Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
King P

Given Maccagnan's draft approach + having an extra 3rd, I don't see why anybody should be against trading for Mack

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I know we've talked about Mack a bit, but I figured I'd discuss this topic from a different point of view that I'm not sure has been brought up (it might have and I just missed). I wanna focus more on Macc than Mack for a second. Not to crap all over him, but just to give a reminder of his perspective so that a trade for Mack can be rationalized.

Now this is assuming the Raiders are willing to trade Mack and lower their demands. I'm completely against trading more and 1 1st. But if we  this can get him for a 1st and a 3rd, I'm all for it. Here's my rationale.

I'm not one to play Nostradamus, but I believe that the Jets will have a high pick in 2019. Not saying Top 5 necessarily, but Top 10 most likely. Now remember, Macc has definitely shown that he's a BPA type of guy. Now who will be the best player available? I can't tell you that exactly. But if we were to take an educated guess, it will most likely come down to either an edge rusher (next class is deep with pass rushers) or an offensive lineman (more specifically a left tackle).

Now I bet most of us would rather go OT. We've all complained about our porous O-Line and even made threads about crappy the line is (*waves* hi @Paradis). So of course we would want to finally address that. But now, here's where Maccagnan's draft philosophy comes into play...

Macc has been on record stating that he basically doesn't place high value on O-Lineman. All you'd have to do is look at his track record to see that. But if you need even more proof, I leave you with this quote from our GM himself...

"I think historically, when you look at teams that are successful, one of the things they do in the draft is they find value in offensive line prospects that they can grow and develop. They don't always have to be high picks. Alot of teams are very successful developing an offensive line through the draft - picks from the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th round, and sometimes even college free agents."

There you have it folks. The man believes you can go O-Line in the mid and late rounds. You know what this tells me? It tells me that if Macc with our 1st round pick is given the choices between edge rusher and OT, put your money on the edge rusher being selected.

So this is where Khalil Mack comes into play. Because as I explained, edge rusher will most likely be the selection in next year's draft. If that's the case, why use that 1st rounder on a prospect that may or may not be a bust, may or may not be as good as Khalil Mack, when we can just get there sure thing in Khalil Mack? You know 90% of you have been yearning for a legit pass rusher since John Abraham was our last one. So if one was obtainable, you wouldn't want him?

I'll leave you with a quote from my main man, The Great Peter Griffin....

 

family_guy.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, King P said:

I know we've talked about Mack a bit, but I figured I'd discuss this topic from a different point of view that I'm not sure has been brought up (it might have and I just missed). I wanna focus more on Macc than Mack for a second. Not to crap all over him, but just to give a reminder of his perspective so that a trade for Mack can be rationalized.

Now this is assuming the Raiders are willing to trade Mack and lower their demands. I'm completely against trading more and 1 1st. But if we  this can get him for a 1st and a 3rd, I'm all for it. Here's my rationale.

I'm not one to play Nostradamus, but I believe that the Jets will have a high pick in 2015. Not saying Top 5 necessarily, but Top 10 most likely. Now remember, Macc has definitely shown that he's a BPA type of guy. Now who will be the best player available? I can't tell you that exactly. But if we were to take an educated guess, it will most likely come down to either an edge rusher (next class is deep with pass rushers) or an offensive lineman (more specifically a left tackle).

Now I bet most of us would rather go OT. We've all complained about our porous O-Line and even made threads about crappy the line is (*waves* hi @Paradis). So of course we would want to finally address that. But now, here's where Maccagnan's draft philosophy comes into play...

Macc has been on record stating that he basically doesn't place high value on O-Lineman. All you'd have to do is look at his track record to see that. But if you need even more proof, I leave you with this quote from our GM himself...

"I think historically, when you look at teams that are successful, one of the things they do in the draft is they find value in offensive line prospects that they can grow and develop. They don't always have to be high picks. Alot of teams are very successful developing an offensive line through the draft - picks from the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th round, and sometimes even college free agents."

There you have it folks. The man believes you can go O-Line in the mid and late rounds. You know what this tells me? It tells me that if Macc with our 1st round pick is given the choices between edge rusher and OT, put your money on the edge rusher being selected.

So this is where Khalil Mack comes into play. Because as I explained, edge rusher will most likely be the selection in next year's draft. If that's the case, why use that 1st rounder on a prospect that may or may not be a bust, may or may not be as good as Khalil Mack, when we can just get there sure thing in Khalil Mack? You know 90% of you have been yearning for a legit pass rusher since John Abraham was our last one. So if one was obtainable, you wouldn't want him?

I'll leave you with a quote from my main man, The Great Peter Griffin....

 

family_guy.jpg

If we can get Mack for a 1st and 3rd, I would be thrilled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue with trading for Mack is that he's a double whammy -- you're giving up serious compensation for the trade while at the same time giving one of the biggest contracts in league history. By contrast the draft pick would be under team control at an affordable rate for five years while a FA signing costs nothing in draft capital.

