We called Oak about Mack - Get it Done!!

[Dunnie]

Sign this beast to a record deal ... We have money to burn!

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[ComfortablyNumb]

I was here week two last year when the Raiders played the Jets. ( don't know where you were)    I didn't watch the NFL last year after that game.   Nfl anthem protest disgusted me .  ( boycotted the NFL).  That is a fact. 

 

Can you boycott Jetnation too?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ECURB]

1 hour ago, Doggin94it said:

No, he won't.  He gets hurt this year, he costs himself 20+M in franchise dollars, minimum.  And he's a FA next year either way.

He doesn't set foot on the field without a new deal

Does his contract keep ticking if he never plays? Wouldn't this year not count?

[BigO]

7 hours ago, Raideraholic said:

Hello Reggie Mckenize this is the Jets GM I'm calling to find out what it would take to get K Mack. Click. The Raiders hang up on the Jets . The jets Gm talks for another twenty minutes, not realizing there isn't anyone on the other line.

The Jets don't have enough to get a deal done with the Raiders.

And the Raiders don’t have the common sense to sign one of the NFL’s most electric players. Cheap azz douches.

[BigO]

3 hours ago, Raideraholic said:

I was here week two last year when the Raiders played the Jets. ( don't know where you were)    I didn't watch the NFL last year after that game.   Nfl anthem protest disgusted me .  ( boycotted the NFL).  That is a fact. 

I’m protesting every post you write. Your posts are just as meaningless as these moronic politicians protesting against the players RIGHT to protest. Fact.

[BigO]

1 hour ago, Dunnie said:

Sign this beast to a record deal ... We have money to burn!

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 

Wait till next year and sign him as a FA. It would cost a ton in picks to get him. Not worth mortgaging the bleak future Mac has in store for this team. 

[MykePM]

This isn't news.  It's PR.  Maccagnan called the Raiders to ask about Mack but didn't make an offer?  The only thing that this story accomplishes is making it look like Maccagnan is "looking under every rock".  The Jets still won't have an edge rusher this season, but you can't blame the GM... he really tried!

(And I like Maccagnan)

[Fantasy Island]

Trade Jamal Adams, Darron Lee and Ardarius Stewart to Oakland for Khalil Mack and their 5th round pick in 2021.

[BigO]

2 minutes ago, Fantasy Island said:

Trade Jamal Adams, Darron Lee and Ardarius Stewart to Oakland for Khalil Mack and their 5th round pick in 2021.

Are you serious? I can’t tell when you’re being facetious or serious. Who do you think the Raiders GM is - Mac? Throw in our 2nd rounder and it’s a deal ?

[BornJetsFan1983]

Let's just draft a guy next year, I mean I get it, but no thanks, plus he aint going nowear

[TuscanyTile2]

10 hours ago, Losmeister said:

Lee Maye Adams...     I say you got something there, Son!

 

[LockeJET]

5 hours ago, BigO said:

Wait till next year and sign him as a FA. It would cost a ton in picks to get him. Not worth mortgaging the bleak future Mac has in store for this team. 

It will still cost picks. He will 100% be franchised. 

[Barry McCockinner]

5 hours ago, ECURB said:

Does his contract keep ticking if he never plays? Wouldn't this year not count?

I believe this is how it works. Not sure on that though.

[Raideraholic]

8 hours ago, Doggin94it said:

No, he won't.  He gets hurt this year, he costs himself 20+M in franchise dollars, minimum.  And he's a FA next year either way.

He doesn't set foot on the field without a new deal

He isn't walking away from 13.8 million dollars this year.( under contract) He isn't a true free agent as the Raiders will use the franchise tag the next two years. ( will make less under the tag than the Raiders have offered him).    

The Raiders control K Mack the next three years if they want to.  They could be hard arses but why would you want to tick off your captain.  

 The Raiders are going to pay him 20 million per year, but they aren't going to,pay him 25 million.       Without a doubt one of the best defenders in the NFL, but he isn't a Qb.  No defensive player worth 25 million per year.    

[jetsfansince7]

That’s a close one because of Leo’s upcoming contract and the expectation that Adams will studify in year 2. There’s better depth at safety but I would go ahead and trade Leo and the 1st IF Mac does not intend to resign Leo. No brainer.

Then who fills Leo’s spot. We have more depth at safety


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[CanadaSteve]

14 hours ago, prime21 said:

BREAKING: #Jets reach out to Raiders to express interest in trading for disgruntled All-Pro Khalil Mack, per sources.

NYJ is going big-game hunting.

IS he doing this on purpose?  I mean, he is suppose to be a writer. 

NYJ ARE going big-game hunting.

