GREEN BAY − Green Bay Press-Gazette and PackersNews columnist Pete Dougherty responds to reader questions on the hot topics of the Green Bay Packers’ offseason.
Did the Packers get better this offseason?
Dan in Sussex: Now that the draft is over, looking at who the Packers have added and lost since last season ended, is there realistic hope that they have improved as a team?
Pete Dougherty: Hi everybody, welcome to the final chat until the week of the 2026 regular-season opener. Let’s get right to it with a big-picture question.
Sure, there’s a good chance they’ve improved, especially if you take it from the end of last season, when they were hit hard by injuries to some of their best players. But then yes, they’ll need most or all of those key players to come back from serious injury as well as Christian Watson did last year.
The Packers played much of last season without Tucker Kraft (ACL). He should be game-ready by about the start of the regular season, although even assuming he makes that timeline he’ll still need a few weeks to ramp up to playing full time. But not having him the second half of last season took a bite out of their offense. He’s a difference maker, assuming all goes well with his recovery, which is never a given.
They played the final 3½ regular-season games and playoffs without Micah Parsons (ACL). That obviously was huge. They absolutely need him to make a strong recovery. He’s expected to miss the first three or four games and then presumably will need about a month to ramp up to full-time game action.
Devonte Wyatt (broken lower leg) missed the final seven games, and his absence was noticeable. He’s expected to be ready for training camp.
And Zach Tom (patellar tendon) missed the final five games. He’s their best offensive lineman, and their depth on the line looks shaky right now. They need him to make a strong recovery too. Sounds like he had a partial tear, not a full one, which should help, but it’s still a serious injury that required surgery, so we’ll see.
As for non-injury changes, on offense they lost Romeo Doubs but will in effect be replacing him with Matthew Golden. Doubs is a good, veteran receiver, but Golden is more explosive and talented, and my take is he’ll be an upgrade. He just needs to play.
At least theoretically, Anthony Belton should improve at right guard. He’d never played guard before moving there in the middle of last season. He was a road grader as a run blocker but had issues in pass protection last season.
They’ll also have Watson all season instead of having to wait for his return from ACL, as they did last year. And Jayden Reed is healthy after missing 11 games because of a broken collarbone.
The Packers also have ascending young players on defense in Edgerrin Cooper, Evan Williams and Javon Bullard.
They have more talent at cornerback with the signing of Benjamin St.-Juste and drafting of Brandon Cisse in the second round.
There’s good reason to think Cisse will be at least challenge for a starting job. I’m not at all suggesting that the Packers have an abundance of talent at cornerback, but Cisse at least upgrades the talent at that position. It would help the Packers a lot if he’s good enough to start as a rookie, if not at the beginning of the season then at some point.
Signing free agent DT Javon Hargrave comes with risk, because he turned 33 earlier this year and could hit a steep decline. But if he has one more good season left in him, there’s a little more more talent on the defensive line. He in effect replaces Colby Wooden.
The Packers also could use an early contribution from third-round pick Chris McClellan at nose tackle. If they get that – and there will be ample opportunity for him – their defensive line should be stronger inside.
Are there issues? Many. Some of those injured players might not be the same as they were before getting hurt. Other players are sure to be lost to injury this season. Depth at running back and the offensive line is very shaky. Plenty of other things could go wrong.
But there’s talent on the roster and some young players who should be on the rise and hitting their primes. Jordan Love is still at a time in his career when he should be improving.
So yeah, there’s plenty of reason to think the Packers will be a better team than they were at the end of last season. I’ll be surprised if they’re not. The question is whether it will be better enough to make a deep playoff run.
Can the Packers really count on MarShawn Lloyd?
Scott Velasquez: The RB room seems a little light and highly dependent on Jacobs. Do you foresee management getting getting a veteran RB before training camp? They need to add some explosiveness and MarShawn Lloyd has already proven to be unreliable.
Alison G: Unless the Packers are waiting for cuts, they seem to be banking on MarShawn Lloyd as the top backup running back. Weren’t most of his injuries soft tissue in nature? And didn’t he go through the same program [at UW] that seems to have worked for Christian Watson? If so, maybe backup RB isn’t as dire as it seems. What say you, Pete?
Dougherty: Backup running back was one of my big questions immediately after the draft. It’s a crucial position in Matt LaFleur’s offense, and it’s such a high-attrition position you really need a couple of good ones to get through a season.
So yeah, I’m still thinking that somehow or other the Packers need to add another running back. I suppose it could be in the next couple of weeks, though more likely during training camp, at the end of camp or maybe in a trade before the trade deadline during the season.
