Jump to content
Greenseed4

Trade for Mack?

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, T0mShane said:

On the one hand, it’s extremely hard to find another Khalil Mack, even when you have a top-3 pick. On the other hand, the Jets will have a top-3 pick next year with tons of cap space and might want to hang onto both to attract a new coach and GM. 

This is my only issue here, IF the Jets get a top 5 pick AFTER trading it away for Mack it would be impossible to swallow mostly because when you trade a big asset like a 1st round pick for a player you expect that player acquired to be a difference maker, and have a team ready to be ok, but that 1 player you traded for was supposed to be the guy that put you over the hump from 5-8 wins to 8-10 minimum, and then you go out, and sh*t the bed to the tube of 4 wins, and the Raiders are on the clock in the top 5 somewhere with your pick possibly selecting the next Mack 6 years younger, and under control for 5 years on the cheap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Mack is awesome. Pay him a gazillion dollars. Great. Fine. Take that shot. The Jets certainly have the money. But do it in free agency. You do not trade picks away for the right to hand out that sort of deal. That is a recipe for disaster.

This, IF Darnold has a rookie season similar to Wentz, Wilson, Prescott ect. I’d be all in giving BIG money to a Mack, Bell, and whoever else you can afford on contracts that had guaranteed money for 3 years only, after that you have to pay Darnold you have to be more frugal elsewhere, and if your paying Darnold come year 5 your hoping he is the type of franchise QB that can win you games even without top talent all over the field on both sides of the ball.  But make no mistake the Jets have been very public in their plan for the next 4 years, follow the Eagles, and Seahawks model of going all in while your franchise QB isn’t breaking bank, and taking up 15-20% of the cap space, the rest is on Darnold (and Macc by getting the right FA players in here with that cap space, and drafting well) proving the Jets right in drafting Darnold, and handing him the keys to the kingdom expecting him to be good enough to win fairly quickly with a (hopefully if the plan goes good, and the Jets get the right players in FA) highly talented supporting cast like Wilson, and Wentz did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing about wanting to limit contracts to three years.  IMO there is a good chance many FAs looking to bet on themselves will be looking for 2 year deals next year.  That is why Cousins deal is only 3 years.  He wants to be a FA when the next CBA hits.  I do not think that will be the case with a RB getting on in years/carries. 

Looking at the Trumaine Johnson deal, he is 28, and we have an "out" after 3 years.   Please note, that "out" means will be paying that 31 year old $8M to play somewhere else. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Lith said:

Normally, I would agree.  You do not rebuild a young team by trading #1 picks -- they are too valuable.  Chance to get an elite player under team control on an affordable deal; rebuild through the draft.  For Mack, I would be willing to make an exception.  2 biggest needs for this team are OL and Edge.  If we can move a #1 and solve for edge, getting a guy we know is one of the 4 or 5 best edge rushers in the league, with the amount of cap space we have, I am willing to do that in this case.

But I still think it is a huge long shot -- hadn't read the part about the taxes, but I still think Raiders and Mack get a deal done.  Mack to the Jets is a pipe dream.

Here's the difference: the Jets' starting QB for the upcoming 4 years is $8m/yr. Other teams with veteran QBs under new (or about to be new) deals are in for $20m/yr more than that... or about what Mack's extension will cost.

This is the best time to spend.

The only downside is it probably locks the team in to starters like Shell whether he improves or not. If they can swing this for just next year's#1 they have about a 1/4 chance of finding one really good starter with the remaining 2019 picks, and they need at least one guard, a CB2, a NB, a NT, and another LB. Plus any upgrades after addressing the 2018 performance from Shell, Winters, Long, Beachum, and/or TE, RB, WR, DE2 Also remember Leo's pay will be jumping into the $13-18m range.

Even still, if we ended up with a top 10-15 pick, this is the type of player we'd fork over the following year's 2nd to move up to draft without thinking (plus $10m/yr and minus the college/combine warrior bust potential).