[Lith]

10 hours ago, Raideraholic said:

Raiders are willing to pay him 20 million per year, he wants more than that.  A Donald is looking for supposedly 25 per year( Qb money) Mack asking price should be right around there.  Five extra million at four year contract = 20 extra million dollars.

The Raiders can hold on to K Mack for at least three more years . If he wants security he has to accept the fact as great as he is no defense player worth that much coin. k Mack isn't walking away from 13.8 million this year,

I am talking cap hit, not average salary.  If the Jets, or anyone else, were able to make a deal for hm, they probably would have to structure it with a lower cap hit, especially for 2018.  Teams just don't have $20MM + of available space right now -- not without re-structuring or cutting other guys.  You could do a 5 year $100MM + deal with less than a $20MM cap hit in the first couple of years and defer the hit to the later years when the cap is likely to increase.  

That said, I agree with you.  Longshot that the Raiders trade Mack.

[ljr]

14 hours ago, Mogglez said:

I'll eat an entire orange, with the rine still on it, and post a video of it here for all of you to watch if we get Khalil Mack, that's how sure I am that this isn't happening (unfortunately).

Will you also wear a ballerina outfit & have written in lipstick on your forehead "I kneel for Michael Sam in the locker-room while the National Anthem plays" ?

[Jetsfan80]

He's a future Hall of Famer.  Therefore its a pipe dream that we'll land him.  But we at least have to try.  And its fun to dream. 

[Jetsfan80]

12 hours ago, LockeJET said:

Just curious here but if the Raiders wanted a player and a first rounder would you trade Adams and a 1st or Leo and a first for Mack?

In a f***ing heartbeat. 

[Jetsfan80]

12 hours ago, LockeJET said:

Just curious here but if the Raiders wanted a player and a first rounder would you trade Adams and a 1st or Leo and a first for Mack?

 

11 hours ago, Vader said:

That’s a close one because of Leo’s upcoming contract and the expectation that Adams will studify in year 2. There’s better depth at safety but I would go ahead and trade Leo and the 1st IF Mac does not intend to resign Leo. No brainer. 

 

11 hours ago, GreenFish said:

I wouldn’t. You also have to factor in the money Mack would get. So this trade is essentially Jamal, Leo and let’s say a free agent signing like Barr.. Assuming we get a player of Leo’s caliber with our first in 2019. So I wouldn’t trade either player plus a 1st.

 

You 2 are insane.  Adams has the trade value of a 2nd-3rd rounder.  Williams isn't the player he was promised to be.  Mack is a future HOFer.  The Raiders would laugh at either offer. 

[Jetsfan80]

11 hours ago, Lith said:

Mack is a great player, but the issue is the cost.  Given that there will be a huge market for him, we would likely have to give up two premium picks.  If not our next two ones, then probably a 2019 1 and either a 2019 3 or a 2020 2.  On top of that, we have to pay him -- assume a cap hit of $17MM each of the next two seasons. 

Instead of going into 2019 with $80MM cap space, we would be below $50MM due to Mack's 2018 and 2019 cap hits; and be down 3 premium picks in the next two seasons.  At the end of this season, McCown, Bridgewater, Enunwa, Pryor, Kearse, Carpenter, Powell, Henry Anderson, McLendon, Skrine and Claiborne are all free agents.  Plus we all want to upgrade the OL.  $50MM for a back-up QB, LT, RG, 1 or 2WRs, 1 or 2 CBs and a DL.  We would never be able to fill all of these holes in FA. 

I love Mack.  Great player.  But I am not willing to pay the price.

 

While Darnold is on a cheap rookie deal, this would be the time where we can afford to pay a non-QB insane money.  Therefore I think we're one of the few teams that would be able to make this happen in that sense.

The picks are the bigger concern to me.  With so many teams interested in Mack, there's no way we'd be able to give up a bevy of picks for him that would beat other offers, if indeed the Raiders really are looking to move him.  The Browns, on the other hand, are in fine shape to do something like that. 

[Jetsfan80]

11 hours ago, Lith said:

To me, this is the type of deal that a team makes if it is one player away.  If you are GB with a 35 year old Aaron Rodgers, you go all in for Mack.  We are not in that position.  I would pass.

The Packers are negotiating Rodgers' new deal as we speak.  They wouldn't be able to afford TWO players at QB money. 

Proven teams with QB's who have already gotten mega deals are precisely the teams that would NOT be able to make this move.

No, we're not one player away.  But Mack is only 27.  The thinking is you go get him, give him a mega deal and get as much as you can out of him, then he comes off the books by the time Darnold's rookie deal ends.  We get 4-5 years of HOF-level pass rush while Darnold develops into the franchise QB. 

