Raiders, Bears Reach Agreement on Khalil Mack Trade

[Heinz D.]

3 hours ago, Ragnar Danneskjold said:

I am amazed at the number of fans that think the Bears roster is so much better than the Packers.

I wouldn't say "so much" better, but it is better, overall. 

2 hours ago, Broncofan said:

I've got no dog in this show, but frankly, you take away ARod, the Bears are clearly a more talented roster on D, and a similarly talented roster on O.    I'd spot them a 2W+ difference on D talent, and frankly, McCarthy loses a W over any decent HC staff (and I'm probably being generous - and yeah, I know, VJ is probably a -2, so not throwing stones in glass houses).

Having said that, ARod is a 4W+ QB in his own right, so I think GB & CHI are pretty close overall now, but GB gets the edge, but only because of the impact A-Rod has, and because we don't know if Trubisky is league-average or better yet.    And I looooooove what GB did in this draft FWIW - so I think GB is going to be really better...in 2019.   NO's 2017 draft impact is the outlier.    

Yeah, it's unfortunate that the thread derailed into Packers vs. Bears. Not only is that sort of off-topic, but it also ignores the Vikings and Lions--who should both be pretty darn good, as well. 

But I agree with your assessment of the teams there. It's pretty spot-on. I also love Green Bay's draft. Gutekunst really did an excellent job

1 hour ago, RaidersAreOne said:

Honestly our D has improved from last season to now through the draft/FA/getting healthy, even without Mack. The biggest difference is Guenther >>>>>> KNR. That can not be explained enough. 

Our CB's are much better and deeper. Out DT's are much better and deeper. Our edge got worse (Losing Mack is HUGE but moving Bruce to DE full-time and adding Key/Carradine helps a lot). Our S's have not improved. Our LB have slightly improved. Our pass-rush was honestly one of the brightest units throughout camp and preseason, without Mack. Not to say we wont miss him (we will no matter what), but overall the talent level has improved on D and the coaching is exponentially better.

I agree with you on all that. I think they're trending in the right direction, even without Mack. Will they be light years better? Probably not, but they will be better--provided they at least sort of replace Mack's production, which isn't out of the question.

A lot of the naysaying around the Raiders end of the trade stems from a mistrust of Gruden, which I simply don't get. Maybe there's a whole bunch of youngsters about, but Gruden was a high quality coach, and there's no reason to believe he's like out of touch with the modern game, or anything. 

[El Ramster]

Man this season is going to be hella spicy. The north remembers and it looks like a rough stacked conference. 

[Heinz D.]

18 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

The personal callouts are COMPLETELY unnecessary, guys.  I don't share @CWood21's opinion, but it doesn't mean he gets to be called out being a Mod when a disagreement breaks out.  We're supposed to disagree - hopefully we can learn from each other, but we don't all have to agree in the end.  If he's insulting others, or breaking Webby's rules, that's one thing.   But, a Mod is still entitled to disagree.    We can be better than the "expect better from a Mod" angle if it's just a disagreement no one is willing to concede.  It's about as uncalled for as the "he could get injured" angle.  My 2 cents.  

I don't see how criticizing how someone  is constructing their arguments constitutes a personal callout at all. And I don't mind disagreements whatsoever, even with Mods, as that's to be expected on an online forum. However, I do think we should all expect a certain standard of behavior around here, and I won't go into any more detail than that.

Thanks for weighing in, Broncofan. You continue to demonstrate you're a class act. If I have more time, maybe I'll send you a PM later. 

[CWood21]

32 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

I see the DL's as very similar.  I see the ILB's as significantly better.  I absolutely love the GB draft, but I have to give the secondary for CHI the nod...for now.  2019, different story.   

The one element I should have expanded on why I see a GB/CHI D difference - speed/disruptive ability.  I see 2 guys on GB who have it (Daniels/ and healthy Nick Perry).   I see 3 guys now on CHI who have it (Hicks, Mack & Floyd).   It used to be a wash, but Mack really changes the dynamic there.  O's can counter 1 guy pretty easily (see OAK & Mack alone).  2? Tough.  3?  Pretty near impossible.  That's a huge difference (and even before you get to the health issues Perry's had - negated by Floyd's, but then it's 2 vs. 1 rather than 3 vs. 2).   Then you add in what Roquan can do in the middle of that field, it really changes the tiers in which CHI's D can bring heat/disruption vs. what GB can do, and Roquan changes what the run D looks like (both DL's play well when healthy).  And as I prefaced in the Comp Forum, I really think Mack's run D is incredibly underrated - he and Von are 2 game-changing EDGE run defenders.    Mack and Roquan upgrade the run D an insane amount.

Don't get me wrong, I think GB had a fantastic offseason.  Truly epic, especially when you add in the extra 1st for 2019.   They are going to upgrade that D and O so much it's scary.  But it's more of a 2019+ effect for the Pack, given how most drafts work.  For this year, it's all about how much A-Rod can carry that team.