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

Here's the difference: the Jets' starting QB for the upcoming 4 years is $8m/yr. Other teams with veteran QBs under new (or about to be new) deals are in for $20m/yr more than that... or about what Mack's extension will cost.

This is the best time to spend.

The only downside is it probably locks the team in to starters like Shell whether he improves or not. If they can swing this for just next year's#1 they have about a 1/4 chance of finding one really good starter with the remaining 2019 picks, and they need at least one guard, a CB2, a NB, a NT, and another LB. Plus any upgrades after addressing the 2018 performance from Shell, Winters, Long, Beachum, and/or TE, RB, WR, DE2 Also remember Leo's pay will be jumping into the $13-18m range.

Even still, if we ended up with a top 10-15 pick, this is the type of player we'd fork over the following year's 2nd to move up to get without thinking (plus $10m/yr and minus the college/combine warrior bust potential).

Don't forget WR.  I believe they will all be unrestricted FAs next year.  Unless you think Stewart and Hansen are starters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

Don't forget WR.  I believe they will all be unrestricted FAs next year.  Unless you think Stewart and Hansen are starters.

I didn't. WR is in there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I didn't. WR is in there.

Yeah.  I saw it in your list.  I thought you meant for upgrades.  IIRC, Anderson, Kearse, Enunwa and Pryor are all UFA in 2019.  They won't just need upgrades, they will need bodies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is why all that cap space is crucial. Take lumps up front while we have the luxury and make the next few years manageable so we can keep adding talent until Sam bends us over when his contract is up. Our window is his rookie deal and we are positioned very well capwise to spend smart and surround Darnold with everything possible to be successful.

I posted a while back that out “starters” on the offensive line can pretty much all be cut with no dead money. They should acquire AND replace all the talent possible. Spend and buy a rock solid O-line so we have a balanced offense that can run the ball well which will help Sam tremendously with his play action and rollouts. Hell, resign some of our guys that we cut as depth if they don’t pan out and will play cheap (winters,Carpenter,beachum,long).

I don’t care what happens to them, just build a stud O-line to help our young QB thrive and do it while we can afford it. Make this window count because I want a F*ckin Super Bowl run starting next year!!! Arrghhhh!!!!! 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Untouchable said:

I don’t think the receiving corps is terrible...but they’re no better than league average. And can you really count on guys like Enunwa and Pryor to stay healthy?

I totally agree with the mindset that you don’t need a dynamic #1 like Julio Jones or Antonio Brown to field a capable offense, but I think you need a bit more than what we currently have.

I think you can, yes - at least 1 of them.  Neither are "chronic injury" guys; Enunwa took a vicious hit and Pryor broke his ankle, but those things happen.  The odds are good that 3 of our top 4 WRs make it through the season healthy, and that's fine.  And the WR corps is a lot better than league average.  I mean, they're easily the best WR group in the division.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, #27TheDominator said:

Yeah.  I saw it in your list.  I thought you meant for upgrades.  IIRC, Anderson, Kearse, Enunwa and Pryor are all UFA in 2019.  They won't just need upgrades, they will need bodies. 

Ah, right. I lumped WR in with the wrong group.

I think they have a decent chance of re-signing Kearse for roughly the same money he's making now (around $5m). Nothing that should break the bank. He was a starter in Seattle when he got a 3 x $4.5m/year with them, and that was when he had a 26 year-old's upside. He won't be able to sell anyone on that upside at age 29 after failing to realize it beforehand despite another 3 years starting. 

Anderson is a FA, but only a RFA after this season. Honestly this is still a perfect time to extend him, when the last thing he's done of note is get arrested. His suspension risk is not going to go down if he goes another season without attracting handcuffs. He's making just $630k this year, and next year - if he doesn't get injured this season...or this pre-season - it'll be in the $3m range (which doesn't get guaranteed until September, and gets dispensed as 16 weekly paychecks with no up-front bonus). Then at age 27 he'll be a full UFA, but the team can still franchise tag him (big money, but again no pay until the season starts). These are the types of ahead-of-the-curve moves Maccagnan needs to learn to make, instead of avoiding risk but then along the way spending the money anyway on the likes of signing or keeping Forte, Breno, Skrine, $10m McCown, $5m Ijalana, etc., followed by paying full UFA money to the player (or his UFA replacement) anyhow.

