Mack Traded!!!!!!!

[Laughing Coffin]

19 minutes ago, COTC said:

Darius?? 

I get your point though. 

 

 Beane is not helping. He may be the worse gm in bills history. 

 

Hes been on the job for 1 offseason lolll

[billsfan714]

Let your Buffalo freak flag fly....post should for sure start with youse guys.?

[Bangarang]

I still can’t believe we didn’t draft Brady when we had the chance. It keeps me up at night.

Edited September 3, 2018 by Bangarang

[Wayne Cubed]

4 hours ago, Maynard said:

Damn. Thought this was a band camp thingy. 

 

Probably would have been a better thread if it was.

[plenzmd1]

18 hours ago, K-9 said:

The old adage says the team that gets the best player wins the trade. 

 

Right now, that’s the Bears, hands down.

 

If and when one of the picks acquired by Oakland ends up being better than Mack, then we can say the Raiders won the trade. The odds are against it, though. 

I think that is true in a player for player(s) swap in most sports, but football is just such a different beast.I think this trade is truly a loss-loss as opposed to a win-win trade.

 

Mack is an unbelievable talent, albeit getting a little older, and the Raiders only had to pay him to keep him. Bird in the hand! Letting that go is foolish to me. if you believe the money will affect his play.

OTOH, The Bears not only had to pay him,  but give up first two rounders, which in theory let you acquire and pay other great players as you have cost control at said draft positions.

 

I thiunk they both lose this trade.

[26CornerBlitz]

"Macksimum" Impact!

 

 

[Virgil]

Can we close and vault this thread. It depresses me 

[26CornerBlitz]

1 minute ago, Virgil said:

Can we close and vault this thread. It depresses me 

 

Seriously? 

[The Frankish Reich]

22 hours ago, Cornette's Commentary said:

Mods. please close this thread.

 

3 minutes ago, Virgil said:

Can we close and vault this thread. It depresses me 

Why does anyone bother to post these "Close this thread!" comments?  I get it when the thread has descended into name calling, etc., but other than that?

(I do get that Virgil's can be taken other than literally.)

[timtebow15]

History shows that trading first round picks for players like this and signing them to huge contracts doesn't usually work out and I don't think it will go well for the Bears.  Way too much salary for a LB and you lose your cheap labor (first round picks).  Because you can't afford to pay top dollar at many positions in today's NFL I think drafting well is more important than ever so you build with affordable quality players and keep a few difference makers.  If I was GM I would trade down every draft to accumulate as many 1-5 round picks as possible to build a team with good depth and then find a franchise QB.  

Edited September 4, 2018 by timtebow15

[Wsam4031]

for all you that said the BIlls would never try to make a move for him I have heard form a reliable source that the Bills did in fact offer 2 1st and Hughes for MAck mbut the Raiders took the Bears offer instead

[SouthNYfan]

7 minutes ago, Wsam4031 said:

for all you that said the BIlls would never try to make a move for him I have heard form a reliable source that the Bills did in fact offer 2 1st and Hughes for MAck mbut the Raiders took the Bears offer instead

 

I'm not so sure that's true.

If the offer was just straight up:

2019 1st

2020 1st

Hughes

for

Mack

 

then the Raiders valued Hughes at next to nothing because they received:

2019 1st

2019 3rd

2020 1st

2020 6th

and gave up

Mack

2020 2nd 

2020 conditional 5th

 

That means they valued the swap of:

[giving up]

2020 2nd

2020 conditional 5th

for

[receiving]

2019 3rd

2020 6th

 

over Hughes straight up.

 

I am not sure why the Raiders would do that, unless they feel Hughes has ZERO value.

Edited September 4, 2018 by SouthNYfan

[dave mcbride]

10 minutes ago, SouthNYfan said:

 

I'm not so sure that's true.

If the offer was just straight up:

2019 1st

2020 1st

Hughes

for

Mack

 

then the Raiders valued Hughes at next to nothing because they received:

2019 1st

2019 3rd

2020 1st

2020 6th

and gave up

Mack

2020 2nd 

2020 conditional 5th

 

That means they valued the swap of:

[giving up]

2020 2nd

2020 conditional 5th

for

[receiving]

2019 3rd

2020 6th

 

over Hughes straight up.

 

I am not sure why the Raiders would do that, unless they feel Hughes has ZERO value.

