Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I also don't think it is happening but I do think dominant pass rusher is absolutely our #1 need. Jerry at his peak was good not great (he benefitted from having Mario at his peak opposite him) and Jerry is not at his peak anymore. I like Trent Murphy but he is a complimentary guy not a cornerstone guy. 

 

To me in the modern NFL if you can't rush the passer and do it without blitzing then even the most disciplined defense will eventually break down. 

 

I think receiver is need #1A but pass rusher, pass rusher, pass rusher. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Brianmoorman4jesus said:

I don’t even think we need a LB now. (IMO) Edmunds and Milano are young, fast, modern day LBs that will be the center of this defense for years to come.  I realize that Mack is a great player, but it’s a salary cap sport. Go trade for a WR. Don’t give something up for a player at a position of strength.

Disagree...our Pass rush was horrible last season. that is why they went out and paid big money for Murphy.  Anyways that was NOT the OPs question.   His question was simply as to what you would give to get Mack

Posted
1 hour ago, ganesh said:

Disagree...our Pass rush was horrible last season. that is why they went out and paid big money for Murphy.  Anyways that was NOT the OPs question.   His question was simply as to what you would give to get Mack

Well then considering I said don’t give up something for a LB, I guess my answer to the question was I’d give nothing for Mack.

Posted (edited)

The thing with trading for Mack isn't only about what he's worth in trade, it's what the Raiders can realistically get. If they aren't going to pay him he sits out 2018 and leaves, essentially leaving the Raiders with bupkis. Hughes and/or Lawson and a high pick is  better than nothing.

 

Plus who is calling the shots in Oakland? Gruden? How skilled a negotiator is he? Maybe he just wants to be done with Mack, pissing on his glorious debut season.

Edited by PromoTheRobot
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Jimmy G was no Mack when he was traded.  He was an unknown commodity.  Mack is already a proven defensive stud and rising star.

 

1.  Raiders are not going to trade him.

2.  That offer in the OP is terrible for us.  Why would we give up so much for him?  We got a lot of good players in the D front 7 including two very good looking rookies already.  

3.  We NEED to add offense and not spend so much on one defensive player.  Our D is set up real well right now, so we need the cap room and those draft picks to address the OL, WR, TE, and RB (McCoys up there in age).  

 

I would hate this crazy offer of a first and a 2nd and all that money for Mack, and I love Mack. Oddly, I am not even sure the Raiders would consider trading mack for that anyway.  

 

A lot of good players in the front 7? Who? I've been a defender of his but Hughes was non existent last year, Kyle is getting up there. Shaq looks like a bust, Starr, Murphy are unknowns. Milano is serviceable. Hopefully Edmunds pans out to be the guy we are excited for. Adolphus looks bust worthy also. Phillips, despite the love, looks 2nd string at this point behind a great aging player and an unknown.

 

What front 7 are you talking about? This isn't 2014.

39 minutes ago, Brianmoorman4jesus said:

Well then considering I said don’t give up something for a LB, I guess my answer to the question was I’d give nothing for Mack.

 

I don't think it's feasible to get him, but I think it's hilarious you think we are set at LB. Also Mack can play DE.

 

Why give up anything for a top 3 or the best LB/DE in the game when I have a rookie and a fifth round pick who looked Ok last year?

Edited by Ol Dirty B
Posted
1 hour ago, Ol Dirty B said:

 

A lot of good players in the front 7? Who? I've been a defender of his but Hughes was non existent last year, Kyle is getting up there. Shaq looks like a bust, Starr, Murphy are unknowns. Milano is serviceable. Hopefully Edmunds pans out to be the guy we are excited for. Adolphus looks bust worthy also. Phillips, despite the love, looks 2nd string at this point behind a great aging player and an unknown.

 

What front 7 are you talking about? This isn't 2014.

 

I don't think it's feasible to get him, but I think it's hilarious you think we are set at LB. Also Mack can play DE.