Enunwa is hard to peg after the neck injury. I still like him as a player, but the way we're going I don't see us bringing him back. He'll either have a good season and want to reward himself with testing free agency (he's earned it), or he'll just be ok in which case they may think he's not worth a veteran contract.

Or anyway it'd be Enunwa or Kearse, but not both. 

Pryor is a great athlete but he's still such a wildcard as a WR it's similar to Enunwa: to see if he's worth extending they'd have to let him play out his 1 year and pay through the nose like with Winters, or he's not worth extending in the first place. I think if he's serviceable as a WR he's an interesting guy to keep around as he reduces the need to carry 3 QBs on the roster, when the 3rd guy is almost always useless and temporary anyway.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Khalil Mack gives this D some identity and a legitimate pass rusher that we haven't had in years. Sign me up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mack would bring an awesomeness to our D. 

With Leo and Shep bringing DL pressure, and our secondary coming into its own, we could have an elite defense unlike anything the league has ever seen

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, RutgersJetFan said:

It's not the concept of landing Khalil Mack that's the problem. Far from it. We've been through this literally twice over the past ten years. Trading picks away, especially picks that land you good talent on the cheap, for high priced talent compounds several problems on top of each other. Most notably the long-term sustainability of the team to compete. The shelf life of these guys is so circumstantial and when you engage in this type of stuff you have overpriced talent coming in, all the money going out, and nothing remotely viable coming in otherwise. There's no backup plan and it causes the team to fill the rest of the roster with low probability players and eventually the roster crashes out.

Trading the second rounders away to land a top QB prospect was fine. That's the one thing you do that sh*t for. Otherwise it's not worth it. And this isn't theoretical either. The Jets have been through this several times over and it's one of the primary reasons (along with absolute dogsh*t drafting) as to why they're about to have their 8th season in a row without a playoff appearance.

All of this may be true, BUT, BUT, three things:

1. The defense is probably a big edge rusher away from being really good. The D-line is stout, they have some ability at the other LB spots, and the secondary has enough personnel to profit if a pass rush develops.

AND

2. Regarding Mack’s salary, the Jets don’t have any young talent worth paying other than Leonard Williams and (presumably) Sam Darnold. They’d be out of Mack’s deal by the time Darnold comes due, anyway. If they lose Lee and Adams in free agency because of Mack’s $18 mil per, who cares? 

3. As far as the lost pick(s) are concerned, presuming the feature cost is next year’s one, we’re most likely using that pick on a DE anyway, and you’re gambling that Bosa/the Clemson dudes/etc can be Mack. 

 

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Like 1
  • Post of the Week 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lupz27 said:

This is my only issue here, IF the Jets get a top 5 pick AFTER trading it away for Mack it would be impossible to swallow mostly because when you trade a big asset like a 1st round pick for a player you expect that player acquired to be a difference maker, and have a team ready to be ok, but that 1 player you traded for was supposed to be the guy that put you over the hump from 5-8 wins to 8-10 minimum, and then you go out, and sh*t the bed to the tube of 4 wins, and the Raiders are on the clock in the top 5 somewhere with your pick possibly selecting the next Mack 6 years younger, and under control for 5 years on the cheap.

Well, yeah, Mack doesn’t get this team to nine wins next year and that’s a good point, but I think if Darnold is any good, you should be competing for playoff runs next year, and a title in 2020. In the scenario where they’d trade next year’s one for Mack, he effectively becomes your draft pick, albeit one that eats up $10 mil more in cap space than whatever rookie EDGE you were gonna take anyway. I just think that there’s no one on the roster who you’re going to have to pay big money too other than Leonard within the next three years, so I’m not too concerned about the financial impact.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, RutgersJetFan said:

It's not the concept of landing Khalil Mack that's the problem. Far from it. We've been through this literally twice over the past ten years. Trading picks away, especially picks that land you good talent on the cheap, for high priced talent compounds several problems on top of each other. Most notably the long-term sustainability of the team to compete. The shelf life of these guys is so circumstantial and when you engage in this type of stuff you have overpriced talent coming in, all the money going out, and nothing remotely viable coming in otherwise. There's no backup plan and it causes the team to fill the rest of the roster with low probability players and eventually the roster crashes out.

