Jump to content

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

YoloinOhio

By YoloinOhio
in The Stadium Wall Archives

 Share

Recommended Posts

SWATeam All Pro

SWATeam

Posted
Posted
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.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 700
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Cotton Fitzsimmons
Cotton Fitzsimmons

YE OLE can also see this deal happening and McDermott stepping to podium very matter of fact like and telling the media “Brandon and his team do a great job. They’re always looking for good players th

Rico
Rico

What if the Raiders insisted that EJ was part of the trade?

YoloinOhio
YoloinOhio

Posted Images

Bobby Hooks Veteran

Bobby Hooks

Posted
Posted (edited)
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 by Bobby Hooks
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mannc Hall of Famer

mannc

Posted
Posted (edited)
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 by mannc
Link to comment
Share on other sites
billybob71 Veteran

billybob71

Posted
Posted

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
billybob71 Veteran

billybob71

Posted
Posted
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

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BullBuchanan Veteran

BullBuchanan

Posted
Posted
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
3rdand12 Hall of Famer

3rdand12

Posted
Posted (edited)
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 by 3rdand12
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SWATeam All Pro

SWATeam

Posted
Posted
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.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wppete All Pro

wppete

Posted
Posted
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...