Jump to content

Raiders, Bears Reach Agreement on Khalil Mack Trade


ramssuperbowl99

Recommended Posts

Just now, RaidersAreOne said:

Very far from it. Reggie has been one of the worst drafting GM's in the first 3 rounds since the Mack draft imo. However with Gruden having lots of control in this past draft, it's looking very promising and we likely have 7 picks starting or getting very serious playing time.

That probably says more about the state of your roster than your draft tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

I don't follow the Raiders too closely, and am naturally lazy, so can someone tell me whether OAK has been hitting on recent early picks not named Mack? 

Raiders haven't had a quality first round pick other than Mack since 2003. And they've picked towards the top most years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

That probably says more about the state of your roster than your draft tbh.

Hall, Hurst and Key would start on most teams. Miller is a push but should be sheltered. Nick Nelson is a promising rookie CB who would play nickel on others. Our K/P duo is up in the air.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Thelonebillsfan said:

This is just more evidence the NFL needs a cap structure modeled after the NBA more than anything. 

They never will of course but they should it makes sense for all involved.

 

tbh if the Raiders went 6-10 with him last year, this may be the Raiders deciding to try out a mini-tank. Tanking should work well in the NFL, but the short half life of players has kind of kept it out of the public sphere except Cleveland.

Given that it's kind of a lost season anyway, they might just get a quick tank going then try to compete when they move to Vegas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Thelonebillsfan said:

This is just more evidence the NFL needs a cap structure modeled after the NBA more than anything. 

They never will of course but they should it makes sense for all involved.

 

Bird rights and no franchise tag would be awesome. But a pipe dream

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ramssuperbowl99 said:

tbh if the Raiders went 6-10 with him last year, this may be the Raiders deciding to try out a mini-tank. Tanking should work well in the NFL, but the short half life of players has kind of kept it out of the public sphere except Cleveland.

Given that it's kind of a lost season anyway, they might just get a quick tank going then try to compete when they move to Vegas.

They'll likely be last or second to last in attendance so it's not a bad play, but without knowing the total compensation it's hard to know yet. If they managed to keep AAV on these assets low enough they might come put ahead but Mack's value is ridiculously high so that's gonna be difficult. He alone accounted for 40% of their total sack production over the last 3 seasons. You can use that to day they lack talent around him sure. But you can also point to that as a signal of his value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

.... There are salary ramifications. But there are 2 first rounders and a yet to be named player. 

 

What if you could have traded him to Dallas for our 2 first rounders + a decent player in 2015. You can pick any mid level player you want. How about Anthony Hitchens? He was a midlevel play for us. 

 

Plus you get our next 2 first rounders - So Byron Jones & Zeke. Plus you get $20m - to keep this fair I will only look at people in the 4-6M range/year. So thats: Bryan Baluga, Brandon Graham, Cole Beasely & Adrian Clayborne.

 

JJ Watt

OR

Hitchens

Bryon Jones

Zeke (OR JAYLON RAMSEY)

Bryan Baluga

Brandon Graham

Cole BEASTLY!!

Adrian Clayborne

 

Which makes you a better team? 

That isn't exactly an apples to apples comparison. You cherry picked some incredible value contracts to essentially say trading Mack was a no brainer. 

A better way to look at it is to see who you can currently sign, as a free agent and not cherry picking extreme value contracts that have already been signed, in addition to the money that the two first rounders take up.

You wouldn't be getting nearly as much value as you are implying. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...