Trading the second rounders away to land a top QB prospect was fine. That's the one thing you do that sh*t for. Otherwise it's not worth it. And this isn't theoretical either. The Jets have been through this several times over and it's one of the primary reasons (along with absolute dogsh*t drafting) as to why they're about to have their 8th season in a row without a playoff appearance.

The mitigating factor is that a good QB on a rookie deal is the most valuable commodity in sports. The Ravens, Seahawks, and Eagles have spent around that and ridden it to championships (and the former two have shown how quickly things turn to sh*t once you have to actually pay the man). If Darnold is the real deal, our window opens the second he gets good and closes the second the clock hits triple zeroes on the 2022 season, so for once the damn-the-torpedoes approach actually makes some sense. In the end I come down on this the same way you do, partially for all the best-practices reasons you're citing but mainly because we have so much work to do in areas that are just as important as pass rusher, but this isn't like trading a pick for Brandon Marshall when our QB room is Fitzpatrick-Geno-Petty, you know?

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Larz said:

No 

Draft a pass rusher next year, supposed to be a good class, and use the cap space to build an offense around Darnold 

I wrote this in another thread but it makes more sense here:

The only big dollars Mac should be spending on Defense is a proven generational talent like Aaron Donald if he becomes available at the end of this year. That’s it.

Defense can be drafted. In general, defenders (specifically DEs) and OL can come in and make immediate impacts at a greater rate than offensive skill position guys. Draft an LT, a C, a DE over the next two years. Buy the skill guys over the next few years. If Darnold is the real deal and the OL becomes 90% of what our 2009 OL was, you don’t need all-pros at the skills, just guys who will do their jobs. Those guys come available in FA every year. Go all in on ‘20-‘22 (years 3,4,5 of Darnold’s rookie contract) and win me a god damn super bowl.

  • Upvote 1
  • Post of the Week 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dbatesman said:

The mitigating factor is that a good QB on a rookie deal is the most valuable commodity in sports. The Ravens, Seahawks, and Eagles have spent around that and ridden it to championships (and the former two have shown how quickly things turn to sh*t once you have to actually pay the man). If Darnold is the real deal, our window opens the second he gets good and closes the second the clock hits triple zeroes on the 2022 season, so for once the damn-the-torpedoes approach actually makes some sense. In the end I come down on this the same way you do, partially for all the best-practices reasons you're citing but mainly because we have so much work to do in areas that are just as important as pass rusher, but this isn't like trading a pick for Brandon Marshall when our QB room is Fitzpatrick-Geno-Petty, you know?

Pickwise, what would you say would be fair value in exchange for Mack? Because I think anything more than a 2nd is preposterous. And even with that I'm hesitant. I look at what happened with Tampa and Revis and if that's a realistic thing, which it clearly is, that is no way worth it. There are so many little things that go into ensuring that the new guy fits in well...I just don't know. Who gives a sh*t anyways, right? I'm just an idiot on the Internet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, T0mShane said:

All of this may be true, BUT, BUT, three things:

1. The defense is probably a big edge rusher away from being really good. The D-line is stout, they have some ability at the other LB spots, and the secondary has enough personnel to profit if a pass rush develops.

AND

2. Regarding Mack’s salary, the Jets don’t have any young talent worth paying other than Leonard Williams and (presumably) Sam Darnold. They’d be out of Mack’s deal by the time Darnold comes due, anyway. If they lose Lee and Adams in free agency because of Mack’s $18 mil per, who cares? 

