Lacanfora: Bills have reached out to Raiders about Khalil Mack trade

[John from Riverside]

I think I might make this deal just to keep him away from the jets

[ExWNYer]

21 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Nope. He still has Peterman.

 

You're right. I must've been looking at yours. Damn old eyes. ?

[26CornerBlitz]

3 minutes ago, ExWNYer said:

 

You're right. I must've been looking at yours. Damn old eyes. ?

 

Just remember that getting old is a privilege.  

[ExWNYer]

?

[PIZ]

Would the Raiders insist on a player like Tre White to be part of the deal?  I would assume the Bills would not include any top draft pick players drafted by McBeane:. White, Phillips, obviously Allen, Edmunds, Jones, and Dawkins.  Anyone else off limits?

 

[Doc Brown]

Now would be the ideal time to make a big signing with Josh Allen on his rookie contract and a ton of cap space open next year.  However, I wouldn't want to give up a 1st rounder for him and then pay a huge contract when we're going to need all those picks next year to address some of the holes in offense to give Allen help (WR, OT, OG, and likely RB).  If they find a way to make the trade without giving up a ton, then I wouldn't have a problem with the signing.  You can front load the contract given the space we'll have next year.

[ExWNYer]

2 minutes ago, PIZ said:

Would the Raiders insist on a player like Tre White to be part of the deal?  I would assume the Bills would not include any top draft pick players drafted by McBeane:. White, Phillips, obviously Allen, Edmunds, Jones, and Dawkins.  Anyone else off limits?

 

 

White is a non-starter, IMO. If Oakland insists, I hang up the phone. Whoever lands Mack will be shelling out a small fortune, they won't have to surrender a top player. The Raiders will either have to pay that small fortune themselves to keep him (doubtful) or take the best offer they can get which will more than likely involve draft picks. I don't see any team surrendering one of their best players. The Raiders have less and less leverage with each passing day.

[Doc Brown]

10 minutes ago, PIZ said:

Would the Raiders insist on a player like Tre White to be part of the deal?  I would assume the Bills would not include any top draft pick players drafted by McBeane:. White, Phillips, obviously Allen, Edmunds, Jones, and Dawkins.  Anyone else off limits?

 

I wouldn't put Phillips or Jones off the table.  Phillips is a late 3rd round pick who hasn't done anything yet (although we all liked the pick) and Jones is a 2nd round pick that may be a bust.

[Logic]

The most obvious thing Buffalo could do to acquire Mack -- if the Raiders went for it, of course -- would be a position-for-position swap. If they get rid of Mack, they'll need an edge rushing presence.

Jerry Hughes or Shaq Lawson (whichever they prefer....though I'm not sure why they'd prefer Lawson other than age), 2019 1st and 3rd round pick.

That's the LEAST Buffalo could hope to spend in trade compensation, in my estimation. 

Are Bills fans prepared to go into next year's draft without 1st and 3rd round picks? 

Edited August 25, 2018 by Logic

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

2 hours ago, JaCrispy said:

...I’m still trying to figure out how they are going to getting a starting OG, C, and WR next year

kijiji?

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

7 minutes ago, Logic said:

The most obvious thing Buffalo could do to acquire Mack -- if the Raiders went for it, of course -- would be a position-for-position swap. If they get rid of Mack, they'll need an edge rushing presence.

Jerry Hughes or Shaq Lawson (whichever they prefer....though I'm not sure why they'd prefer Lawson other than age), 2019 1st and 3rd round pick.

That's the LEAST Buffalo could hope to spend in trade compensation, in my estimation. 

Are Bills fans prepared to go into next year's draft without 1st and 3rd round picks? 

...which is probably the tariff which is why it never happens....WELL beyond McBeane's acquisition wheelhouse IMO.....

[mannc]

8 minutes ago, Logic said:

Jerry Hughes or Shaq Lawson (whichever they prefer....though I'm not sure why they'd prefer Lawson other than age), 2019 1st and 3rd round pick.