[Sperm Edwards]

13 hours ago, bla bla bla said:

I’d trade a 1st and 3rd no questions asked (if they were in different years even better). Give him a 3 year fully guaranteed deal $60M. I want a LT with that 1st rounder but Mack is too good to pass up.

Certainly won’t lose any sleep if we don’t get him because I like the OLB in FA and the LT in the 1st method.

Just curious, if you're willing to pay that why wouldn't you make it 5 years $100m with $60m guaranteed? 

[Sperm Edwards]

11 hours ago, Lith said:

Mack is a great player, but the issue is the cost.  Given that there will be a huge market for him, we would likely have to give up two premium picks.  If not our next two ones, then probably a 2019 1 and either a 2019 3 or a 2020 2.  On top of that, we have to pay him -- assume a cap hit of $17MM each of the next two seasons. 

Instead of going into 2019 with $80MM cap space, we would be below $50MM due to Mack's 2018 and 2019 cap hits; and be down 3 premium picks in the next two seasons.  At the end of this season, McCown, Bridgewater, Enunwa, Pryor, Kearse, Carpenter, Powell, Henry Anderson, McLendon, Skrine and Claiborne are all free agents.  Plus we all want to upgrade the OL.  $50MM for a back-up QB, LT, RG, 1 or 2WRs, 1 or 2 CBs and a DL.  We would never be able to fill all of these holes in FA. 

I love Mack.  Great player.  But I am not willing to pay the price.

He's not going to take $17m/year. If there's been any actual offer made, I'm sure Oakland already offered at least that. $17m/year is what the Jets handed Mo just over 2 years ago.

He's more 2015 Von Miller than 2015 Mo Wilkerson, and in the summer of 2016 Miller got $19.8m/year the same time Mo got a few million per less.

My guess is he's likely looking for something a lot closer to $22m/year than $17m/year.

One does not rent Josh McCown for 1 year $10m then balk at paying Mack because we might not then have enough cap room left.

[Creepy Lurker]

8 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Just curious, if you're willing to pay that why wouldn't you make it 5 years $100m with $60m guaranteed? 

Wouldn’t this be an appropriate deal? I’m sure he sees that Oakland has him Dead to rights and he can’t recoup the lost money from 5th year option and franchise tag for 1-2 years. So I don’t think it would cost more than that and we can actually afford it. We are actually in danger of losing rolled over cap money if we don’t sign some solid FAs next year so we can actually handle this. 

PLUS, can’t a pass rushing DE/OLB play well til about age 32? His first 4 years (27-30) would be prime time and we could always re-negotiate/cut the last year if he really declines. 

Again, I’m normally not for a move like this but we have the cap space, a 5 year window and I don’t think anyone here is worried that it’ll cost us he ability to draft the next Darron Lee or misuse draft position and draft a DT or SS. Mac hasn’t done anything but the Darnold trade to give me confidence in his drafting. 

I also, worry that an “all-in” move like this now will prolong Bowles and Mac being here which may ruin our 5 year window anyways. I think we all agree that Mac is here for at least a few years and will get to pick his own coach if Bowles is fired so we are probably stuck with Mac for a while and since he would be drafting, trade the picks. Big deal. Cap space and our ability to afford a player like this is our true advantage right now, not draft capital. 

 

 

 

[Sperm Edwards]

7 hours ago, Fantasy Island said:

Trade Jamal Adams, Darron Lee and Ardarius Stewart to Oakland for Khalil Mack and their 5th round pick in 2021.

 

7 hours ago, BigO said:

Are you serious? I can’t tell when you’re being facetious or serious. Who do you think the Raiders GM is - Mac? Throw in our 2nd rounder and it’s a deal ?

I think his not-so-subtle point is from 2016-2017 this is what we’ve done with our own recent 2 firsts plus throw a third for good measure. Plus we already traded them Hackenberg for a conditional 7th we won’t receive.

[Jet Nut]

15 hours ago, Raideraholic said:

Hello Reggie Mckenize this is the Jets GM I'm calling to find out what it would take to get K Mack. Click. The Raiders hang up on the Jets . The jets Gm talks for another twenty minutes, not realizing there isn't anyone on the other line.

The Jets don't have enough to get a deal done with the Raiders.

Problem for you is your team doesn't have enough cash to get it done at the negotiating table with Mack.  So McKenzie would be a moron if he hangs up on anybody.  

 

[Jet Nut]

15 hours ago, Mogglez said:

I'll eat an entire orange, with the rine still on it, and post a video of it here for all of you to watch if we get Khalil Mack, that's how sure I am that this isn't happening (unfortunately).

I'd bet you said the same thing about the  chances that Jets were getting Darnold in the draft a year ago.

[Lith]

12 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

He's not going to take $17m/year. If there's been any actual offer made, I'm sure Oakland already offered at least that. $17m/year is what the Jets handed Mo just over 2 years ago.

