SoCalNiner Posted September 1, 2018 Share Posted September 1, 2018 Just now, J-ALL-DAY said: I get this one. Joseph wasn't going to start and it makes sense to see what they can get for him. I don't get trading a 5th for McCarron though. They also threw away a 3rd by releasing Bryant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-ALL-DAY Posted September 1, 2018 Share Posted September 1, 2018 1 hour ago, y2lamanaki said: I love how aggressively the Bears are going after this thing. If that team gets, it will be scary at every level. I just hate how they were my wildcard team all along and one team I was on the train before most, and now they will be the popular sleeper pick with Mack. Smh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-ALL-DAY Posted September 1, 2018 Share Posted September 1, 2018 Just now, SoCalNiner said: They also threw away a 3rd by releasing Bryant. Yep, dude may never play another snap in the league if he he loses his appeal. Also gave up a 2nd rounder in the Mack trade. Granted, they got a 3rd in the same draft but a lot of things they are doing that doesn't make much sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TecmoSuperJoe Posted September 1, 2018 Share Posted September 1, 2018 4 hours ago, big9erfan said: Crazy? Anyone would get two guys with two pciisk. Now they have one. So they only lost one body. That's not a lot of draft capital. What they get is a known quantity - known to be one of the best player sin the league. What they give up is two totally unknowns. It would be a near miracle if either of those picks turns out to be as good as Mack, and quite likely, it seems to me, that the two together will not contribute anywhere near as much as one of the best pass rushers in the league. I think a team would be crazy not to consider doing this kind of deal (cap consideration of course needing to be taken into account). I meant crazy for a team to do it with the current mentality around the league about coveting draft picks. I would have pulled the trigger myself. The deal looks better now that they aren't giving up a player, and getting a 2nd round pick back. And I agree, the chances that the Raiders two new first round picks turn out to equal what Mack is currently is slim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big9erfan Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 15 hours ago, PapaShogun said: I meant crazy for a team to do it with the current mentality around the league about coveting draft picks. I would have pulled the trigger myself. The deal looks better now that they aren't giving up a player, and getting a 2nd round pick back. And I agree, the chances that the Raiders two new first round picks turn out to equal what Mack is currently is slim. Ah. Yes, then. Two first didn't seem to me as high a price and most did. But swapping a third and getting back a second makes the price even more palattable. I will add that a couple of time before I added something about contract "considerations aside". But of course most teams have cap issues. Even those that don't now will in the future. So contract considerations are almost part of the picture. IMHO that's what makes draft picks so valuable to teams. I doubt two random picks even in the first will provide more improvement to a team than Mack would. But what a team could do with the money saved by getting two rookies on their rookie deals as opposed to one really big deal fr Mack could make a hige difference. In affect it's not just two unknown rookies instead of Mack. It's two unknown rookies plus the ability to keep some of their own young stars, or to add other pieces in freee agency that might not be as good as Mack but who can still help the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NcFinest9erFan Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incarcerated_Scarface Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 On 9/1/2018 at 3:51 PM, Forge said: Actually makes more sense though. I never thought to firsts outright would happen. Didn't make much sense. But at least they got the two firsts from a talent standpoint. The 5 / 6 are basically a wash given the year difference. So a first outright, swap of first and second (which may not be that big of a difference if the bears are good next year and the raiders not so much) and a third. Good of them to get the two firsts, but that value range is much more in line with what I expected I don't understand why people say if a team trades away next year's 3rd it's really a 4th. Can someone explain this logic to me please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted September 3, 2018 Author Share Posted September 3, 2018 31 minutes ago, Incarcerated_Scarface said: I don't understand why people say if a team trades away next year's 3rd it's really a 4th. Can someone explain this logic to me please? Future year picks (as in not this upcoming draft), are usually discounted a round with regards to trade value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big9erfan Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 1 hour ago, Incarcerated_Scarface said: I don't understand why people say if a team trades away next year's 3rd it's really a 4th. Can someone explain this logic to me please? Deferred value = reduced value Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted September 3, 2018 Author Share Posted September 3, 2018 43 minutes ago, big9erfan said: Deferred value = reduced value This is better stated than me and exactly right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-ALL-DAY Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 On your books, accrued revenue>deferred revenue. Did it have anything to do with this conversation? No, but I don't care lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted September 3, 2018 Author Share Posted September 3, 2018 9 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said: On your books, accrued revenue>deferred revenue. Did it have anything to do with this conversation? No, but I don't care lol. Did you just bust out your accounting skills? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
y2lamanaki Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 Or... Getting my Christmas present now would be infinitely cooler than getting it in December because I'm still 12. Early Christmas Present > On-Time Christmas Present Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TecmoSuperJoe Posted September 4, 2018 Share Posted September 4, 2018 I hope Earl Thomas holds out the entire season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudyZ Posted September 4, 2018 Share Posted September 4, 2018 On 2018-09-03 at 7:39 AM, y2lamanaki said: Or... Getting my Christmas present now would be infinitely cooler than getting it in December because I'm still 12. Early Christmas Present > On-Time Christmas Present I'd pay more to get pizza today than I want to pay for tomorrow's pizza. But tomorrow, I'll pay as much as today for the same pizza, because I just love pizza. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.