Jump to content

Bears could be interested in trading too much for Khalil Mack


cooters22

Recommended Posts

Let's play a game of what the GB 2 first round picks might get in terms of value.  I pulled the picks from the 10th, 15th, 20th and 25th draft slots.  I am going to assume that 1 of GB or NO will make the playoffs, so the 25th pick would be a Division round playoff exit (best draft slot of those 4 teams ousted in that round).  In a "best" case scenario, 1 of them (New Orleans) misses the playoffs.   Where that pick might be could vary a lot.    So pick a year and take 2 of the players and see if you would want that caliber of player over Mack.   And understand it is Mack in his prime vs 2 rookies.

Rk Year Rnd Pick   Pos
1 2017 1 25 Jabrill Peppers S
2 2016 1 25 Artie Burns CB
3 2015 1 25 Shaq Thompson OLB
4 2014 1 25 Jason Verrett DB
5 2013 1 25 Xavier Rhodes DB
6 2012 1 25 Dont'a Hightower LB
7 2011 1 25 James Carpenter T
8 2010 1 25 Tim Tebow QB
9 2009 1 25 Vontae Davis DB
10 2008 1 25 Mike Jenkins DB
11 2007 1 25 Jon Beason LB
12 2006 1 25 Santonio Holmes WR
13 2005 1 25 Jason Campbell QB
           
Rk Year Rnd Pick   Pos
1 2017 1 20 Garett Bolles T
2 2016 1 20 Darron Lee OLB
3 2015 1 20 Nelson Agholor WR
4 2014 1 20 Brandin Cooks WR
5 2013 1 20 Kyle Long G
6 2012 1 20 Kendall Wright WR
7 2011 1 20 Adrian Clayborn DE
8 2010 1 20 Kareem Jackson DB
9 2009 1 20 Brandon Pettigrew TE
10 2008 1 20 Aqib Talib DB
11 2007 1 20 Aaron Ross DB
12 2006 1 20 Tamba Hali DE
13 2005 1 20 Marcus Spears DE
           
Rk Year Rnd Pick   Pos
1 2017 1 15 Malik Hooker S
2 2016 1 15 Corey Coleman WR
3 2015 1 15 Melvin Gordon RB
4 2014 1 15 Ryan Shazier LB
5 2013 1 15 Kenny Vaccaro DB
6 2012 1 15 Bruce Irvin DE
7 2011 1 15 Mike Pouncey G
8 2010 1 15 Jason Pierre-Paul DE
9 2009 1 15 Brian Cushing LB
10 2008 1 15 Branden Albert G
11 2007 1 15 Lawrence Timmons LB
12 2006 1 15 Tye Hill DB
13 2005 1 15 Derrick Johnson LB
           
Rk Year Rnd Pick   Pos
1 2017 1 10 Patrick Mahomes QB
2 2016 1 10 Eli Apple CB
3 2015 1 10 Todd Gurley RB
4 2014 1 10 Eric Ebron TE
5 2013 1 10 Chance Warmack G
6 2012 1 10 Stephon Gilmore DB
7 2011 1 10 Blaine Gabbert QB
8 2010 1 10 Tyson Alualu DT
9 2009 1 10 Michael Crabtree WR
10 2008 1 10 Jerod Mayo LB
11 2007 1 10 Amobi Okoye DT
12 2006 1 10 Matt Leinart QB
13 2005 1 10 Mike Williams WR
           
           
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

but to have any qualms about it if it did is crazy talk.

So if anyone disagrees with you, then they're crazy? ... I thought you were suppose to be the moderator? And you want to throw insult around just because I disagree? Because you can't mentally understand another person's logic.

15 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Your giving them up for a guy your team has no shot to acquire via normal means, Von Miller, Joey Bosa, Khalil Mack, JJ Watt, Vic Beasley, Aldon Smith (pre idiot mode), Clowney, Myles Garrett, Mario Williams, I could go on and on, the freaky pass rushers in the NFL are top 12 picks. Unless we suck you have no chance of getting Khalil Mack. If we suck that bad Aaron's not going to want to stick around anyway.