That's the LEAST Buffalo could hope to spend in trade compensation, in my estimation.
 

What makes you think that?  What other teams in the last ten years have traded assets of that magnitude for a non-QB?  

[BullBuchanan]

23 hours ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

What statistic gives you that fact?

Mack just came off 10.5 sacks with 61 solo tackles and a combined 78 tackles.  That's All Pro for a DE.

 

 

 

Don't bring up Lawrence.  Him and Mack came into the league at the same time.  Lawrence's numbers are no where close to Mack's and he signed a

one year contract (because he can't stay healthy) for over 17 million.

 

Von Miller, yeah he's great that's why he is the highest paid.  Mack is in the same category.

 

Chandler Jones was a disappointment in NE, that's why he was traded.  He is much better in Arizona but still not the all around player Mack is.

 

Bosa could be exceptional.  If so he will command close to 25 million a year when his rookie contract is up.

If the Chargers wait to pay him the way the Raiders are doing with Mack, he will leave too.

 

So if your conclusion is Mack may not be the best because of Von Miller or maybe Bosa....................

 

 

I watched most of Mack's games last year. I had him on my fantasy team. While he finished the year with 10.5 sacks. Most of them were Aaron Schoebel sacks. The kind accrued that were a result of coverage or garbage time. He was largely an invisible Man last year. He was also a defensive liability at times and he dominated exactly zero games.

 

Also 10 sacks is not elite territory. It's just pretty good, Jerry Hughes level. I'm not interested in paying $2 million per sack. I'm not saying he isn't a great player, but I'm positive he'll be unable to live up to a $20m contract, and I think you can get players almost as good for close to half that.

Edited August 25, 2018 by BullBuchanan

[26CornerBlitz]

3 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

I watched most of Mack's games last year. I had him on my fantasy team. While he finished the year with 10.5 sacks. Most of them were Aaron Schoebel sacks. The kind accrued that were a result of coverage or garbage time. He was largely an invisible Man last year. He was also a defensive liability at times and he dominated exactly zero games.

 

Also 10 sacks is not elite territory. It's just pretty good, Jerry Hughes level. I'm not interested in paying $2 million per sack. I'm not saying he isn't a great player, but I'm positive he'll be unable to live up to a $20m contract, and I think you can get players almost as good for close to half that.

 

78 QB pressures last season. You like so many others look at sack numbers as the way to evaluate DEs or Edge rushers.  Mack is an elite player by any measure. 

Edited August 25, 2018 by 26CornerBlitz

[BullBuchanan]

1 minute ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

78 QB pressures last season. You like so many others look at sack numbers as the way to evaluate DEs or Edge rushers.  Mack is an elite player by any measure. 

 

Like I said, I think his best ball may already be behind him. I think he'll continue to be a top tier guy for a few more years, as long as the money doesn't go to his head. But I don't want him on the team at the contract he'll command. Even with so zero trade compensation. I don't ever remember it working out in the salary cap era.

[26CornerBlitz]

1 minute ago, BullBuchanan said:

 

Like I said, I think his best ball may already be behind him. I think he'll continue to be a top tier guy for a few more years, as long as the money doesn't go to his head. But I don't want him on the team at the contract he'll command. Even with so zero trade compensation. I don't ever remember it working out in the salary cap era.

 

Based on what?

[Logic]

1 hour ago, mannc said:

What makes you think that?  What other teams in the last ten years have traded assets of that magnitude for a non-QB?  

The fact that he is the best defensive player in the league.

The Saints gave up next year's 1st rounder just to draft a pass rushing PROSPECT in this year's draft. Not even a proven guy.

So you figure the starting point is a 1st rounder. From there, you figure the Raiders are going to need to fill the void left by Mack, hence the player(s) I included. 

