I strongly support trading Wicks or Reed.
Willis needs a familiar face.
And both would hold a draft selection at 3 & 5.
Paying them 10mil plus is ridicules for a back up.
Gute paid a 6th for Cobb to come back.

If Gute does trade one.
A back-up OL should be taken.

You must fit your roster needs with the draft board.
Even Best impact player available.

That’s a lot of ifs Greg . But it is that time of the off season . I can’t see any of the wide receivers going anywhere it would have to be a “ can’t refuse “ deal for the Packers .
( today is the Ohio State Pro Day . Hopefully a few are on the Packers radar .) GPG . Go Bucks !

Ted DiBiase? Pfft. Seems more appropriate to quote Baron von Raschke if you're taking any trade rumor article seriously this time of year. "Do you think I'm crazy"?

The Baron could crush coconuts with is grip, you know. The Claw really should have been barred as a submission hold.

I agree we don't trade any of our wide receivers just to trade them. We have to get something worthwhile in return.
The difficulty is in re-signing all three of these guys, so it does make sense to trade at least one of them this offseason.
With Golden and Williams as promising for next season, there's also the matter of having enough targets to go around.
Plus, there's the other wide receivers already on our roster, as well as the draft.
I'm sad for any of these three to leave the Packers, but it seems unrealistic for all of them to stay.
Let's hope Gute makes the best out of a difficult and delicate situation.
P.S. Josh Sweat turns 29 on the 29th of March. Just a little over a year from his 2.5 sacks in the Super Bowl. Reunite with Gannon?

I can't imagine us trading Watson since he's the cream of the crop despite his injury history. He is such a difference maker. Reed and Wicks are expendable, but once we lose them, what once was a strength becomes a weakness.

Of the tradeable WRs, Wicks is the most expendable, but of course he has far less trade value than Watson or Reed. A former 5th round pick who has flashed but has never really put it all together for any length of time, and who was in and out of the lineup with injuries last season, is probably worth...about a 5th round pick. By offering Wicks in a trade, you are not going to get very far in acquiring a difference maker, like say, Josh Sweat. You would need to trade Watson or Reed to do that, and you would then be depriving this offense of a lot of firepower in 2026, plus you would forfeit the opportunity to bring them back in 2027 or beyond. So I agree with the author that a WR trade looks unlikely, but who knows, if they've decided that one of these players is not in their plans for the future, it could happen.

Where is Golden best suited to play? That’s the first question and one that has to be answered before deciding the fate of others. If it’s the slot or Doubs’ old role then something has to give. Personally, I really don’t think he projects well to the role Doubs filled or that of Watson. He is, and needs to be a slot.

We have 3 returning WRs on expiring contracts. We are not going to retain them all. Thus how they project Golden is determinative of where the surplus is and thus who it would make sense to consider trading. As much as I like Reed, I think we will pay Watson and won’t be able to afford Reed. Reed also plays at a position where Golden projects (best in my view) and we have additional depth in Melton, Morre and Keeny-James at the moment. Watson’s size speed mix is rare, but unless Neyor explodes, we don’t have anything close. Williams has size but not the speed (4.48 as opposed to 4.36: Neyor ran a 4.40). Williams and Neyor are both 6’4” and close to 220 pounds.

Thus, if we are going to trade, Reed seems both the most valuable piece and the one with the most behind him. If Wicks doesn’t take over from Doubs, then at least he can support at all three WR positions. Reed had struggled away from the slot. Reed is the one who would probably be unhappy (with some justification) if he loses snaps to Golden.

For the above reasons, the one WR I think we might need to consider trading is Reed, unless we try to force Golden to play a role that his size and blocking acumen do not seem to promise optimal results from. Reed also seems the one WR who plays a role where we have at least got some known existing depth behind Golden.

The rumor mill is really churning full speed with Wicks. Ravens, Giants, Cardinals, Chiefs....This should help jack up the compensation if he is moved. I might be tempted to bite if a Day 2 pick was offered, but not less (the upside is there with more opportunities). Wicks on the Packers is a nice insurance depth piece, and I'm kind of comfortable with us having plenty of options here, especially given the injury history of a couple of them. Wicks can get separation and can block, so in the not-unlikely event that Watson gets injured, here is a suitable reserve option.

I believe the last few years have taught this team that you never have too many receivers. This is a passing league and receivers get hurt. Only trade one of these three if it is a deal you cannot pass up.

Gute drafted 7s (Reed & Wicks) and received the injury prone energy (baggage) that often comes with it. Ditto 7 Kraft (ACL), though I was all aboard drafting him as a potential gem rounds 3-4. If you can get value, you trade them all, but therein lies the problem: additional picks for a GM I have no confidence in rounds 1-3.

Here we are a year later, in March once again, with a WR article. I'll reboot LAST YEAR's article heading and my response...as I said earlier this year: can lead a horse to water, can't force it to drink.

<<"Which WR is most likely to step up in '25?"

March 27, 2025 at 10:13 am
Dragon5

The healthy one.

Kraft 7 life path
Reed 7 life path
Wicks 7 life path AND born on 16th (1 + 6 = 7 day)

7 Energy: high IQ, introverted / loner, and INJURY PRONE

LVN, Wyatt, King, McManus also 7s

Wyatt increased odds of injury in personal 7 year 03-31-2025 3+3+1+2+2+5 = 16 1+6=7 >>🤫

<<Dragon5
November 30, 2025 at 11:10 pm

those 7 LPs...tellin Curd Nation like it is for years...prove me wrong
Wyatt, Wicks, Reed, Kraft, McManus
A GM in charge of personnel that acquires too many 7s 🤕🩼🤷‍♂️🤦‍♂️

#FAIL>>

7 life path Reed will enter a personal 7 year April '27
7 life path Wicks will enter a personal 7 year June '28
7 life path Kraft will enter a personal 7 year Nov '27

Watson is the only one with no inherent 7 energy, nor soon to face a personal 7 year

OT reminder, St Juste & Franklin are 7s...with Franklin in his enemy year and St Juste next year; Hargrave born on a 7 day...don't hold your breath.