The Packers did sign an undrafted rookie running back, Central Florida’s Jaden Nixon. But this was a weak RB class overall, and I doubt they expect him to come in as a rookie and be their No. 2.
He’s a small back (5-foot-9, 199 pounds) and averaged 6.1 yards a carry at Oklahoma State, Western Michigan and Central Florida in his college career. There’s always the chance he’ll surprise and win the No. 2 role if Lloyd’s injury issues continue – it’s worth remembering that Emanuel Wilson was undrafted and became the No. 2. But it’s not something anyone should be counting on.
So yeah, it seems like a really big roll of the dice with Lloyd. His run of soft-tissue injury after soft-tissue injury over two years has been incredible.
As Alison G. said, Lloyd did visit a biomechanics clinic in California later last year to try to get to the bottom of his soft-tissue issues. Our Tom Silverstein reported that the clinic determined an ACL tear he sustained in college was making him susceptible to muscle pulls.
He returned to practice at the end of the season but never was activated to the roster. But he’s had quite a while to work through whatever rehab/maintenance program prescribed.
So the Packers might have reason to be optimistic. But it still looks like a big roll of the dice. For what it’s worth, right after the draft GM Brian Gutekunst said he had no plans to add a veteran back. LaFleur said backup running back is something they’ll be monitoring in the offseason.
It’s worth remembering too that you never know what they might be thinking. They paid Brandon McManus his $1M roster bonus in March, so it looked like he was for sure their kicker again this year. Then they surprised everyone with their trade of two D7s to move up for Trey Smack with the last pick of the sixth round.
It could be they’re content to see whether Lloyd can get through camp healthy, and if not add a back via a waiver claim after the roster cutdown, or make a trade. Or even wait until early in the season to make a trade.
Regardless, I don’t see any way they can go into the season with Chris Brooks as their No. 2. He’s a good special-teams player, but he’s not much of a threat with the ball in his hands. I know the Packers and some observers like him as a third-down back because of his blocking, but if I’m a defensive coordinator I’m fine seeing him take the field on third downs because you don’t have to worry about him making a play.
Is Trevon Diggs still a possibility? Anyone else post-June 1?
Paul S: Hi Pete, thanks, as always, for chatting with us fans, and hope you’ve had a bit of a chance to take a breath now that the draft is over. So, it looks like the Packers will be one of the youngest teams again, with a lot of our depth being relatively low-experience guys.
That said, they have room to add a couple free agents. Do you have any insight on whether they would be interested in re-signing Trevon Diggs, now that he’s been out there a while, and his price might be more cap-friendly? What other current FAs or possible June 1 cuts do you see as players they may target? And do you think they would be able to trade McManus for a pick next year, since they also have Lucas Havrisik, along with draft pick Smack?
Dougherty: Sure looks to me like the Packers have zero interest in Diggs.
You’re right that his price might have come down, but everything points to them having no interest in bringing him back. Very much looks like they just took a flier on him for the playoffs because of how badly off they were at cornerback at the end of the season, and that was all they needed to see.
When they claimed him on waivers I’d heard Diggs wasn’t anywhere near the player he’d been before his ACL tear in 2023. I suspect that after watching him in practice and the half-game he played against Minnesota in the regular-season finale, the Packers decided he was too far into decline to bring back.
At other positions, the list of veteran RBs available, for instance, isn’t pretty. It’s almost all old backs such as Joe Mixon (30 in July), Austin Ekeler (31 in May), Raheem Mostert (34), Nick Chubb (30) and Najee Harris (recently turned 28). Running back is the ultimate young man’s position.
It’s doubtful there is any help there. It looks like Gutekunst is willing to wait it out at that position, see if Lloyd makes it through camp and adjust from there.
A McManus trade is possible, though I’d think something like that wouldn’t happen until late in camp or at the roster cutdown to 53. I just don’t see how they can be confident Smack is the guy without having seen him kick in training camp.
There will be a lot of pressure in their competition in camp, every kick will be under scrutiny by the coaches, scouts, teammates, media and fans. I would think the Packers will have to see how he does under those circumstances for several weeks before committing to him.
Why did Dani Dennis-Sutton last until Round 4?
Tullibee Tom, Scandia, MN: Pete, Gutey seems to have found a possible gem again in the fourth round. Dani Dennis-Sutton according to the top draft pundits was a second- or third-round projection. His performance at the top level of college football for multiple years and athletic measurables support that projection.
So why did he drop to the 120th pick with every team passing on him at least once since the late third round? Did every team in need of an edge rusher already pick their guy? Was there something in his personality or background that didn’t seem right? I’m curious if anything is out there that was rumored and not reported.