3. As far as the lost pick(s) are concerned, presuming the feature cost is next year’s one, we’re most likely using that pick on a DE anyway, and you’re gambling that Bosa/the Clemson dudes/etc can be Mack. 

 

 

I guess I'll just agree to disagree. Nothing is a sure thing and the risk/reward isn't as even as some are making it out to be. Who the hell knows if Mack isn't a douchebag, for starters. Malcontents that get paid a gazillion dollars don't seem to have great histories, nor do the teams that trade for them. I'm just going off precedent here. I understand the theoretical sh*t and the narratives and those are great, but there are so many cases of this sort of thing going horribly wrong for the team that's giving everything up. The costs of trading away a pick to pay someone that wants a new team AND a ****ton of money seem to stretch on forever and when you look at the cases where it's happened it doesn't seem to favor the team trading for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lmaoo gotta love when jets fans act like Khalil Mack isn’t a top 3 defensive player in this league ..  he isn’t as good jj watt , and Bosa or transcendent or my favorite some college kid who hasn’t proven a thing 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/9/2018 at 1:02 AM, Fantasy Island said:

Trade Adams and Lee for Mack

Throw in Skrine, Leggett, Devin Smith (oh he’s cut already), Winters, Stewart, Donahue, McGuire, McClown and every other castoff 😏

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Losmeister said:

generally, i don't like these threads whih are , eseentially, absolute fantasy.

waste of time.

Mac, Bowles, Adams, Lee, McClown and our #1 for Mack AND Gruden. It’s just a fantasy hwooo hwooo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Creepy Lurker said:

I was just giving my opinion but it’s not like it’s a BAD move at all. It’s not realistic and I’m looking at realistic alternatives. If we pull it off, I would still be happy just not getting hopes up and looking at the “cons” of the deal. 

Although....Gruden seems to be on a mission to destroy the Raiders so anything is possible I guess. 

That was obvious when he cut Hackenberg.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/9/2018 at 12:45 AM, Greenseed4 said:

 

Jets need Edge rusher.....problem solved. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, MaxAF said:

Jets need Edge rusher.....problem solved. 

Nah he isn’t transcendent lmaoooo 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm against trading our #1 (and some) for Mack.  Our main focus should be to protect Darnold and also get him weapons.  If the Jets were further along in their SB quest then you could argue he'd be the "Charles Haley to the Cowboys" type move.  Darnold is a rookie though and the Jets have other holes.  This doesn't feel like the right fit at all.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

I'm against trading our #1 (and some) for Mack.  Our main focus should be to protect Darnold and also get him weapons.  If the Jets were further along in their SB quest then you could argue he'd be the "Charles Haley to the Cowboys" type move.  Darnold is a rookie though and the Jets have other holes.  This doesn't feel like the right fit at all.

I would much rather get the sure fire elite talent .. than hoping we hit on a OLinemen in the draft next year ..  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

I'm against trading our #1 (and some) for Mack.  Our main focus should be to protect Darnold and also get him weapons.  If the Jets were further along in their SB quest then you could argue he'd be the "Charles Haley to the Cowboys" type move.  Darnold is a rookie though and the Jets have other holes.  This doesn't feel like the right fit at all.

hence the reason this thread is fantasy, unrealistic, crazy, funny, etc...  the Jets do not have any combo of players (not named Darnold) that would even be considered in a trade for Mack - a #1 is where this talk starts

O-line has to take priority over pass rush and it's not close - Jets have the best prospect at QB since Namath, and have to protect Sam or go back to the drawing board, Luck is a great case study why pass rush waits, unless they find something under one of those rocks...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Scoop24 said:

Nah he isn’t transcendent lmaoooo 

It would be big money and maybe DPs also. Would definitely inject some intensity into the D. I think it would complete the Defense with a good push up the middle and the Jets secondary kicked up they could run a tight man coverage and blitz almost every down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Scoop24 said:

Lmaoo gotta love when jets fans act like Khalil Mack isn’t a top 3 defensive player in this league ..  he isn’t as good jj watt , and Bosa or transcendent or my favorite some college kid who hasn’t proven a thing 

Exactly who in this thread said Mack wasn't great?  I think the closest was me, saying he wasn't the outright best pass rusher. 

