Lacanfora: Bills have reached out to Raiders about Khalil Mack trade

[billsfan89]

5 hours ago, mannc said:

The Cooks trade actually supports my argument.

 

1.  Edge rusher is not “just below QB” in positional value.  The drop off is huge.  If qb is 10, edge is 3 or 4, even if edge is the second most valuable, which it’s not.  (That  would be WR.)

 

2.  Cooks has averaged over 1100 yds receiving the last 3 seasons.  

 

3.  Cooks turns 25 next month.  Mack turns 28 in February.  That matters.

 

4. Cooks signed a five-year extension with only $20 million guaranteed.  Mack will be looking for around $60 million guaranteed, if not more.

 

5.  You are wrong about what the Rams gave up for Cooks.  They gave up less than 23 overall.  They got Cooks and NE’s 4th round pick for 23 overall and their 6th rounder.  And at the time they made the trade, the Rams knew they were only giving up 23 overall.  The Bills would be giving up what might well be a top 10 overall pick in a draft packed with impact d-linemen and edge rushers.  Those guys will be 21-years old, and on cheap contracts through 2022.

 

6.  I think you are overestimating the number of teams seriously interested in trading for Mack.  I think it’s probably only a couple.

 

Conclusion:  The Raiders will be lucky to get someone’s 2019 first round pick for Mack, and the Bills might actually be overpaying by giving them just next year’s first.  I think Beane might get it done for a second and a player like Shaq.

 

One other conclusion:  Jon Gruden is an idiot,

 

Just under QB is a mistake on my part but pass rushers are one of if not the top Non-QB position in the league. Pass rushers are probably the most important players on defense. Sacks are drive killers and pressures and hits are the most effective defense against a QB. Mack is a top 3 pass rusher in the league if not the best pass rusher in the league. Even factoring in his age (27 this season) and the fact that he wants a big contract I still think there is at least one team out there willing to give up a 1st plus a mid-round pick for him. 

 

The rumor and innuendo state that there are at least 4-5 teams that have significant interest in Mack. I think one of those teams is willing to give up at least a 1st. The Seahawks gave up a 1st plus other picks for Percy Harvin who they gave a big contract to, The Seahawks also gave up a 1st round pick and their starting center for Jimmy Graham who was on a big contract. Now these bold win-now type moves aren't limited to Seattle (Who did not benefit for either move.)

 

As I said the Rams were willing to give 1st for Cooks and a pick swap that amounted to a 5th round pick. The Colts gave up a 1st for Trent Richardson. These trades happen for players. Every circumstance is different as some of these players like Richardson were still on rookie deals. But when the top or one of the top pass rushers in his prime is out on the market a 1st plus a big contract isn't the most unthinkable bounty. 

 

I hope you are right in that maybe the Bills can get it done for a 2nd and Shaq or Hughes but I just don't think the market will come down to that. The Packers are desperate for defensive help and have 2 first round picks (They have the Saints first rounder from a draft-day deal) I could see them sending the Saints pick plus a mid-rounder to the Raiders for Mack. The Packers are in win-now mode as Rodgers gets older and have extra draft capital to pull off the deal. 

[Da webster guy]

Mack seems the guy you bring in when you're making your run.   Last piece of the puzzle sort of.  

 

That's why Green Bay seems such a perfect fit for him.   Throwing $20M at an edge guy is a lotta cake, but maybe it's worth it.

[Chandler#81]

9 minutes ago, K-9 said:

I think we are undervaluing the talent of Mack somewhat. The first player ever to be named All Pro at two different positions? And he's just in his prime as a player? He's a rare, transcendent player; the guy an offense has to account for before EVERY snap. We don't have anyone like that on our defense. As such, I think the minimum price will be what we paid for Biscuit back in the day and, imo, he's worth it seven ways to Sunday. Polian's formula still stands today; if you think you have your QB, then you get a player who can get to the opponent's QB. 

Of Course, we are K-9! We want him, but we want him CHEAP! This all a ploy to lure Chuckie into checking our site to set his asking price.

Will Mack be washed up before the Contract ends? 

YouBetcha!

