Jump to content

Bears could be interested in trading too much for Khalil Mack


cooters22

Recommended Posts

I think most reasonable people get why a Mack trade probably isn’t a good idea. Max cap + multiple high value picks is a tough pill to swallow and analytically doesn’t make sense for a non Qb. I have moved a bit and could see one first since we have extra ammo, clay rolls off next year, and it would fix a need. Anything more is too much

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, pacman5252 said:

I think most reasonable people get why a Mack trade probably isn’t a good idea. Max cap + multiple high value picks is a tough pill to swallow and analytically doesn’t make sense for a non Qb. I have moved a bit and could see one first since we have extra ammo, clay rolls off next year, and it would fix a need. Anything more is too much

I think most reasonable people understand that you maybe get a chance to make this type of move once every 10 years, that is to get a player who by himself elevates your team to another level. You gladly give up two, probably late, 1st round picks if Oakland is so generous to part with him for that compensation. This deal is even more appealing now when your HOF QB is now in his mid-30s and about ready to sign probably his last contract with GB. Then you figure out the money for Mack and make it work. Maybe you have to cut a lesser, overpaid player. Maybe not depending on how you structure ARods deal. Bottom line, this deal is a no-brainer if Oakland is a willing participant, which of course is the biggest question of all here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, packfanfb said:

I think most reasonable people understand that you maybe get a chance to make this type of move once every 10 years, that is to get a player who by himself elevates your team to another level. You gladly give up two, probably late, 1st round picks if Oakland is so generous to part with him for that compensation. This deal is even more appealing now when your HOF QB is now in his mid-30s and about ready to sign probably his last contract with GB. Then you figure out the money for Mack and make it work. Maybe you have to cut a lesser, overpaid player. Maybe not depending on how you structure ARods deal. Bottom line, this deal is a no-brainer if Oakland is a willing participant, which of course is the biggest question of all here.

Yes a no-brainier that you don't do it at that price point.

Mack can only really super elevate a team if the has a talent team else where as well ... and two 1st and 22+ million is basically talented 4 players ... vs OT Bakhtiari , TE Graham, CB King and DT Kenny Clark. Mack is a GREAT player, but he can only be one place at a time, which makes it hard to beat 4 very good players, some of which have the potential to maybe be great themselves. Which can also elevate a team having multiple very good players.

Heck the Packers can't even seem to figure out how to get a top of the mark for Rodgers... AARON FREAKING RODGERS... how they going to do a top of market deal for someone they've never been around?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Beast said:

Heck the Packers can't even seem to figure out how to get a top of the mark for Rodgers... AARON FREAKING RODGERS... how they going to do a top of market deal for someone they've never been around?

That's why you pay Russ Ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

That's why you pay Russ Ball.

I assume (and might be wrong, but I assume) Ball is the one having trouble with it.

No way does tightwad Ball get a good deal if Reggie McKenzie can't.

MKO-rubber-band-ball.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, HighCalebR said:

Tightwad ball. Uh what? You mean the guy who just made Graham the highest paid TE ever?

No I'm not talking about Gute at all. (Edit: actually the Packers didn't even make Graham the highest paid TE ever, the Saints did... they gave him $10 million per year first... the Packers just matched that... so no it wasn't the Packers).

I'm talking about the tightwad guy that Thompson listen to, in which everyone call Thompson, Tightwad Ted

Though it should be noted, I've been pretty sarcastic and joking around today. But yes I believe Thompson and Ball are clearly fairly conservative with money. But since we got tightwad ted, why not tightwad ball? :P:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Packerraymond said:

Freak you out that we'll get Mack, win all the SB's and you'll have no choice but to love Aaron Rodgers and call him the GOAT?

No, freaked out we'll trade two first round picks for 4 years of production. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...