That said, if we could get him for a 1st and a 3rd I'd do it as well. He's arguably the best defensive player in the league at a position of huge need -- with him I think we have a real shot at an elite defense and we have the cap room. Having a rookie QB on his first contract is a huge competitive advantage, now's the time to spend. 

I'm just not sure that compensation gets it done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Raiders are really refusing to come down from asking for two first rounders, then they aren't going to have a trading partner anytime soon. If/when they come down from that craziness, I think a 1st and 3rd for Mack is a realistic target. 

(I'm still not convinced that they are actually going to trade him)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

The issue with trading for Mack is that he's a double whammy -- you're giving up serious compensation for the trade while at the same time giving one of the biggest contracts in league history. By contrast the draft pick would be under team control at an affordable rate for five years while a FA signing costs nothing in draft capital.

That said, if we could get him for a 1st and a 3rd I'd do it as well. He's arguably the best defensive player in the league at a position of huge need -- with him I think we have a real shot at an elite defense and we have the cap room. Having a rookie QB on his first contract is a huge competitive advantage, now's the time to spend. 

I'm just not sure that compensation gets it done.

I agree.

The potential contract really scares me though, but maybe it shouldn't. It's just so risky hamstringing yourself to one player like the Jets would have to do with Mack... 

DE/pass rusher is a huge need for sure, but they have other needs too that they need to sort out in the next few seasons if they want to win. I'm wary of going all-in on one position and having to mostly neglect others... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're the perfect team to get Mack, because we're one of the few that can afford his contract.  With a rookie QB on the first year of his rookie deal, and $90M in cap space next season, its an absolute MUST to go hard after Mack if the price is anything reasonable.  This is the exact caliber of player to spend QB money on rather than overpay a few slightly above average alternatives in free agency. 

I'd gladly give up two firsts for Mack.  He's a future HOFer.  Use the remaining cap space to upgrade the Offensive Line, and we're golden.  Instant contenders. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is absolutely no reason the Raiders have to trade Mack right now.  They have the leverage.  They can control him till he’s 30 years old.  

 

I get why Mack is holding out for dear life, this will be his only payday given his age.  I just don’t want to be the team that gives him that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want up and coming players that are trying to earn that big contract. Mack has earned it so once he gets it who’s to say he doesn’t pull a Wilkerson?  If the Jets were 1 player away from having a super bowl contending team then Yes go get him. We are not. I think the Jets learned their lesson with Wilkerson. How hard do u think Mack is gonna play when the Jets are 5-7 and basically out of the playoff race and he has this huge bank account? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

The issue with trading for Mack is that he's a double whammy -- you're giving up serious compensation for the trade while at the same time giving one of the biggest contracts in league history. By contrast the draft pick would be under team control at an affordable rate for five years while a FA signing costs nothing in draft capital.

That said, if we could get him for a 1st and a 3rd I'd do it as well. He's arguably the best defensive player in the league at a position of huge need -- with him I think we have a real shot at an elite defense and we have the cap room. Having a rookie QB on his first contract is a huge competitive advantage, now's the time to spend. 

I'm just not sure that compensation gets it done.

Mack might cost a pretty penny, but he's worth every cent he gets.

The draft pick we get would be under control at an affordable rate, but what if busts? Our luck with drafting edge rushers hasn't been great, why not go with the sure thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I know guys like Mack  don't come along often but if we make this trade now and we see our young rookie quarterback getting smashed behind a weak o- line I think people will be singing a different tune. I would not make this trade, if Sam turns out to be the franchise quarterback we hope the only thing I want Mac to do is protect him and  surround him with the right playmakers.  I would love Mack on this team but to me a possible FQB comes first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Raiders & Gruden decide to trade Mack he's coming to the Jets. Not only can the Jets pay him but would u rather have the Jets draft picks or Green Bay's draft picks? Would you rather be somewhere probably top 10, maybe top 3 or picking like 28-32? 1st & 3rd is a NO BRAINER with 90 million in cap space. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, FTL Jet Fan said:

 I know guys like Mack  don't come along often but if we make this trade now and we see our young rookie quarterback getting smashed behind a weak o- line I think people will be singing a different tune.

Breh, did you even read my original post? Of course we would love to build up the O-Line. But our GM is on record as saying he prefers to build the mid/late rounds. He's most likely not going OL in the 1st. Which is the rational in trading for Mack. There's no difference maker at OL available to help us right now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's also a matter of timing. This could carry on into October. Does Mac want to wait that far into the season for Oakland to fold? I think Mac wants someone in here asap. Donte Fowler seems to me more likely at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well now I'm willing to give up less since the Raiders might NEED a trade partner. A first and a fourth plus one of our safeties seems like enough.

