Jump to content

Bears could be interested in trading too much for Khalil Mack


cooters22

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Packerraymond said:

It definitely puts more stress to draft well, like early Ted drafts with a move like that would produce a killer team. 2013-2015 Ted drafts we'd probably be hurting.

Exactly right. I dont have much of a ***** with TT or the FO - but I did question (after the fact) how our talent evals were going.

Thats why I like the apparent approach of the new crew - to weed out and select talented and athletic players. We keep ahead of the that curve - we'll do okay. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Leader said:

 

"They’re about $29 million under next year’s cap. If they have to watch costs, the headliners among their free agents are a 33-year-old Matthews, Randall Cobb, Muhammad Wilkerson and Ha Ha Clinton-Dix. There’s not a must-sign player in the group."

OK, if Clinton-Dix isn't a 'must-sign' player throw him in the deal with the Raiders. Dix a 1 and a 3 next year ought to get it done. I'm not sure the drop off between Dix and someone else would be that great. The Raiders suck at safety. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Gopher Trace said:

 I wouldn't give more than a 2nd, but for mayyyyybe a conditional 1st if he has a career year with us.

I wouldn't pay $20 for a hundred dollar bill. Maybe $40 if it was crisp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Shanedorf said:

Looney tunes ?

Pretty much. Like yeah Mack has huge value and DIX has been down. But that's going to make a garbage safety combo. I guess we'll just keep trading to replace him. All avenues. Choo choo. The Gute train rolls on 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Norm said:

Dix Dix Dix Dix

And the drop off would be massive. Brice and Jones? That's what we're starting. Yeah just ruin whatever momentum we have at corner for da tradez.

This is getting out of control.

Did you read the article? The writer stated Dix was not a MUST re-sign for next year. Not sure Jones and Brice would be much of a drop off,  but i see Dix as a marginal starter to begin with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Golfman said:

Did you read the article? The writer stated Dix was not a MUST re-sign for next year. Not sure Jones and Brice would be much of a drop off,  but i see Dix as a marginal starter to begin with. 

Oh my bad. If a writer said it I take back my comments. 

If you think he's a marginal starter, well. I don't feel like getting banned just yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Golfman said:

Did you read the article? The writer stated Dix was not a MUST re-sign for next year. Not sure Jones and Brice would be much of a drop off,  but i see Dix as a marginal starter to begin with. 

Haha isn't the best athlete but he's got pretty darn good instincts and knows where he's suppose to be which allows him to play FS. Jones is the opposite and that's why he's sucky right now and you probably don't want him to play FS.

All I'm saying, is they new a real FS and we can't go through starting M.D. Jennings back there again. But hey if he's not resigned of traded, maybe the Packers could grab another 30 year old Seahawks FAs (Earl Thomas) next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Norm said:

Dix Dix Dix Dix

And the drop off would be massive. Brice and Jones? That's what we're starting. Yeah just ruin whatever momentum we have at corner for da tradez.

This is getting out of control.

Packers are getting Mack and Earl Thomas, no worries

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, deltarich87 said:

Packers are getting Mack and Earl Thomas, no worries

3 way trade,

Packers get Thomas and Mack

Raiders get Haha and our 1st our 4th

Seahens get our 2nd and Raiders 6th

 

Thomas costs about 2.5M more than Haha this year

 

HaHa is a tough resign, he is mediocre to above average at best safety but has the name recognition and achievements that go with a perennial pro-bowl caliber player. My favorite part about him is that he's played in 71 out of 71 possible games, regular season + playoffs.  That kind of durability should not be overlooked.  Just really don't think he is worth a 50 million deal for 4 years.  But I also really don't want to go back to the MD Jennings and Charlie Peprah days either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...