When the Green Bay Packers shipped Ha Ha Clinton-Dix to Washington

before the 2018 trade deadline Jason Spriggs Jersey , they ultimately staged a coup in netting a fourth-round draft pick for a player who struggled in a burgundy and gold uniform. More recently, reports indicate that the Packers are set interview current Washington linebackers coach Kirk Olivadotti for the same position in Green Bay. After potentially stealing two assets from Washington in less than three months, the Packers could have a chance at yet another in free agency.The Packers, especially without an injured Randall Cobb for the majority of the season, struggled with converting third-and-short situations. While much of that had to do with offensive scheming and persistence from Aaron Rodgers to find the big play, Green Bay could greatly improve its short-to-intermediate passing game heading into the 2019 season by adding a dynamic slot receiver. Though he’s dealt with nagging hamstring and ankle injuries over the past couple of seasons, Washington’s Jamison Crowder could be a player that the Packers keep an eye on over the spring if he is not re-signed.At just 25 years old, Crowder’s peak could still be well ahead of him. In Washington, he has been a catalyst for opening up the field for other receivers on offense while occasionally beating the defense deep himself. Crowder was most effective when targeted on first down for Washington, generating almost 11 yards per reception on that down over his four seasons. That kind of production could instantly help a Green Bay offense that gained 1.5 yards less on first down than the league average, according to Pro Football Reference. As a slot receiver, Crowder’s career 11.9 yards per reception is well above the 10.0 mark Jarvis Landry had prior to signing a franchise tag with Miami last offseason and getting traded to Cleveland. Crowder’s injury history has helped keep him under the radar in comparison to Landry who hauled in a high number of catches. While the receiving market is thin in free agency, that could bode well for Green Bay’s chances of signing him to a more reasonable deal.The Packers should know Crowder well, as the veteran has posted especially strong numbers in his two games against them. Crowder’s 20.14 yards per reception (141 yards on seven catches) is an average almost five yards more than he has against any other team. Crowder hauled in all seven of his targets in those games versus Green Bay while tallying a pair of receiving scores. At just over 5’9, Crowder would not be the biggest target for Rodgers and the Packer offense, but he has proven to be dangerous. With the Titans in 2018, Matt LaFleur used receiver Rishard Matthews in the slot before Matthews’ surprising mid-season departure from the team, while new Packers offensive coordinator Nathaniel Hackett received great production from Marqise Lee in the same role in Jacksonville. It is fair to believe that the duo will seek a more-than-capable slot receiver in their new offense.In addition to his skills as a slot receiver, Crowder has experience as a return man, notably on punts. Although those numbers have leaned toward the average level, his 2016 season resulted in a 12.1-yard average with a touchdown. As the Packers have waited on the development of Trevor Davis only to be burned by the injury bug, Green Bay could potentially fill that role with Crowder while adding a more polished receiving weapon than Davis seems likely to become.While drafting a slot receiver may be the more typical and economical approach for a team like Green Bay, the Packers have enough money to spend in free agency on an offensive weapon, especially with the likelihood of moving on from Cobb. Welcoming an NFL-tested pass-catcher with a skillset that varies from the Packers’ current group of up-and-coming receivers would be a perk. While Green Bay certainly should not get into a bidding war for a slot receiver this offseason, Crowder’s contract demands and fit within a LaFleur-Hackett offense should be explored. Two APC writers take on the question that has arisen after recent reported pre-draft visits." />Skip to main contentclockmenumore-arrownoyesAcme Packing Company homepageHorizontal - WhiteAcme Packing Companya Green Bay Packers communityFollow Acme Packing Company online:Follow Acme Packing Company on TwitterFollow Acme Packing Company on FacebookFollow Acme Packing Company on InstagramLog in or sign upLog InSign UpSite searchSearchSearchAcme Packing Company main menuFanpostsFanshotsSectionsPackersOddsAboutMastheadCommunity GuidelinesStubHubMoreAll 