Getty Brian Gutekunst, general manager of the Green Bay Packers.
The Green Bay Packers are still searching for a way to replenish their receiving corps with the 2022 NFL draft a little more than a week away, and while their two first-round selections could land a pass catcher, the wheels continue to turn on their other options.
In his annual list of hypothetical trade packages for each of the 32 first-round picks in the draft ESPN’s Bill Barnwell proposed an interesting scenario in which the Packers flipped their No. 22 overall pick for a stud receiver — the Pittsburgh Steelers‘ Chase Claypool — and a later-round pick in a three-team trade.
Here’s the deal:
Packers get: WR Chase Claypool (from Steelers), 4-114 (from Falcons)
Steelers get: 1-8, 6-190 (from Falcons)
Falcons get: 1-20 (from Steelers), 1-22 (from Packers)It’s the first three-team trade here! There are other ways for each of these teams to accomplish their goals, but this gets all three organizations what they want have coming out of this draft.
Let’s start with the Packers, who add a valuable young receiver set to make just $2.7 million combined over the next two seasons. Claypool didn’t take a leap forward in his second season, but he has the size and physical tools to win at all levels of the field, and he’d get a massive upgrade at quarterback when it comes to deeper routes. The Packers have been rewarded for their patience in the past; remember that Davante Adams himself was seen as a disappointment after his second season and didn’t post a 1,000-yard campaign until his fifth year. Claypool’s early success makes him a slightly better bet than the average rookie being drafted in the 20s.
The latest Packers news straight to your inbox! Join the Heavy on Packers newsletter here!
Claypool Could Be Better Than Rookie Gamble
If the Steelers would be open to moving Claypool, the Packers would be silly to not consider it. At 6-foot-4 and 238 pounds, Claypool is a big and physical weapon who made 121 receptions in his first two seasons — which is just two short of what Marquez Valdes-Scantling managed in twice as many seasons with the Packers. Claypool, who will be 24 when the season starts, also played those two seasons with a waning Ben Roethlisberger, so he could be explosive with four-time MVP quarterback Aaron Rodgers throwing to him.
The Packers would still have three of the top 60 picks in the draft, including No. 28. They could add another receiver if they wanted — perhaps Jahan Dotson, Christian Watson, George Pickens, Skyy Moore or Alec Pierce — and still have premium capital left to address other needs, like right tackle. In Barnwell’s scenario, the Packers would also get an additional fourth-round pick from Atlanta (No. 114) to give them three total picks in the fourth round.
Trade Would See Steelers ‘Sacrifice’ Claypool for QB
The trade could make sense from the rebuilding Steelers’ perspective, Barnwell wrote, noting that the Steelers’ No. 1 receiver, Diontae Johnson, “due for a massive extension” after the 2022 season, “which would make it difficult for the Steelers to then offer Claypool a similar deal the following offseason.”
Trading Claypool now could get a significant return for him and put the pieces toward a more important spot for their future: quarterback.
“In this scenario, the Steelers sacrifice Claypool and the No. 20 pick to move up and get their quarterback of the future,” Barnwell wrote. “They can use their second- or third-round pick to draft Claypool’s replacement, sign Johnson to an extension and move forward with a transitioning core on offense. This deal values Claypool as being worth something in the ballpark of the No. 34 pick in a typical draft.”
The Packers’ original pick would actually end up with the Falcons in this scenario, but the Steelers would move up to Atlanta’s original position at No. 8 overall where they could most likely have their pick of quarterbacks — as long as Detroit and Carolina avoid taking one of the top prospects before Pittsburgh is on the clock.
Is it a long shot that such a three-team deal would take place? Of course, but it’s also hard to deny that a trade like the one Barnwell proposed wouldn’t benefit all sides.
Comments