While most of us were fully immersed in college basketball's March Madness on St. Pattie's Day, another type of madness was unleashed inside the NFL world: the Packers had traded all-pro wide receiver Davante Adams to the Las Vegas Raiders.
Having placed the franchise tag on Adams just over a week prior, the Packers were trying to get a longer-term deal done with Adams, for the benefit of the team and Adams alike. While reports have surfaced that suggest the Packers made comparable or potentially even stronger offers to Adams than the money he'll get with Vegas, Number 17 was ostensibly set on leaving Green Bay.
For all of the drama surrounding Aaron Rodgers this offseason, it seemed that the pieces were in place to sustain the Rodgers/Adams duo in Green Bay for at least one more season. Fortunately, it seems that Adams' departure won't ruffle any new feathers with Rodgers, provided the Packers' front office can equip the future Hall of Famer with other assets via free agency and next month's draft.
But, even with new talent aboard, is it really possible to replace Davante Adams?
In February, I wrote about the importance of retaining Adams this offseason. The reality is this: the Packers will be worse off moving the ball through the air next season without Adams. The $140 million-plus offer that GM Brian Gutekunst and the Packers allegedly made to him suggests they feel the same way. And, while I expect Gute to march forward with contingency plan that includes veteran receivers like Will Fuller and one or more rookie receivers in the draft, those moves won't supplant the incredible chemistry that Adams had fostered with Rodgers for so many years.
However, despite the gap that Adams' absence will create for Rodgers and Co. initially, it doesn't change what the Packers are capable of accomplishing both in 2022 and in the coming seasons. In fact, I would argue that it has the potential to be a net positive.
Mega Draft Capital
This one is obvious. The Raiders paid up in draft picks - this year's first and second-round picks, to be exact - to land the near 30 year-old at his absolute peak value. The timing couldn't be better for an "all-in" Packers organization that figures to be in dire need of ample, young talent once they can no longer make good on the contracts doled out to veteran superstars on the roster (Aaron Jones, Preston Smith and potentially De'Vondre Campbell, David Bakhtiari or Kenny Clark down the line).
Curbing an Unhealthy Over-Reliance
On many different occasions between 2019 and 2021, fans and media alike observed a clear reliance on Adams by Rodgers in the passing game. In some cases, Adams proved worthy of the many targets, such as in San Francisco last season when he hauled in two big-time catches on the game-winning drive. Other times, Adams' presence detracted from the more balanced play calling and offensive tempo that has worked so well since Matt LaFleur arrived in Green Bay. After all, the Packers are 7-0 without Adams during the LaFleur era.
Timing of the Trade
This one will go under-appreciated. Yes, there was a sense of urgency to get a long-term deal done with Adams this offseason. But, despite salary cap implications and Adams' insistence that he wouldn't play under the franchise tag, Gutekunst could have played hardball. Instead, he got a deal done without risking a training camp holdout and well in advance of the NFL draft, which affords the Packers' front office more time to plan for potential personnel available at their picks instead of operating on the fly during draft weekend.
Long-Term Cap Relief
If you've witnessed the economic magic spooled by Russ Ball over the past two seasons, you know it's possible that the Packers could have easily found a way to stuff a fat Adams contact into their current salary cap position, without compromising deals due to rising stars on the roster. But, committing unprecedented money to Adams mostly for what he's already accomplished would have put the Packers in an even more precarious financial situation a year and two years from now. Instead, they'll avoid a guarantee-laden contract for a player soon to be on the wrong side of 30.
Comments