What other teams have given up multiple assets for a non-QB? How about when the Eagles sent the Bills 1st, 4th, and 6th round picks for Jason Peters? Revis being traded to the Bucs for a high 1st round pick and an additional conditional draft pick. 

Anyone thinking the Bills can get Mack for just a 1st round pick is dreaming, in my estimation. It'll take something else to sweeten the pot -- ESPECIALLY if, as reported, there are about 12 interested teams.
 

[SWATeam]

It was interesting watching the Raiders game last night, they were really talking up Arden Key...  Maybe getting the fan base ready for the move? 

[26CornerBlitz]

5 minutes ago, Logic said:

The fact that he is the best defensive player in the league.

The Saints gave up next year's 1st rounder just to draft a pass rushing PROSPECT in this year's draft. Not even a proven guy.

So you figure the starting point is a 1st rounder. From there, you figure the Raiders are going to need to fill the void left by Mack, hence the player(s) I included. 

What other teams have given up multiple assets for a non-QB? How about when the Eagles sent the Bills 1st, 4th, and 6th round picks for Jason Peters? Revis being traded to the Bucs for a high 1st round pick and an additional conditional draft pick. 

Anyone thinking the Bills can get Mack for just a 1st round pick is dreaming, in my estimation. It'll take something else to sweeten the pot -- ESPECIALLY if, as reported, there are about 12 interested teams.
 

 

Agent's Take: How a potential Khalil Mack trade might work, and five landing spots

 

Trade compensation

The Raiders should be able to command a king's ransom if Mack is put on the trading block. I asked former longtime Eagles president and Browns CEO Joe Banner via direct message on Twitter about the type of compensation the Raiders could get in a Mack trade. The Eagles were considered as a team to emulate in salary-cap management under Banner's direction.

 

"I think the range is a 1, 3 and 7 on the low end to two 1s on the high end. A lot also depends on how high the 1 is. Maybe it's a 1 and 2 if it's fairly high, or two 1s if it's lower," said Banner. "Maybe a team would be smart to include a 1 with a quality player. Or a 1, a middle pick and a quality player. He (Mack) is as good or better than any of the players we have seen involved in these kind of trades."

 

Banner's assessment is consistent with the top trade compensation for veteran non-quarterbacks during the 21st century, which is outlined in the chart below. 

[Logic]

2 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

"Maybe a team would be smart to include a 1 with a quality player. Or a 1, a middle pick and a quality player."

 

Boom!

[SWATeam]

3 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Agent's Take: How a potential Khalil Mack trade might work, and five landing spots

 

Trade compensation

The Raiders should be able to command a king's ransom if Mack is put on the trading block. I asked former longtime Eagles president and Browns CEO Joe Banner via direct message on Twitter about the type of compensation the Raiders could get in a Mack trade. The Eagles were considered as a team to emulate in salary-cap management under Banner's direction.

 

"I think the range is a 1, 3 and 7 on the low end to two 1s on the high end. A lot also depends on how high the 1 is. Maybe it's a 1 and 2 if it's fairly high, or two 1s if it's lower," said Banner. "Maybe a team would be smart to include a 1 with a quality player. Or a 1, a middle pick and a quality player. He (Mack) is as good or better than any of the players we have seen involved in these kind of trades."

 

Banner's assessment is consistent with the top trade compensation for veteran non-quarterbacks during the 21st century, which is outlined in the chart below. 

Bills are in a great position because, nationally, we are assumed to be in the running for the first overall pick.  Certainly trumps Green Bay and some of the other teams rumored to be interested.

[wppete]

Can we please hurry up and trade for him. Thanks. 

[Bobby Hooks]

Give them a 1 and Trent Murphy! 

[wppete]

3 minutes ago, Bobby Hooks said:

Give them a 1 and Trent Murphy! 

 

1 and Jerry Hughes contract. Trent Murphy is not tradable right now. 

[Bobby Hooks]

2 minutes ago, wppete said:

 

1 and Jerry Hughes contract. Trent Murphy is not tradable right now. 