After that you sign Mack to a 5-year $100 Million extension with $83 million guaranteed after guaranteeing this year's salary and most of it paid out in the first 4 years of the deal as a bonus. This gives you control of Mack for 6 years since its an extension. Guarantee his $13+ for the year and pay out $50 million of his guarantees over 3 years leaving you to pay out $20 million guaranteed + almost $30 million salary from years 4-6 and making him tradable/ cuttable after year 4. This should leave us with like $50 million in cap space going into next off season. That should be enough to work on Shell's, Beachum's, Anderson's and Enunwa's deal.

Share this post


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

Breh, did you even read my original post? Of course we would love to build up the O-Line. But our GM is on record as saying he prefers to build the mid/late rounds. He's most likely not going OL in the 1st. Which is the rational in trading for Mack. There's no difference maker at OL available to help us right now

I agree with what your saying, there is no way Mac does not put a priority on the o-line next year  if Sam is getting killed back there. The extra third helps but not having a second, to me, in my opinion it's just a risky trade. The thing is we just don't know how the o- line is going to hold up this year, that's where my hesitation is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, King P said:

Mack might cost a pretty penny, but he's worth every cent he gets.

The draft pick we get would be under control at an affordable rate, but what if busts? Our luck with drafting edge rushers hasn't been great, why not go with the sure thing?

I agree he would live up to the contract. I think he's got that kind of fire.

But, is it worth it for the Jets? I don't know the answer. Maybe?

For what it might cost to get him, could the Jets instead sign 2 or 3 guys for other spots? Maybe someone a tier below Mack and also some help elsewhere?

Is he THAT good that he's worth having to skimp at other roster spots... I don't know the answer. Maybe it's yes! But it's a concern too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

No he's not. He's 27. This is the "in his prime" mega deal. When you don't want him is the next deal, when he's 31.

We have a 21 year old quarterback and Brady is still in our division. He’ll be in his 30s when we are ready to complete for a super bowl. 

The fact that the Raiders- a win now team are showing no urgency to get Mack on the field should tell you a lot about how good this guy really is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, nico002 said:

We have a 21 year old quarterback and Brady is still in our division. He’ll be in his 30s when we are ready to complete for a super bowl. 

I don't really agree with that. Teams turn it around quick in the NFL. Once you have the QB you can add other pieces quickly.

5 minutes ago, nico002 said:

The fact that the Raiders- a win now team are showing no urgency to get Mack on the field should tell you a lot about how good this guy really is.

Totally different argument, but worth considering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't agree with OP's rationale but I would give a 1 and a 3 for Mack. Doubt the Raiders capitulate however so it is probably moot.

Personally, I would be just as happy with a top tier WR or OL in next year's draft.

Share this post


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

If the Raiders are really refusing to come down from asking for two first rounders, then they aren't going to have a trading partner anytime soon. If/when they come down from that craziness, I think a 1st and 3rd for Mack is a realistic target. 

(I'm still not convinced that they are actually going to trade him)

After what Donald just got paid Mack's leverage went up.  Not sure how many teams have the cap space to sign him to that kind of money (including the Raiders)

Share this post


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

I'm not one to play Nostradamus, but I believe that the Jets will have a high pick in 2015

stopped reading

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Losmeister said:

stopped reading

😂😂😂 I was having a convo about something that happened in 2015 while I was writing this up and put in that year without even realizing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nico002 said:

If he was 24- yes. He’s too old guys 

2018: Age 27

2019: 28

2020: 29

2021: 30

Sure I wish Mack was 25 but getting him for ages 27 thru 30 isn’t terrible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is tough but I’m leaning towards Not shelling out more mega resources(draft picks AND HUGE contract) after trading up to get Darnold. We also absolutely can’t “bail out” Bowles. Enough’s enough with this staff.

2018 is an evaluation year now that we got our future QB and it will determine whether we make changes at coach, GM or both. It’s not fair to sacrifice the future even more before we know that we have the proper coach and gm in place. The draft may be rich with pass rushers and we may have a high pick. Plus we will maintain flexibility for the next disgruntled star that may shake free due to contract negotiations. I know it’s rare that they are let go but we can fill so many holes with the draft choices and value free agents if we sit tight. 

So many variables and as much as I’d like Mack, we need to know how we are moving forward as a team and who is coming along before we go all in. This coaching staff and GM haven’t earned enough to blow resources 2 times in one offseason. They shouldn’t have to do it twice. That sounds like desperation which is short sighted which is what they are concerned about now for their own sakes. They have their own best interests in mind and Chris Johnson needs to keep a leash on them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it matter though? Teams could just double Mack every play and still have no fear of our rush....I just think the timing is off for him to be a Jet...OL and playmakers are a higher priority....Id rather lose games 34-31 with a safe Darnold than lose 13-10 with a Darnold getting butalized and sacked 4 or 5 times a game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



Content Partnership

Yes Network

Websites, SEO & Social Media

Mile Social

Get Winning Picks

×