Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
BillsFan1988

Looking Back I wish we traded for Mack

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Why would the Raiders care if Mack was on the Bills?  How would that hurt them?

 

 

 

Mack would not have made the Browns a SB this year.  Bears are better overall and they were not a serious contender this past season, it turns out.

I disagree I think u add Mack to Browns there much better then Mack on Bears. Imagine Garrett and Mack coming at u ? Plus Mayfield to me is light yrs ahead of Trubisky as a QB. 

20 minutes ago, Albany,n.y. said:

One thing the OP has forgotten: At the time of the trade from Oakland to Chicago, the Bills were thinking they could have one of the worst teams in the NFL, while the Bears were thinking they could be a playoff contender with Mack.  What that means is the Bears believed they'd be offering the Raiders lower 1st round picks.  The Bills, on the other hand had serious deficiencies on offense & couldn't afford to risk what could be a top 5 pick, maybe even the #1 pick this year & another 1st rounder next year to get Mack.  As it turned out the Bears were who they thought they were & ended up in the playoffs, the Bills actually overachieved to get 6 wins and the 9th pick.  If the Bills had ended up with a top 5 pick or the top pick they would have been in a great spot to trade down for some serious picks, at 9 not so much.  So now the risk doesn't appear to be as severe, but at the time of the trade, the idea of giving up this year's #1 was viewed as too much for any one player who would do nothing to fill the serious voids on offense.  

Another miscalculation by our front office coaching staff not knowing what they have was better then the worse start team in the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trading for Mack will hurt Chicago in the long run.  in a few years they will need to pay Trubisky.  You cannot give them both 100M dollar deals.  At that point Mack is out the door and you lost two first round picks.  he litterly has to give you a championship or it's not worth it.  

no defensive player is worth that kind of money.  Ask the Patriots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure he is a generational player that only comes along once in a lifetime a LT or a Jerry Rice type of player & it would be great to see him making plays in a Bills uni, but given the way the NFL has gone i would rather get 3 players that can help the team & do as much like we had in the 90's .

 

I would rather have Talley, Biscuit, & Conlan for 5 yrs on a reasonable contract than mack & 2 under achieving LB's to be taken advantage of by the likes of a really good offensive coach . Even though those  guys will get beat from time to time i think they would win more than lose but i have seen Mack & other great players get taken out of a game with great planning ...

Edited by T master

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Oh I'd definitely have traded two firsts for Mack as well if Oakland would have been willing to trade him within the conference.

 

If you aren't using your first round pick on a QB then it becomes the most overrated piece in the entire talent acquisition process.

 

That's not to say they aren't important but fans clutch to them like they are invaluable.......when in reality they just as often turn out to be Aaron Maybin or Donte Whitner or Shaq Lawson.........various levels of "meh"........as anything particularly impactful.

 

Mack would have been impactful on multiple levels..........great young player at the second most important position in football(pass rusher).........but also an underdog turned superstar character guy in the locker room........and a local legend who would have been a real "feel good" asset that fans could get behind.

 

Could have been a real feather in the cap of McBeane with the fanbase. 

 

The Bills have a bad rep for drafting poorly during the 2000's but they haven't been particularly bad in round 1.............it's just that they've had a tendency to pick a lot of low hanging fruit.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Oh I'd definitely have traded two firsts for Mack as well if Oakland would have been willing to trade him within the conference.

 

If you aren't using your first round pick on a QB then it becomes the most overrated piece in the entire talent acquisition process.

 

That's not to say they aren't important but fans clutch to them like they are invaluable.......when in reality they just as often turn out to be Aaron Maybin or Donte Whitner or Shaq Lawson.........various levels of "meh"........as anything particularly impactful.

 

Mack would have been impactful on multiple levels..........great young player at the second most important position in football(pass rusher).........but also an underdog turned superstar character guy in the locker room........and a local legend who would have been a real "feel good" asset that fans could get behind.

 

Could have been a real feather in the cap of McBeane with the fanbase. 

 

The Bills have a bad rep for drafting poorly during the 2000's but they haven't been particularly bad in round 1.............it's just that they've had a tendency to pick a lot of low hanging fruit.   

Mack started out great this past season, but after his mid-October ankle injury, he was not the same guy the rest of the way (he missed two games too). He was still good and made plays late into the season (and he played well vs Philly in the playoffs despite the stats), but the stand-out physical dynamism wasn't there. He should be fine, of course, but that injury did hamper him a bit down the stretch. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can't force teams to trade with us. All 31 other teams would have been happy to capitalize on the dumb decision by the Raiders to let Mack go. As others have stated, if you are going to trade an elite player, you better trade him out of the conference and especially out of your division so he doesn't come back to bite you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

Mack started out great this past season, but after his mid-October ankle injury, he was not the same guy the rest of the way (he missed two games too). He was still good and made plays late into the season (and he played well vs Philly in the playoffs despite the stats), but the stand-out physical dynamism wasn't there. He should be fine, of course, but that injury did hamper him a bit down the stretch. 

He commands a double team just by being in the field.  Injuries definitely hurt him but he is the main reason why their defense was 3 overall and had 36 takeaways.

