Re-sign, let go and prediction: Packers free agent IDL TJ Slaton

Paul Bretl | 2/18/2025

GREEN BAY, Wis. — In the coming weeks, I will take a closer look at the Packers pending free agents in my ‘Re-sign or Let Go and Prediction’ series.

For each free agent I will make a case as to why the Packers should re-sign them and I’ll also discuss why the Packers would let them walk and play elsewhere. Then at the end, I’ll make my prediction.

This will be my third offseason doing this series and through the first two, I’ve gotten 24 of the 27 predictions correct.

Up next, let’s take a closer look at whether or not defensive tackle TJ Slaton will return for the 2025 season. If you missed our other previews, you can find them below:

Eric Wilson
Isaiah McDuffie
Robert Rochell

Why the Packers will re-sign TJ Slaton

Although the defensive front would struggle to consistently get after the quarterback last season, the Packers were one of the better teams against the run. Green Bay finished the season ranked third in fewest yards per rush allowed, they ranked sixth in ESPN’s run-stop rate, and the Packers gave up fewer than 100 rushing yards per game for the first time since 2009.

Hit like and subscribe to my YouTube Channel ‘The Paul Bretl Show’ for more Packers coverage.

Often in the middle of that run defense unit was Slaton. With Slaton’s role, he isn’t always going to fill up the stat sheet, but when Slaton is playing well, his teammates can feel his presence. With the space he takes up and the blockers he can occupy, that can help open up opportunities for other defenders to make plays.

“The way he’s getting off the ball at his size and how disruptive he can be and penetrate, he’s hard to block,” said Jeff Hafley last season.

Slaton finished the season with 14 pressures and a sack as a pass rusher, along with 32 total tackles, two of which were for a loss. According to PFF’s advanced metrics, out of 153 eligible interior defenders, Slaton ranked 26th in run-stops and he was tied for 22nd in run-stop rate.

“He’s intentional in practice, he works hard, how he handles the meetings,” said former defensive line coach Jason Reborvich.

At 6-5 – 330 pounds, the Packers don’t have an obvious replacement for Slaton’s role on their roster already. Slaton also contributed 158 special teams snaps last season, playing on both field goal units.

Why the Packers won’t re-sign TJ Slaton

As described, the run defense for the Packers was quite good last season, but the pass rush was not. Adding to the defensive front is an item that will have to be on GM Brian Gutekunst’s to do list.

However, whether it be draft capital or salary cap space, there are only so many resources and roster spots to go around–and re-signing Slaton takes away from both of those. It’s also not as if the defensive front is the only need that has to be addressed either.

If Slaton were to return, Green Bay still has Kenny Clark, who obviously isn’t going anywhere, and three players still on rookie deals in 2025 in Devonte Wyatt, Karl Brooks, and Colby Wooden. That’s already five players accounted for on the potential future 53-man roster without another addition made and keeping six defensive tackles when the in-game rotation isn’t that deep is going to take away from another position group.

Now, having said that, my point in that example isn’t that the Packers should keep the status quo or that playing time from 2024 to 2025 won’t be altered for some. But instead, re-signing a rotational veteran who played 39% of the defensive snaps in 2024, which then in turn may require the Packers to part ways with a player on their rookie deal is a concept that just very much seems to go against the grain when it comes to Gutekunst’s roster building approach.

This also happens to be a very loaded defensive line draft class. Daniel Jeremiah recently released his first top 50 prospects big board and included were a whopping 16 defensive linemen. So the Packers will have the opportunity to add high-end talent at this position through the draft, giving them a defender on a rookie deal and a potential upgrade as well, given the talent level of this year’s class.

Prediction: The Packers don’t re-sign TJ Slaton

I did initially go back and forth a bit on what to choose here. But the tipping point for me is that re-signing Slaton seems to go against how Gutekunst typically builds out his roster.

As I just mentioned, with the draft class at the defensive tackle position being incredibly deep, that allows for Gutekunst to not only add another valuable rookie deal to the roster, but he should find some immediate impact help as well to replace Slaton. Not that I anticipate Slaton’s next deal breaking the salary cap bank, but there’s certainly more value in having a rookie contract on the books for the next several years.

In addition to that, keeping Slaton and still making an addition–which has to happen–creates a logjam if we fast-forward to the construction of the 53-man roster. And while competition has been a catalyst behind the Packers’ success the last few years and can’t be forgotten about, choosing to give Slaton a new deal to then, in turn, move on from someone on a rookie deal doesn’t exactly align with how Gutekunst operates. Or if the Packers went heavy number-wise at defensive tackle–just to list someone as inactive on gamedays–that then means going light elsewhere.

For the right player, you’ll navigate the aforementioned scenario. But I don’t know that a rotational run defender fits into that category.

And something worth noting is that while we saw Jeff Hafley’s ability to adjust and adapt on display last season, Slaton’s size isn’t a prototypical fit for this defensive scheme.

While at different positions, we did see Gutekunst take a similar approach last offseason with the offensive line with Jon Runyan. He would end up signing with the Giants in free agency and the Packers were comfortable with that, knowing they had Sean Rhyan on the roster and then they used a first-round pick on Jordan Morgan. Perhaps we see a similar approach at defensive tackle.

Powered By SoCast