To Comp Or Not To Comp?

Are the Packers better served by leaning into stockpiling compensatory selections?

As the first wave of free agency winds down to a close, the Packers have added four players to their roster via a wide range of avenues. Through one trade, one signing of a released player, and two free agency signings, Green Bay has begun the dirty work of restocking for the 2026 season. Naturally, every move the team makes at this point is done in service of one singular goal: winning the Super Bowl. 

To that end, one of the biggest questions that teams face in this period is whether signing players to contracts now (aka, immediate gratification) is a better long term strategy than reaping the eventual rewards of collecting compensatory selections a year later. 

But before we get to that, let’s go through the minutiae of what comp picks are, and how their value is determined. 

Compensatory picks have been given out to teams since 1994 (when the modern forms of free agency, the salary cap, and the draft all also came into being). By definition, they are a set of draft picks given out to teams in a corresponding fashion to the number of compensatory free agents (CFA) lost in the previous offseason. A CFA is a player who is: an unrestricted free agent (thus excluding restricted free agents and players who are cut) that ranks within the top 35% of all league players in terms of adjusted average salary per year, playing time, and other performance indicators. 

Teams that lose more CFAs to other teams than they themselves acquire are thus rewarded with a compensatory selection in the draft. The formula by which the NFL actually determines what round those picks will be awarded within is not quite publicly known. However, very smart people like OverTheCap’s Nick Korte are able to put it all together for us. Just know that the average annual value is the most important factor in working that out, followed by what percentage of snaps they played in the subsequent season, and then followed by whatever post season awards the player earns. This is why the compensatory selections are doled out the year after a player signs, as how that player actually performs on that contract is hugely important. 

Next up, the NFL determines the value of whatever CFA that the team signed that same year, with a few simple rules. A CFA gained by a team will cancel out the highest valued CFA with the same round valuation. If there is no CFA with a same round valuation, the next highest in a lower round will be canceled out instead. The value of a cancelled out CFA can only cancel out a higher valuation if there are no other CFAs available to be canceled out. 

For example, we have the Eagles’ 2020 offseason signings. Philly lost four CFAs that season, and signed one. Our own newest signing, Javon Hargrave, was signed by Philly coming off of his rookie contract with the Steelers, and was valued as a four rounder. Since Philly didn’t have a fourth round value of their own, their next highest valued CFA was canceled out instead, leaving them with three seventh round comp picks. They also signed Will Parks, who was paid outside of the top 35% of the league, and thus was not eligible for a compensatory pick.

From the same year, the Packers lost five players, four of whom qualified to be CFAs. They did not sign any players that qualified as a CFA, and thus gained comp picks as a result. If you are curious, those four comp picks turned into Royce Newman, Shemar Jean-Charles, and Isiah McDuffie (no pick was awarded for BJ Goodson, due to the maximum number of picks being reached. The same rule is why we only have one seventh round comp pick this year, instead of two.) 

So, now that we have a grasp on compensatory picks as a concept, let’s talk about the 2026 offseason. 

With the majority of free agency settled, we have an idea of how next year’s compensatory picks should be doled out. As of now, the Packers are expected to receive a fourth round pick for Malik WIllis (which could rise to a third based on his snap count next season), a fourth for Romeo Doubs, a fifth round pick for Quay Walker, and a fifth or sixth round pick for Rasheed Walker OR a sixth round pick for Kingsley Enagbarre. The Packers’ signing of Benjamin St-Juste will cancel out either the Rasheed Walker pick or the Kingsley Enagbarre pick, but would still leave the Packers with four comp picks. 

According to OverTheCap, the Packers are sitting with $28.8 million dollars in cap space, more than enough room to make an additional signing if they had wanted to. It’s become more and more obvious, however, that the Packers don’t want to make another signing. Not a CFA, anyway. 