 

its similar to when we got Mario.  Just his presence alone made the entire d line better.  It’s not a coincidence that Hughes, Kyle, and Dareus all had their best seasons when Mario was here.  That’s why a great pass rusher is so important.  They make the whole defense better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, C.Biscuit97 said:

He commands a double team just by being in the field.  Injuries definitely hurt him but he is the main reason why their defense was 3 overall and had 36 takeaways.

 

its similar to when we got Mario.  Just his presence alone made the entire d line better.  It’s not a coincidence that Hughes, Kyle, and Dareus all had their best seasons when Mario was here.  That’s why a great pass rusher is so important.  They make the whole defense better.

I agree that he's great, and he had a very good season overall. His September numbers alone (when he was completely healthy) were all-pro worthy. I'm just saying that he had a decent stretch this season where he was clearly not 100 percent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, kota said:

Trading for Mack will hurt Chicago in the long run.  in a few years they will need to pay Trubisky.  You cannot give them both 100M dollar deals.  At that point Mack is out the door and you lost two first round picks.  he litterly has to give you a championship or it's not worth it.  

no defensive player is worth that kind of money.  Ask the Patriots.

Who cares about the long run?  They won 7 more games than they did last year and had a chance to compete for the SB.  If Mitch is legit to earn that money, it will be his team).  But imagine the Bears if they just took Mahomes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

Mack started out great this past season, but after his mid-October ankle injury, he was not the same guy the rest of the way (he missed two games too). He was still good and made plays late into the season (and he played well vs Philly in the playoffs despite the stats), but the stand-out physical dynamism wasn't there. He should be fine, of course, but that injury did hamper him a bit down the stretch. 

 

Yeah and he wasn't going to make the Bills a contender last season either way considering how poor the offense was..........but I expect he will be a big producer over the next 5-7 years.........and often times the really good ones get better at avoiding those types of injuries as they mature.

 

I also LOVE the Bills results in round 2 in years where they haven't had a first round pick.

 

Something about not having a first rounder seems to clarify their judgement in round 2...........Thurman(HOF), Cowart(DPOY candidate), Darby(very nice CB) and Roscoe(meh)..........some of the best second rounders in franchise history(from a team that otherwise does not have a good track record in round 2).

 

I think there is something to it.......when you don't have a first rounder the pressure surrounding the draft is somewhat alleviated........the idea that they can somehow fill all needs is gone.........and they seem to draft BPA with that pick instead of need.  

 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Something about not having a first rounder seems to clarify their judgement in round 2...........Thurman(HOF), Cowart(DPOY candidate), Darby(very nice CB) and Roscoe(meh)..........some of the best second rounders in franchise history(from a team that otherwise does not have a good track record in round 2).

 

I think there is something to it.......when you don't have a first rounder the pressure surrounding the draft is somewhat alleviated........the idea that they can somehow fill all needs is gone.........and they seem to draft BPA with that pick instead of need.  

 

 

The same seemed to hold when they traded back in the 1st and took EJ as well.... they had two 2nds and picked Woods and Alonso (both good 2nd round picks and decent at worst NFL players). It is almost as though not having a first or knowing they'd reached a bit on a QB in the 1st clarified their thinking in round 2 and they just picked the best players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Elite pass rusher >>>> oline and receiver.  Those groups can be very easily found in the draft.  The Steeelrs rarely ever draft receiver high (I think JuJu, who we passed on, might be their highest drafted Wr in a long time) but they always can find guys.  

 

In in terms of nfl team construction, the hardest positions to find are qb, pass rusher, and cb.  The rest of the positions can fall into place after you have those other pieces. Mack wrecks teams by himself and he loves Buffalo.  I would have definitely given up the 9th this year and hopefully something like the 20th (fingers crossed) or so next year.  Honestly, it’s pretty much a no brainer.

 

I'll give a kinda shrug to all of this.

 

In the not too distant past, the Bills paid a DE the highest defensive salary in the league.

 

For 2 years, they led the league in sacks and probably had the best DL in the game. He himself had over 27 sacks in 2 years.

 

And they were fun to watch. 

 

Pressure comes from the left, QB moves right just to be sacked on the right side.

If the QB moves up in the pocket, he had one or two DT's waiting for him.

If the DT's bring pressure up the middle...the QB gets nailed by one of the DE's.

 

They complimented each other, they played well together.

 

As I said, leading the league in sacks for 2 straight years, a top 5 pass D and a top 5 D overall in one of those years.

 

Now, if these things are the end all that people profess they are...the Bills should not only have been in the playoffs, they should have been in the conference championship game, looking for a trip to the Dance.

 

But there was no trip to the Dance, there wasn't even a playoff spot.

 

Because the O sucked. And frankly, the O they had was better than what this team showed. And it definitely had less holes to fill, except at QB.

 

Now giving up 2 number 1 picks and $25 million a year in cap space to bolster a D that already gave up the fewest pass yards in the NFL...idk...its a brainer to me. I see it as overkill when the other side of the ball has been severely neglected.

