https://overthecap.com/compensatory-formula

We can only max at 4 compensation picks, so if Enagebare is the 5th, getting a FA of equivalent value won't cost any pick either. 

[CheezWizHed]

In hindsight, it is too bad the Packers didn't include Gary last year instead of Clark.  They might've given up much less in terms of draft picks and we'd have been better off last year too. 

[LouisEly]

3 hours ago, JosephC said:

This really hasn't come up on this board, but I've seen it mentioned on other websites how the Packers need to avoid certain free agent signings so they don't compromise possible compensatory picks for the 2027 draft.

I don't get it.

If you're going to sign a FA that will negate a draft pick, you want to make sure it's a player who can be signed to a multi-year deal and is young enough that he can be expected to be a productive player for multiple years.  A guy who fits that profile will likely be expensive and may not fit into their cap and/or plans for extending players (Kraft, etc.).

Just as you wouldn't trade a 3rd or 4th round pick for a one-year stop-gap, you don't want to sacrifice a 3rd or 4th round comp pick for a one-year guy either.  In today's NFL where starting QBs are getting $50M, WR's getting $30M, and guards getting $20M, minimum salary draft picks to fill out a roster and provide quality depth are incredibly valuable assets.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

7 minutes ago, LouisEly said:

If you're going to sign a FA that will negate a draft pick, you want to make sure it's a player who can be signed to a multi-year deal and is young enough that he can be expected to be a productive player for multiple years.  A guy who fits that profile will likely be expensive and may not fit into their cap and/or plans for extending players (Kraft, etc.).

Just as you wouldn't trade a 3rd or 4th round pick for a one-year stop-gap, you don't want to sacrifice a 3rd or 4th round comp pick for a one-year guy either.  In today's NFL where starting QBs are getting $50M, WR's getting $30M, and guards getting $20M, minimum salary draft picks to fill out a roster and provide quality depth are incredibly valuable assets.

Count me in the minority of fans that couldn't care less about sacrificing a 3rd round pick for a stop gap that contributes meaningfully for a season. 

I would happily give up a 3rd for a 1-year CB that resembles an NFL player, for example. I would agree if we were the Jets or something. Not if we are serious about "contending for championships." 

This is unlikely to be a plausible scenario for the reasons you point out though. If there were someone on the market that fit the profile but had reasons to only sign a 1 year deal, I'd be interested. 

[LouisEly]

1 hour ago, JosephC said:

overthecap is projecting a 4th round pick for Willis and a 6th round pick for Enagbare.  One would think the 6th rounder for Enagbare will get cancelled by a free agent signing. 

Part of their formula is snap % and snaps played.  It looks like that is hurting Willis in their projection, but that is because the snap % they are using is retrospective. 

The actual pick awarded, IIRC, is based on snaps and snap % the season after they sign, which is how GB might get a comp pick for Eric Wilson and Josh Myers.  Neither of their contracts signed would have netted them a comp pick, but because they both played such a high % of snaps last season, it boosted their points total to likely in the top 32 and thus the projected comp pick for both of them.

Assuming Willis is the starter and gets 90% of snaps (he got 12% of snaps last year with Love's injuries), I wouldn't bet on that being a 4th round pick just yet.

[homer]

25 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

Count me in the minority of fans that couldn't care less about sacrificing a 3rd round pick for a stop gap that contributes meaningfully for a season. 

I would happily give up a 3rd for a 1-year CB that resembles an NFL player, for example. I would agree if we were the Jets or something. Not if we are serious about "contending for championships." 

This is unlikely to be a plausible scenario for the reasons you point out though. If there were someone on the market that fit the profile but had reasons to only sign a 1 year deal, I'd be interested. 

I would like to know if any NFL gm has given up a 3rd round pick for a 1 year stop gap.

[LouisEly]

4 hours ago, homer said:

yikes

 

 

 

"just 13 pressures, including the playoffs, after the Micah Parsons injury"

Parsons was injured halfway through the Broncos game, week 15.  They played 4.5 games after Parsons got injured.  That means that Gary averaged 2.889 pressures per game after Parsons went down.  Over an 18 game season, 2.889 pressures per game amounts to exactly 52 pressures.