[hondo in seattle]

58 minutes ago, blacklabel said:

I used to immediately discredit just about anything I read coming from LaCanfora, especially if it was about the Bills. However, he had the Rex firing news weeks before it went down and also had the Whaley firing news around that same time. Since then he's also hit on a few other Bills news-bits before anyone else had. He's clearly got someone in the know with the Bills that tips him off so, while this rumor isn't exactly earth-shattering because it's been floating around for a while now that Mack might end up on the trade block, it's interesting to see an "official" source name the Bills as an interested party. I gotta imagine the asking price is astronomical at this point, plus whichever team lands him is going to have to keep him happy by sending a fleet of loaded Brinks trucks to his house and unloading a few bazillion dollars onto his lawn.

 

LaCanfora doesn't just make stuff up - or at least I don't think he does.  His problem is that he relies on sources of questionable credibility.  So he's sometimes right - and sometime very wrong.  

 

I don't think it's clear at all that he's got someone in the know with the Bills.   Didn't LaCanfora once say that we were trading Shady?  And he kept predicting we'd fire Rex until we did.   Well, eventually we were going to fire Rex.  That was a given.  It wasn't a surprise.   Nor was Whaley's firing.  I really think LaCanfora's sources are often people who are just speculating and happen to speculate right once in a while.   

 

LaCanfora is effectively a gossip columnist and sometimes the rumors he repeats are true.   So maybe his report about us seeking a trade for Mack are correct but I wouldn't bet the farm on it just because LaCan tweeted it out.  

Edited August 24, 2018 by hondo in seattle

[John from Riverside]

3 minutes ago, Da webster guy said:

Mack seems the guy you bring in when you're making your run.   Last piece of the puzzle sort of.  

 

That's why Green Bay seems such a perfect fit for him.   Throwing $20M at an edge guy is a lotta cake, but maybe it's worth it.

Its one of the key positions on a team

 

To me you get these guys when you can get them....and we seem to be in a perfect position TO get him.

 

My thought is this....if they were thinking pass rusher in next year's draft....then use the 1st on Mack now and get him here....and concentrate on wide receiver in round 2.

[Nihilarian]

14 minutes ago, K-9 said:

I think we are undervaluing the talent of Mack somewhat. The first player ever to be named All Pro at two different positions? And he's just in his prime as a player? He's a rare, transcendent player; the guy an offense has to account for before EVERY snap. We don't have anyone like that on our defense. As such, I think the minimum price will be what we paid for Biscuit back in the day and, imo, he's worth it seven ways to Sunday. Polian's formula still stands today; if you think you have your QB, then you get a player who can get to the opponent's QB. 

2

This said, perhaps Beane is waiting to see if Allen is "the guy" this Sunday and should he perform well enough to show he will be the starter. Then Beane makes a strong move going after Mack.  

[Hapless Bills Fan]

13 hours ago, Johnny Hammersticks said:

He’s perhaps the best defensive player in the game.  First team all-pro at both DE and OLB. I’d gladly give up next year’s first for him.  Gladly.

 

At a guess, Oak wanted 2 firsts and a grab bag of goodies, just to start the conversation.

[mannc]

6 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

Just under QB is a mistake on my part but pass rushers are one of if not the top Non-QB position in the league. Pass rushers are probably the most important players on defense. Sacks are drive killers and pressures and hits are the most effective defense against a QB. Mack is a top 3 pass rusher in the league if not the best pass rusher in the league. Even factoring in his age (27 this season) and the fact that he wants a big contract I still think there is at least one team out there willing to give up a 1st plus a mid-round pick for him. 

 

The rumor and innuendo state that there are at least 4-5 teams that have significant interest in Mack. I think one of those teams is willing to give up at least a 1st. The Seahawks gave up a 1st plus other picks for Percy Harvin who they gave a big contract to, The Seahawks also gave up a 1st round pick and their starting center for Jimmy Graham who was on a big contract. Now these bold win-now type moves aren't limited to Seattle (Who did not benefit for either move.)

 

As I said the Rams were willing to give 1st for Cooks and a pick swap that amounted to a 5th round pick. The Colts gave up a 1st for Trent Richardson. These trades happen for players. Every circumstance is different as some of these players like Richardson were still on rookie deals. But when the top or one of the top pass rushers in his prime is out on the market a 1st plus a big contract isn't the most unthinkable bounty. 

 

I hope you are right in that maybe the Bills can get it done for a 2nd and Shaq or Hughes but I just don't think the market will come down to that. The Packers are desperate for defensive help and have 2 first round picks (They have the Saints first rounder from a draft-day deal) I could see them sending the Saints pick plus a mid-rounder to the Raiders for Mack. The Packers are in win-now mode as Rodgers gets older and have extra draft capital to pull off the deal. 

