Jump to content

Revisiting the Khalil Mack Trade


MacReady

Recommended Posts

Just now, topwop1 said:

That significant of an upgrade that the Ravens were that willing to let him walk so easily?

Yeah, sometimes teams have to let good players go. Does the fact that the Raiders were willing to trade Mack limit his significance to the Bears? The Ravens also let Mosley and Suggs walk. Does that mean they aren't significant upgrades for the teams they went to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, KingOfTheNorth said:

Yeah, sometimes teams have to let good players go. Does the fact that the Raiders were willing to trade Mack limit his significance to the Bears? The Ravens also let Mosley and Suggs walk. Does that mean they aren't significant upgrades for the teams they went to?

I'm just having a hard time seeing why the Ravens wouldn't want to keep Smith if they thought he was worth the money after losing both Mosley and Suggs and having approximately $31M in cap space available.

Not saying Smith isn't a decent player but let's not act like he's any better than Clay or Perry when healthy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, coachbuns said:

Kick the can down the road on him ... fine.  However, don't forget about not having 2 1st round picks and having starters leaving cuz they couldn't be paid.  Packers did it ok by me.

 

It didn't kick the can.  It was like magic.  Rest of cap hits stayed same and Bears can get out in 2022 if he suddenly declines in performance or health with just 12 million in dead cap.

Don't forget we get a 2 back next year from Raiders and both our 1's are likely to be late rounders cause we are good now.

Not quite so bad or dire as you hope it is.  And all or most of these starters that we are losing will result in comp picks.

;)

Are you looking at that 2019 Bears front 7?  That is best they have had in a long, long time on paper.

Good luck. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, topwop1 said:

I'm just having a hard time seeing why the Ravens wouldn't want to keep Smith if they thought he was worth the money after losing both Mosley and Suggs and having approximately $31M in cap space available.

Not saying Smith isn't a decent player but let's not act like he's any better than Clay or Perry when healthy.

Ravens had space.  That is a head scratcher.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, topwop1 said:

I'm just having a hard time seeing why the Ravens wouldn't want to keep Smith if they thought he was worth the money after losing both Mosley and Suggs and having approximately $31M in cap space available.

Not saying Smith isn't a decent player but let's not act like he's any better than Clay or Perry when healthy.

You've obviously not watched many Packer games the last few years.  Clay slowed down big time.  High effort, poor results.  Perry has been healthy for one season.  One.  And he plays poorly when not 100%.

GB just got a lot better on the EDGE.  I don't expect either Smith to hit double digit sacks, but I do expect them to add pressure that Perry couldn't from the trainer's table or this old version of Matthews.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, topwop1 said:

I'm just having a hard time seeing why the Ravens wouldn't want to keep Smith if they thought he was worth the money after losing both Mosley and Suggs and having approximately $31M in cap space available.

Not saying Smith isn't a decent player but let's not act like he's any better than Clay or Perry when healthy.

I would ask you to look at what Matthews and Perry did last season. I can't speak as to why the Ravens chose not to resign him. But based on what the Packers rolled out on the edge last year, this is a significant improvement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

Your troll game is spectacular!

Answering the red

-53 million is just a quick estimate of yearly cap hit of all players that were named.

-We didn't have a lot of space this year because we signed a bunch of FAs last year in addition to Mack.  

-Matthews didn't play that bad in games I watched.  Bears and MN games.  Maybe he was awful in others, definitely aging.  Perry was hurt I think.  Smiths are upgrade then, but not like they are top line NFL talent.  Haha was traded, but I would say Amos and Haha are comparable players with similar talent around them.   

-Troll seems to mean having a civil conversation or debate with someone whom you disagree these days.  I'll take it.  Don't cite me for hate speech.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dll2000 said:

Answering the red

-53 million is just a quick estimate of yearly cap hit of all players that were named.

-We didn't have a lot of space this year because we signed a bunch of FAs last year in addition to Mack.  

-Matthews didn't play that bad in games I watched.  Bears and MN games.  Maybe he was awful in others, definitely aging.  Perry was hurt I think.  Smiths are upgrade then, but not like they are top line NFL talent.  Haha was traded, but I would say Amos and Haha are comparable players with similar talent around them.   

-Troll seems to mean having a civil conversation or debate with someone whom you disagree these days.  I'll take it.  Don't cite me for hate speech.

 

 

 

 

 

I mean, you are kind of in the Packers forum subtly trolling, no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dll2000 said:

53 million is just a quick estimate of yearly cap hit of all players that were named.

Assuming flat contracts (using AAV) it would be 16 + 13 + 9 + 7 = 45. Year 1 cap hit is probably lower due to signing bonuses

3 minutes ago, dll2000 said:

Matthews didn't play that bad in games I watched.  Bears and MN games.  Maybe he was awful in others, definitely aging.  Perry was hurt I think.  Smiths are upgrade then, but not like they are top line NFL talent.  Haha was traded, but I would say Amos and Haha are comparable players with similar talent around them.   

Matthews was his overpursuing self in 2018, getting washed out of plays more often than not.

Perry was hurt, yes - as usual.

Smiths are (hopefully) an upgrade not just in production but also in availability.

Haha is the only player in the world that thinks a contract year is more "let's not get hurt" than "let's ball out and get paid".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Fl0nkerton said:

I mean, you are kind of in the Packers forum subtly trolling, no?

I go to all kinds of other forums.I go to yours and MN more than most because you are divisional teams.  

People really study their own teams.  You get better insight that way.  I see a comment and sometimes I respond.

Sometimes I ask a question.  Don't see what the big deal is.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Packer_ESP said:

Assuming flat contracts (using AAV) it would be 16 + 13 + 9 + 7 = 45. Year 1 cap hit is probably lower due to signing bonuses

 

Plus first rounders you would have traded.  Again it was just top of my head guesstimate.  Fairly close actually.  

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...