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.

[RyanC883]

On 9/1/2018 at 6:56 PM, mannc said:

Somewhere upthread someone listed all of the veteran players traded for at least two first round picks.  Not one of those trades (there are about 10) worked out even remotely well for the team giving up picks.  And I guarantee they all thought they were getting a proven all-pro.  What could go wrong?

 

and none of those players were on the level that Mack is.  

On 9/2/2018 at 11:01 AM, JaCrispy said:

It will be impossible for Mack to ever live up to that contract, let alone the draft capital traded for him... Raiders won the trade hands down imo

 

okay.  when the Bears have a dominant D for the next 5 years and a QB on a rookie contract we'll see who "won" the trade.  Raiders won't make the playoffs in that timespan.  

On 9/2/2018 at 12:16 PM, Mr. WEO said:

 

I disagree.  Why shell out all that cap going forward and those picks for any superstar on Defense?  How often does that work out?

  

Suh, Haynesworth, Mario--all traded for huge money and all did nothing for the fortunes of the teams that signed them.  Even the Broncos, who re-signed Von Miller have since seen their defense go from 4th in points surrendered to 22nd.

  

 People are saying Gruen was crazy for trading Mack. I disagree.  He got 2 first round picks out of Chicago---at team that will not one one extra gam because of Mack.  If their QB situation tanks, they are screwed, no matter if Mack makes it back to even 12 sacks a year.  Bears won't have any relief in the draft going forward.

 

Bears won't have any relief in the draft?  They have 2nd round and onward.  They now have Mack and Roquan at LB.   They will have a top 5 D.  The raiders have no one.  Suh and Haynesworth were bums before those trades/money.  Mario was fantastic his first 3 years here with 10, 13 and 14 sacks while being on a top 5 D.  

[Mr. WEO]

6 minutes ago, RyanC883 said:

 

and none of those players were on the level that Mack is.  

 

okay.  when the Bears have a dominant D for the next 5 years and a QB on a rookie contract we'll see who "won" the trade.  Raiders won't make the playoffs in that timespan.  

 

Bears won't have any relief in the draft?  They have 2nd round and onward.  They now have Mack and Roquan at LB.   They will have a top 5 D.  The raiders have no one.  Suh and Haynesworth were bums before those trades/money.  Mario was fantastic his first 3 years here with 10, 13 and 14 sacks while being on a top 5 D.  

 

Bears were top 10 D last season.  If they go to top 5....so what?  Their offense stinks.  If Trubisky washes out they can't replace him with 1st round talent in the next 2 years. 

 

The Bills had one winning season (and a single top 5 D) and no playoffs with Mario.  Their D was 26th, 20th and 4th his 1st 3 years. Complete waste of money.

[Wsam4031]

2 hours 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.

Im not sure why they would do it either but this is what ive heard. I think Gruden wanted to send him to a NFC team in my opinion

[billsfan89]

The Raiders got way more than I thought they would. I thought they would get something in the range of a 2019 1st, a 2019 3rd, and a 2020 3rd plus a throw-in player. So for the Raiders to get two firsts is a big boon, even factoring in the swap of a 2020 second for a 2020 3rd it is still a good deal for the Raiders. I think Chicago is giving up a lot for Mack (All those draft picks plus a massive contract) but Mack gives them one of the best pass rushers in the league to a defense that was ranked 10th last season despite the fact that they didn't have that big-time pass rusher. To top it off the Bears did add the best linebacker in the draft in the top 10. But these trades tend to benefit the teams receiving the draft picks and not handing out the big contract.

 

That's not to say that there aren't exceptions to the rule. We all know how the Jason Peters trade ended up. But if I had to put money on it I would say that the Raiders will most likely come out the "winner" of this trade.

[K-9]

2 hours 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/

Just read it. King is spot on regarding the relative value of a proven impact player like Mack vs. totally unknown draft picks. Also appreciate his point about what Green Bay must be thinking. Again, I see similarities between the Bears/Mack and the Bills/Bennett; the acquisition of those players changed the balance of power in their respective divisions over night. Chicago's front seven is a bonafide force. 

[dave mcbride]

1 hour ago, K-9 said:

Just read it. King is spot on regarding the relative value of a proven impact player like Mack vs. totally unknown draft picks. Also appreciate his point about what Green Bay must be thinking. Again, I see similarities between the Bears/Mack and the Bills/Bennett; the acquisition of those players changed the balance of power in their respective divisions over night. Chicago's front seven is a bonafide force. 

Bennett is an excellent comparison. The Bills didn't regret that move!  I like Trubisky and think he'll probably be at least pretty good.

1 hour ago, K-9 said:

Just read it. King is spot on regarding the relative value of a proven impact player like Mack vs. totally unknown draft picks. Also appreciate his point about what Green Bay must be thinking. Again, I see similarities between the Bears/Mack and the Bills/Bennett; the acquisition of those players changed the balance of power in their respective divisions over night. Chicago's front seven is a bonafide force. 