You might be right about GB, but both those first rounders are likely to be late round picks (like the one Seattle gave up for Graham, a trade that has not worked out too well for them), whereas the Bills' first rounder is according to most (but not me) is likely to be top 10.  If so, it's worth far more than either of the picks GB may be dangling.  Beane is not going to overpay.  If Mack is traded, I think people will be surprised at how little Oakland gets in return.  

[BuffaloBaumer]

I would rather draft a top tackle or receiver in next years draft and then use the Mack $$ to fill in the rest of the holes (DE, WR, G).

[ddaryl]

43 minutes ago, Dablitzkrieg said:

That's gonna fall off if you're not careful ?

 

42 minutes ago, K-9 said:

He's gonna go blind at that rate. 

 

 

Too late it fell off... And I'm blind  ?

[Alphadawg7]

There is just no way IMO that Raiders trade Mack for anything that doesn’t include a first.  People trying to act like 27 is too old to pay that much is over the top, that is a young Elite DE who has at least 5 years of Elite play in him and then he will still be very good for years after that...assuming he stays healthy and doesn’t have injuries derail his career.  

 

Its going to take more than a first round pick...either a first and another quality pick or a first and a good player...maybe both.  I wouldn’t be surprised to see Packers trade both their firsts next year and Cobb (or cut Cobb and sign Dez cheap) like some rumors are suggesting.  

 

Then again, Beane is absolutely a witch, so I’ve leanrend not to doubt his magical dark arts powers and wouldn’t be surprised to see him get Mack for a 2nd and Hughes.  Go Beane!

[K-9]

1 minute ago, Nihilarian said:

This said, perhaps Beane is waiting to see if Allen is "the guy" this Sunday and should he perform well enough to show he will be the starter. Then Beane makes a strong move going after Mack.  

I understand your larger point, but I don't think Beane and Co. invested that much draft capital to select a QB at #7 without already thinking they got their QB. While an important step in his evolution as a pro QB, this coming Sunday is only a pixel in a much larger picture with regards to Allen and whether or not he pans out as their franchise QB. I would make the deal for Mack regardless. 

[SCBills]

Given how much confidence I have in Josh Allen, I've moved to the camp that would move next year's 1st and a player for Mack.  If we send Hughes back as the player, we still have some serious money to play with in addressing any holes we have going into 2019 during FA and the Draft.

[billsfan89]

Just now, mannc said:

You might be right about GB, but both those first rounders are likely to be late round picks (like the one Seattle gave up for Graham, a trade that has not worked out too well for them), whereas the Bills' first rounder is according to most (but not me) is likely to be top 10.  If so, it's worth far more than either of the picks GB may be dangling.  Beane is not going to overpay.  If Mack is traded, I think people will be surprised at how little Oakland gets in return.  

 

I think the Raiders also would rather pay Mack than trade him away for a 2nd and 4th round pick. I think Green Bay being in win now mode and having that extra 1st is what lines up for the Raiders to at least get one of those 1st round picks plus some other mid-round picks at the very least. 

 

Green Bay is desperate to keep Rodgers happy and they need a lot of help on defense. Mack wouldn't solve all their defensive issues but he would be a big help immediately and the Packers would still have a 1st round pick at their disposal in 2019. The Packers window to win with Rodgers is about as lengthy as the remainder of Mack's primer years (3-5 seasons) so the window to win also lines up well for them. I think the final trade package for Mack ends up being a 1st plus 2 mid-round picks one in 2019 and one in 2020 along with a throw-in player.

[blacklabel]

13 minutes ago, hondo in seattle said:

 

LaCanfora doesn't just make stuff up - or at least I don't think he does.  His problem is that he relies on sources of questionable credibility.  So he's sometimes right - and sometime very wrong.  

 

I don't think it's clear at all that he's got someone in the know with the Bills.   Didn't LaCanfora once say that we were trading Shady?  And he kept predicting we'd fire Rex until we did.   Well, eventually we were going to fire Rex.  That was a given.  It wasn't a surprise.   Nor was Whaley's firing.  I really think LaCanfora's sources are often people who are just speculating and happen to speculate right once in a while.   

