Jump to content

Revisiting the Khalil Mack Trade


MacReady

Recommended Posts

On 12/6/2018 at 11:04 AM, Outpost31 said:

Coming from a Bears fan everybody. 

The answer to those questions I think is no:

Aaron's issues have been going on since 2015.  Mack doesn't change that.
Mack helps our defense.  Doesn't make it a top 5 scoring defense still.  Not with our safety problems and youth/lack of health at CB.

Not sure what his being a Bears fan has to do with anything.  I watch plenty of CHI games year over year, and you are vastly underrating the impact Mack has made for them.  The statements Pool made are valid enough.

That being said, it's easy to look back on this lost season and feel like it's just as well that Mack did not land in GB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Superman(DH23) said:

According to Schefter the Pack was never really in it.  They had made early inquiries but nothing ever materialized.  The top 3 were, of course the Bears, 49ers, Rams.  Bears were only team that offered 2 firsts.  Rams had offered a first and 3rd.  No idea what 49ers offered, but I trust that Schefter knows what teams were really in it.

That's very interesting some in the media made it sound like Gute was going hard for Mack and it all came down to Chicago's two first rounders being higher than a Rodgers led team being the deciding factor for winning Mack.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, St Vince said:

That's very interesting some in the media made it sound like Gute was going hard for Mack and it all came down to Chicago's two first rounders being higher than a Rodgers led team being the deciding factor for winning Mack.

Not according to schefter you can check out Kap & Company podcast Monday after the lions game I think it was.   Schefter talks about how the Bears had been working it since Feb, and who was really in it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This article, including a quote from an NFL source, gives some details on the Packers offer...

https://madison.com/wsj/sports/football/professional/packers-offer-not-enough-to-land-linebacker-khalil-mack-who/article_33e5e022-4d55-58c2-807d-be594d1e934d.html

Quote

The Packers have two first-round picks in next year’s NFL draft — their own, plus the New Orleans Saints’ — but an NFL source said the Packers’ offer to the Raiders did not include both 2019 first-round picks. Instead, it was for one of the first-rounders plus other picks, the source said.

 

Raiders GM Reggie McKenzie said "half the league" made inquiries but he came right out and said that Raiders narrowed things down to the teams they thought would have high picks n the 2019 draft.

Quote

 

We may have an answer as Raiders GM and former Packers executive Reggie McKenzie talked to reporters on Saturday evening and he said "more than half the league" was looking to trade for Mack. But when it came down to it the Raiders narrowed it down to it, the Raiders narrowed it to teams who they believed would have a high draft pick in 2019 according to Michael Gehlken of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. 

So even with the Packers two first-round picks next year, they weren't in the position to trade for Mack.

 

 

It's not that the Packers weren't trying. As I said on the previous page, the Raiders determined the Bears to be the lesser team, thus more likely to produce a high pick. The Packers would have had to far exceed what the Bears traded. As it turns out the Packers offer wasn't equal to Chicago's even if guessing draft pick position hadn't been factored. If Green Bay puts up the exact same offer as the Bears, Chicago's still would've been accepted.

Unless there's someone here who thinks the Packers should have given up even more than the Bears did, this topic is pointless.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And this article mentions how even if the Packers offered both of their 2019 firsts, it still probably doesn't get done because the Packers and Saints were expected to be good teams not picking near the top...

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/who-tried-to-trade-for-khalil-mack-half-the-league-called-but-three-teams-were-close/

Quote

And it's possible the two first-round picks wouldn't have gotten it done either. Having three first-round picks would be extremely appealing for Oakland, but both the Packers with Mack and the Saints are expected to be good next year. Those picks could very well end up being in the bottom 10 of the draft. 

Schefter wasn't saying the Packers didn't try. What it sounds like Schefter was saying is that the Packers weren't one of the finalists. And that's because of the perception that their picks wouldn't be very high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Bears 2019 Offseason Outlook:

22.3 million cap hit for Khalil Mack, who did not help them win a playoff game.
3rd round pick.
4th round pick.
5th round pick.
7th round pick.
20 million in cap space (7th lowest)
*13 million Effective Cap Space (5th lowest)

Free Agents:

Bobby Massie (Starting Right Tackle)
Aaron Lynch (Third string pass rusher)
Bryce Callahan (Elite level slot corner)
Pat O'Donnell (Punter)
Eric Kush (Backup guard)
Bryan Witzmann (Backup guard)
Adrian Amos (Starting safety)

*Effective cap space is the maximum cap space a team will have once they sign at least 51 players to their roster)

Somebody want to tell me how the Bears are going to get better than the Wild Card round when they have three starters, the fifth lowest amount of effective cap space and only four picks starting in the third round?

Anybody willing to admit I was right yet? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Bears 2019 Offseason Outlook:

22.3 million cap hit for Khalil Mack, who did not help them win a playoff game.
3rd round pick.
4th round pick.
5th round pick.
7th round pick.
20 million in cap space (7th lowest)
*13 million Effective Cap Space (5th lowest)

Free Agents:

Bobby Massie (Starting Right Tackle)
Aaron Lynch (Third string pass rusher)
Bryce Callahan (Elite level slot corner)
Pat O'Donnell (Punter)
Eric Kush (Backup guard)
Bryan Witzmann (Backup guard)
Adrian Amos (Starting safety)

*Effective cap space is the maximum cap space a team will have once they sign at least 51 players to their roster)

Somebody want to tell me how the Bears are going to get better than the Wild Card round when they have three starters, the fifth lowest amount of effective cap space and only four picks starting in the third round?

Anybody willing to admit I was right yet? 

