Rumors sparked at the NFL Combine, as they do every year. Among the ones that generated a little smoke this year was a bit of gossip about the Green Bay Packers’ interest in Seattle Seahawks wide receiver DK Metcalf.
One report, which The Athletic later shot down, indicated that the Packers had submitted a trade offer to the Seahawks for Metcalf. Regardless of the veracity of this claim, Metcalf isn’t the 1A move at the position for Green Bay anyway.
It sounds like a broken record, but the Packers must address the wide receiver position this offseason.
In an ideal world, the Packers would net a bonafide No. 1 wide receiver to boost the offense. Given Green Bay’s historical reluctance to make big trades — or even trade in general — that’s an unlikely avenue.
The Seahawks aren’t releasing Metcalf. If Seattle does any sort of move involving their speed-demon wideout, it would be via trade. At age 27 and having posted another solid season, Metcalf is in line for a sizeable payday when his contract runs out at the end of 2025.
Metcalf would be the best receiver on the Packers, and he’s never missed more than two games in six seasons. His career averages are an eye-popping 77 receptions, 1,108 yards, and eight touchdowns.
All of this sounds great. So why wouldn’t Metcalf be the 1A option for Green Bay if it could acquire him?
Last year, second-year wide receiver Jaxon Smith-Njigba leapfrogged Metcalf in the pecking order in Seattle. Metcalf finished second in targets, receptions, yards, and touchdowns. Smith-Njigba was first in all those categories.
That isn’t a knock on Metcalf but more to point out what Green Bay would be getting in a trade for Seattle’s physical freak of a wide receiver: a low-end WR1.
Metcalf isn’t a Ja’Marr Chase, Justin Jefferson, or CeeDee Lamb. Those types of wide receivers are hard to find. Still, Seattle’s asking price could be for something closer to elite WR1 compensation to part ways.
Metcalf would make Green Bay’s offense more dynamic; there’s no questioning that. However, would he have as big of an immediate impact as Davante Adams would?
Adams is older (32) but is still playing at a clear No. 1 wide receiver level. At his peak, Adams was arguably the best wideout in football. Metcalf hasn’t been that. While Adams likely only has a couple of really good years left, it’s hard to argue Metcalf over Adams, even at this stage.
Last year, Metcalf went down a rung in Seattle. Conversely, the Las Vegas Raiders traded Adams to the New York Jets and immediately became part of a 1 and 1A duo with Garrett Wilson.
Metcalf’s age is more appealing for a Packers team that boasts the youngest roster in the NFL two years in a row. Adams is the more proven commodity, and his familiarity with Green Bay is significant. There wouldn’t be a question about fitting into the team or Matt LaFleur’s scheme.
Don’t ignore the money, either. If the Jets can’t find a trade partner for Adams, they’ll release him. Adams’s contract would be cheaper than Metcalf’s next extension.
From a financial standpoint, Adams makes more sense as a 1A option for the Packers. He also makes more sense from a familiarity and production standpoint.
Metcalf will cost significant draft capital and potentially a young player. That is if Seattle ever entertains the idea.
Green Bay getting Metcalf wouldn’t be a disaster scenario. It just isn’t the best solution.
Regardless of what the Packers do, Brian Gutekunst knows they need someone at the No. 1 spot.
You’d like to have somebody move into that space. But, at the same time, I’d like multiple guys to be able to move into that space. What I’m looking for is guys that, when they’re called upon, can perform at a high level. I think we have a lot of guys that have done that.
Metcalf would be an answer to Green Bay’s big question at wide receiver. He’d immediately boost the talent in the room and give quarterback Jordan Love a deep-threat option that occupies the defense’s attention.
Is it the top option the Packers could pursue, though? No. There is at least one better option in Adams.
