soulman Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 Jack Del Rio on Khalil Mack trade: 'When you have that talented of a player, you keep those guys' https://bearswire.usatoday.com/2019/04/08/jack-del-rio-on-khalil-mack-trade-when-you-have-that-talented-of-a-player-you-keep-those-guys/ By: Alyssa Barbieri | 3 hours ago When the Oakland Raiders traded Khalil Mack to the Chicago Bears last September, the football world scratched their collective heads. How could the Raiders trade a player on a Hall of Fame track in the prime of his career? Better yet, how could they defend it? Jon Gruden claimed that they got value for the trade and they did — a pair of first-round picks in 2019 and 2020, along with a third-round pick in 2020 and a sixth-round pick in 2019. But was all of that worth trading one of the league’s best defensive players and a game wrecker that forces teams to design separate game plans just for him? There has been criticism, and rightfully so, that has followed Gruden since that fateful September day. And while some will tell you that the Raiders, not the Bears, won that trade, it’s clear that the repercussions of that decision will follow Gruden throughout his tenure with the Raiders. Former Raiders coach Jack Del Rio saw firsthand just how special of a player Mack is, and he opened up about the Mack trade to NFL Network, where he basically said that when you have a generational talent like Mack, you pay the man. “I think Khalil Mack is a future Hall of Fame player,” Del Rio said. “To me, when you have that talented of a player, you keep those guys. They chose to. . . .They didn’t think they could pay him, didn’t think they’d get a deal done, so they got value and draft picks.” Now, Bears fans are more than happy that Gruden decided that he’d rather pay a 30-year old receiver that brings with him a ton of baggage instead of paying up for a linebacker in his prime that also happens to be a great person off the field. “They clearly decided not to pay one of the great human beings and great football players that I’ve ever coached,” Del Rio said. Mack is worth every one of those draft picks that GM Ryan Pace dealt the Raiders. It was evident in his first game with the Bears, in his NFC Defensive Player of the Month honor in September and in every snap that followed during the 2018 season. When Bears coach Matt Nagy was jokingly asked back in February if he’d trade two first round picks right now for Mack, he replied: “Nope.” What about for three first round picks? The answer, again: “Nope.” The Raiders might not have been willing to pay a future Hall of Famer in his prime, but the Bears sure were, and they’ve been reaping the benefits ever since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soulman Posted April 9, 2019 Author Share Posted April 9, 2019 What the article overlooks is that we also receive Oakland's 2020 2nd round pick in addition to Mack. That pick may turn out to be only a few picks below the 2020 1st Oakland gets from us so it more like a swap of picks and it was a key part of our willingness to pay Oakland's price. Give Ryan Pace's success in drafting in the 2nd round we could very well end up with a second front line starter similar to guy like Goldman, Whitehair, Shaheen, and Miller along with Mack. That tends to push the scale a bit more in our direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 What people don't say is trade was actually good for both teams. Raiders weren't good with Mack, it gives them a chance to remake themselves. It took Bears from decent team to legit contender. Now if Raiders blow picks or Mack gets hurt people will declare one or other the winner, but I think that would be after the fact revisionism. At time it was a fair trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pool Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 3 minutes ago, dll2000 said: What people don't say is trade was actually good for both teams. Raiders weren't good with Mack, it gives them a chance to remake themselves. It took Bears from decent team to legit contender. Now if Raiders blow picks or Mack gets hurt people will declare one or other the winner, but I think that would be after the fact revisionism. At time it was a fair trade. Agreed. Both teams improved by making the trade. I think the Raiders could have got more for him but I'm certainly glad they didn't! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topwop1 Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 11 minutes ago, Pool said: Agreed. Both teams improved by making the trade. I think the Raiders could have got more for him but I'm certainly glad they didn't! Bears improved for sure. Raiders still yet to be determined. They certainly got a good haul of draft picks, but it's all about what they do with those picks now. Them trading for Antonio Brown and signing all those FAs this year are separate factors, and even then it is yet to be determined if those moves will actually improve their record from last year. I'm just not all that sold on Gruden and don't think he's the right guy for that job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskieBear Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 8 hours ago, soulman said: What the article overlooks is that we also receive Oakland's 