The Packers found a perfect fit in Javon Hargrave, and even though the team is paying him more than they are paying fellow signee Benjamin St-Juste, he won’t cost the Packers a selection. Hargrave was released from his contract and does not count against the compensatory formula. 

When considering whether or not the Packers should have had more interest in signing outside free agents, it’s important to remember that depending on the player, you are directly costing the team a draft pick. Maybe even a high one. 

Of course, when you are in a championship window like the Packers are, how important is that? For the team to get over the final hump and bring the Lombardi home, it’s pretty clear that the team could use some difference makers now. Signing free agents this year could have been a quick and easy way to plug up the holes that the team has found itself with along the line of scrimmage and at cornerback. 

On the other hand, the Packers are in desperate need of draft capital to supplement their loss of two first round picks. Additionally, the Packers are also losing a surplus of players from their roster, because their free agents classes this year and next will stem mostly from draft classes that benefited from the Davante Adams and Aaron Rodgers trades. So, they’ll be bringing in fewer cheap rookie contracts than they are losing, a key aspect of how they have managed to bring on talent in free agency of late. The salary cap hits of Jordan Love and Micah Parsons are also to be considered, as the Packers can kick the can down the road, but those bills will come due eventually. 

For the record, the total “value” of next year’s projected comp picks coming to Green Bay, according to the draft pick value chart, is approximately 172 points, worth a mid third round draft pick. Of course it’s not a one for one comparison, since we are talking about the value of four rookie contracts to take up space on the Packers’ roster.  But it’s still worth discussing (and is, of course, the root of the contention here): would it have been worth it for the Packers to spend more on players who could make an instant impact? Perhaps at cornerback with a Riq Woolen or a Jaylen Watson? Could they have lured John Franklin-Myers to Green Bay instead of going with Johnathan Hargrave? Or perhaps they could have really thrown us all for a loop, and been in on Mike Evans. All fun ideas, but everything comes back to money. 

Stockpiling those cheap rookie contracts is, and will be, a key aspect of keeping a viable team around their core of talent. Will the players on those rookie contracts be enough to get the Packers a Lombardi? I don’t know, but we also don’t know whether the free agents will either. Sometimes we don’t like to admit it, but spending in free agency can be as much of a shot in the dark as drafting is. In 2024, the Packers spent big in free agency with Xavier McKinney and Josh Jacobs, which was an absolute home run for the team. In 2025, they gambled again and lost big on getting any sort of ROI from Aaron Banks and Nate Hobbs. We’re okay on losing out on comp picks in 2024 (those signings canceled out compensation from Darnell Savage and Jon Runyan), but I’m sure we’d all love to have the two extra picks this year, which would have stemmed from losing Eric Stokes and TJ Slaton. 

Good teams know how to maximize their quantity of draft picks, while still being able to add outside talent. The Packers dabbled in this with signing Javon Hargrave after his release, and could continue to add players in this way via trades, or signing players after the draft (which is when the comp formula stops tracking signings). 

The Packers should continue to live in this “best of both worlds” approach, and maximize both aspects of their team building approach. I’d love to see the Packers make a trade over the next few weeks for another player to impact the defense, though the compensation Green Bay should be willing to give up does become a bit of a pressure point. 

The ultimate question of whether or not Green Bay should have leaned into stockpiling comp picks vs signing outside free agents is probably best left to the eye of the beholder. It’s now clear which side of the fence Brian Gutekunst falls on (which has probably been inevitable since the Micah Parsons trade). Barring a trade or post draft signings, the Packers will have lots of money to award extensions to their internal candidates such as Christian Watson and Tucker Kraft. Whatever money is left over will be a nice stash fund for the season, and then roll over into the 2027 offseason, where the Packers are poised to be major spenders armed with $84 million dollars in projected cap. Then the real fun begins.

 

PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.

__________________________

Co-Owner of the thirteen time world champion Green Bay Packers. Sometimes I write about them. Follow me on Twitter at https://x.com/kjones_in_co and on Substack for film breakdowns!