 

Also, this provides good perspective. I don't think the Redskins regretted paying a ton in draft capital for Wilbur Marshall, who was a great player for them. He had 3 sacks in the 1991 NFC championship game! http://nflfootballjournal.blogspot.com/2018/09/bears-give-up-most-for-defensive-player.html

 

Obtaining Hall of Famer Ted Hendricks for 2 first rounders worked out extremely well for the Raiders too. Hendricks, btw, has four SB rings - 3 for Oakland one for Baltimore (1970). 

Dave Butz ended up being a 14-year starter for Washington and played in multiple Super Bowls (2 rings).  Bill Bergey was the heart and soul of Philly's D for about a decade too. 

Edited September 4, 2018 by dave mcbride

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[26CornerBlitz]

The Rams are not messing around!

 

Rams offered package for Khalil Mack, but Raiders believed the draft pick would be too low in 2019

 

The Rams defense is a star-laden unit that features defensive linemen Aaron Donald and Ndamukong Suh among others.

 

And as they prepared for Monday night’s season opener against the Oakland Raiders, the Rams were working last week to add another piece: Khalil Mack.

 

Kevin Demoff, the Rams’ executive vice president of football operations, said Wednesday that the Rams made inquiries with the Raiders about trading for Mack, the star outside linebacker who was dealt to the Chicago Bears on Saturday for two first-round draft picks, a third-round pick and a sixth-round pick.

 

Demoff declined to specify what the Rams offered the Raiders for the 2016 NFL defensive player of the year, who signed a $141-million extension with the Bears the day after Donald signed a $135-million extension with the Rams.

 

“We offered a pretty aggressive package and they came back and said, ‘We just think you’re going to pick too low,’ ” Demoff said about the Rams’ potential pick in the 2019 draft.

[BillsFan4]

13 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

The Rams are not messing around!

 

Rams offered package for Khalil Mack, but Raiders believed the draft pick would be too low in 2019

 

The Rams defense is a star-laden unit that features defensive linemen Aaron Donald and Ndamukong Suh among others.

 

And as they prepared for Monday night’s season opener against the Oakland Raiders, the Rams were working last week to add another piece: Khalil Mack.

 

Kevin Demoff, the Rams’ executive vice president of football operations, said Wednesday that the Rams made inquiries with the Raiders about trading for Mack, the star outside linebacker who was dealt to the Chicago Bears on Saturday for two first-round draft picks, a third-round pick and a sixth-round pick.

 

Demoff declined to specify what the Rams offered the Raiders for the 2016 NFL defensive player of the year, who signed a $141-million extension with the Bears the day after Donald signed a $135-million extension with the Rams.

 

“We offered a pretty aggressive package and they came back and said, ‘We just think you’re going to pick too low,’ ” Demoff said about the Rams’ potential pick in the 2019 draft.

 

They are 110% all in for the next few years. Because after that, their salary cap is going to be a big issue and they know it. 

 

They obviously feel that they need to win, and win quick, to grab the attention of the LA market. 

 

They will be a very interesting team to follow, that’s for sure! 

[Augie]

4 minutes ago, BillsFan4 said:

 

They are 110% all in for the next few years. Because after that, their salary cap is going to be a big issue and they know it. 

 

They obviously feel that they need to win, and win quick, to grab the attention of the LA market. 

 

They will be a very interesting team to follow, that’s for sure! 

 

No kidding! I know they have a cheap young QB and a lot of one year deals, but it feels like they are operating with a totally different salary cap than everyone else. 

[Malazan]

after watching Mack again this week and seeing the Raiders play....what the hell was Gruden thinking? 

[whatdrought]

2 minutes ago, jeremy2020 said:

after watching Mack again this week and seeing the Raiders play....what the hell was Gruden thinking? 

 

There is no empirical evidence that any thinking was being done. 

[YoloinOhio]

6 minutes ago, jeremy2020 said:

after watching Mack again this week and seeing the Raiders play....what the hell was Gruden thinking? 

I don’t know but Mack has more sacks on the season than the entire Raiders D

[Lurker]

8 minutes ago, jeremy2020 said:

after watching Mack again this week and seeing the Raiders play....what the hell was Gruden thinking? 

 

That he's missing that Corona Hotline gig a lot more than he thought he would...

[Alphadawg7]

9 minutes ago, jeremy2020 said:

after watching Mack again this week and seeing the Raiders play....what the hell was Gruden thinking? 

 

Basically came down to:  Carr or Mack

 

And like the Villain in Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade who had to choose a Grail...he chose poorly.

[apuszczalowski]

Maybe he was just still stuck thinking back the way things were done when he last coached. Back when defences won championships and you could get by with a caretaker QB.......

 

Or he just really wanted a pass rusher so he figured he should tank this season so he can draft one at the top of this years draft.....

 

He also might be too young to play on Grudens team......

 

Obviously though, it all came down to money and how Gruden wants to run things. Mack was holding out for a new deal, Gruden didnt want to give him what he wanted and wants to show the team who's boss by not giving into a hold out, so he shipped him off. It's not looking like a good move so far.....

Edited September 24, 2018 by apuszczalowski