Packers 2026 Offseason

[JosephC]

At the combine, Gutekunst was asked about Van Ness' 5th year option, and Gutekunst immediately replied with, "you don't make decisions based on what a player has been, you make decisions on what you think a player could be."  That is typical GM-speak for, "he has not earned that 5th year option, but I spent a #1 pick on him so we will be picking up the option."  Common-sense man would look and say, "is the previous 3 years an unreliable indicator of what Van Ness will be in year #5?"

Ultimately, there will be two things that play key roles in the Van Ness decision.  First, will Van Ness be a fit for Gannon's defense?  Second, it will be more of a cap decision based on extensions and releases.  I would think they would prioritize extensions to Watson, Kraft, Nixon and others over committing money to Van Ness.  Then they have to come up with a plan for likely releases, that would probably start with Jacobs, Banks, Hargrave and McManus.  Do the math.  Add in the money for the extensions that they anticipate getting done, subtract out the money that they would free up with anticipated cuts, and then they have to see if they have roughly 15 million left over.

[CheezWizHed]

49 minutes ago, JosephC said:

Common-sense man would look and say, "is the previous 3 years an unreliable indicator of what Van Ness will be in year #5?"

I think the main difference between Enagbare and LVN is that Enagbare's development is maxed and LVN still has ceiling he could achieve. Doesn't mean he will reach it... just that there is an opportunity. 

 

50 minutes ago, JosephC said:

First, will Van Ness be a fit for Gannon's defense?  

This is a very good point that isn't totally clear.

[Sixtolezcano]

LVN’s option was picked up today @ $14.5M per Ryan Wood (GBPG).

[adambr2]

15 minutes ago, Sixtolezcano said:

LVN’s option was picked up today @ $14.5M per Ryan Wood (GBPG).

That’s kind of shocking. Were they watching the same LVN we were the last 3 years ?

This is the same organization that picked up the 5th year option of Darnell Savage. I think they are suffering from some sunk cost fallacy when it comes to their own 1st round picks.

[LouisEly]

FWIW, PFF has his 2025 grade as 75.5, placing him 27th among 115 edge rushers.

Must have been one helluva beast against the run.

[homer]

6 minutes ago, LouisEly said:

FWIW, PFF has his 2025 grade as 75.5, placing him 27th among 115 edge rushers.

Must have been one helluva beast against the run.

Guessing the difference between 27 and, say, 50 is pretty small. Is there a big drop-off after the top 12 or so?

[LouisEly]

16 minutes ago, homer said:

Guessing the difference between 27 and, say, 50 is pretty small. Is there a big drop-off after the top 12 or so?

Don't know, I can only get for a single player at a time.  Total list costs $$.

Rashan Gary was 53rd at 68.3.  Micah Parsons was 3rd at 92.0.   Enagbare was 71st at 63.6.

[JosephC]

5 hours ago, adambr2 said:

That’s kind of shocking. Were they watching the same LVN we were the last 3 years ?

This is the same organization that picked up the 5th year option of Darnell Savage. I think they are suffering from some sunk cost fallacy when it comes to their own 1st round picks.

I said it before and I'll say it again-

At the combine, Gutekunst was asked about Van Ness' 5th year option, and Gutekunst immediately replied with, "you don't make decisions based on what a player has been, you make decisions on what you think a player could be."  That is typical GM-speak for, "he has not earned that 5th year option, but I spent a #1 pick on him so we will be picking up the option."

[adambr2]

On 4/29/2026 at 9:33 AM, JosephC said:

At the combine, Gutekunst was asked about Van Ness' 5th year option, and Gutekunst immediately replied with, "you don't make decisions based on what a player has been, you make decisions on what you think a player could be."  That is typical GM-speak for, "he has not earned that 5th year option, but I spent a #1 pick on him so we will be picking up the option."  Common-sense man would look and say, "is the previous 3 years an unreliable indicator of what Van Ness will be in year #5?"

Ultimately, there will be two things that play key roles in the Van Ness decision.  First, will Van Ness be a fit for Gannon's defense?  Second, it will be more of a cap decision based on extensions and releases.  I would think they would prioritize extensions to Watson, Kraft, Nixon and others over committing money to Van Ness.  Then they have to come up with a plan for likely releases, that would probably start with Jacobs, Banks, Hargrave and McManus.  Do the math.  Add in the money for the extensions that they anticipate getting done, subtract out the money that they would free up with anticipated cuts, and then they have to see if they have roughly 15 million left over.