Also, did you happen to catch his harp-assisted announcement by Gavin James in Ireland? Without a doubt the best presentation in this year’s draft.
Dougherty: Gutekunst said the Packers tried to trade into the bottom of the third round on Day 2 to get him, so they clearly liked him. But I do wonder, if that’s the case, why Gutekunst didn’t try again for a shorter trade up in the fourth round.
At any rate, I asked four scouts about Dennis-Sutton before the draft. One thought he was an underachiever and considered him a late-round pick. There probably were some teams that agreed.
The other three liked Dennis-Sutton but not unequivocally. They all thought a little something was missing despite the size and testing.
He’s not a quick-twitch guy. He’s more a power rusher. He isn’t one of those bendy, instinctive rushers who just finds a way around the edge and to the QB. He also isn’t one of those guys that brings a mad-dog temperament to a defense. All that probably pushed him down some boards.
You also might be right that teams in most need of an edge player drafted someone in the first three rounds. There was decent depth at that position in this draft, and 10 of them went in the first three rounds. Edge rushers are so valuable that you’d still think if a guy was good he wouldn’t last too long. But 10 different teams picked those 10 edge players, that’s a lot of teams that probably moved on to other positions for the rest of the draft.
Dennis-Sutton’s production was pretty good at a major school – he had 8½ sacks in each of his final two seasons at Penn State. One scout I talked to did say he was a little disappointed Dennis-Sutton didn’t do more his final season, he thought he didn’t play quite as well as the year before even if the numbers were about the same.
But Dennis-Sutton has the size (6-5⅝, 256) Gutekunst loves in edge players to hold up against the run. He tested great. I thought it was interesting that as far as testing goes, one of the comps on MockDraftable was Danielle Hunter, a former late third-round pick who has been one of the NFL’s better rushers the last 10 years. That doesn’t for a second mean Dennis-Sutton will become Hunter, it only means their physical testing and size are similar. But it was interesting nonetheless.
And yes, I did see the pick announcement from Ireland. Have to say that was pretty good. I got a kick out of those talented harpists plucking the notes to ESPN’s the-pick-is-in tones.
What was Gutekunst’s draft strategy?
Dave Sommers: Pete, I hear for the draft you always want to draft the best available player, no matter what position, why Gutey doesn’t believe in that?
Dougherty: From what I’ve observed in his eight previous drafts, Gutekunst does believe in drafting the best player available. That’s how to explain a pick like Savion Williams in the third round in 2025 after having already taken a receiver (Golden) in the first round.
But a lot of this is semantics, and no team can just take the highest-rated player on its board every pick. You could end up drafting seven or eight guys at the same position, or leaving a position of great need completely unaddressed.
It’s more about taking the best player available as often as possible. You can’t do it all the time because other factors have to play a role.
One of them is the role need plays in draft grades. Bill Belichick’s grading system explicitly factored in need. Part of a prospect’s grade when Belichick was running the Patriots was how the player compared to others at his position already on the roster.
Gutekunst has said the Packers don’t do that, but he frequently talks about the subconscious role need plays in draft grades. Basically, he’s saying that good players at positions of need probably get a little boost in their grade, even if it’s unintentional.
The McClellan pick in the third round is illustrative of that. The Packers had a high grade on him and considered him at No. 52. When he was still on the board as their pick at 84 got closer, Gutekunst traded up seven spots for him.
Now, if McClellan didn’t play a position of such great need, he might not have had quite as high a grade, and even if he did, Gutekunst probably wouldn’t have traded up for him. But Gutekunst badly needed a DT, and McClellan’s grade was much higher than the next defensive tackle on the Packers’ board, so he moved up.
It’s probably safe to say McClellan was the highest-rated player on the Packers’ board at the time they made the trade. They took best player available. But would he have been quite as highly graded if the Packers’ need wasn’t so great? The draft board played a huge factor too. If the drop-off from him to their next DT hadn’t been so great, maybe they don’t make the trade.
There are no pat answers to the need vs. best player available debate. It’s more a general approach to drafting than a how-to book.
Finding good players is difficult. More picks end up being average or below than are above average or really good, even in the first round. But if you have faith in your evaluations, then the more often you lean toward drafting the best player as opposed to need, the better your odds of finding a good player.
Gutekunst’s draft this year was clearly need-based. Need probably affected his grades on some players, and it definitely affected his strategy (trading up, etc.).
Chris: Why give up two draft picks for a kicker when they had limited draft picks?
Dougherty: The explanation Gutekunst gave was that he didn’t see much value in the seventh round.