Pass rusher is the #2 most important position in the NFL today and it really isn't debatable. It would give you the #1 player in the NFL at the #1 and #2 moat important positions in the league.

I have even the slightest of minute hopes it happens, but to have any qualms about it if it did is crazy talk.

If the Raiders called tomorrow and said, we'll give you Mack for Nick Perry and Kenny Clark would you say no? Helpful players no doubt but that's the kind of guy odds tell you that late 1st round pick will get you.

I don't care where a person is draft... Rodgers wasn't in the top 12 picks, so he must really suck by the draft selection is important logic.

Do you have any understanding of Pettine's scheme? ... normally he gets it done by using great coverage and then smart up front scheme with talented interior DL. Most edge players have been less important in his scheme. I want Clark to stick around and I want to be able to pay Daniels or Wilkerson, instead of being in Sherman's cap hell again, with a lot of star players, but can't afford to keep them all around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not even sure how this is a point of debate. Clay is a like for like, who is way worse. Cobb is replaceable, very replaceable, with the caveat that Rodgers seems to be unable to throw to receivers who have grown up with the privilege of running fast (not a knock just a theory that slower receivers have to compensate with better precision, and that fits better with Rodgers). Bulaga is on the tail end, and we have been drafting replacements for a couple years now. Bam Mack Money, then we deal with the draft picks, but I mean we are talking about dudes like Jones, Randall, HHCD, Clark (stupid inclusion cause you can't really judge his contribution vis-a-vis Mack), Perry (good but not Mack and still here), etc.

If it can be done do it, obviously, no hesitation. But then again, it can't really be done.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, squire12 said:

 And understand it is Mack in his prime vs 2 rookies.

           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           

You're forgetting the cap space... the reality is that it's Mack vs 2 first round picks AND possibly 20 million per year to go towards any player you might want. 

Everyone seems to want to talk about the draft picks or the money, but few are talking about the combo of BOTH. That's possible four talented players, not just two.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

People keep acting like if we added Mack we literally would have to get rid of all the rest of our team lol. Imagine taking Cobb and Matthews' money and giving it to Mack instead. That's not a 10 player to 1 player swap, its 2 for 1. The other 51 guys on the team stay put. 

Are we a better team? Absolutely because only one of those 3 is a complete difference maker, Mack.

Again, it's not just Cobb and Matthews, there are also two 1st round picks.

It's crazy how all the pro-Mack people are either completely ignoring the draft picks or the money in their comments. It's going to take BOTH to get the deal completed, this is common sense, but I guess ignoring reality is what you got to do to dream.  Don't get me wrong, Mack is a great dream... but that's too much to give up for a single player.

 

Heck pro-Mack fans are ignoring the Raiders unwillingness for them to pay him, even though they don't have to give up the draft picks. Don't you think they know Mack very well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Beast said:

You're forgetting the cap space... the reality is that it's Mack vs 2 first round picks AND possibly 20 million per year to go towards any player you might want. 

Everyone seems to want to talk about the draft picks or the money, but few are talking about the combo of BOTH. That's possible four talented players, not just two.

 

I was not forgetting about the cap space.  For the longest time, posters were lamenting the talent deficiency on the GB Packers.   Perpetually picking in the late 1st round, it is hard to get elite talent.  If the option to use those 2 first round picks to get an elite talent, it is something to very much consider.  

Elite players cost higher cap space.  That is the way of the NFL.  If you are banking on the 2 firsts being elite talent, you might be in for a long wait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Packers acquire an extra 1st rd pick and some fans go completely Gollum with it.  LoL

Of course you have to pay the best players big time money.  If Alexander hits, that extra 1st rd pick will be even more worth it if it helps us snag Mack.  So we can keep them both and hope that maybe they become excellent  players who can help us.  Or we can use them to get the best defensive player in the league.  

