Jump to content

Who won the Khalil Mack trade?


Humble_Beast

Who won the Khalil Mack trade?  

199 members have voted

  1. 1. Who won the Khalil Mack trade?

    • Bears
      107
    • Raiders
      40
    • What in the world is Jon Gruden thinking?
      52


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, OakRaiders3828 said:

I know it’s a hip and funny narrative, but Gruden has even said it himself, if they did a better job at drafting from 15-17 they wouldn’t have had to fill holes with vets at the bottom of the depth chart. And before you come back with, well they would’ve just traded those good players they drafted, not every player is going to be demanding that type of money. Gruden is going to build this team with his players clearly, unfortunately Reggie hasn’t been cutting it. 

You sound like me after Ol' Chipper traded LeSean McCoy. I've seen the end of that movie and I'd cover your eyes if I were you. 

Edited by EaglesPeteC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, megatechpc said:

Its essentially impossible to know who "won" this trade at this point in time.  In 5 years it will be definitive who won the the trade but right now all we have is opinions and gut feelings to go on.  We dont know what possibly great players Gruden will bring in with five 1st round picks in the next 3 years.  Or he might draft terribly and squander those pics.  Who knows.

At this moment all possibilities remain conceivable.  Mack could go on to have a HOF career in Chicago and be as successful as many say he will be.  Or maybe he regresses or becomes less hungry with his $141 million already in the bank?  Gruden might find another Gronk or an Earl Thomas in the draft with all those picks.  Or maybe he drafts 5 duds?  Point is, I could see scenarios where the Bears won the trade, the Raiders won the trade, both teams won the trade, or both teams lost the trade.

Gruden simply has a different perspective on this team.  He came in, kicked the tires, and decided the roster as currently built was not going to win a SB.  Simply doubling down and signing Mack to a mega deal wasn't going to suddenly transform this team into a champion, when they finished last year at 6-10 WITH Mack.  So the idea is, blow it up, gather as many assets as you can, and rebuild around the star player you already have locked up (Carr).  I'm not saying its gonna work, but the guy clearly does have a plan.

It really reminds me of the 76ers a few years ago when the GM decided to blow up the team and get a bunch of high draft picks.  He was criticized and mocked and eventually got run out of town, but now the team (and fans) are reaping the benefits of his plan (Imbide and Simmons and a playoff caliber team), yet have totally forgotten how they got there.  

That's what I am saying. These things can't be quantified now. The dust hasn't even begun to settle. You have to wait and see how Mack plays in Chicago. You have to wait and see what the Raiders do with those picks and how those picks/trades turn out. 

I can say this now though: If I was a Raiders fan I would be pissed. Mack was a fan favorite and a hell of a ball player. He was the proverbial "bird in the hand." Albeit a verrrrry expensive one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OakRaiders3828 said:

The point is, that contract would have seriously hindered their ability to build that good team around him. It’s already proven that it takes a lot more than just Mack to field a great defense. 

Build a good team around him with more overpriced FA. Once a player gets to his second contract it means there is already less room to improve your team. It’s why drafting is critical. Like what did you think he would cost the closer you got to end of his rookie deal? Bears won this trade easily as of right now.

Edited by Kip Smithers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mack obviously.

 

But between the two teams, Raiders, quite easily. They're going to get a top 15 pick (maybe even top 10) in next year's draft for a guy they weren't going to re-sign. This season might be a struggle for them, but with Carr locked up to a big deal, they're going to need a lot of cheap, quality talent to offset it. An extra two first rounders in the next two seasons will go a long way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will say Bears. Pace has been able to draft well in the 2nd and on but his firsts (as has been ever since Urlacher was drafted) have been underwhelming overall. We have a solid roster but lacked a real dynamic gamechanger until this trade. It filled that need, filled a positional need, and much of the contract is offset but the two firsts and Kevin White all being gone.  This is in a division with Rodgers, Cousins, and Stafford accounting for 6 of the games each year. Plus getting a 2nd rounder back helps a lot with maneuverability for Pace.

 

That being said if Key turns into a stud and a few picks turn into solid guys, the Raiders couldn't really have the trade as a negative. If the defense flounders due to missing a stud like Mack then even more pressure will be on OAK for those picks to be impactful.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Slateman said:

Mack obviously.

 

But between the two teams, Raiders, quite easily. They're going to get a top 15 pick (maybe even top 10) in next year's draft for a guy they weren't going to re-sign. This season might be a struggle for them, but with Carr locked up to a big deal, they're going to need a lot of cheap, quality talent to offset it. An extra two first rounders in the next two seasons will go a long way.

Raiders easily?  We just lost our best player and there is no guarantee those picks turn into anything good.  The Bears are guaranteed a top 5 defensive player in this league.  You use draft picks praying you get a guy like Mack, well we got him and then didn’t pay to keep him.  Yes, we will have cap space and draft picks, but what good are those unless you land great players?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, daineraider said:

Raiders easily?  We just lost our best player and there is no guarantee those picks turn into anything good.  The Bears are guaranteed a top 5 defensive player in this league.  You use draft picks praying you get a guy like Mack, well we got him and then didn’t pay to keep him.  Yes, we will have cap space and draft picks, but what good are those unless you land great players?

That's a lot of money to spend on one guy that plays a position that isn't protected like a QB or a receiver.

Several good players > one great one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, jrry32 said:

After seeing Mack was traded, I thought Gruden was a fool. After seeing Mack was serious about demanding more money than Aaron Donald, I thought the Bears were fools.

Mack is arguably superior to Donald at a more premiere position. I know you’re gunna jockey for your guy but let’s be realists here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...