I know but then who do we have in the other side, Lawson? I mean, I’d still do it but I thought with magic Beane as gm he could pull off another trade miracle. 

 

No one thought we’d get anything for Taylor. 

Edited August 25, 2018 by Bobby Hooks

[mannc]

45 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Agent's Take: How a potential Khalil Mack trade might work, and five landing spots

 

Trade compensation

The Raiders should be able to command a king's ransom if Mack is put on the trading block. I asked former longtime Eagles president and Browns CEO Joe Banner via direct message on Twitter about the type of compensation the Raiders could get in a Mack trade. The Eagles were considered as a team to emulate in salary-cap management under Banner's direction.

 

"I think the range is a 1, 3 and 7 on the low end to two 1s on the high end. A lot also depends on how high the 1 is. Maybe it's a 1 and 2 if it's fairly high, or two 1s if it's lower," said Banner. "Maybe a team would be smart to include a 1 with a quality player. Or a 1, a middle pick and a quality player. He (Mack) is as good or better than any of the players we have seen involved in these kind of trades."

 

Banner's assessment is consistent with the top trade compensation for veteran non-quarterbacks during the 21st century, which is outlined in the chart below. 

I’m sure that’s what Gruden is hoping to get but I don’t think he’ll succeed.

 

Interesting thing about the chart at the bottom of the article: all those deals turned out poorly for the team trading premium draft picks for a “proven” player, except the Jason Peter trade.  Peter was three years younger than Mack and signed a four year extension as part of the trade.  Also, at the time of the trade, the Eagles knew the pick they were giving up was only 28 overall.  The Bills’ first next year is likely to be significantly higher, maybe even top 10.

1 hour ago, BullBuchanan said:

I watched most of Mack's games last year. I had him on my fantasy team. While he finished the year with 10.5 sacks. Most of them were Aaron Schoebel sacks. The kind accrued that were a result of coverage or garbage time. He was largely an invisible Man last year. He was also a defensive liability at times and he dominated exactly zero games.

 

Also 10 sacks is not elite territory. It's just pretty good, Jerry Hughes level. I'm not interested in paying $2 million per sack. I'm not saying he isn't a great player, but I'm positive he'll be unable to live up to a $20m contract, and I think you can get players almost as good for close to half that.

I’m guessing this is why the raiders have decided not to give him a huge extension. I don’t believe for a second there are a dozen teams that are seriously interested.

Edited August 25, 2018 by mannc

[billybob71]

I wanted Mack at first but the more I think about it I don't think its a good idea. I'm with some other posters on here its exciting to make that big splash trade or signing ( see Owens or Mario) but this regime seems to be building a team thru the draft and signing free agents who fit at a economical price. I don't know maybe Mack would be that perfect fit but I guess I gotta sit back and trust the process. Tough call either way and I  just talked in circles in the span of this post. 

[Jamie Nails]

Days go by and still I think of you
Days when I couldn't live my life without you
 

[billybob71]

7 minutes ago, Jamie Nails said:

Days go by and still I think of you
Days when I couldn't live my life without you
 

I'm a musician who has made a living playing and teaching guitar for the past 27 years and you stumped me on this lyric. I had to google it

[3rdand12]

9 minutes ago, Jamie Nails said:

Days go by and still I think of you
Days when I couldn't live my life without you
 

thank you. 

 seems forever i thought you had forgotten

 

 

[billybob71]

I'm not the only drunk person on here tonight?

[BullBuchanan]

1 hour ago, mannc said:

I’m sure that’s what Gruden is hoping to get but I don’t think he’ll succeed.

 

Interesting thing about the chart at the bottom of the article: all those deals turned out poorly for the team trading premium draft picks for a “proven” player, except the Jason Peter trade.  Peter was three years younger than Mack and signed a four year extension as part of the trade.  Also, at the time of the trade, the Eagles knew the pick they were giving up was only 28 overall.  The Bills’ first next year is likely to be significantly higher, maybe even top 10.