LIS, I don't have any issue someone grading the Bears' DL similar to the Packers.  I just think if we're getting a motivated Wilkerson (and admittedly that's a big IF), the Bears DL isn't quite as good as the Packers.  That's not a knock on the Bears, just a testament to the talent the Packers have.  I'm not going to pretend I watch a ton of Eddie Goldman, but a LOT of Kenny Clark's value doesn't come in the way of the stat sheet.  He's consistently holding up at the POA against double teams freeing up his teammates to make plays.  There's a few Packers fans on Twitter that do a great job mentioning it.

I do question the fact that you mention Leonard Floyd as having the speed/disruptive ability, but don't mention Clay Matthews.  The biggest issue is that the Packers don't have the depth behind Clay Matthews or Nick Perry, so when the inevitable injury happens the Packers are stuck using Reggie Gilbert and Kyler Fackrell as their pass rushers.  That's why the Packers EDGE seems to be a concern.  Not so much because of their starters, but because they're incredibly thin at that position.  As for Roquan Smith, I have no doubt he's going to be in the running for DROY, but I'd probably be a bit hesitant to put him as a strong run defender.  I definitely docked him in my pre-draft evaluation as being an average run defender.  And I believe (and Bears fans can correct me if I'm wrong) that Smith is slated as the WILL ILB, not the SAM.

The secondary is the thing that I find most interesting.  On paper, I don't think there's very many people who prefer the Packers' secondary to the Bears right now, but this is something that could easily change in a few months.  Prince Amukamara is already 29 years old, and his best days are probably behind him.  He's closer to the downside of his career, and corners don't really age well.  The bigger issue I have is the sheer lack of depth at corner.  Right now, the Packers 3rd and 4th corners are Jaire Alexander and Josh Jackson, where as the Bears have Marcus Cooper and Bryce Callahan I believe.  I don't think there's anyone who'd take the Bears' depth over the Packers right now let alone in the future.  And any slip in CB play puts more pressure on the Bears' safeties.  We saw that happen last year with HHCD.

[Broncofan]

1 minute ago, CWood21 said:

LIS, I don't have any issue someone grading the Bears' DL similar to the Packers.  I just think if we're getting a motivated Wilkerson (and admittedly that's a big IF), the Bears DL isn't quite as good as the Packers.  That's not a knock on the Bears, just a testament to the talent the Packers have.  I'm not going to pretend I watch a ton of Eddie Goldman, but a LOT of Kenny Clark's value doesn't come in the way of the stat sheet.  He's consistently holding up at the POA against double teams freeing up his teammates to make plays.  There's a few Packers fans on Twitter that do a great job mentioning it.

I do question the fact that you mention Leonard Floyd as having the speed/disruptive ability, but don't mention Clay Matthews.  The biggest issue is that the Packers don't have the depth behind Clay Matthews or Nick Perry, so when the inevitable injury happens the Packers are stuck using Reggie Gilbert and Kyler Fackrell as their pass rushers.  That's why the Packers EDGE seems to be a concern.  Not so much because of their starters, but because they're incredibly thin at that position.  As for Roquan Smith, I have no doubt he's going to be in the running for DROY, but I'd probably be a bit hesitant to put him as a strong run defender.  I definitely docked him in my pre-draft evaluation as being an average run defender.  And I believe (and Bears fans can correct me if I'm wrong) that Smith is slated as the WILL ILB, not the SAM.

The secondary is the thing that I find most interesting.  On paper, I don't think there's very many people who prefer the Packers' secondary to the Bears right now, but this is something that could easily change in a few months.  Prince Amukamara is already 29 years old, and his best days are probably behind him.  He's closer to the downside of his career, and corners don't really age well.  The bigger issue I have is the sheer lack of depth at corner.  Right now, the Packers 3rd and 4th corners are Jaire Alexander and Josh Jackson, where as the Bears have Marcus Cooper and Bryce Callahan I believe.  I don't think there's anyone who'd take the Bears' depth over the Packers right now let alone in the future.  And any slip in CB play puts more pressure on the Bears' safeties.  We saw that happen last year with HHCD.

I just think Matthews has lost a step.   If I'm wrong, I see your point.

Re: secondary, I love the picks.  They just take time.   I think PHI is going to be even tougher with Sydney Jones year 2.  I see the same kind of surge next year.   This year they'll take a fair share of lumps.

[CWood21]

Just now, Broncofan said:

I just think Matthews has lost a step.   If I'm wrong, I see your point.

If you look at this overall pressure stats (and not just his sacks), he's been just as productive.  He just hasn't finished plays as much as he had in past year's.  And part of that has to do with the abomination of our CBs the last few years.  You can have all the pressure in the world, but if your corners can't stick that pressure isn't going to amount to much.

[Broncofan]

15 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

If you look at this overall pressure stats (and not just his sacks), he's been just as productive.  He just hasn't finished plays as much as he had in past year's.  And part of that has to do with the abomination of our CBs the last few years.  You can have all the pressure in the world, but if your corners can't stick that pressure isn't going to amount to much.

