Packers Discussion: Keep, cut or trade Nate Hobbs in 2026?

The path to a Nate Hobbs trade isn’t as far-out as you might think.

Summarized by AI ⓘ

What is the story about?

I think all Green Bay Packers fans realize we’re not getting much bang for our buck from the 2025 free agent class. Usually, free agency is a bad bet. Teams just don’t allow good, healthy players to hit the open market often, especially in an era where cash spending is so much higher than the cap.

Historically, general manager Brian Gutekunst’s track record has been pretty good in free agency. He did well in 2019 with the additions of Za’Darius Smith, Adrian Amos, Preston Smith and Billy Turner. The

same could be said of the 2024 class, when he brought in Xavier McKinney and Josh Jacobs. But neither guard Aaron Banks nor cornerback Nate Hobbs, the two big 2025 free agents, is panning out.

Here, I want to discuss Hobbs, specifically, as it relates to 2026.

For whatever reason, Green Bay thought it was a smart idea to add Hobbs, who was a nickelback for the Las Vegas Raiders, last season. They even paid him like a slot defender, and the NFL’s nickel market reacted as if the Packers paid him to be their slot defender moving forward.

Here’s the problem: There was already a logjam at slot positions for the Packers going into 2025, as safety Javon Bullard, safety Kitan Oladapo and cornerback Keisean Nixon all had experience at the position and still had multiple deals left on their contracts. Bullard was even pushed into the slot role because Evan Williams and Xavier McKinney, who are also still on multi-year deals, cemented their spots at safety.

When camp started, Hobbs played both the slot role and was given snaps at outside cornerback. Hobbs tore his meniscus in the summer, which required surgery in August. After missing Week 1 with the meniscus, Hobbs started at outside cornerback in the next five games of the Packers’ season, playing 77.4 percent of the team’s total defensive snaps. He was struggling on the outside, so he was benched for the next two weeks, only playing 19 percent of the team’s defensive snaps, and then was shut down with an MCL sprain (to the opposite knee than the one he tore his meniscus in) and was held out until Week 14. According to the reporting, Hobbs’ MCL sprain was incorrectly diagnosed as a cyst after Green Bay’s Week 4 tie against the Dallas Cowboys, but the team didn’t realize it was a sprain until Monday of Week 10.

When Hobbs returned, following his second knee injury of the year, he played 24.5 percent of the Packers’ defensive snaps from Week 14 to Week 17. In Week 17, though, Green Bay’s final competitive game of the 2025 regular season, Hobbs suffered a third knee injury, which led to him being placed on the injured reserve, ending his year.

As an outside cornerback, Hobbs allowed 1.28 yards per coverage snap, more than Nixon or Carrington Valentine. In the slot, though, he allowed just 0.63 yards per coverage snap. Bullard allowed 0.74, according to NFL Pro’s date, for perspective.

Hobbs held up well as a nickel defender. He did not hold up as an outside cornerback. But do the Packers need another nickel defender in 2026, even with how much new defensive coordinator Jonathan Gannon likes to play dime? That’s the big question Green Bay needs to answer this offseason.

Here are the Nate Hobbs options for the Packers this offseason:

Keep Nate Hobbs

Hobbs is due a $6.25 million roster bonus on the third day of the new league year, March 13th. If the Packers keep Hobbs for the 2026 season (his salary will be fully guaranteed on Week 1 of the regular season, since he’s a vested veteran), it will cost the team up to $9.05 million in cash, as he has $400,000 in workout bonuses (cost to make him show up for “voluntary” organized team activities this offseason) and $600,000 in per-game roster bonuses on top of this $1.8 million salary.

His cap hit for the year would be $12.8 milloin, since only $4 million of the $16 million signing bonus that he signed in 2025 has been paid down on the cap so far. As it stands right now, the Packers will account for $4 million of that $16 million each year through the 2028 season (this number will accelerate onto the cap if he is pre-June 1st traded or released). So, if Green Bay keeps Hobbs in 2026, he will still have an $8 million dead cap cost to release in 2027, since only half of his signing bonus will have hit the Packers’ cap by that point.

Cap Hits

2026: $12.8 million
2027: $14.1 million ($8 million dead cap, $6.1 million in immediate cap savings with a 2027 release)
2028: $14.7 million ($4 million dead cap, $10.7 million in immediate cap savings with a 2028 release)

Cut Nate Hobbs – pre-March 13th

Pre-June 1st releasing Hobbs saves Green Bay just $838,235 in cap space, as he has a dead cap of $12 million and a cap hit of $12.8. Releasing Hobbs would very much be a move to free up cap space to make future cap space in 2027 or 2028, likely to be used to retain players who are internal extension candidates (Tucker Kraft, Christian Watson, Devonte Wyatt, Lukas Van Ness, Jayden Reed, etc.), not a move that would create enough cap space for the Packers to go back into the market and sign a veteran starting outside cornerback (the market for average second-contract outside cornerbacks is around $18 million per year).

While the short-term cap gains are small, the clean break from Hobbs in 2026 means that his $14.1 million cap hit in 2027 and $14.7 million cap hit in 2028 would be completely off of the Packers’ books, as long as they eat all of that dead cap in 2026.

There will not be a post-June 1st release of Hobbs, since he’s due that $6.25 million signing bonus on March 13th. All that would do is add to the multi-year dead cap of Hobbs, taking it from a total of $12 million to $18.25 million.

Cap Hits

2026: $12 million dead cap ($838,235 in cap savings)
2027: $0 ($14.1 million in cap savings)
2028: $0 ($14.7 million in cap savings)

Trade Nate Hobbs – post-March 13th

Here is the interesting one. What if you turned Hobbs’ contract into an asset?

Hobbs has a market as a slot defender (I’ve been told by a source in the agent industry that Hobbs actually turned down slightly more money to join the Packers, because he wanted to be back with Rich Bisaccia). If Green Bay holds onto the Hobbs deal until after the signing bonus is paid, here’s what his contract would look like for a team that trades him:

2026: $2,588,235 cash/cap hit ($1.8 million salary, $388,235 per-game roster bonuses and $400,000 workout bonus)
2027: $10,050,000 cash/cap hit ($9.05 million salary, $600,000 per-game roster bonuses and $400,000 workout bonus)
2028: $10,700,000 cash/cap hit ($9.7 million salary, $600,000 per-game roster bonuses and $400,000 workout bonus)

None of that money would be guaranteed (no dead cap) for a team that would trade for Hobbs. It would amount to a one-year, $2.6 million deal with two team options. Over three years, his average per year would be just $7.8 million for a team that needs a slot defender. Considering that the market for a slot defender is around $13 million a year (Kyle Hamilton is a special case, so I’m not going to use his $25 million per as the bar here), there’s real value to the remaining deal.

The big question is whether the Packers have the stomach to eat dead cap in exchange for a draft pick, a move that Philadelphia Eagles general manager Howie Roseman has made famous at this point. Here’s what a trade of Hobbs, after his $6.25 million roster bonus is paid, would look like for the Packers:

Cap Hits

2026: $18.25 million ($12 million prorated signing bonus and $6.25 million roster bonus, $5,411,765 added to Green Bay’s 2026 cap sheet)
2027: $0 ($14.1 million in cap savings)
2028: $0 ($14.7 million in cap savings)

Does eating $6.25 million offset whatever another team would be willing to trade for Hobbs on a three-year, non-guaranteed contract at 60 percent of the market rate for a slot defender? That’s the math Green Bay will need to solve there. Unless his knee injuries have completely tanked his market in a year, a team should be willing to give up something for that deal.

–

What direction do you think the Packers should take? Voice your opinion in the comment section.