6 hours ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Pickwise, what would you say would be fair value in exchange for Mack? Because I think anything more than a 2nd is preposterous. And even with that I'm hesitant. I look at what happened with Tampa and Revis and if that's a realistic thing, which it clearly is, that is no way worth it. There are so many little things that go into ensuring that the new guy fits in well...I just don't know. Who gives a sh*t anyways, right? I'm just an idiot on the Internet.

That is the trouble with doing it now.  It would be ince to have the player now, but you give up a pick and have a collapse like 2005, 2005, 2007, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2017 and you are giving up a serious pick. Or what happened to Tampa to get us I mean that never happens here, right?  If you do it around the draft you know what you are giving up and you can always trade down to give up a 1st so the other team saves face, but not your top 10 pick.  Think Abraham/Mangold. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, greenwichjetfan said:

I wrote this in another thread but it makes more sense here:

The only big dollars Mac should be spending on Defense is a proven generational talent like Aaron Donald if he becomes available at the end of this year. That’s it.

Defense can be drafted. In general, defenders (specifically DEs) and OL can come in and make immediate impacts at a greater rate than offensive skill position guys. Draft an LT, a C, a DE over the next two years. Buy the skill guys over the next few years. If Darnold is the real deal and the OL becomes 90% of what our 2009 OL was, you don’t need all-pros at the skills, just guys who will do their jobs. Those guys come available in FA every year. Go all in on ‘20-‘22 (years 3,4,5 of Darnold’s rookie contract) and win me a god damn super bowl.

+1

Happy to pay FAs, but pay rare/unique players this heavily in the teens per year, not the likes of Fitz ($12m in 2016 is proportional to $14m in 2018) or Mo, or frankly on the basis of body of work thus far, not Leo either as much as I like him. I'm not sure Trumaine counts as Donald-level elite either, but we'll see, and he's at least at a premium position. 

The problem is we don't have anyone obvious to step up after this year is over, and two of our three starting CBs are FAs again next year without an obvious replacement on the roster, meaning we're hitting the FA circuit for starting CBs yet again next year for at least one of them. (We hope Mr. 4.32 Nickerson can replace Skrine, but his injury concerns aren't exactly disappearing, making him difficult to bet on for a whole season).

Health aside:

  • Likely outright holes after this season (just by expiring contracts or current needs): LG, NT, EDGE, CB2, NB, WR (maybe 2 WRs)
  • Plus other possible holes or upgrades desired/needed after this season, depending on performance in 2018: RB, WR, TE, C, RG, RT, LT*
  • *LT is only a non-hole if Beachum has a repeat of his 2017 season (just ok, and stays healthy). It becomes a hole if Beachum gets injured again, or if he regains his Pittsburgh form and makes the PB, which is easier now with so many players opting out or simply ineligible because they're in the SB; he can then opt out of 2019, and he certainly would unless he and his agent both have severe brain damage)

We have a good amount of cap space, but with this many positions and being short a trio of 2nd rounders it'll go fast with that many reinvestments needed unless we bring back 4/5 of a below-average OL again. This is the cost of using high draft picks on lower-cost positions that should be found in the middle rounds or in FA.

Even still, if we can get an elite player at a top 2-3 demand position, then get him. An elite edge rusher can be the difference-maker in a good secondary looking great, or an ok secondary looking good. There's a good chance we're going to use our 1st rounder on an edge rusher anyway, and if the team relies upon the draft to fill the position, they aren't going to be in a position to hope the ideal player falls to them, meaning they could be trading away another pick/player to move up anyway.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, #27TheDominator said:

Exactly who in this thread said Mack wasn't great?  I think the closest was me, saying he wasn't the outright best pass rusher. 

That is the trouble with doing it now.  It would be ince to have the player now, but you give up a pick and have a collapse like 2005, 2005, 2007, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2017 and you are giving up a serious pick. Or what happened to Tampa to get us I mean that never happens here, right?  If you do it around the draft you know what you are giving up and you can always trade down to give up a 1st so the other team saves face, but not your top 10 pick.  Think Abraham/Mangold. 