 

I don't diminish the need for a pass rush...its an important part of the D, and an important part of a team, but it isn't the end all that people think it is.

 

If it was, the players on the '13 and '14 teams and probably the '04 team, should at least be sporting conference championship rings. As it was, none of those teams even saw the playoffs.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, FeelingOnYouboty said:

 

That's pretty remarkable considering he was saddled with the worst HC of all time for a majority of that.

 

Tied the Steelers
Lost to the Saints by 3
Lost to the Raiders by 3
Lost to the Bucs by 3
Lost to the Ravens by 2

 

 

Hue was gone after week 8, but, yeah---he was easily and will always be the worst NFL HC of all time.  His 1-31 record will never ever be equaled.  Every poster on this board....heck any civilian off the street could have wandered onto the sideline, put on a headset and won more than a single game over two years on any NFL team.

3 hours ago, Stank_Nasty said:

2-5-1 under Jackson. 5-3 under Williams. 

 

It’s not unrealistic at all for somebody to argue that Jackson’s coaching and sitting of mayfield is a primary reason they weren’t in the playoffs. 

 

Not sayinf they were some sort of shoe in. But it’s debatable they could have at least made it for sure. 

 

 

It would have taken at least 10 wins.  I doubt it.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

The Bills have a bad rep for drafting poorly during the 2000's but they haven't been particularly bad in round 1.............it's just that they've had a tendency to pick a lot of low hanging fruit.   

Interesting......I took a very quick look and decided to rate the 19 1st round picks we had from 2000 until present. I came up with this in terms of rating players:

Excellent: 2

Good: 9

So-So: 2

Poor: 6

Of course these ratings are very subjective.

 

At face value it would seem that they weren't so bad but imo they were just horrible. Most of these "good" players did not help the Bills win football games. Imo, Josh Allen was their best draft selection of the century even if he doesn't develop as much as we want him to. This is how to build a team. Now, if only we can get him some blockers and some weapons we will have a shot.

 

Before drafting Josh we were a dog chasing its tail.

Edited by Bill from NYC
  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

The same seemed to hold when they traded back in the 1st and took EJ as well.... they had two 2nds and picked Woods and Alonso (both good 2nd round picks and decent at worst NFL players). It is almost as though not having a first or knowing they'd reached a bit on a QB in the 1st clarified their thinking in round 2 and they just picked the best players.

 

 

It would be a very interesting subject for a member of the media to talk to former GM's about......IMO.

 

Most GM's end up ultimately being judged by their drafts and specifically their first round picks..........the pressure has to be enormous and the idea that a drafting philosophy can go off the rails after that selection would hardly surprise me.    

 

It could be the post-pick worry about that first selection made that leads to them trying to play catch up with subsequent picks.

 

Or it could be a loss of focus after the elation or disappointment of getting the player in round 1 that they had wanted all along or even one they didn't expect.

 

There just seems to be something that throws Bills GM's off that doesn't seem to happen when they don't have a first round pick(or when they use one on the outlier QB position, as you mentioned)     

 

As you know I've long been of the belief that you could just ALWAYS draft a QB in round 1 and come out better for it in the long run.

 

I know that's not a popular take(the hope around first round picks is intoxicating to fans) but a good portion of that is steeped in my belief that the pressure of planning to use that first round pick elsewhere has seemed to hurt the Bills.

 

And knowing the QB-centric approach is not going to happen.........I'm for a disciplined approach in early rounds.........premium $ positions only........and very open to trades for proven star players.    Doesn't solve all the problems but any good organization needs systems in place and I think the Bills approach has been too random/yearly.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, BillsFan1988 said:

When u have a great player like this that wants to be in Buffalo wants to play for Buffalo and all it takes was 2 first rd pks and some cap space . Man we made a huge mistake not trading for Khalil .  Now we might spend this first on a DE that can't even play in the NFL. This class of DE's especially the ones projected to be on the board at #9 is not very good in my opinion. 

 

Just to think our defense finished #2 in the NFL but we only had 26 sacks on the season. Had we made that trade I think we had 50sks on the season and probably would of won 9 if not 10gms last yr. 

 

I realize Beane wants to build threw the draft but trading for Mack could of opened many doors for us especially in free agency.  I really believe players would look at the Bills as a prime destination.  We still would probably have close to 70mil to fill the holes. I'm pretty sure the Bills kicked the tires on Mack but weren't ready to pay the draft compensation required by the Raiders.

 

Looking back man I wish we traded for Mack.

 

Is that all? lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, bmur66 said:

Gotta have the cake before you put the icing on it

 

Mack is the cake ie the foundation 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

You enjoy your pressures.  I’ll take the guy who is in the discussion for DPOY every year he is healthy.  So would every non Bills fans.  

 

 

Not at the cost.  I would definitely take Mack for 9th overall.  We need a lot more on the other side of the ball.  I noticed you only responded to that point.  My point is that Jerry was actually more disruptive than him this past season.  Whether you or snyone else likes it or not its a fact.  Our D would be amazing with Mack opposite of Jerry.  Oir offense would still suck though.  Its also obvious that a lot of other teams felt the price was too much as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...