321 blogs on Horizontal - WhiteFanposts Fanshots Sections The APC PodcastPackers Film RoomFantasy Football AdviceCDTOn Monday Mike Daniels Color Rush Jersey , news broke that the Green Bay Packers have shown interest in a few quarterback prospects in the 2019 NFL Draft class. The Packers have had an official visit with Missouri’s Drew Lock, and they tried but were unable to schedule a visit for Duke’s Daniel Jones.Both quarterbacks are likely to be first-round draft picks, and this raises a question of whether this research is a sign of serious interest in the position or if it is a pre-draft smokescreen. The Packers, of course, have one of the NFL’s very best quarterbacks locked down for several more years, and although they do have a pair of first-round draft picks at #12 and #30 overall, that would still be a significant investment if they were to select a signal-caller.Here at Acme Packing Company, there are varying opinions on the value of drafting a backup for Aaron Rodgers. Two APC writers, Paul Noonan and Peter Bukowski, are here to weigh in on both sides of the issue. Review both arguments and decide for yourself.Paul Noonan: Backup insurance for Rodgers and potential future value should make it an optionMy issue with the idea that you shouldn’t take a quarterback is the same issue I would have with anyone who would “draft for need” rather than taking the best player available. While I suspect that Peter and I would reach similar ends in this draft, as the QB class is purportedly weak after Kyler Murray, our reasoning couldn’t be more different. Let’s start by putting forth some incontrovertible facts: Due to his contract, Rodgers is the starter for at least three seasons.The Packers have roster holes that need filling. This makes it very simple to not pick a quarterback, but front offices have to be more nuanced than this. The fact of the matter is that the two worst things that can happen to an NFL franchise are, in order, having a bad quarterback and having an average quarterback on a Matthew Stafford-sized deal. If you’re not making quarterback plans, you’re doing a bad job because even if Aaron Rodgers is never bad, he could easily turn into a player who puts the team underwater on his value.While a player like Stafford is a huge albatross, a player like Stafford getting paid rookie money is a huge asset. “But, what if he never plays for the team” you say? Well, by virtue of being super valuable, quarterbacks are also very fungible assets. Consider Brett Hundley for a second, who was taken as a 5th round project, showed no growth and played terribly, and still brought back a 6th rounder in a trade a few years later. Jimmy Garoppolo was picked in the 2nd round (62nd pick) and was traded away when he was no longer even on a cheap contract https://www.thepackersfanshop.com/Jamaal-Williams-Jersey , returning the 43rd overall pick. Both Hundley and Garp are examples of “worst case” scenarios, serving as backups and never really playing much, but the costs to both teams were minor, and had Tom Brady gotten injured, the returns could have been huge.The main reason to draft a QB highly, above all else, is that hitting on one sets you up for sustained success for a decade. Going into the 2017 draft, which was well-regarded in terms of QB talent, the Carolina Panthers had the inconsistent-but-pretty-good Cam Newton signed through 2020. The earliest they could move on without salary cap ramifications was after 2018. They had the 8th pick, and selected Christian McCaffrey. Taking a running back in the first is next level bad, but when you consider that DeShaun Watson and Patrick Mahomes went a few picks later, that selection seems devastating. It is FAR better to have Watson/Mahomes on your bench than McCaffrey in your lineup.Finally, Aaron Rodgers is old, and plays a style that results in him taking a ton of hits. He is more likely than most to miss time. A highly talented rookie is likely to serve both as better insurance against injury than a veteran retread, and will likely also have the ability to increase his trade value by playing. Spending cap space on a backup quarterback is one of the worst uses for cap space there is, but spending high draft capital on a backup for an aging quarterback is exactly the opposite. Quarterbacks are almost unique in sports for how valuable they are compared to their teammates. While this draft is fairly awful by popular consensus, if Kyler Murray were to suffer an Aaron Rodgers-style fall, taking him should be an option. The upside of doing so is ten years of franchise