Then trade Leo for Mack and keep our 1st rounder to draft a player that'd cost $15m/year in free agency (not to mention save $15-18m/year on a Leo extension). Oak gets an extra cheap year with Leo only being $3m in 2018, so even though they're lopsided in terms of player value, that cost differential may mean we don't have to give up much more (if at all).

I don't worry about the fan popularity (unpopularity) of the move at the time; at the time the popular fan moves were to re-sign Fitzpatrick, bring back Revis, give Mo a gargantuan extension, etc. 

My main reluctance is legit fear we'd use that saved 1st round pick on a guard or a TE, even if it's a top 10 pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our best hope is that Teddy looks good and we swing him to the Jags for Fowler. Mack would be great to have but the price of adding him is astronomical plus he's already 27 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Then trade Leo for Mack and keep our 1st rounder to draft a player that'd cost $15m/year in free agency (not to mention save $15-18m/year on a Leo extension). Oak gets an extra cheap year with Leo only being $3m in 2018, so even though they're lopsided in terms of player value, that cost differential may mean we don't have to give up much more (if at all).

I don't worry about the fan popularity (unpopularity) of the move at the time; at the time the popular fan moves were to re-sign Fitzpatrick, bring back Revis, give Mo a gargantuan extension, etc. 

My main reluctance is legit fear we'd use that saved 1st round pick on a guard or a TE, even if it's a top 10 pick.

My main reluctance is that the "well the pick might not be worth much anyways" angle is exactly why we all jerked off all over ourselves with things like the Braylon Edwards and Marshall deals. There is so, so, so much precedent here for staying away from these types of moves.

Think about it this way, all of the reasons for not doing something like this are based on real life, albeit anecdotal, evidence. All of the reasons for doing it are based in theory. Why bother? The team isn't going to collapse if it doesn't trade away for Khalil Mack. The team isn't going to collapse if it busts on another first rounder. But the team is definitely going to experience a large vacuum of pigeon poo if it trades away valuable assets for Mack and the move goes South. We know all of this from the last 10 years. It's all happened. No need to relive it.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Then trade Leo for Mack and keep our 1st rounder to draft a player that'd cost $15m/year in free agency (not to mention save $15-18m/year on a Leo extension). Oak gets an extra cheap year with Leo only being $3m in 2018, so even though they're lopsided in terms of player value, that cost differential may mean we don't have to give up much more (if at all).

I don't worry about the fan popularity (unpopularity) of the move at the time; at the time the popular fan moves were to re-sign Fitzpatrick, bring back Revis, give Mo a gargantuan extension, etc. 

My main reluctance is legit fear we'd use that saved 1st round pick on a guard or a TE, even if it's a top 10 pick.

The Raiders don't want Leonard Williams , or any defenselineman . That is clearly the strength of their defense.    The Raiders aren't trading K Mack this year.     Let's see De's 1. k Mack, 2. Bruce Irvin- fulltime De now,3  Arden Key( has been impressive)4.  Tank Carridine,5.  Fadol Brown( Brown's GM said they thought about stealing off Raiders practice squad last year. ( will be trade offers for him 6.  DT Justin Ellis ,7.  M Hurst, 8 Pj Hall6'1 310 4.7 36 Bp 38 ' vertical 9. Mario Edwards Jr10.  Ed Vanderdoes 11 Treyvon Hester .  Probably keep 9 and at the most 10.  Probably comes down to F Brown and Carradine for roster spot.   T Hester probably loses out to Vanderdoes( if He proves healthy.   Hester will be on someone else 53 man roster.

Raiders hit the jackpot in this years draft with Pj Hall, Arden Key, and M Hurst. ( Raiders expect all to have impact this year). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




Content Partnership

Yes Network

Site Sponsor

MILE-Social - NJ Social Media & SEO company
×
×
  • Create New...