It has been reported that the Raiders didn't want to trade him to another AFC team. Regardless, it was a TERRIBLE trade by the Raiders. What the hell are they thinking?

Edited September 4, 2018 by dave mcbride

[Talonz]

On 9/3/2018 at 12:22 AM, Cornette's Commentary said:

Mods. please close this thread.

 

I wish they would close your account instead of this thread.

[K-9]

11 hours ago, timtebow15 said:

History shows that trading first round picks for players like this and signing them to huge contracts doesn't usually work out and I don't think it will go well for the Bears.  Way too much salary for a LB and you lose your cheap labor (first round picks).  Because you can't afford to pay top dollar at many positions in today's NFL I think drafting well is more important than ever so you build with affordable quality players and keep a few difference makers.  If I was GM I would trade down every draft to accumulate as many 1-5 round picks as possible to build a team with good depth and then find a franchise QB.  

When it comes to players being traded in sports, history serves an anecdotal role at best. Each player, each team dynamic is a unique situation. Mack, although I doubt it, may well end up not working out, but that remains to be seen. But "history" has no bearing one way or another. I would think less of a GM, coach, owner, etc., that balked at making moves because "history" dictates otherwise. 

 

Regarding keeping a few difference makers, well, the Bears went out and acquired one to keep. An impact player at an impact position they can build around. 

[dave mcbride]

18 minutes ago, K-9 said:

When it comes to players being traded in sports, history serves an anecdotal role at best. Each player, each team dynamic is a unique situation. Mack, although I doubt it, may well end up not working out, but that remains to be seen. But "history" has no bearing one way or another. I would think less of a GM, coach, owner, etc., that balked at making moves because "history" dictates otherwise. 

 

Regarding keeping a few difference makers, well, the Bears went out and acquired one to keep. An impact player at an impact position they can build around. 

It was a smart trade by the Bears. Did you read the Peter King piece about it? It's good: https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/09/03/khalil-mack-trade-super-bowl-prediction-peter-king/

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

5 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

It was a smart trade by the Bears. Did you read the Peter King piece about it? It's good: https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/09/03/khalil-mack-trade-super-bowl-prediction-peter-king/

 

Jesus the Christ he's so wordy.

 

 

[K-9]

1 minute ago, dave mcbride said:

It was a smart trade by the Bears. Did you read the Peter King piece about it? It's good: https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/09/03/khalil-mack-trade-super-bowl-prediction-peter-king/

Haven't read much about the trade at all, just what's been posted in threads so thanks for the link. 

 

Bottom line is the Bears got an impact player at an impact position in his athletic prime. He will help them on defense, there is no doubt in my mind.

 

IMO,  it all comes down to how Trubisky develops. I've long compared any prospective Mack deal to the Bennett deal. Really, the only difference I can see is that Bennett was more of a finishing piece for us as Kelly had already had four years of pro ball under his belt and was largely a finished product. And Polian and Co. did a great job of building around him; the Bills were ready to contend. I think the Bears are talented, but Trubisky is the main ingredient. 

[TheElectricCompany]

Ryan Pace's comments regarding the draft pick giveaway were interesting: 

 

“When we look at this next draft, right, our first-round pick is Khalil Mack and our next round pick is Anthony Miller,” Pace said.

https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/bears/ryan-pace-makes-compelling-counter-draft-capital-argument-khalil-mack-blockbuster

 

Gruden is going to run this team into the ground. I just don't get his moves. 

[26CornerBlitz]

2 minutes ago, K-9 said:

Haven't read much about the trade at all, just what's been posted in threads so thanks for the link. 

 

Bottom line is the Bears got an impact player at an impact position in his athletic prime. He will help them on defense, there is no doubt in my mind.

 

IMO,  it all comes down to how Trubisky develops. I've long compared any prospective Mack deal to the Bennett deal. Really, the only difference I can see is that Bennett was more of a finishing piece for us as Kelly had already had four years of pro ball under his belt and was largely a finished product. And Polian and Co. did a great job of building around him; the Bills were ready to contend. I think the Bears are talented, but Trubisky is the main ingredient. 

 

The Bears did a nice job giving Trubisky a supporting cast to help him succeed this season with the acquisitions of Robinson, Gabriel, Burton via UFA and drafting Anthony Miller.