Here's a thing to remember about the rumor mill: A large amount of the 'info' is speculation not based on fact. I read a fan one time fantasizing(admittedly) about a possible trade. Not an hour later that 'rumor' appeared on yet another board pretending it was a fact. Especially in today's digital world, 'journalists' are everywhere. Few deal is facts. Hits to their site matter more.

A GM one time said almost any player is trade bait if the right offer came around. That is true with a few exceptions.

It would not surprise me if one of the receivers did move on. They will likely keep S. Moore who can be a back up receiver. I don't think they will want to pay both Watson and Reed market value. One story last season found a team was interested in Wicks.

Another thing to consider is availability. Both Watson and Reed have been injured a lot.

We have a WR on the practice squad, Will Shepard, who has a draft profile similar to Wicks except Shepard has really good hands. Shepard is bigger, slightly faster and has a knack for getting separation. On paper, which is where you start, Shepard could be an easy replacement for Wicks.

Reed would bring back a better draft haul, or a better player in exchange. Our list of needs is large so that could be an option, maybe with a pick as a bonus to draft another WR.

I have a late round sleeper WR in J Michael Sturdivant-UCLA-6'3 215 4.4 career stats- 150 catches 2,073 yds 16 TDs 13.8 Ave per catch
Noah Thomas-Georgia has been mentioned too as a late round or UFDA.

All too often, there are those who will overvalue what another team will pay for a player. Examples would include two QB's sent to Seattle. Brett Hundley for a swap of sixth rounders, and Matt Hasselbeck for a swap of firsts and a third. There was grumbling at the time, especially that Hasselbeck did not get more compensation from Seattle.
So, what could the team get for Watson? Considering his injury history, this might well again disappoint Packers fans. Wicks has had concussion issues (though so has Doubs, and he did OK in the market).
What could the Packers realistically get for either of these guys? That would be determined by the team that wants to trade for them. But the idea they might bring in a very good CB or a very high draft choice seems unlikely. A team can draft a WR and have them under a cheap contract for four years, and not have to worry about the rising cost of WR's next year.

Interesting, i guess.

The only reason we would have to, or want to trade assets, is because we have too many holes to fill.
But i heard....'It's Time to win Championships', the architect told Packer Nation a year ago.
With that, am i asking too much to get past the wild card round?
A season after that statement, Policy seems ok with that, i'm not.

Here's my problem with the premise of this article.
Where is this coming from?
I don't see any source other than "some football talk outlets" suggested it.
To me this is a big nothing burger at this point.
But then again, it is the Silly Season until Sept, so....

Not sure why...after letting Loves favorite go to receiver walk, that we have all this depth to fill holes.
The rest have injury history, which other teams are aware of, so i'm just not sure what kind of net gain you get back in return.
So, if your not getting a net gain then....why?

Tucker would still bring an asset probably, but does anyone think he's going anywhere, i don't.
He's one of the few difference makers this team has, so you ride or die with a young talent like that.

A better article might have been,.....
Is this team heading in the right direction?
Why do we have so many holes.
Is Guters plan....going as planned?

Apparently Policy likes what he see's
I can't wait until September to see what the Gute is cooking.

"The rest have injury history, which other teams are aware of, so i'm just not sure what kind of net gain you get back in return."

Well 75, Doubs was about 1 or 2 concussions from being out of football in 2024. He had a nice bounceback year and made himself a rich man. Congrats Romeo!

The facts are GB won't resign Kraft and 4 WRs next year, Kraft and Watson will be signed for sure and probably Moore too if he has a good season because he will be cheap. Wicks will be the odd man out and he will get paid by someone if he has a solid season, just not the Packers. GB also still has a lot of holes to fill and weaker position groups, and not a lot of $$$ so any not cheap Free Agents are not in the plan to replace them.

Gutey has almost earned his pay for 2026 by getting a 4th round pick for Gary and trading a backup DT for a solid starting LB to replace Walker. If he could pull off trading a WR for a starting CB or Edge, then we might have to erect a statue to him outside Lambeau. He still has a big job in front of him and that is knocking the 2026 draft out of the park. The championship window is slowly closing.

I Have read that next year is a buying year so likely no compensation for lost free agents. Estimates are Watson 28 mill per year, reed 20 mill per year and wicks 10 per year. I think that is too much for Watson or reed. If wicks stayed healthy I think he could go way up too. The problem is we do not know what we really have in the new guys. I would like a 3rd to 5th round WR this year. Reed has missed due to injury and had drops one year. If we could get a second for reed I would jump at it. Once the season starts we may see that one of the new guys step up and make some of these guys redundant and do another in season trade.

Not a single piece of evidence in this article that supports the assertion "Packers' Receivers Being Dangled as Trade Bait."

So, yeah. Next.....

I don't think that we've seen enough of our WR room production to speculate like this. We have some talent and I believe they have not shown everything they've got yet. But this is far from 2010 Packers.

Wicks - I don't know if all this separation metrics and training camp highlights will ever come to fruition. I hope yes but I'd let him go for a good price.
Reed - I'd keep him.
Watson - in my opinion he is a WR1 when healthy in a system where the ball is not spread around. Extend him.