stability, and the downside is likely recouping the value of that pick a few years later via trade. <hr class="p-entry-hr" id="aCr8T2">Peter Bukowski: Why draft a player who, if all goes well, won’t even play?The Packers wouldn’t have Aaron Rodgers if Ted Thompson hadn’t ignored fan desires to improve a playoff team in the waning years of Brett Favre’s career. That becomes the go-to example any time there’s some discussion about Green Bay finding a replacement for Rodgers, now 35 years old and coming off yet another serious injury. Setting aside, for now, some other obvious differences in those scenarios, the most important one is financial: the Packers are paying Aaron Rodgers to be their quarterback for at least three more years. His dead cap isn’t zero until after the fourth year on his deal Dean Lowry Jersey , and the team could keep him another season beyond that. In short, Rodgers is the quarterback of this team for at least three years, probably four. He’s said he wants to play until he’s 40 (and his contract expires after his age-39 season). Taking a quarterback with a high draft pick means hoping that player doesn’t play at all on his rookie deal, or at the very least not until a decision has to be made on his expensive fifth-year option. Then there’s the question of the value of having a backup, one we can’t even be sure will be ready with extremely limited backup reps under the CBA should he need to play in Rodgers’ stead. DeShone Kizer would almost certainly be more ready to step in for the 2019 season, so the team would already be down a year of value on that rookie contract. Few things are as valuable in the NFL as a good player on a rookie contract. The balancing of this question seems fairly obvious: a backup player’s value on his rookie contract vs. another top-50 player who can actually help the team win. What is more likely to benefit this team over the course of his rookie contract: a player who starts or at least regularly contributes at a position of need, or a backup quarterback? Taking Drew Lock at 12 instead of a potential starting offensive tackle or tight end or pass rusher makes no sense given the constraints of the salary cap. Even though Lock would be relatively cheap for four years, he’d only be giving the Packers minimal value. Meanwhile, a starting offensive tackle like Andre Dillard could be a long-term solution at right tackle, prolonging the career of Aaron Rodgers.And this is the rub for Green Bay. Taking a quarterback now doesn’t get the Packers any closer to winning a Super Bowl with Aaron Rodgers. Brian Gutekunst just made Rodgers the highest paid quarterback ever. They’re confident he’s the guy for the next three years at least, most likely four. The Packers aren’t likely to pick in the top-15 again, which means maximizing this opportunity to get a blue chip talent must be maximized. That makes this calculation fundamentally different. Using the 12th pick on a quarterback in a bad quarterback draft is orders worse than allowing arguably the No. 1 QB fall into the mid-20’s when your current quarterback mulls retirement any time he’s front of microphone. Favre was a flight risk at any moment. The value at 24 was simply too good to pass up. The opportunity cost in that moment was importantly different than it would be for the Packers. The Packers have three or four years to find the right guy. There’s genuinely no rush. This isn’t Tom Brady at 41 or Drew Brees at 39. Rodgers has a contract and intends to play it out. We know what the time frame looks like.Everyone wants to believe the train can just keep going, but the mechanisms for team building just aren’t the same as they were under the old CBA. Draft-and-develop with quarterbacks isn’t a model that can work the same way. If they wait until 2020 or 2021, there could be players worth taking, and if there aren’t, wait again. Bottom out of you have to and try to find someone at the top of the draft.From a timing and financial standpoint, the marginal utility in having a backup insurance policy can’t be justified compared to a possible starting caliber player, even if that quarterback has the potential to become a starter down the road. Pick a quarterback, that’s fine. Just not at 12, or 30, or even 44. After that, go nuts. Ron Wolf proved why that strategy made sense. Spending a high draft pick on a quarterback given the timeline with Rodgers simply doesn’t make sense given the opportunity cost of not getting someone who can help the team win games over that same time period.<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="cDe82C">