Rodgers can’t and won’t speak on it but behind closed doors I’d bet he’d do whatever he could to help make it happen.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, squire12 said:

I was not forgetting about the cap space.  For the longest time, posters were lamenting the talent deficiency on the GB Packers.   Perpetually picking in the late 1st round, it is hard to get elite talent.  If the option to use those 2 first round picks to get an elite talent, it is something to very much consider.  

Elite players cost higher cap space.  That is the way of the NFL.  If you are banking on the 2 firsts being elite talent, you might be in for a long wait.

Elite talent outside their rookie years cost higher cap space, which is why you try to get them on their rookie contracts via the draft.

Speaking of this draft, this draft is said to be loaded with DL and edge rusher talent, which fits perfectly for the Packers just like last year the draft was loaded with CB talent when the Packers needed CBs.

 

Posters will always find something to complain about if they're not winning... ALWAYS... but there are limits on talent, draft picks and cap space.

FAs you give up cap space to get talent.

Draft you give up picks to get talent.

But teams try not to give up BOTH cap space and picks for talent because then you're paying double the actually price.

 

And if this is such an easy decision, then why haven't the Raiders (the team that knows him best) already done it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, squire12 said:

GB will have $40M in cap space in 2019 prior to the cap going up.  You can get Mack into that cap space and still have room for HaHa and Wilkerson if you want to retain them.

And the Raiders will have even more... so if you're so much smarter than Reggie, then why is he getting rid of Mack?

Also the Packers haven't factored in Rodgers new deal yet.

10 minutes ago, thrILL! said:

Rodgers can’t and won’t speak on it but behind closed doors I’d bet he’d do whatever he could to help make it happen.  

You think Rodgers will take a pretty low contract amount just like Brady to make it happen?

10 minutes ago, thrILL! said:

Packers acquire an extra 1st rd pick and some fans go completely Gollum with it.  LoL

You're oversimplifying it again to the point of lying... it's not the extra 1st round, it's the entire cost of getting him here long term. 

Why are we even considering this for the Packers vs the 31 other teams?

 

Heck no one has answered why the Raiders aren't giving in just like Packers fans drooling all over Mack... nor have any of the aggressive GM made a move (yet).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

none of this matters because the raiders would be absolutely crazy to let it happen. they aren't going to let a generational pass rusher leave them. 

but i really can't believe the fans in here that would be reluctant to pull the trigger on this....my goodness. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Beast said:

You think Rodgers will take a pretty low contract amount just like Brady to make it happen?

I don’t know what kind of discount it would be but Rodgers has never struck me as the kind of guy who wants to be the highest paid player out of greed and pride.  Esp since these contracts are always eventually surpassed by the next big contract.  I could see him helping make this happen.  How could he not if he’s serious about rings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Beast said:

And the Raiders will have even more... so if you're so much smarter than Reggie, then why is he getting rid of Mack?

Also the Packers haven't factored in Rodgers new deal yet.

You think Rodgers will take a pretty low contract amount just like Brady to make it happen?

Maybe Mack does not want to re-sign with the Raiders.  Maybe he wants to play somewhere else and not under Gruden.  

Rodgers new deal could be structured several ways to be fit in under that $40M cap space....since he already accounts $20M against it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Beast said:

And the Raiders will have even more... so if you're so much smarter than Reggie, then why is he getting rid of Mack?

Maybe Mack wants a few mil more a year than the Raiders want to pay, even if Raiders are willing to make him highest paid defensive player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, persiandud said:

none of this matters because the raiders would be absolutely crazy to let it happen. they aren't going to let a generational pass rusher leave them. 

but i really can't believe the fans in here that would be reluctant to pull the trigger on this....my goodness. 

We disagree, but at least you're making a lot of sense. I don't understand this argument that Mack is so bad that the Raiders would let him go, and then he'll be godly for the Packers... that just doesn't make sense. If he's good as the worship he's getting here, then the Raiders aren't going to let him go.

But it's also stupid to trade away everything just for one guy... ask Mike Ditka about Ricky Williams. Everything for one thing, is just a bad idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...