Add in how relatively healthy they were this year. That is an anomaly not the norm or something they should count on next year. There is no chance they get better, this is it, unless Trubisky becomes elite. I don't see him being that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Bears 2019 Offseason Outlook:

22.3 million cap hit for Khalil Mack, who did not help them win a playoff game.
3rd round pick.
4th round pick.
5th round pick.
7th round pick.
20 million in cap space (7th lowest)
*13 million Effective Cap Space (5th lowest)

Free Agents:

Bobby Massie (Starting Right Tackle)
Aaron Lynch (Third string pass rusher)
Bryce Callahan (Elite level slot corner)
Pat O'Donnell (Punter)
Eric Kush (Backup guard)
Bryan Witzmann (Backup guard)
Adrian Amos (Starting safety)

*Effective cap space is the maximum cap space a team will have once they sign at least 51 players to their roster)

Somebody want to tell me how the Bears are going to get better than the Wild Card round when they have three starters, the fifth lowest amount of effective cap space and only four picks starting in the third round?

Anybody willing to admit I was right yet? 

Its a good trade. 

No complaints on that..

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Bears 2019 Offseason Outlook:

22.3 million cap hit for Khalil Mack, who did not help them win a playoff game.
3rd round pick.
4th round pick.
5th round pick.
7th round pick.
20 million in cap space (7th lowest)
*13 million Effective Cap Space (5th lowest)

Free Agents:

Bobby Massie (Starting Right Tackle)
Aaron Lynch (Third string pass rusher)
Bryce Callahan (Elite level slot corner)
Pat O'Donnell (Punter)
Eric Kush (Backup guard)
Bryan Witzmann (Backup guard)
Adrian Amos (Starting safety)

*Effective cap space is the maximum cap space a team will have once they sign at least 51 players to their roster)

Somebody want to tell me how the Bears are going to get better than the Wild Card round when they have three starters, the fifth lowest amount of effective cap space and only four picks starting in the third round?

Anybody willing to admit I was right yet? 

You think that group of FA will cost 30+ million for 2019?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Bears 2019 Offseason Outlook:

22.3 million cap hit for Khalil Mack, who did not help them win a playoff game.
3rd round pick.
4th round pick.
5th round pick.
7th round pick.
20 million in cap space (7th lowest)
*13 million Effective Cap Space (5th lowest)

Free Agents:

Bobby Massie (Starting Right Tackle)
Aaron Lynch (Third string pass rusher)
Bryce Callahan (Elite level slot corner)
Pat O'Donnell (Punter)
Eric Kush (Backup guard)
Bryan Witzmann (Backup guard)
Adrian Amos (Starting safety)

*Effective cap space is the maximum cap space a team will have once they sign at least 51 players to their roster)

Somebody want to tell me how the Bears are going to get better than the Wild Card round when they have three starters, the fifth lowest amount of effective cap space and only four picks starting in the third round?

Anybody willing to admit I was right yet? 

Internal improvement. If Turbisky takes a step forward that could be a contender. 

Also just because a team lost in the wild card round doesn't mean it's not Super Bowl caliber. Play that game 10 times and the Bears probably win 6.

If you're the best team in the league, you've probably only got a 65 percent chance of beating other playoff teams. 

.65x.65x.65=27.5% at a Superbowl win.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, squire12 said:

You think that group of FA will cost 30+ million for 2019?

What?  The Bears have 20 million in cap.  Why you asking if it will cost 30+ million? 

As few draft picks as they have, they still have to pay their rookies.  They have to get to 51 players.  It's not, "They have 20 million dollars to spend on free agents." 

They're going to need 7 of that 20 million JUST to get to the minimum amount of players to have on a roster. 

That leaves 13 million dollars to re-sign:

Massie, Amos, Callahan. 

Callahan is getting 6 million per.
Amos is getting probably 7 million per. 

They're losing one of them, or they're cutting someone to afford them. 

The Bears are losing players without the money nor the cap space to replace them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Bears 2019 Offseason Outlook:

22.3 million cap hit for Khalil Mack, who did not help them win a playoff game.
3rd round pick.
4th round pick.
5th round pick.
7th round pick.
20 million in cap space (7th lowest)
*13 million Effective Cap Space (5th lowest)

Free Agents:

Bobby Massie (Starting Right Tackle)
Aaron Lynch (Third string pass rusher)
Bryce Callahan (Elite level slot corner)
Pat O'Donnell (Punter)
Eric Kush (Backup guard)
Bryan Witzmann (Backup guard)
Adrian Amos (Starting safety)

*Effective cap space is the maximum cap space a team will have once they sign at least 51 players to their roster)

Somebody want to tell me how the Bears are going to get better than the Wild Card round when they have three starters, the fifth lowest amount of effective cap space and only four picks starting in the third round?

Anybody willing to admit I was right yet? 

All they need is Trubisky to be better. I said from day 1 of the Mack trade, it would come down to how Trubisky played at the end of the day. If he's a little better next year,  the Bears are as good or a better team. That FA list is laughable. Bunch of irrelevant players outside of Amos, Massie and Callahan. They'll resign at least one of them, probably Amos, replace Callahan with McManis who isnt bad, and plug in a RT. You are WAY over-exaggerating the Bears' demise. If they aren't right back in the hunt next year it'll be because of major injuries, that's it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, AlexGreen#20 said:

Internal improvement. If Turbisky takes a step forward that could be a contender.

That's the only thing that can save them, yes.  Trubisky isn't improving. 

His only games with a QB rating over 86 were against: Niners, Packers, Lions, Jets, Dolphins, Buccaneers. 

 

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...