__________________________

 

NFL Categories: 
0 points
 

Comments (36)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
T7Steve's picture

March 16, 2026 at 06:51 am

Known versus unknown. Not as hard of a decision as it's made out to be. It's always nice to hear there are 8-11 draft picks, but when the extra picks are all 4th thru 7th it has to be better to trade that comp pick for a known vet to help out immediately.

0 points
0
0
GregC's picture

March 16, 2026 at 07:25 am

Comp picks are all at the end of the round too, so they're not even as valuable as they sound.

0 points
0
0
Guam's picture

March 16, 2026 at 08:12 am

I dunno T7Steve, there is some pretty good talent that can be had in later rounds. Fourth round picks on the Packer roster last season: Zach Tom, Romeo Doubs. Evan Williams, Colby Wooden and Barryn Sorrell. Fifth round picks: Wicks, Enabare, Oladapo, Monks, and Oliver. Sixth round picks: Brinson, Brooks and Glover. Seventh round picks: R. Walker, Valentine and Ford.

That's sixteen players including seven starters. That's about 30% of the roster and 30% of the starters. I wouldn't under value those day three picks.

0 points
0
0
T7Steve's picture

March 16, 2026 at 09:27 am

I'll give you those, but how many of those were comp picks? I think they've done better getting undrafted free agent rookies and some of them that they got off other practice squads. That's why I think proven help is a better direction than a speculative one even if they're more expensive. You may end up with some that have to be cut either way, as proven by last season's CB addition, but there's no reason to hang onto them rather than a drafted one that they keep wanting to give another chanc.

0 points
0
0
Guam's picture

March 16, 2026 at 10:23 am

Does it make a difference whether they were comp picks or not? They were picked in their respective rounds and likely late in the round even if it was a draft (versus comp) choice given where the Packers usually pick.

Veterans can be useful, but they tend to cost a lot more in cap space than a draftee and as Hobbs proved, even vets are not a guarantee of performance.

Fourth and fifth rounders have been valuable picks for the Packers and many other teams. Since the majority of the comp picks in 2027 will fall into the fourth and fifth round category, I would prefer Gute keep them rather than trade for a more cap heavy vet.

0 points
0
0
T7Steve's picture

March 16, 2026 at 11:06 am

I'm talking about guys like Rasul Douglas, Campble, Nixon and such. That add starters and depth immediately, want to prove themselves and that aren't necessarily expensive. Not all the vets have to be like the Smiths to be proven help that Gute's scouts snag up.

0 points
0
0
Guam's picture

March 16, 2026 at 11:32 am

I'm a little confused. I thought we were talking about trading comp picks to acquire vets. All three guys you cited (Douglas, Campbell, Nixon) were either free agents or on practice squads and the Packers acquired them without trading any draft/comp choices. Would the Packers have traded draft/comp picks for any of those guys had that been necessary - probably not.

Malik Willis is the last guy I can remember the Packers trading a draft pick for and that was a seventh rounder (well worth it!). Giving up a 7th round pick is okay, but the Packer comp picks this year will be higher than a 7th round pick and it would have to be a damn good veteran to give up a third, fourth or fifth rounder.

0 points
0
0
T7Steve's picture

March 16, 2026 at 12:20 pm

Sorry. I must not have expressed myself correctly, as usual (poor spelling doesn't help me either). I was saying I'd rather have comp picks voided with acquiring proven players than not and have the comp picks. We need to have draft and develop players too, but it seems they even do it with the high draft picks.

0 points
0
0
golfpacker61's picture

March 16, 2026 at 09:28 am

Thanks Guam, I was about to make that same point. Teams can get some really good players in rounds 4-6. Hell, I would even say we could really strengthen the OL & CB position groups in this draft with guys that have the talent to start, if we had 2-3 more picks in those rounds. There will be some really good TE2 available in rounds 4-5, and we really need a talent infusion there too.