By that I think he meant he didn’t have many players with draftable grades on them. He had a draftable grade on Smack and wanted serious competition for the kicking job, so he saw more value in spending the two picks on one player with a draftable grade than two picks on players he didn’t have draftable grades on.
He very well might have ended up drafting guys he signed as undrafted free agents. We can’t know that for sure, maybe they missed out on signing someone they might have drafted if he’d kept those picks. But more likely, he would have used those picks on players he signed anyway.
Are Gutekunst’s recent drafts looking up?
Digger: Hi Pete, they say it takes three years to evaluate a draft. You’ve written a lot about Gutey’s big haul in 2022. But 2023 is looking good also, led by Kraft, but also Reed, Lukas Van Ness, Brooks, Dontayvion Wicks, Carrington Valentine. He missed on Luke Musgrave and a few others, but, combined with 2022 class, that was a pretty good haul, agree?
Dougherty: Yes, I’d consider ‘23 a good draft. Assuming Kraft signs a contract extension this year, that will make at least two players from that class signed to second contracts.
The league average is 1.5 or 1.6 per draft class, so two from one class is doing well. If Van Ness ends up doing an extension, that will make it three. Second contracts aren’t the only way to judge a draft class – there’s no single criterion that tells the full story – but I still think it’s the best if you’re only going to use one.
I think Gutekunst’s 2024 class looks good too. Cooper is a stud, Williams is a potential All-Pro and Bullard is an ascending nickel corner. They’re all still a year away from possible second contracts, but there’s a very good chance all three will get one with the Packers. And we’ll all be keeping an eye on whether Jordan Morgan proves to be a keeper at left tackle this year as well.
Packers seem slight at some backups
David Hansen: Who will be the backup C, RB and QB this year?
Dougherty: I’d say Jacob Monk is the leading candidate at backup center, but I wouldn’t rule out fourth-round pick Jager Burton.
Burton started for Kentucky at guard in 2023 and ‘25, but he was the starting center in ‘24. I have to think he’ll get some work at center in camp, and if he’s a quick study he could win the backup job. The Packers have drafted some really good linemen in the fourth round (T.J. Lang, Josh Sitton, David Bakhtiari, Tom). Maybe he’ll be another.
If they really want, the Packers can always use Tom as a fallback at center, but at this point it doesn’t make much sense to move him in there if Sean Rhyan gets hurt. That would open a big hole at right tackle with no ready-made replacement.
At running back, the backup is either Lloyd if he makes it through camp healthy, or someone who’s not on the roster. As said earlier, I don’t see how they could have Brooks as their No. 2 all season. There’s also always the chance the undrafted Nixon wins the job, though that’s a long shot.
As for backup QB, your guess is as good as mine. Right now their No. 2 is Desmond Ridder. He’s started 18 games in the NFL (8-10 record) and was talented enough to be a second-round draft pick. He’s also athletic – his 40 (4.52) vertical (36 inches) and broad jump (10-7) were all 92nd percentile or better among QBs at the combine since 1999, according to MockDraftable – which is good to have in a backup, because if nothing else he can scramble for first downs.
But it’s striking to me that the Packers have been relatively cautious in their public comments about Ridder. LaFleur basically has said they’re just getting to see who Ridder is because he only joined them the week of the final regular-season game last season. LaFleur and Gutekunst say they like his talent, but they don’t say much more. Makes me wonder why.
I wondered if they might try to sign Jimmy Garoppolo, but the latest on him this week is he’s seriously considering retiring. Tyrod Taylor (36 years old) and Cooper Rush (32) are still on the street. Not sure if either is a clear upgrade on Ridder.
There’s always the chance for a trade. They got Malik Willis for a D7 at the end of training camp. Maybe they’ll go for a similarly abandoned QB such as Tennessee’s Will Levis or Indianapolis’ Anthony Richardson. Levis has the far more palatable contract ($2M this year as opposed to Richardson’s $5.4M).
The Packers signed undrafted rookie Kyron Drones of Virginia Tech, but the odds of him being ready to back up Jordan Love as a rookie are slim. They liked Drones enough to bring him in as one of their 30 pre-draft visits. He’s athletic (4.62 40) and it sounds like he has some talent. But even if he ends up being a viable No. 2 quarterback in the future, they need a No. 2 who can help now.
They also have Kyle McCord, who was a sixth-round pick by the Eagles last year. He spent the season on their practice squad. The Packers signed him after the season. I have no idea if he’s a viable candidate.
What will happen to Trey Smack if he doesn’t win the job?
Jakob B: How likely is it that the Packers could keep K Trey Smack on the practice squad at the start of the season if he loses the kicking competition? I’ve seen that proposed by commentators, but I’m skeptical. There are always teams with kicking issues during the season, and you’d think they’d leap at the chance to sign the first kicker drafted this year. Thank you for your insight – I look forward to the return of this column in a few months!
