Khalil Mack holding out... in Buffalo

[3rdand12]

6 minutes ago, BuffaloRebound said:

I think some people underestimate what an elite pass rusher can do for your team.  Hughes is a decent pass rusher but he isn’t disrupting offenses on a consistent basis.  If Raiders deal Mack, I really hope Bills at least make an attractive offer.  

I am quite on board with this thinking. Hope they are least sharing home phone numbers. Just in case. My son out in LA has been  Raiders fans for years and years. Loves Mack.
He is about to have a fit over Gruden right no.

he would take consolation if Bills got him somehow. His second Team is Bills, cuz Dad probably.
 

  Do not see Beanes method allowing big spending.

 especially after having to dump Dareus and all that darned dead money....

[Deranged Rhino]

 

1 hour ago, 3rdand12 said:

I am quite on board with this thinking. Hope they are least sharing home phone numbers. Just in case. My son out in LA has been  Raiders fans for years and years. Loves Mack.
He is about to have a fit over Gruden right no.

he would take consolation if Bills got him somehow. His second Team is Bills, cuz Dad probably.
 

  Do not see Beanes method allowing big spending.

 especially after having to dump Dareus and all that darned dead money....

 

Mack is a guy you spend money on if you believe in process because he's A) young and elite, B) with game day tape to back it up. Money wouldn't scare this regime off (imo), not on a guy like him. The asking price in terms of draft capital in return would likely be the biggest roadblock to a deal. 

 

... But man, that'd be a nice piece to add. Which is why it's fun to think about. 

[Trogdor]

10 hours ago, clayboy54 said:

How can you believe they didn’t address DT when they drafted Horrible Harry? Then, they went out and got Trent Murphy in free agency. It may not work out, but they clearly addressed the Dline. Plus, they stole Edmunds to replace Preston Brown. He might take a while to develop, but he’s a star in waiting. You clearly are not following the Bills very closely.

I said seriously address, not throw poorly rated players at it. Harrison isn't proven and most likely will be a rotational early down DT. Murphy has had one good season and a PED suspension with injuries. Edmunds is a huge specimen with a high ceiling, but he is better suited for OLB at this stage. If that's how they are going to "address" holes, then this team is doomed. Harrison might turn out to be a very good DT that replaces Kyle and I think Edmunds will be a stud for years, but that doesn't do anything this year. The Dline isn't any better than last year and the LBs are worse. You clearly aren't following the Bills very closely. 

13 hours ago, ndirish1978 said:

LOVE Mack. But this team needs 3 OL before we keep upgrading the D.

Still waiting on those upgrades. The LBs are older and just as slow, the Dline still can't stop the run, and the Stud secondary is still the same studs with no real depth. I agree though that the OL is is worse shape and probably bottom 5 in the league. If they can figure out how to stop the run, the defense might be very good. 

9 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

Mack is a guy you spend money on if you believe in process because he's A) young and elite, B) with game day tape to back it up. Money wouldn't scare this regime off (imo), not on a guy like him. The asking price in terms of draft capital in return would likely be the biggest roadblock to a deal. 

 

... But man, that'd be a nice piece to add. Which is why it's fun to think about. 

Maybe holding out doesn't fit the "process"? I'm still trying to figure out the parameters with the addition of the PED suspension players. 

[njbuff]

The Bills could use a stud like Mack (who couldn't) in their front 7, but do they even have the money THIS YEAR to fit him in financially, never mind trading the capitol to get him here.

[dollars 2 donuts]

3 minutes ago, njbuff said:

The Bills could use a stud like Mack (who couldn't) in their front 7, but do they even have the money THIS YEAR to fit him in financially, never mind trading the capitol to get him here.

 

 

About 10.7 million right now, 16th most cap space I. The league, but they usually like to keep a buffer, and there could be cut down day signings.

 

good question, but I would image if they want him bade enough they could make something work.  Guaranties and such.