Plus those comp picks will give Gute more opportunities to swing the bat and move around if he chooses. Comp picks are very important, the Eagles, Ravens, & Patriots have made a living by have 3 every year.

0 points
0
0
PeteK's picture

March 16, 2026 at 09:30 am

You never know, Tom & Bak 4th ,Wells & Driver 7th, on rare occasions we could strike gold. There have also been numerous players that contributed, and even a few taken after the draft was over.

0 points
0
0
LambeauPlain's picture

March 16, 2026 at 10:21 am

The Teams scouting department can make such a huge difference. The Patriots drafted a QB in the 6th round and he became a HOF GOAT at the position.

0 points
0
0
BuckyBadger's picture

March 16, 2026 at 09:41 am

Vets aren't sure things either. A guy like Hargrave may have had some good years in the past but what does he have left? Did the Vikings just cut a good player because they are incompetent? I remember when we would laugh at them for signing our old castoffs.

Fans think a vet is proven but many times that vet has played his best days and the next team doesn't really know what they will get.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

March 16, 2026 at 09:58 am

"Did the Vikings just cut a good player because they are incompetent? "

They cut a capable player because Kwesi couldn't manage the cap.

0 points
0
0
Guam's picture

March 16, 2026 at 10:31 am

Agreed. Everything I read was Hargrave was a cap casualty, not a performance cut.

0 points
0
0
Coldworld's picture

March 16, 2026 at 09:55 am

Vets that can help materially cost cap. A team can only handle so many and remain competitive. If one can sign a player (or players)believing it will put a team over the top, then of course one should do it. However, if those signings just make the team a CB little better, it hurts the future by limiting internal development potential and future cap space to retain as well as sign.

There’s no absolute rule, but, right now, before we trade picks and tie up cap, we need to be asking if the player in question is really likely to tip the field not just noticeably in our favor, but critically as far as credible outcomes. How many of those does one get for late 3rd round picks, let alone later round ones? Not impossible, but count me as largely doubtful this line if thinking stands scrutiny except on very rare occasions.

0 points
0
0
heyjoe4's picture

March 21, 2026 at 05:49 am

Agreed Steve. If the Packers are in the same situation next year - needing to at plug least one big hole, the trade capital from comps will be very valuable. So will the cap from not making splash signings this offseason.

CB still concerns me this season. I don't think Gluten saw value in getting a young, FA CB - and for all I know there weren't any available. So we have to hope Juste adds some inexpensive value, and that Nixon and Valentine improve. And Nixon must stop committing PFs. He is notoriously undisciplined.

0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

March 16, 2026 at 07:17 am

Yes - Comp picks are better than cap hell.
Yes- If your Wolf or TT
Yes - if your rebuilding.
No- if your Gute.
The draft and development is gone.
Best player available vs Free Agency.
And unless its baptism by Fire.
The loss in value is obvious.

Still if you want to trade up.
And you don't have a #!.
Every little bit helps.

The real answer is- Yes
Depth is good.
And dreams can come true.
Because it's about the money now, and not the ring.

0 points
0
0
golfpacker61's picture

March 16, 2026 at 09:33 am

Signing the best players in Free Agency only helps if teams have the money to do it. Although I will say teams overpay so badly on the first 2 days, like us last year with Banks & Hobbs, that they use their money up fast. The Hobbs pick was especially bad because of the overpay and the fact we needed a "BOUNDARY" CB, not a Slot. The new contract he signed last week really showed what a terrible signing that was for GB.

Trading our #1s in 2026 & 2027 was the best move we could have made considering how marginal the picks have been for years in GB. I only wish Gary had been the player traded instead of Clark.

0 points
0
0
LambeauPlain's picture

March 16, 2026 at 10:28 am

"I only wish Gary had been the player traded instead of Clark."

Hindsight is perfect vision...but that is a rather good view.

Gary was at his most productive when Parsons was creating opportunities for him. Let's hope Micah can do that for Van Ness and maybe Sorrell, Cox, coming from the other side.