I’m guessing this is why the raiders have decided not to give him a huge extension. I don’t believe for a second there are a dozen teams that are seriously interested.

 

Exactly my thoughts.

 

1) I don't think the Raiders are really interested in trading him for anything below 2 1's+

2) The Raiders have him locked down for 2 more years worst case, so why trade him? He'll be 29 by then and they'll have effectively eaten the rest of his prime.

3) If the team that drafted him #4 overall and has watched him ever single day doesn't want to give him $20m, why should we be chomping at the bit?

 

In hindsight, all the teams that let their Elite defensive players walk have looked like geniuses. Suh, Williams, Haynesworth,  and my personal favorite: https://www.nbcsports.com/boston/video/should-stephon-gilmore-lose-his-starting-cornerback-job

I really hope the Bills are smart enough to realize that you hamstring yourself when you sign players to these kinds of deals, and they should because we just got rid of one in Dareus. I pray the Jets land him, because it all but ends their hopes of being a decent team for the next 5 years.

[PIZ]

2020 1st round pick, 2019 3rd round pick + Jerry Hughes or Shaq Lawson.

 

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

14 minutes ago, Jamie Nails said:

Days go by and still I think of you
Days when I couldn't live my life without you
 

You got a 'sad' smilie from me in your original comment, but it's got nothing to do with Mack.

[3rdand12]

1 hour ago, mannc said:

I’m sure that’s what Gruden is hoping to get but I don’t think he’ll succeed.

 

Interesting thing about the chart at the bottom of the article: all those deals turned out poorly for the team trading premium draft picks for a “proven” player, except the Jason Peter trade.  Peter was three years younger than Mack and signed a four year extension as part of the trade.  Also, at the time of the trade, the Eagles knew the pick they were giving up was only 28 overall.  The Bills’ first next year is likely to be significantly higher, maybe even top 10.

I’m guessing this is why the raiders have decided not to give him a huge extension. I don’t believe for a second there are a dozen teams that are seriously interested.

Everyone should be interested.
 

 Regardless of the draft pick guessing/ wager , what would Mack bring to the Bills ?
is he a good fit?

 will his skill set transition?

 

and most important

 

is he That Good ?

some one does not think so.
good stuff to follow along with I think.  Bet he gets over paid somewhere that is not Buffalo.
if he comes to us? well that's fine by me because i trust that Mc Beanes are not any one who would overpay for anything.

4 minutes ago, billybob71 said:

I'm not the only drunk person on here tonight?

yet another reason we get along so darned well 

Edited August 26, 2018 by 3rdand12

[purple haze]

1 hour ago, wppete said:

 

1 and Jerry Hughes contract. Trent Murphy is not tradable right now. 

Why does everyone want to get rid of Hughes?  His money is not oppressive.  And he puts pressure on QBs even if he doesn't get the sack.    

 

[SWATeam]

2 minutes ago, purple haze said:

Why does everyone want to get rid of Hughes?  His money is not oppressive.  And he puts pressure on QBs even if he doesn't get the sack.    

 

Hughes has been quietly unimpressive the last couple of years.  Not as much production as you would like, tends to disappear at times.  Plus the bone head penalties.

[wppete]

3 minutes ago, purple haze said:

Why does everyone want to get rid of Hughes?  His money is not oppressive.  And he puts pressure on QBs even if he doesn't get the sack.    

 

 

Have to free up money to sign Mack. Don’t want Hughes to be traded but trading him makes the most sense along with a draft pick. Also the raiders will be looking for some help at DE.

[Bangarang]

23 minutes ago, PIZ said:

2020 1st round pick, 2019 3rd round pick + Jerry Hughes or Shaq Lawson.

 

 

No chance

[PIZ]

Just now, Bangarang said:

 

No chance

 

Too much or not enough?

 

If they have to give up a number 1, I'd rather give the 2020 one.