 

Edit: my bad, 11.2 million, still 16th though.

Edited August 21, 2018 by dollars 2 donuts

[ALF]

The higher priority is the OL to keep Allen and Shady in one piece.

[nucci]

44 minutes ago, njbuff said:

The Bills could use a stud like Mack (who couldn't) in their front 7, but do they even have the money THIS YEAR to fit him in financially, never mind trading the capitol to get him here.

Contracts can be structured to fit

15 hours ago, Trogdor said:

The problem with Hughes is that he is a liability in the run. He loses contain all the time to try and get to the QB, or he takes a dumb penalty after a great play. He is a great piece when mixed with another dominant end, but not by himself. We have such a good secondary going to waste and it's hard to fathom why they didn't seriously address the DT and DE. This is where a great pro personnel guy like Whaley shines. I'm not impressed at all by Beane's moves and he probably needs some help. If Benjamin stays healthy it will be his first positive for me. I'm not sold on the McDermott defense either and its going to need new linebackers to be effective. 

 

I would love Mack btw, but I don't think it would solve anything. 

You don't think Mack would help against the  run? Offenses would have to check on Mack which makes the rest of the defense better....you question Hughes and why Beane didn't address the DE position but yet you don't think Mack will solve anything....that doesn't make sense

[billsbackto81]

13 hours ago, ndirish1978 said:

LOVE Mack. But this team needs 3 OL before we keep upgrading the D.

Dawkins will be fine. Teller looks legit at Guard and Miller seems to be coming around nicely. Groy is serviceble but nothing special and RT is a dumpster fire. Mills, Ducasse and Bodine aren't even CFL worthy.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

16 hours ago, nucci said:

You don't have to sell Mack on Buffalo

 

...from the tariff he'll require as in "north of Von Miller", think you'll have to sell McBeane on that type of investment......pick(s) and a boatload of cash...

[Trogdor]

42 minutes ago, nucci said:

Contracts can be structured to fit

You don't think Mack would help against the  run? Offenses would have to check on Mack which makes the rest of the defense better....you question Hughes and why Beane didn't address the DE position but yet you don't think Mack will solve anything....that doesn't make sense

I initially started out with how bad the DT play is and that's where most of our yards are given up, but then I just went full rant. I would love Mack, I just think that our line will still suck until they can prevent teams from running it up the gut. Do the even have the money for that type of investment? The Bills never seem to find a good balance of stopping the run and the pass. I'm sure other teams have this problem, but they were just one of the worst last year. 

[nucci]

1 minute ago, Trogdor said:

I initially started out with how bad the DT play is and that's where most of our yards are given up, but then I just went full rant. I would love Mack, I just think that our line will still suck until they can prevent teams from running it up the gut. Do the even have the money for that type of investment? The Bills never seem to find a good balance of stopping the run and the pass. I'm sure other teams have this problem, but they were just one of the worst last year. 

I get that but just saying even as a DE Mack can help in that area....as far as trading for Mack....I don't think there is much of a chance of that happening

[Trogdor]

2 minutes ago, nucci said:

I get that but just saying even as a DE Mack can help in that area....as far as trading for Mack....I don't think there is much of a chance of that happening

Outside of picks do we even have anything that anyone would want? We can always dream though. 

[BruceVilanch]

Just now, Trogdor said:

Outside of picks do we even have anything that anyone would want? We can always dream though. 

According to some we have a legit franchise QB who might not start week 1 (peterman)

[ndirish1978]

3 hours ago, billsbackto81 said:

Dawkins will be fine. Teller looks legit at Guard and Miller seems to be coming around nicely. Groy is serviceble but nothing special and RT is a dumpster fire. Mills, Ducasse and Bodine aren't even CFL worthy.

 

Yeah I'm not against trading for Mack, it just seems like LG, C, RT are still a big need. LG wouldn't be a need if I thought Castillo would pull his head out of where it currently is and put Teller in to replace Ducasse, but I've seen little evidence he's willing to put his buddy on the bench. 