 

Why give up anything for a top 3 or the best LB/DE in the game when I have a rookie and a fifth round pick who looked Ok last year?

 

Um, we have Star, Phillips, Edmunds, Hughes and Murphy for starters.  We dont need to trade away very valuable draft picks right now for more D personnel, not mention spend that much money on him as proposed, until we see what these guys can do together on the filed.  VERY PROMISING GROUP, especially with how sick our secondary is.  We have WAY bigger concerns and needs right now on offense, and we need those picks to protect our QB and get him some weapons, not to mention McCoy is on the wrong side of 30 now too.

Posted
15 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Um, we have Star, Phillips, Edmunds, Hughes and Murphy for starters.  We dont need to trade away very valuable draft picks right now for more D personnel, not mention spend that much money on him as proposed, until we see what these guys can do together on the filed.  VERY PROMISING GROUP, especially with how sick our secondary is.  We have WAY bigger concerns and needs right now on offense, and we need those picks to protect our QB and get him some weapons, not to mention McCoy is on the wrong side of 30 now too.

Hughes is 29 and hasn't had more than 6 sacks in a season since 2014.  Star and Phillips will hopefully eat space in the middle, but don't expect any pass rush from them.  Trent Murphy didn't play last year and it remains to be seen if he can return to 2016 form.

 

Mack is arguably the best defensive player in the NFL and would be an absolute stud on this defense for the next five plus years.  If the Raiders are crazy enough to trade him then the Bills should pursue him aggressively.  We'll still have money to upgrade our offense next year, but you don't pass up on a stud like that because it's not our most pressing area of need at the moment.  It's a pipe dream at this point, but Beane would be crazy to at least not make a phone call.

  • Like (+1) 3
Posted

Do you give up a first for him? Hell yeah. He's a known stud. Know idea what our first round pick will do in the NFL. Mack is an obvious get. 

Posted

Always what if

 

 He is a fan of musicians Tim McGraw and Hanson.

 

Mack is an active Christian and spent much of his youth attending a church where his father and mother both served as deacons. Mack also enjoys spending time with his nieces, Malaysia, Maayana and Ma’kiyah, and counts his favorite film as The Sound of Music.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalil_Mack

Posted
4 hours ago, Domdab99 said:

Do you give up a first for him? Hell yeah. He's a known stud. Know idea what our first round pick will do in the NFL. Mack is an obvious get. 

Completely agree, I doubt a first alone gets it done. rarely do players of his caliber at his age become available, if the FO thinks it's doable pull the trigger. 

Posted
On ‎7‎/‎27‎/‎2018 at 9:51 AM, Royale with Cheese said:

 

Von Miller makes an average of $19 million a year.  Mack is not going to get $6-11,000,000 more than the highest paid OLB/DE.

thank you

On ‎7‎/‎27‎/‎2018 at 12:12 PM, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Totally realistic. :lol:

I know right theyd need to add a 1st

Posted

I wouldn't trade a 1st for him. Obviously he's an awesome player, but if there's a chance the Raiders and Mack are splitting up next offseason, I'll take my chance on that happening and keep what I think is possibly a top 5 pick.

Posted
Just now, DCOrange said:

I wouldn't trade a 1st for him. Obviously he's an awesome player, but if there's a chance the Raiders and Mack are splitting up next offseason, I'll take my chance on that happening and keep what I think is possibly a top 5 pick.

Most fans would trade a 1st and much more, if need be.

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Cornette's Commentary said:

Most fans would trade a 1st and much more, if need be.

 

Just doesn't make sense to me at all. Thankfully I doubt Beane sees it that way too.

Edited by DCOrange
Posted
10 minutes ago, DCOrange said:

I wouldn't trade a 1st for him. Obviously he's an awesome player, but if there's a chance the Raiders and Mack are splitting up next offseason, I'll take my chance on that happening and keep what I think is possibly a top 5 pick.

so you think the Bills only win 3-4 games this year?

×
×
  • Create New...