2020 2nd round pick in addition to Mack. articles always overlook this because it doesnt fit the narrative as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 1 hour ago, topwop1 said: Bears improved for sure. Raiders still yet to be determined. They certainly got a good haul of draft picks, but it's all about what they do with those picks now. Them trading for Antonio Brown and signing all those FAs this year are separate factors, and even then it is yet to be determined if those moves will actually improve their record from last year. I'm just not all that sold on Gruden and don't think he's the right guy for that job. I agree with all here, the Raiders didn't feel like paying him would be effective on a team that wasn't ready to contend, so got pretty good draft capital. Bears got a transformative player and have outperformed expectations. The Raiders have a pretty decent quiver of draft pics, and IF Gruden is good they could be really good in 2020 or so. I too don't think Gruden is going to get it right, his philosophy is both outdated and a little wild, and I think he's going to trip and fall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 34 minutes ago, RunningVaccs said: I agree with all here, the Raiders didn't feel like paying him would be effective on a team that wasn't ready to contend, so got pretty good draft capital. Bears got a transformative player and have outperformed expectations. The Raiders have a pretty decent quiver of draft pics, and IF Gruden is good they could be really good in 2020 or so. I too don't think Gruden is going to get it right, his philosophy is both outdated and a little wild, and I think he's going to trip and fall. I think adding Mayock to that mix helped them a lot. Mayock is a better talent evaluator than Gruden and isn't as impulsive. Gruden still has final say, but Mayock should be a good influence and is a strong enough personality not to be a yes man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 Impulsive is the right word. The old-school vs. analytics debate is boring, but you have to agree that talent and value evaluation has gotten a lot more refined, and if you're a shoot-from-the-hip type you are rolling the dice more often than not It's an interesting team to pay attention to, lotta risk but if everything lands their way they'll be talented and volatile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soulman Posted April 9, 2019 Author Share Posted April 9, 2019 3 hours ago, Pool said: Agreed. Both teams improved by making the trade. I think the Raiders could have got more for him but I'm certainly glad they didn't! SF even claims they offered more and GB seems to feel they did as well. Praise to Pace for getting to the window with his $$$ first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugashane Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 Bears won the trade so far, unless they get some studs with the firsts then it is hard to argue that IMO. I hope OAK falls flat on their face with the picks. And I feel that way more due to posters here than anything else. Lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 4 minutes ago, Sugashane said: Bears won the trade so far, unless they get some studs with the firsts then it is hard to argue that IMO. I hope OAK falls flat on their face with the picks. And I feel that way more due to posters here than anything else. Lol. Most of Oak fans have been okay IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugashane Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 2 minutes ago, dll2000 said: Most of Oak fans have been okay IMO. Absolutely. I should have pointed out that it is only a few of them, not the fan base as a whole. It was the same with the Super Bowl. I went from rooting for LAR to 2-3 posters actually flipping me to NE, which was bizarre AF for me to root for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topwop1 Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 1 hour ago, soulman said: SF even claims they offered more and GB seems to feel they did as well. Praise to Pace for getting to the window with his $$$ first. Could be that or could also be that the Raiders thought Bears would be worse than both SF and GB, which is pretty funny in hindsight but surely would have made sense at the time. Otherwise what other reason could you justify not wanting to trade Mack to SF if they did indeed offer more, because it's only like a 20 min drive from Oakland? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soulman Posted April 9, 2019 Author Share Posted April 9, 2019 1 minute ago, topwop1 said: Could be that or could also be that the Raiders thought Bears would be worse than both SF and GB, which is pretty funny in hindsight but surely would have made sense at the time. Otherwise what other reason could you justify not wanting to trade Mack to SF if they did indeed offer more, because it's only like a 20 min drive from Oakland? I do believe they did not want to trade him to SF. Too close for comfort. I also believe Gruden figured the Bears good for at least one more year of a top ten pick. That's what arrogance gets you and Chucky has that in abundance. Based on a best case scenario for us it can't get a whole lot better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.