Dougherty: I agree with you.
The Packers almost surely would want to keep Smack on the practice squad if he doesn’t win the job, but if he has a good camp another team will probably claim him on the final cutdown. If not that, there’s a good chance he’d get poached off their practice squad during the season.
The most interesting scenario will be if both kickers have a good camp. Would they decide they prefer sending the vet McManus out there to kick a game-winner in the regular season? Or would they feel good enough about Smack, go with him and hope they’ll avoid growing pains with a team they think can contend for the Super Bowl?
It’s not an easy answer. You generally go with the young player over the old when it’s that close, but with this team at this time, Gutekunst might prefer the vet. You’d think they’d try to trade whichever one loses.
Shawn B: What part of the roster do you think is most vulnerable if there is a major injury to a starter?
Dougherty: Offensive line and running back.
A longer-term injury to Jacobs could be devastating. Even a couple-week injury would make things tough. They’ll have to count on Love to carry them through something like that.
But even if Lloyd gets through camp healthy, what are the chances he makes it through the season, especially if he has to take on starter snaps? He’s flashed talent, so there’s reason to think he’ll do well when he plays. But keeping him on the field would be a big concern.
On the offensive line, the overall depth is shaky. If Burton is good enough to win the backup jobs at guard (and maybe even center), that would help the depth a lot. But there still would be an issue at tackle.
Darian Kinnard is theoretically their swing tackle, but I have trouble seeing them using him at left tackle, and even at right tackle he’s a big step down. Their backup swing tackle in truth might be Belton.
The problem with that is, Belton needs all the work he can get at right guard, where he’s going to be the starter. He’d never played there until halfway through last season. Taking backup tackle snaps in practice will only dilute his work at guard.
Also, moving him would create one of those double shifts that teams try to avoid. It would open the right guard spot, so you’re presumably getting worse at two positions rather than just one. Again, hitting on the Burton pick would be a big help. Who knows, maybe he’ll even be able to challenge Belton for the starting job at RG. Wouldn’t bet on it, but you never know.
Still, if I’m the Packers, backup tackle is a real concern.
Are we sure Devonte Wyatt will get a second contract?
David A: Devonte Wyatt will be a UFA in 2027. There is lots of chatter about a second contract, but he will turn 29 before he ever takes a snap under a new deal. Set aside missing games due to injury in 2024 and 2025, it seems counterintuitive that Gutekunst would extend a player three to four years who is nearly 30 years old. My bet he doesn’t and everyone will be shocked.
Dougherty: Not saying you’re wrong, because the drafting of McClellan at least makes allowing Wyatt to walk after this season a possibility.
But odds are high Gutekunst will extend Wyatt, for a couple of reasons.
One, even if they do a three-year or four-year extension, those deals in effect are two-year contracts with team options thereafter. If they do an extension with Wyatt this offseason, they’d look at it as a guaranteed deal for ‘26 and ‘27, and then take it year-by-year after that.
Wyat is older – he turned 28 in March. In the spring of ‘28, he’ll be 30. If the Packers think he’s in decline, they can cut him. They’d have to eat some dead cap, but teams do that kind of thing all the time.
It’s also worth remembering that Hargrave is both old (turned 31 in February) and expensive ($11.5M average). He very well could end up being a one-year rental. Defensive line is very important, and if the Packers let Wyatt walk next offseason, they could be losing him and Hargrave, and be back to badly needing defensive tackles.
So my guess is they extend Wyatt this offseason with the hopes of getting two or maybe three good years (‘26, ’27 and ‘28) out of him.
Did the Rams cheat with Ty Simpson meeting?
Jeff Delvaux: Ty Simpson has revealed he had a secret meeting with the Rams. That sounds like it’s not within the rules.
Dougherty: It’s within the rules to keep the meeting secret because Sean McVay visited Simpson, not the other way around. Teams have to report to the league the draft prospects they bring in for their 30 visits, but they don’t have to report if they visit the player or conduct a Zoom interview.
And with that, we’ll call it a wrap on this mailbag for today and for the offseason. The chats will return the week of the 2026 regular-season opener.
But never fear, PackersNews.com will still have all the news from the Packers’ OTAs and minicamps, and any personnel moves they make. Before you know it, training camp will be starting up again.
Until then, take care everybody!
This article originally appeared on Packers News: Pete Dougherty has answers on Gutekunst’s draft strategy, Trey Smack
Reporting by Pete Dougherty, Green Bay Press-Gazette / Packers News
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