Not having a first rounder (would have been around the 20th selection). Would I rather have Parsons or the 20th selection on the roster for 2026? I know, a rhetorical question.

0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

March 16, 2026 at 11:30 am

I still see negative consequences with Free Agents.
It's like trading in a Lemmon for Cap friendly contracts.

0 points
0
0
heyjoe4's picture

March 21, 2026 at 05:54 am

Hi stockholder. Interesting comment that "it's the money now and not the ring".

I don't think that's true in GB. The Packers have spent a lot in FA in the past, just not this year, and for valid reasons.

What did you mean by that comment? I think it does apply to other teams, but not the Packers. Thanks.

0 points
0
0
egbertsouse's picture

March 16, 2026 at 07:23 am

Stockpiling a bunch of 6th and 7th round picks is like having a jar of pennies, it looks impressive but it doesn’t add up to much.

0 points
0
0
golfpacker61's picture

March 16, 2026 at 09:40 am

Well, one benefit of having extra late picks like that is if a team really wants a player they think is the best UFDA, they can get him for sure with that extra pick. Think if we hadn't had a 7th round pick to draft Rasheed Walker. He wasn't an All-Pro, but he was a 4 year starting NFL LT for us. It's still a big surprise he didn't sign for more money, top backups get that much.

0 points
0
0
LambeauPlain's picture

March 16, 2026 at 10:40 am

He was a 2+ year starting LT. Didn't play at all as a rookie except a few meaningless snaps. Time shared with Nijman in '23. Yosh played as good or better than Walker early in the Stenovich game of musical chairs. Something happened to Nijman later in the season and he seemed miffed he didn't get the job outright to start the season.

Yosh's attitude and body language on the field in the second half of the season was terrible..finally leaving for the Panthers in FA. Ironically, Walker will again replace Nijman in Carolina next season due to Yosh's retirement.

0 points
0
0
Savage57's picture

March 16, 2026 at 07:26 am

A vet FA signing has a one in two chance.

A draft pick a one in three, four chance.

But the latter doesn't hammer the cap

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

March 16, 2026 at 07:48 am

The premise of this article seems to be that the reason the Packers didn't chase the top end of the FA market was that they are conserving their comp pick capital, and not that they have limited cap resources and several position groups on the roster they need to shore up with NFL level players if they want to get better.

I don't think Gute is done, yet, and I don't think he'll be afraid to sacrifice a 6th or 7th round comp pick for a player that makes the Packers better. I also think he might make several acquisitions after the comp pick window closes. Right now, I'd argue they're still short a pass rusher. Hargrave helps, and when Wyatt gets hurt, he gives them a similar kind of player to impact QBs on the inside, but the edges are woefully uncertain at this point. The kind of player we're talking about probably isn't a cheap FA.

There's not enough draft capital in 2026 to fill all the holes in the depth chart, and if they're relying on future draft picks at this point then, frankly, they're not as good as they think they are. The Packers are still going to need players already on the roster to play and/or play better...that's the position having the youngest roster in the league for a couple years running puts you in.

0 points
0
0
T7Steve's picture

March 16, 2026 at 07:54 am

"play and/or play better" add stay healthy (which may be included in your "play") to your list because the NFL season has to be shot with luck to get to any of the goal worthy levels.

0 points
0
0
golfpacker61's picture

March 16, 2026 at 09:47 am

Dobber, I agree we need an Edge rusher. Ideally, if the money was right, I would love to see A J Epenesa in a Packer uniform. He wouldn't break the bank, he is 27 years old, he is decent against the run, and he has the talent to get close to dbl digit sacks across from Parsons. He is an upgrade easily from Enagbare, and probably Gary if he get enough snaps.

I would also love to see a veteran TE and another veteran CB. Everything else we can get in the draft if we select a Top 10 CB @ #52 all the way to #72. Trade back, get more mid round picks.