I hear you, just going off what I see - and admittedly, I only watched half the GB games.   Just going off that and where he's at in his career arc and cumulative effect of injuries, it seems more likely.  But maybe he's a freak that defies Father Time, esp with better coverage.   We'll see.   Having said that, it would close the gap (although man, Mack is in a class by himself with Von, but at least it wouldn't be 3 vs. 2 before we even get to Mack).

P.S. I said I'd stop if I had nothing new to add....so my bad.  Really stopping now. Truly.  LOL.

[Nabbs4u]

9 hours ago, tab said:

how good/bad of a deal will this have been if the Raiders use the money saved from the Mack deal to get Lev Bell next year in addition to the 2 bears picks

Could very well be a possibility. Assuming of course Bell's legs don't fall off with the 400+ carries Pittsburgh going try and give him this year before he leaves!

Just don't think albeit a Gruden thing to do, spending that money on a RB rather then Defensively is what will occur.

Alot of Defensive FA next off-season depending on the Tag?

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/2019/all/defense/

[TecmoSuperJoe]

 

[base615]

On 04/09/2018 at 12:42 AM, CWood21 said:

Only knock?  That's a pretty damn big knock, especially how we're in a passing-oriented league.  That's like saying your OL is a stud even though his pass protection is average at best, but he's a great run blocker.  It's illogical.  Are you comfortable paying him elite RB money?  Because I certainly wouldn't be.  I'd rather reinvest my money elsewhere and gamble that I can find a better value back in the draft or in FA.  He's not in that elite tier, and I'm not sure he's in that next tier below either.

Howard isn’t a GREAT pass catcher, but he’s a serviceable one.

His catching stats are not bad at all and he developed this ‘can’t catch’  reputation from only two dropped catches. OK, they probably cost those games but it was pure lack of concentration as he was concentrating on trying to get the go ahead score. That can be smashed out of his game.

He’s certainly at least on the bubble of the elite tier IMO. Chicago has had some truly legendary RBs and, among them, only Gale Sayers has done what Howard has done in his first two seasons.

[Broncofan]

3 hours ago, base615 said:

Howard isn’t a GREAT pass catcher, but he’s a serviceable one.

His catching stats are not bad at all and he developed this ‘can’t catch’  reputation from only two dropped catches. OK, they probably cost those games but it was pure lack of concentration as he was concentrating on trying to get the go ahead score. That can be smashed out of his game.

He’s certainly at least on the bubble of the elite tier IMO. Chicago has had some truly legendary RBs and, among them, only Gale Sayers has done what Howard has done in his first two seasons.

I love where the Bears are headed - but Howard's not a natural ball catcher.   And at this stage, probably never will be.   He can catch a ball if he's facing the QB and has his back to the LOS, but that's also what removes any real home run threat as a pass catcher.   

There's absolutely nothing wrong with that - RB is a devalued position regardless.  Having a 2-down hammer is a great asset if you have a 3rd down threat to pair, and Cohen is that (and more, as he can also line up wide).  But there's no need to make Howard more than he is.   He's not going to be one of the 3-down monster threats.  It's just not who he is.  It's also why extending him to a big contract after his cheap rookie deal is a big mistake IMO.   If he's willing to take 2-down back $, fine.  If not, go back to the RB draft well.   I mean, let's face it - it's what every team that doesn't have a DJ/Elliott/Bell/Gurley/Barkley are doing.  And those teams are doing fine.  It's committing big $ to guys who aren't worth it in their 2nd deal where the problems come in.

[Hunter2_1]

Mack belongs in the wind and snow. Leave that 80F and palm trees for the show ponies  

The North is going to be funnnnn! 

I don't think Rodgers will give a damn, but I can see the other QBs in that division having a bit of a " oh, great" moment. 

[Soko]

On 9/3/2018 at 10:42 AM, CWood21 said:

Only knock?  That's a pretty damn big knock, especially how we're in a passing-oriented league.  That's like saying your OL is a stud even though his pass protection is average at best, but he's a great run blocker.  It's illogical.

The only illogical thing in this conversation is the equating of a running back that doesn’t catch well to a linemen that doesn’t pass block well. 

Those aren’t remotely similar. 

[Kip Smithers]

I mean was Adrian Peterson not a stud because he wasn’t a decent pass catching back?

Comparing pass blocking with pass catching from a RB is real dumb for a number of reasons lol.

[Broncofan]

19 minutes ago, Kip Smithers said:

I mean was Adrian Peterson not a stud because he wasn’t a decent pass catching back?

Comparing pass blocking with pass catching from a RB is real dumb for a number of reasons lol.

To be fair though, AP's peak time, pass-catching wasn't nearly as important as it is now.   AP's inability to catch the ball is a big reason why he was so ineffective - D's just knew he was either running it, or a total non-factor.  

It's a huge factor in calling a RB a stud vs. the other 3-down bellcow do-it-alls.  That point is very valid.   It's  not on the same level as OL's ability to pass-block, though.   No argument there.