I am not saying that Gute is a bad GM, but this organization as a whole doesn’t weight past performance nearly heavily enough into their analysis of what a player will become. They don’t do it at the collegiate level, and they don’t do it at the professional level.

In a vacuum, yes, you are paying for a player’s future, not their past. However, as you alluded to, the past 3 seasons should give you some indication on what the future holds.

Picking up 5th year options of guys like Savage and LVN is poor procedure based on, again, a sunk cost fallacy simply because of the level of investment.

If LVN were a 4th round pick we wouldn’t be dreaming of giving him a 1 year, 15M dollar extension for 2027.

[GAME05]

But isn't there a value in being able to delay a resolution on the position by a year? $15M for a $9M player who might be better with more playing time still doesn't seem that bad compared to $20M for a same-production FA or having to play a bunch of 1st- and 2nd-year players who aren't ready. 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I am OK with picking up LVN's option. They had to do it by today, so it makes a bit of sense. If he has the season he was going to have last year before getting hurt, which looked to be that of a pretty average+ edge, he's priced out and likely gets a few years elsewhere. I still think it's pretty likely he walks after year 5, but you could do worse than him as a rotational piece/fringe starter on their DL for $13.8 million.

I don't think this is an example of sunk cost at all. It's a value decision for a team that doesn't have a lot of splash money laying around. They have been pretty open cutting ties to mediocre bust picks, so I am not really seeing that as a valid critique either. Ted definitely let random guys hang around forever, Gute has been pretty good about sending his mistakes to the street.

[CheezWizHed]

Out of curiosity, I scanned what FA Edge players were getting this year:

• Jaelan Phillips - 4years, $120M
• Trey Hendrickson - 4 years, $112M
• Odafe Oweh - 4 years, $100M
• Boye Mafe - 3 years, $60M
• Kwity Paye - 3 years, $48M (ironically, he had his 5th year option declined)
• K'Lavon Chaisson - 1 year, $12M
• Joseph Ossai - 3 year, $36M
• Arnold Ebiketie - 1 year, $7.3M
• Bradley Chubb - 3 years, $43.5M
• Kingsley Enagbare - 1 year, $10M
• Al-Quadin Muhammad - 1 year, $6M

TBH, there are only two players on the list that have a strong history of performance... and Phillips has as many injury problems as LVN.  There is a lot of "pay for potential" going on at the edge.  Oweh, Mafe, and Paye all look like teams grabbing a player they hope will break out (the Zadarius Smith contract). 

To me the biggest risk of LVN's one year contract is his injury history.  

 

[OldHeidelberg]

1 hour ago, GAME05 said:

But isn't there a value in being able to delay a resolution on the position by a year? $15M for a $9M player who might be better with more playing time still doesn't seem that bad compared to $20M for a same-production FA or having to play a bunch of 1st- and 2nd-year players who aren't ready. 

Yes, salaries are growing so fast it just doesn't seem like big number for a 1 year extension. They declined with Quay but he is not an edge. Also, I think their cap situation looks better next year than it did this year at Quay decision time. Now they have their starter opposite Micah for 2 years and can develop the young guys in the rotation around them. I am fine with this, it's similar to the Watson extension which I think paid off. 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

11 minutes ago, OldHeidelberg said:

Yes, salaries are growing so fast it just doesn't seem like big number for a 1 year extension. They declined with Quay but he is not an edge. Also, I think their cap situation looks better next year than it did this year at Quay decision time. Now they have their starter opposite Micah for 2 years and can develop the young guys in the rotation around them. I am fine with this, it's similar to the Watson extension which I think paid off. 

Someone would have paid Watson a shocking amount of money had they not given him that $11mm. It bought them some time at the table. I'm fully expecting him to sign a longer extension this year.

[CheezWizHed]

The Packers finally get long time target Chase Claypool!  Kind of... he is a tryout player at mini-camp this weekend.  Pretty lucky miss to have the Bears' second round pick be better then our second round pick.