He's more 2015 Von Miller than 2015 Mo Wilkerson, and in the summer of 2016 Miller got $19.8m/year the same time Mo got a few million per less.

My guess is he's likely looking for something a lot closer to $22m/year than $17m/year.

One does not rent Josh McCown for 1 year $10m then balk at paying Mack because we might not then have enough cap room left.

I was not suggesting a $17MM annual average contract.  Was just talking about cap hit for this year and next.  I estimated on the low side -- but it just makes the cost of acquiring him that much more prohibitive.  We are talking about 2 premium draft picks and the money that could be used to sign another 4 players.  That is 6 potential starters.  All to acquire Mack.  He is a great player, but it is not a deal I would want done.

[Sperm Edwards]

2 hours ago, Creepy Lurker said:

Wouldn’t this be an appropriate deal? I’m sure he sees that Oakland has him Dead to rights and he can’t recoup the lost money from 5th year option and franchise tag for 1-2 years. So I don’t think it would cost more than that and we can actually afford it. We are actually in danger of losing rolled over cap money if we don’t sign some solid FAs next year so we can actually handle this. 

PLUS, can’t a pass rushing DE/OLB play well til about age 32? His first 4 years (27-30) would be prime time and we could always re-negotiate/cut the last year if he really declines. 

Again, I’m normally not for a move like this but we have the cap space, a 5 year window and I don’t think anyone here is worried that it’ll cost us he ability to draft the next Darron Lee or misuse draft position and draft a DT or SS. Mac hasn’t done anything but the Darnold trade to give me confidence in his drafting. 

I also, worry that an “all-in” move like this now will prolong Bowles and Mac being here which may ruin our 5 year window anyways. I think we all agree that Mac is here for at least a few years and will get to pick his own coach if Bowles is fired so we are probably stuck with Mac for a while and since he would be drafting, trade the picks. Big deal. Cap space and our ability to afford a player like this is our true advantage right now, not draft capital. 

 

 

 

Well my comment was more “Why cut our own balls off after 3 years?”

I’m not trading a pair of 1s for a 3 year rental plus maybe a franchise tag or two that’ll have him holding out all summer if used. Not to mention if he won’t accept 2 more years at $20m added in then he’ll want no-tagging language put in. So this would be 3 years then we have no more rights to him than anyone else.

Given our typical drafting, I’m on board for a trade if Oakland is somehow willing. Ooh we won’t be able to draft a guard next year and a TE or another DT the year after.

Yeah I totally agree get Mack if we can. IMO people have unrealistic ideas of what draft picks are worth before they’re made, and are then too accepting of them being just-ok after they’re made.

[Sperm Edwards]

3 minutes ago, Lith said:

I was not suggesting a $17MM annual average contract.  Was just talking about cap hit for this year and next.  I estimated on the low side -- but it just makes the cost of acquiring him that much more prohibitive.  We are talking about 2 premium draft picks and the money that could be used to sign another 4 players.  That is 6 potential starters.  All to acquire Mack.  He is a great player, but it is not a deal I would want done.

Are we cleaning house in the FO and coaching and scouting before those picks are made? Makes all the difference.

[F00tballGuy69]

Would prefer to go after Fowler for pennies on the dollar, or simply wait until the offseason to go after Mack.  We're already down a 2nd rounder next year, and we can't afford to give up any more premium picks.  Save the picks and pick players who will aid the development of our QB.

[Jet Nut]

11 hours ago, Lith said:

I get that he is a proven player.  Great impact player.  But if we trade for him, we still have to pay him.  Assuming a $17 - $18 mil cap hit, we won't have tons of cap anymore.  $35MM of our cap would have to go to Mack  for the 18 & 19 seasons.  We will have a QB, an Edge and a ton of holes with limited cap space.

To me, this is the type of deal that a team makes if it is one player away.  If you are GB with a 35 year old Aaron Rodgers, you go all in for Mack.  We are not in that position.  I would pass.

Money isn't an issue,  we have more than enough cap room to easily sign him and we have a young roster.  Someone is going to pay him, someone with a lot less cap room than us.  

Every year since Parcells I read about fear of the cap and hardly ever is it even close to being a problem.  We can easily get to over $100 mil under the cap and we're worried about a 18 mil per hit for the most dominant D player? 

[Philc1]

50 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

 

 

You 2 are insane.  Adams has the trade value of a 2nd-3rd rounder.  Williams isn't the player he was promised to be.  Mack is a future HOFer.  The Raiders would laugh at either offer. 

So offer both plus next year’s first round pick

 

We can start Pennel and Shepherd at DE and Adams and his zero picks won’t be missed