According to PFF, Gary ranked #18 among 116 edge rushers in pressures in 2025 with 54.  He was basically the same player after Parsons' injury as before, he just didn't get any sacks.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

27 minutes ago, homer said:

I would like to know if any NFL gm has given up a 3rd round pick for a 1 year stop gap.

Not exactly what you're looking for but Randy Moss was traded to New England for a 4th. He had two years remaining on the deal and a condition of the trade was scrapping for a one-year deal which they did.  

That's what I'm referring to. If there were a malcontent CB out there with a lot of talent that perhaps had been putting together mediocre seasons in Oakland, I would happily lose a 3rd to take that chance - if we are actually serious about this being a championship team. 

IIRC, Moss would have gone to GB but they were unwilling to do the 3rd. 

[Fear The Chorizo]

5 minutes ago, LouisEly said:

 

"just 13 pressures, including the playoffs, after the Micah Parsons injury"

Parsons was injured halfway through the Broncos game, week 15.  They played 4.5 games after Parsons got injured.  That means that Gary averaged 2.889 pressures per game after Parsons went down.  Over an 18 game season, 2.889 pressures per game amounts to exactly 52 pressures.

According to PFF, Gary ranked #18 among 116 edge rushers in pressures in 2025 with 54.  He was basically the same player after Parsons' injury as before, he just didn't get any sacks.

Pressures alone don't win you games on defense if they dont result in enough sacks/incompletions/interceptions.  And he didn't give the Packers enough pressures, either.  IMO pressures leading to a sack directly are a ton different than a PFF- interpreted rush where he beats his 1 on 1 lineman (something a guy paid his salary should do pretty often), but the rush had no chance of ending the play with a sack or even forcing an incompletion.  The fact Gary had zilch in the sack column once the calendar turned to November says it all.

Fact is, Gary had a bad 2025 season despite getting off to a great start with Parsons on the other side of the line from him - his production didn't come close to warranting keeping him around compared to the $$ savings the Packers get (some this year, much more in 2027), and thats why he isnt a Packer anymore.

[homer]

16 minutes ago, LouisEly said:

 

"just 13 pressures, including the playoffs, after the Micah Parsons injury"

Parsons was injured halfway through the Broncos game, week 15.  They played 4.5 games after Parsons got injured.  That means that Gary averaged 2.889 pressures per game after Parsons went down.  Over an 18 game season, 2.889 pressures per game amounts to exactly 52 pressures.

According to PFF, Gary ranked #18 among 116 edge rushers in pressures in 2025 with 54.  He was basically the same player after Parsons' injury as before, he just didn't get any sacks.

My "yikes" was in reference to the guys he sacked. Outside of Daniels...he had a type.

Gary was ok. I don't think he sucked but for that money you need more out of the position. He also had his highest missed tackle % since his rookie year. Maybe he was injured? I dunno but totally fine getting a 4th round pick for him. 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

14 minutes ago, homer said:

My "yikes" was in reference to the guys he sacked. Outside of Daniels...he had a type.

Gary was ok. I don't think he sucked but for that money you need more out of the position. He also had his highest missed tackle % since his rookie year. Maybe he was injured? I dunno but totally fine getting a 4th round pick for him. 

At the time of signing his contract it placed him 5th-10th in the NFL at his position depending on how you want to interpret the cap gymnastics. 

For that money you better do more than sack the same 3 stiffs half a dozen times. 

And again, if anyone looks at his actual sacks, at least half are a stiff running away from Parsons and into him. 

Cherry-picked PFF baloney doesn't change that this guy was a Temu KGB last year. 

Gary was a bust. Not a draft bust, bust a bust on his extension, 100%. 

[LouisEly]

1 hour ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

Fact is, Gary had a bad 2025 season despite getting off to a great start with Parsons on the other side of the line from him

There is a big difference between "having a bad season"/"sucked" and "not worth his contract". 

He was not worth his contract.  But to say that he "had a bad season" is not factually correct.  Ranking top 30 in sacks and top 20 in pressures is not a bad season.  And did his pressures lead to sacks by others or incompletions?  If he truly "had a bad season", nobody would have traded for him.