 

LaCanfora is effectively a gossip columnist and sometimes the rumors he repeats are true.   So maybe his report about us seeking a trade for Mack are correct but I wouldn't bet the farm on it just because LaCan tweeted it out.  

 

I see where you're coming from and I don't disagree. There have been a couple of other things he's hit on with the Bills, nothing too major, and I can't recall it at the moment but over the years, I've gone from, "LaCanfora? This is clearly crap" to "Eh, I'll take it with a grain of salt but maybe he's onto something" so, yeah, a lot of these dudes are throwing crap at the wall and seeing what sticks  but I'm sure he has a source of some kind. Probably an agent.

[K-9]

5 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

There is just no way IMO that Raiders trade Mack for anything that doesn’t include a first.  People trying to act like 27 is too old to pay that much is over the top, that is a young Elite DE who has at least 5 years of Elite play in him and then he will still be very good for years after that...assuming he stays healthy and doesn’t have injuries derail his career.  

 

Its going to take more than a first round pick...either a first and another quality pick or a first and a good player...maybe both.  I wouldn’t be surprised to see Packers trade both their firsts next year and Cobb (or cut Cobb and sign Dez cheap) like some rumors are suggesting.  

 

Then again, Beane is absolutely a witch, so I’ve leanrend not to doubt his magical dark arts powers and wouldn’t be surprised to see him get Mack for a 2nd and Hughes.  Go Beane!

At a minimum. I'm sticking with my Bennett comparison; two 1sts, a 2nd, and a player. 

[billsfan89]

2 minutes ago, K-9 said:

At a minimum. I'm sticking with my Bennett comparison; two 1sts, a 2nd, and a player. 

 

The Raiders are not getting more than 1 first round pick for Mack. No team is giving up 2 firsts for any non-QB player that will require a hefty extension. The Raiders would be extremely fortunate to get a 2019 1st, a 2019 mid-round pick, plus a 2020 2nd or 3rd for Mack. As much as teams covet pass rushers they simply aren't going to give up the kind of draft capital (Two firsts and a second) for a non-QB. That's the type of package you give up for a QB on a rookie contract not the type of trade capital you give up for a pass rusher on his second contract. 

 

I think realisitcally the trade package looks more like this 2019 1st, 2019 4th (Swapped with a 7th from the Raiders), 2020 3rd or 4th (With the Raiders throwing back a 5th or 6th in a pick swap) and a throw-in player. 

[RPbillsfan]

16 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Its one of the key positions on a team

 

To me you get these guys when you can get them....and we seem to be in a perfect position TO get him.

 

My thought is this....if they were thinking pass rusher in next year's draft....then use the 1st on Mack now and get him here....and concentrate on wide receiver in round 2.

We have 9 picks next year and a lot of cap room.  Giving Lawson and our 2019 1st would offset about $5,000,000 of net cap space.

 

Make the offer and if accepted, sign Mack to a 5 year deal for the $100,000,000.00, pay off as follows.

 

2018 - $  7,000,000.00

2019 - $22,000,000.00

2020 - $24,000,000.00

2021 - $25,000.000.00

2022 - $22,000,000.00

 

We get one of the top 5 defensive players in the league in his prime for at least three of those years.

 

Use our still substantial cap space and remaining draft capital to get a top quality Offensive Tackle, RB, WR and LB in 2019.

 

Start Josh Allen from game 1, go thru the growing pains of a 5 to 8 win season and rock in 2019

[Canadian Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

Centimeters?

 

haha

[Dr. Who]

2 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

The Raiders are not getting more than 1 first round pick for Mack. No team is giving up 2 firsts for any non-QB player that will require a hefty extension. The Raiders would be extremely fortunate to get a 2019 1st, a 2019 mid-round pick, plus a 2020 2nd or 3rd for Mack. As much as teams covet pass rushers they simply aren't going to give up the kind of draft capital (Two firsts and a second) for a non-QB. That's the type of package you give up for a QB on a rookie contract not the type of trade capital you give up for a pass rusher on his second contract. 

 

I think realisitcally the trade package looks more like this 2019 1st, 2019 4th (Swapped with a 7th from the Raiders), 2020 3rd or 4th (With the Raiders throwing back a 5th or 6th in a pick swap) and a throw-in player. 

I agree with this. Because of the rookie wage scale, draft picks have more value than they did in the era of the Cornelius Bennett trade, for instance.