packfanfb Posted August 15, 2018 Share Posted August 15, 2018 8 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: You're advocating for basically signing a fully guaranteed contract for a defender at around 24 million per year. Also, if Matthews and Cobb are cap casualties, you're giving up the right to spend the money you would have had with them next year. I'm just not sure any single defender is worth that much money, to say nothing of the draft picks. #MacktothePack AG. Just keep repeating it to yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted August 15, 2018 Share Posted August 15, 2018 7 minutes ago, Beast said: So we're back to this one player is worth more than four or more other players combine. One talented guy doesn't make a complete talented team... even if he's extremely talented. Have we not learned anything from having Favre and Rodgers... and yet we still believe this one guy can be an entire team? ... if that was true don't you think we'd have more than two Super Bowls with those two by now? We don't have two or more SBs because our defense has sucked. Matthews and Cobb are likely casulaties of a youth movement anyway, and sure we could use those guys to sign 2-3 Wilkerson type guys but I'd rather have Mack yes. I'm trusting Monty Adams to take Wilkerson's spot next year. I can still re-sign HHCD, I have Mack and Perry at EDGE with all the same young guys, at CB I'm hoping to be able to cut Tramon and run with King, Alexander, Jackson. I don't see where we aren't improving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted August 15, 2018 Share Posted August 15, 2018 1 minute ago, packfanfb said: #MacktothePack AG. Just keep repeating it to yourself. Just kinda trying to figure out what this team looks like this year. Thinking Mack moves you up from about 10% to 15% at a super bowl this year. Probably even helps you next year too. Not sure about years 3 and 4 of this deal. Clay/Eli Bosa would look really nice in Green and Gold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted August 15, 2018 Share Posted August 15, 2018 2 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: We don't have two or more SBs because our defense has sucked. Matthews and Cobb are likely casulaties of a youth movement anyway, and sure we could use those guys to sign 2-3 Wilkerson type guys but I'd rather have Mack yes. I'm trusting Monty Adams to take Wilkerson's spot next year. I can still re-sign HHCD, I have Mack and Perry at EDGE with all the same young guys, at CB I'm hoping to be able to cut Tramon and run with King, Alexander, Jackson. I don't see where we aren't improving. The depth looks paper thin. Now maybe you can pull a few cheaper vets, but that team is an injury away from being royally screwed if we don't hit on every one of our current young guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted August 15, 2018 Share Posted August 15, 2018 1 hour ago, Beast said: I agree, if it were JUST $22 million per year, or JUST two 1st round picks, I could probably go for it. But the fact that it's both... that's potentially equal to David Bakhtiari, Jimmy Graham, Kenny Clark and Kevin King.... Mack is a great player, I'm just not sure he's better than potential 4 very good players. Those picks could also be Harrell, Sherrod, Randall, Hawk Those FA signings could be Cleditus Hunt, Joe Johnson, Martellus Bennett, Jeff Saturday I get the view that it is a lot to give up. But acting like keeping the picks and the cap space is a fail safe route to hitting on 3-5 upper tier rookies/FA signings is a bit dreamy as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted August 15, 2018 Share Posted August 15, 2018 4 minutes ago, skibrett15 said: Peters got moved for far less than 2 1sts. When a team is ready to move on, they move on. And neither did Randall... players that are considered problem childs like Peters and Packers' own Damarious Randall don't get their max value is trades. So by this comparison, are you suggesting that Khalil Mack has been either suspended or kicked off the field like Peters and Randall? Has Mack opening butted heads with his coaches? That Mack has put himself above others multiple times? That some of his teammates wanted him gone and out of the locker room for good? If you're not saying all those things about Mack, then comparing him to problem child players is completely misleading. 4 minutes ago, skibrett15 said: More likely we are talking Clay matthews and a pick. Which frees up some cap room this year. Why would the Raiders want Matthews under that current contract? If they're trying to rebuild (which is the only reason to get rid of Mack) then you don't want Matthews under his current contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted August 15, 2018 Share Posted August 15, 2018 10 minutes ago, Redt said: Reggie and Farve = Mack and Rodgers, one defensive stalwart and a HOF QB = Championship You've cracked the code. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted August 15, 2018 Share Posted August 15, 2018 1 minute ago, AlexGreen#20 said: The depth looks paper thin. Now maybe you can pull a few cheaper vets, but that team is an injury away from being royally screwed if we don't hit on every one of our current young guys. The GB team is royally screwed if a particular player is injured anyway. Having a top tier D allows another avenue to pursue the title vs solely on Rodgers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Penske Posted August 15, 2018 Share Posted August 15, 2018 8 minutes ago, Redt said: Reggie and Farve = Mack and Rodgers, one defensive stalwart and a HOF QB = Championship Rodgers, Jennings, nick Collins, Clay matthews, Donald Driver, James jones, Jordy Nelson, etc all draft picks. Hitting on draft picks+ HOF QB = championship Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted August 15, 2018 Share Posted August 15, 2018 1 minute ago, Beast said: And neither did Randall... players that are considered problem childs like Peters and Packers' own Damarious Randall don't get their max value is trades. So by this comparison, are you suggesting that Khalil Mack has been either suspended or kicked off the field like Peters and Randall? Has Mack opening butted heads with his coaches? That Mack has put himself above others multiple times? That some of his teammates wanted him gone and out of the locker room for good? If you're not saying all those things about Mack, then comparing him to problem child players is completely misleading. Why would the Raiders want Matthews under that current contract? If they're trying to rebuild (which is the only reason to get rid of Mack) then you don't want Matthews under his current contract. You can cut Matthews for no money after you trade for him if you really don't want him at 10.5. It's not like we're foisting a bad contract on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted August 15, 2018 Share Posted August 15, 2018 11 minutes ago, packfanfb said: Did any of those teams have a guy named Aaron Rodgers? Yes, there was a Mike Sherman team with Aaron Rodgers... and is Aaron Rodgers really that more talented than Brett Favre that automatically another Super Bowl title will appear? This is getting nuts... Anything for a single player! ... because a single player will do what a team can not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted August 15, 2018 Share Posted August 15, 2018 1 minute ago, squire12 said: The GB team is royally screwed if a particular player is injured anyway. Having a top tier D allows another avenue to pursue the title vs solely on Rodgers That's a valid point, but I think we would now have two guys that could completely take the air out of our season with an injury compared to only one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted August 15, 2018 Share Posted August 15, 2018 9 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: We don't have two or more SBs because our defense has sucked. Matthews and Cobb are likely casulaties of a youth movement anyway, and sure we could use those guys to sign 2-3 Wilkerson type guys but I'd rather have Mack yes. I'm trusting Monty Adams to take Wilkerson's spot next year. I can still re-sign HHCD, I have Mack and Perry at EDGE with all the same young guys, at CB I'm hoping to be able to cut Tramon and run with King, Alexander, Jackson. I don't see where we aren't improving. Matthews and Cobb aren't the future... we're talking about cutting future money... not past money, future money... and two first round draft picks or more. A team wins the super bowl, not two players... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted August 15, 2018 Share Posted August 15, 2018 Just now, AlexGreen#20 said: That's a valid point, but I think we would now have two guys that could completely take the air out of our season with an injury compared to only one. It ultimately would come down to looking at the assets as a collective and seeing if the addition of Mack for 2018 and whatever years he would be signed for is better than standing pat and waiting until 2019 to get the 2 (likely later) first round picks, then seeing what those become and how they develop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted August 15, 2018 Share Posted August 15, 2018 Really if you look at 2019 as it stands now, we've got $38 million in cap space with the only must-sign being HHCD. You need to find an edge rusher to fill Clay's spot, but you were likely needing to do that anyway and Mack fills that spot. Now Rodgers is going to be playing on a 21 million dollar deal. That's gonna have to get fixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.