Jump to content

Bears could be interested in trading too much for Khalil Mack


cooters22

Recommended Posts

Mack and CMIII have very similar stats for their first 4 years.  40.5 sacks for Mack 42.5 for CMIII, 7 FF for CMIII and 9 for Mack, 1 INT for Mack 4 for CMIII.  With that said, how long can Mack stay at that level.  
With the addition of Mack,  Clay could move back inside more and that front 7 would be the best in the NFL.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone is excited that we have the draft power to potentially do something like this, but then we would be worse than the Saints who gave up this power... we'd then give away TWO 1st round picks, for the right to resigned the guy to a mega contract when we don't have the cap room at the moment.

 

I want draft power, not to just randomly give it up chasing a single player like the Saints did, ESPECIALLY since this guys doesn't have any cheap rookie years left, like the Saints will have four for the guy they drafted.

 

And if we had to trade for some huge name, I'd much rather have FS Earl Thomas for the 2nd rounder that the Seahawks were asking for, then Mack for two 1st rounders

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, cannondale said:

Acquiring Mack isn't the problem. Keeping him would be the problem. Giving a malcontent QB money wouldn't be high on my priority list. Him sitting out under the current circumstances speaks volumes about the man. He gets $14 million this year and can test the market next year and he is sitting out ?? Give me a break. Once a money chaser, always a money chaser

Cut/TRade Perry or Matthews and let Cobb go, problem solved. Trade whomever of those guys for anything you get for them and then trade next years both first rounders away. Yes this is what you do when a guy is of the caliber of Mack. All you gotta do is think outside of the box, teams like the Rams have gone all offseason making moves like this. Why not us? We already brought in Wilkerson and Jimmy Graham. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Beast said:

Everyone is excited that we have the draft power to potentially do something like this, but then we would be worse than the Saints who gave up this power... we'd then give away TWO 1st round picks, for the right to resigned the guy to a mega contract when we don't have the cap room at the moment.

 

I want draft power, not to just randomly give it up chasing a single player like the Saints did, ESPECIALLY since this guys doesn't have any cheap rookie years left, like the Saints will have four for the guy they drafted.

 

And if we had to trade for some huge name, I'd much rather have FS Earl Thomas for the 2nd rounder that the Seahawks were asking for, then Mack for two 1st rounders

Sounds sensible and the Earl move wouldn't have been bad had we not invested in Josh Jones last year. Still like Earl though. A DB's dream safety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, PACKRULE said:

Sounds sensible and the Earl move wouldn't have been bad had we not invested in Josh Jones last year. Still like Earl though. A DB's dream safety.

It's much more sensible than trading two 1st round picks away... but note that none of the 31 other teams have done it... because when you do that, you get punished twice, both having up the draft investment but also having to pony up for his new contract.... so teams just wait it out, and sign him if he can become a FA.

Josh Jones is a back-up right now, so I don't think his investment has any effect, plus they could always get him on the field as a dime S/LB/CB hybrid. And as of right now, both Thomas and Clinton-Dix are going into contract years... and even if both are resigned, there should be ways to get three Safeties on the field at the same time, especially since the Packers have done it with four Safeties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Beast said:

Everyone is excited that we have the draft power to potentially do something like this, but then we would be worse than the Saints who gave up this power... we'd then give away TWO 1st round picks, for the right to resigned the guy to a mega contract when we don't have the cap room at the moment.

 

I want draft power, not to just randomly give it up chasing a single player like the Saints did, ESPECIALLY since this guys doesn't have any cheap rookie years left, like the Saints will have four for the guy they drafted.

 

And if we had to trade for some huge name, I'd much rather have FS Earl Thomas for the 2nd rounder that the Seahawks were asking for, then Mack for two 1st rounders

You'd rather have Earl Thomas, a descending player at a non premium position than Khalil Mack, an ascending player at the most important non-QB position in the NFL?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

You'd rather have Earl Thomas, a descending player at a non premium position than Khalil Mack, an ascending player at the most important non-QB position in the NFL?

Ascending or descending, non-premium, important... those are OPINIONS... that are not necessary based on facts.

Also Pettine's system is based around being able to cover WRs with the minimum amount of players, then using extra guys up front to use overloads and/or tricks to get one on ones and put pressure on the front. Which means Pettine risks more on having good coverage guys, so in his system the coverage guys that can shut someone down (like Earl Thomas has) are the premium positions. 

 

Plus both Mack and Thomas are demanding top of their position contracts... for Safeties that's 13 million, for Edge players that's 19 million. Also Mack is rumored about TWO 1st round picks, where Thomas is NO 1st round picks.... so yes, if those rumored price tags are correct, I MUCH MUCH MMMMMMUCH rather have the one that saves me both a 1st round pick, $6 million dollars.

 

AND if you were to look at this 2019 draft, it's LOADED with DL and OLBers... we might be able to get a 22 year old 1st round rookie on a cheap rookie contract, or a 27 year old on a 19 million dollar contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember the excitement of signing Reggie White when ppl didn’t think we had a chance. Obviously that was a different situation but the excitement of acquiring Mack would feel quite similar I’d imagine.  That being said, I don’t know why we choose to torture ourselves like this. LoL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, 66PinG said:

Thank you, no.

why would you want to tear your offense apart for one player?

Yeah, I also think Mack is crazy good, but I am not tearing the team apart for him.

Your not tearing it apart. Cobb and Bulaga are both over paid but important components at this stage. Neither probably are on this roster after their current contracts are up. Khalil Mack makes you instantly a top 5 defense, geez if your offense goes from 3rd best to 7th best but your defense goes from 30th to 3rd, yeah these are the types of moves you make to put you over the top for a guy in HIS THIRD SEASON AND A HOF TYPE KID!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Beast said:

Everyone is excited that we have the draft power to potentially do something like this, but then we would be worse than the Saints who gave up this power... we'd then give away TWO 1st round picks, for the right to resigned the guy to a mega contract when we don't have the cap room at the moment.

 

I want draft power, not to just randomly give it up chasing a single player like the Saints did, ESPECIALLY since this guys doesn't have any cheap rookie years left, like the Saints will have four for the guy they drafted.

 

And if we had to trade for some huge name, I'd much rather have FS Earl Thomas for the 2nd rounder that the Seahawks were asking for, then Mack for two 1st rounders

Trading away a 1st for Davenport is a little different than trading away a first, or even two, for Kahlil Mack. We probably wouldnt even have to give up both 1st rounders anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

Trading away a 1st for Davenport is a little different than trading away a first, or even two, for Kahlil Mack. We probably wouldnt even have to give up both 1st rounders anyways.

I agree with this too. At least Mack is proven. Which current college player is 100% sure NOT to bust? Answer: no one 

That said, I would never give 2 firsts for anyone except a proven QB. Just too much to give. If we draft 2 OLB next year in the first, hit rate says most likely both are ok and one might be really good.

Heck, what happens if. Brees tears his ACL in pre-season game 3? Just one of those picks might get you Bosa or Oliver. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Beast said:

Everyone is excited that we have the draft power to potentially do something like this, but then we would be worse than the Saints who gave up this power... we'd then give away TWO 1st round picks, for the right to resigned the guy to a mega contract when we don't have the cap room at the moment.

 

I want draft power, not to just randomly give it up chasing a single player like the Saints did, ESPECIALLY since this guys doesn't have any cheap rookie years left, like the Saints will have four for the guy they drafted.

 

Mack is a proven talent. 

The bust rate for edge rushers is way too high to give up 2 first round picks on a guy who hasn't played a single snap in the NFL, and in the Saints case, a guy who hasn't even done it at the highest level of college.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...