Joe Flacco was 32nd among all QBs in number of times sacked (played 13 games).  Aaron Rodgers was 17th.  (Jalen Daniels 34th.).  Some of those guys are harder to sack than you give them credit for.  And if you want to play that game, here is who Parsons sacked:

Jared Goff (3.5 times - 8th in # of times sacked)
Jalen Daniels (only 1/2 sack, 34th)
Dak Prescott (14th)
Jacoby Brissett (3 times - 5th)
Aaron Rodgers (17th)
Jamies Winston (1.5 times - 56th, but only played 3 games)
J.J. McCarthy (2 times - 20th, but only played 10 games)

That's it. Looks worse than the list of guys Gary sacked.   Take out the 6.5 times he sacked Goff (8th) and Brissett (5th), and what do you have?  A half sack against Jalen Daniels.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

28 minutes ago, LouisEly said:

There is a big difference between "having a bad season"/"sucked" and "not worth his contract". 

He was not worth his contract.  But to say that he "had a bad season" is not factually correct.  Ranking top 30 in sacks and top 20 in pressures is not a bad season.  And did his pressures lead to sacks by others or incompletions?  If he truly "had a bad season", nobody would have traded for him.

Joe Flacco was 32nd among all QBs in number of times sacked (played 13 games).  Aaron Rodgers was 17th.  (Jalen Daniels 34th.).  Some of those guys are harder to sack than you give them credit for.  And if you want to play that game, here is who Parsons sacked:

Jared Goff (3.5 times - 8th in # of times sacked)
Jalen Daniels (only 1/2 sack, 34th)
Dak Prescott (14th)
Jacoby Brissett (3 times - 5th)
Aaron Rodgers (17th)
Jamies Winston (1.5 times - 56th, but only played 3 games)
J.J. McCarthy (2 times - 20th, but only played 10 games)

That's it. Looks worse than the list of guys Gary sacked.   Take out the 6.5 times he sacked Goff (8th) and Brissett (5th), and what do you have?  A half sack against Jalen Daniels.

I guess Micah Parsons should have sacked quarterbacks he didn't play against. That would have been really impressive. I mean this is truly wild gymnastics to make Gary sound like a good player. 

Parsons impacted the game on every snap. Anyone watching saw it. He didn't need to stockpile sacks, even though he did plenty of that. You never knew Gary was on the field. 

I'm done with the PFF crap, but even that stuff shows the galaxy between those two. Parsons is their 2nd highest rated pass rusher, contrasted with Gary ranking 40th and 56th and 49th in productivity, win rate and pressure rate.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I really wish I knew what Gary did on this play: 

 

[homer]

At the end of the day, Gary was good enough to get a 4th round pick in a trade. That's how good the league thought he was.

[LouisEly]

Quay Walker to the Raiders.  Was projected to get $14M/year and got $13.5M/year (3 years, $40.5M) with $28M guaranteed.

Per Next Gen Stats, Walker's 4.5% missed tackle rate in 2025 was 3rd lowest among LBs with at least 100 tackle attempts.  His 28 yards given up after missed tackles was the lowest.

[LouisEly]

Packers formally release Elgton Jenkins.  

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Walker is another one I couldn't care less about losing...but not sure how it makes them better. Pretty awful 1st round pick when they don't make it to a 2nd contract...the athleticism just never seemed to align with playmaking. They needed these guys to be stars and they were just...well, guys. 

Enagbare is the only guy I wish they could have kept for the right price. 

[JosephC]

9 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

Because draft picks are a team's lifeblood while FA is a double-edged sword.  FA are picking through other team's leftovers while paying for a full price meal.  Yes, you can find good players (McKinney, Jacobs), but also find out why teams didn't spend all the money on that player (Hobbs, Banks).  In all cases, they tend to be expensive.  

It's fine to dip into the FA market to fill your gaps, but if you can't draft well and are constantly filling your roster with expensive FAs, you tend to be one of the worst teams in the league.  And after giving up two 1st round picks, making sure we have more draft picks (even lower ones) is important.  In fact, given Gute's history with 1st round picks, we might make out better with 3rd and 4th rounders. 

I agree with everything you just said.  My point was that it would be a stupid approach to use two first rounders on Parsons, and then avoid signing players the next off-season because you are afraid of losing a 4th round pick, or a couple 4th round picks.  If you are going to sink two first rounders in a player, you need to put a team around that player.  If you are scared of losing a 4th round pick, then what was the idea of sinking two first rounders and 160 million in cap space into one player?