[ColoradoBills]

3 hours ago, dollars 2 donuts said:

 

About 10.7 million right now, 16th most cap space I. The league, but they usually like to keep a buffer, and there could be cut down day signings.

good question, but I would image if they want him bade enough they could make something work.  Guaranties and such.

Edit: my bad, 11.2 million, still 16th though.

 

2 hours ago, Trogdor said:

Outside of picks do we even have anything that anyone would want? We can always dream though. 

 

Signing Mack (if Beane wants to pursue it) can be done IF Jerry Hughes is in the trade.

 

1st:  No way Bills sign Mack and keep Jerry Hughes with his contract.

2nd:  Hughes makes sense for OAK because they need to replace his talent somewhere.

Hughes won't cost that much for the next 2 years after Bills eat some cap so they may want to consider a Bills offer.

 

Of course a 2019 1st would probably have to be in the deal.

Question is, would that be enough?  IMO that is the most the Bills should offer.

 

[Trogdor]

1 minute ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

 

Signing Mack (if Beane wants to pursue it) can be done IF Jerry Hughes is in the trade.

 

1st:  No way Bills sign Mack and keep Jerry Hughes with his contract.

2nd:  Hughes makes sense for OAK because they need to replace his talent somewhere.

Hughes won't cost that much for the next 2 years after Bills eat some cap so they may want to consider a Bills offer.

 

Of course a 2019 1st would probably have to be in the deal.

Question is, would that be enough?  IMO that is the most the Bills should offer.

 

God that would be a huge upgrade. Can you imagine a sack that didn't result in the other team gaining 15yds?

[ColoradoBills]

1 minute ago, Trogdor said:

God that would be a huge upgrade. Can you imagine a sack that didn't result in the other team gaining 15yds?

 

Personally I like Hughes and think he is a little under appreciated on the board (warts and all).

It's always a gamble signing a high priced DL player.................but Mack is something special.

There is a good chance (like others have already stated) that Beane uses next years #1 on a pass rusher anyways.

 

Although I think Mack on the Bills only has a slim chance of coming true..........I can see that it could happen.

After all, "Beane is a witch"!

[BillsMafia13]

20 hours ago, dpberr said:

 As a long time Spurs fan, it's exactly what he deserves for his shenanigans.  He's lucky there isn't an NBA franchise in Serbia.  

 

Was there some piece of information I was ignorant to this whole time?  It blows my mind a player could be that selfish that he chose to abandon his team and sit out even after he got paid.

[Alphadawg7]

I love Mack...but:

1. I just cant see Beane what it would take for us trading for him, not to mention, I am not convinced he's even obtainable from the Raiders yet.
2. I also don't think we should trade for him.  Right now, our defensive front 7 has both quality vets and some exciting rookies.  
3. Our OL is a total mess and we have a lot of other offensive question marks, so I do not feel we can afford to move out a lot of quality draft picks right now we are going to need to build around Josh. 

Don't get me wrong, Mack would be a great addition, but I think we will be a stronger team if we invest draft pick assets and cap space in FA into our OL and some other weapons for Josh.  Like anyone, I would be excited if a Mack trade happened, but at the same time I still think we should stand pat and see how the D does with all the veteran and rookie additions we added (Vontae, Star, Edmunsds, and Phillips) and look to invest heavy in the offense next year in both FA and the Draft.  

[Trogdor]

15 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

Personally I like Hughes and think he is a little under appreciated on the board (warts and all).

It's always a gamble signing a high priced DL player.................but Mack is something special.

There is a good chance (like others have already stated) that Beane uses next years #1 on a pass rusher anyways.

 

Although I think Mack on the Bills only has a slim chance of coming true..........I can see that it could happen.

After all, "Beane is a witch"!

He should use next years 1 on Mack right now then lol. Why gamble in the draft when you can get something proven. I still haven't seen anything from Beane that points to him being a master of deals.