0 points
0
0
Since'75's picture

March 16, 2026 at 10:29 am

IN GUTER WE TRUST!

0 points
0
0
GreenandBold's picture

March 16, 2026 at 08:43 am

6-7 round comp picks are about as useful as a poopy flavored lollipop .

0 points
0
0
HarryHodag's picture

March 16, 2026 at 08:48 am

I've long chuckled at how the fans across the league have viewed the draft as the be-all and end-all to problems(closely followed by 'fire the coach'). It shows how deeply we've all become "Kiperized", named for the senior Nfl draft guru at ESPN. Players selected excelled when they played college ball are not a sure bet to be great pros. Draft success is 50 percent in a good year, including first round picks. Fans think "the draft" will fix many of the problems, more often than not it doesn't. If you look at the Bears, they improved last season in no small measure to the veterans they signed.
All that being said, more picks means the Packers have a greater chance of finding good players. Statistically, if a team has seven picks, 3-4 will become contributors. 10 picks signals 4-5 will contribute.
I would summarize by saying it depends on the year. This year Gute judged veterans from elsewhere were needed after the veterans they had got too expensive. He will augment the veterans with draft help at corner, linebacker, edge and maybe quarterback or running back.

0 points
0
0
ricky's picture

March 16, 2026 at 09:14 am

The Packers seem to have had better luck outside the first round the last few years. Why is a good question, but it seems their policy of drafting for potential rather than immediate impact could be the reason. If they want to win a SB, they need to have guys who are a known quantity, rather than those who have "potential". Because frankly, I'm not sure this coaching staff is capable of getting the best out of players who are raw. And having a mixture of vets and younger players that can see first hand how to become successful in the NFL is important.

0 points
0
0
golfpacker61's picture

March 16, 2026 at 09:56 am

"The Packers seem to have had better luck outside the first round the last few years."

More than a few years ricky. That's just one of the reasons trading for Parsons was a great move. Picking where we usually are picking doesn't get the creme of the crop anyway. Although it's completely true GB passed on obvious players at 'Positions of Need" too many times in the last 10 years. I will just say 1 name, Cooper DeJean.

Parsons makes everyone better on the defense, but that works if you have average or above average players. The Packers strange draft strategy of not picking any CBs earlier than the 7th round over the last 5 years is mind boggling. It was the biggest need last year, and because we ignored it and overpaid a square peg in a round hole(Hobbs), CB is the biggest need again this year.

0 points
0
0
GregC's picture

March 16, 2026 at 09:38 am

Would the equation be different if the Packers were only due to receive one or two comp picks, instead of four? In that case, I think those picks would actually be MORE valuable, so they would make more effort to hang onto them. Having four of them in their back pocket makes it easier to sacrifice one or two of them and still have two or three left. I know that they are short on draft capital because of the Micah Parsons trade, but let's not pretend that a day two pick, or even two of them, is any kind of substitute for a first round pick. If they can get a free agent who moves the needle, I hope they would be willing to part with one of those draft picks in order to sign him.

0 points
0
0
golfpacker61's picture

March 16, 2026 at 10:00 am

The point is moot now Greg, the best players are gone right away and we didn't have the money to sign them anyway. Some good veterans will be released that can help the Packers for next year, and they will be cheap. Dobber pointed out a FA need of Edge rusher. I floated A J Epenesa as an upgrade for Enagbare and Gary too, for a lot less cash.

We also could use another veteran TE and CB to give us leeway in the draft.

0 points
0
0
Since'75's picture

March 16, 2026 at 10:24 am

"Are the Packers better served by leaning into stockpiling compensatory selections?"
********
Well, gee, i don't know. Wouldn't time have to dictate that?
Are the Packers better served being the youngest team?

Let me ask this...does any of this mean the Packers will win something, or are we just spinning our wheels writing about stuff because we need content
*******
Well said 😁

0 points
0
0