varjet Posted September 4, 2018 Share Posted September 4, 2018 I think the Bears are an interesting example, and I would rather have Darnold than Trubisky. The Bears realized that they had a good QB under a rookie contract, and then replaced the defensive HC for a virtual OC/HC, and also felt compelled to invest in Khalil Mack, basically paying him the money saved from paying a veteran QB. The Raiders, and other teams with highly-paid QBs, have a harder time paying defenders and other players premier contracts. FWIW, the Bears also have a decent OL, a decent defense, and some RBs. I see the Jets having the same revelation next year, but will need to pay up for OL and EDGE, which is doable. Quite frankly, I can see other teams giving up their EDGE if they other pieces are not already there. The Jets are behind the Bears in development, and the cost of Mack in draft picks and cap space was likely not worth it. But next year Mac or his replacement need to be very aggressive in building in team around Darnold, regardless of how Darnold looks this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetstream23 Posted September 4, 2018 Share Posted September 4, 2018 8 minutes ago, varjet said: I think the Bears are an interesting example, and I would rather have Darnold than Trubisky. The Bears realized that they had a good QB under a rookie contract, and then replaced the defensive HC for a virtual OC/HC, and also felt compelled to invest in Khalil Mack, basically paying him the money saved from paying a veteran QB. The Raiders, and other teams with highly-paid QBs, have a harder time paying defenders and other players premier contracts. FWIW, the Bears also have a decent OL, a decent defense, and some RBs. I see the Jets having the same revelation next year, but will need to pay up for OL and EDGE, which is doable. Quite frankly, I can see other teams giving up their EDGE if they other pieces are not already there. The Jets are behind the Bears in development, and the cost of Mack in draft picks and cap space was likely not worth it. But next year Mac or his replacement need to be very aggressive in building in team around Darnold, regardless of how Darnold looks this year. I think the Jets were in the running but just couldn't pony up as much Draft compensation as the Bears after trading next year's #2 already. I'd guess the Jets were probably the second or third most competitive team.....maybe next year's 1 and a 2020 3rd rounder? Macc knows that the 5-year window of a cheap Sam Darnold can go by faster than you expect and that may be why he was open to overlapping Mack with Darnold on a 5-year deal but again, just too much Draft compensation is my guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASH1962 Posted September 4, 2018 Share Posted September 4, 2018 Sorry I totally disagree. So the Bears went on the clock with 2019 first round pick already and got a future HOF'er. This is guaranteed barring catastrophic injury. So big effing deal, they do not pick in May's crap shoot. So they basically traded their 2020 #1 and 3, got back a 25 year old future HOF'er and a #2. Guys, this is a no brainer to me. I do this trade ANY FRIGGIN DAY OF THE WEEK and so would Mac (or any competent GM) have, however, I believe the Raiders did not want Mack in the AFC and were only trading him to the NFC. You telling me you would not trade 2 #'1's and a 3 to the Browns for Miles Garrett and a #2? LOL in a Country minute I would. These players are generational and not available every season or every 5 seasons actually. This obsession with draft picks is mind boggling, it really is. Who better would anyone get with #1 picks then Kalil Mack? The whole thing is ludicrous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bealeb319 Posted September 4, 2018 Share Posted September 4, 2018 Sorry I totally disagree. So the Bears went on the clock with 2019 first round pick already and got a future HOF'er. This is guaranteed barring catastrophic injury. So big effing deal, they do not pick in May's crap shoot. So they basically traded their 2020 #1 and 3, got back a 25 year old future HOF'er and a #2. Guys, this is a no brainer to me. I do this trade ANY FRIGGIN DAY OF THE WEEK and so would Mac (or any competent GM) have, however, I believe the Raiders did not want Mack in the AFC and were only trading him to the NFC. You telling me you would not trade 2 #'1's and a 3 to the Browns for Miles Garrett and a #2? LOL in a Country minute I would. These players are generational and not available every season or every 5 seasons actually. This obsession with draft picks is mind boggling, it really is. Who better would anyone get with #1 picks then Kalil Mack? The whole thing is ludicrous. I would be more comfortable making that trade for Garrett who still has a good bit of rookie contract. The problem with making that trade for Mack is that you are giving up picks and you have to sign him to a large deal, this is fine and dandy if you don't have alot of holes that need to be filled or will need to be filled in the off-season. Trading for Mack makes all the sense in the world if your team is built decently I don't think it made sense for the bears and I don't think it would have made sense for us honestly. Say we got Mack through the same trade, how do we fix our offensive line next off season? How do we get weapons for darnold? How do we bring in another cb or pay Claiborne to stay? Mack is an exceptional player but he can't win without a cast around himSent from my [device_name] using http://JetNation.com mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.