Bears get Mack

[hoosier]

Trade with the Bears and you could end up with two top 10 picks. And one or both of those picks might amount to something in the NFL, as opposed to becoming the next in a long run of Jamarcus Russell sized busts. That's a lot of maybes.

Who knows, if Gut had upped his offer to two D1s, a D2 and a D3, maybe that would have gotten the Raiders's attention. But that's a lot to give up for the privilege of signing a guy to a $24M/year contract.

[texaspackerbacker]

I'd say Oakland got the better end of the deal. I'd be saying the same thing if it was the Packers making the same deal with them. As good as Mack is, he's not worth two first round picks plus the large chunk salary cap he will soak up. If Mack stays healthy and as good as now for say 5 - 10 years, then it's close to an even trade. That's the best case for the Bears. Any serious injury or diminishing of Mack's ability, and the Bears lose their gamble.

[Radagast]

The important point is that the deal is done and GB is now going to have to deal with Mack at least twice a season now. Who/how is GB going to protect Rodgers from Mack? Will every running play need to be where Mack is not?

[Joemailman]

Problem for the Raiders is the trade could make the Bears better now. That of course would reduce the value of the 1st round picks the Raiders get in return. Bears also get Raiders 2nd round pick while Raiders get Bears 3rd. If this trade weakens the Raiders defense, which it should, that 2nd round pick the Bears get could be a pretty high one.

[Pugger]

he usually plays on the left side. he'll be going against the Packers achilles-hill/weak-link right side. it's going to be extremely ugly.

Not if he goes up against Bulaga and a TE to help out.

[Bretsky]

Problem for the Raiders is the trade could make the Bears better now. That of course would reduce the value of the 1st round picks the Raiders get in return. Bears also get Raiders 2nd round pick while Raiders get Bears 3rd. If this trade weakens the Raiders defense, which it should, that 2nd round pick the Bears get could be a pretty high one.

Hence......Great Day for the Bears !!

[Bretsky]

Maybe. But weren't you also high on Marc Trestman?

TRUE; Kudos for good memory
I didn't think anybody pays any attention to my posts ..lol

[Joemailman]

Hence......Great Day for the Bears !!

I'm inclined to think the Bears got the better of the deal. The only way it works for the Raiders is if they can trade their 2 2019 1st round picks to move up in the draft for a player of Mack's stature. Then they get an elite player for several years without paying him 20+ million per year. I like the Bears odds of winning this trade better though.

[Bretsky]

I'm inclined to think the Bears got the better of the deal. The only way it works for the Raiders is if they can trade their 2 2019 1st round picks to move up in the draft for a player of Mack's stature. Then they get an elite player for several years without paying him 20+ million per year. I like the Bears odds of winning this trade better though.

The Bears actually got a 2nd back and gave up a 3rd.

It makes me think our two 1's Next year would have sealed the deal

[pbmax]

If true, that makes me wonder if McKenzie really has a clue as GM. It's not like the Raiders are one player away from being a contender. The goal should be to acquire a larger number of picks in the first three rounds, not just focus on the team you believe is most likely to get you a top-5 pick. Unless you're trading with the Bengals, you are pretty much prognosticating with tea leaves anyway.

Doughboy's JSO piece about how Gutekunst should have offered more now seems like the kind of reactive response we'd expect from a fan, not a journalist.

Everyone read McKenzie as showing obvious signs of thinking that signing Mack would have been a better option. Gruden might have been fighting against this, indeed, there are reports that he thought the 29th ranked D meant Mack wasn't that important and building for the future was a better idea.

[pbmax]

The important point is that the deal is done and GB is now going to have to deal with Mack at least twice a season now. Who/how is GB going to protect Rodgers from Mack? Will every running play need to be where Mack is not?

His name is Bryan Bulaga. Let's see what he did against Mack in 2015:

                                  Def         Sack           Fumb
Player               Tm Int Yds TD Lng  Sk Tkl Ast   FR Yds TD FF

Khalil Mack         OAK   0   0  0   0 1.0   1   1    0   0  0  0

Provided by View Original Table
Generated 9/2/2018.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201512200rai.htm#all_vis_starters

Someone else said he was not Reggie White. Reggie terrorized a decent Packer O line before heading to GB. Mack can be handled. Everyone should stop moaning.

[Fritz]

His name is Bryan Bulaga. Let's see what he did against Mack in 2015:

                                  Def         Sack           Fumb
Player               Tm Int Yds TD Lng  Sk Tkl Ast   FR Yds TD FF

Khalil Mack         OAK   0   0  0   0 1.0   1   1    0   0  0  0

Provided by View Original Table
Generated 9/2/2018.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201512200rai.htm#all_vis_starters

Someone else said he was not Reggie White. Reggie terrorized a decent Packer O line before heading to GB. Mack can be handled. Everyone should stop moaning.

Except for the strippers.

[pbmax]

Except for the strippers.

Having that as your ring tone is not going to end well Fritz.

[pbmax]

Chucky redux:

The Raiders have also gone down this road before with Jon Gruden. In 1998, Gruden joined the Raiders and allowed DT Chester McGlockton to sign with the rival Chiefs. McGlockton was a Pro Bowl each of the last four seasons, but left Oakland similar to Mack (but 18 months older). After letting him leave, Oakland received the 31st and 59th overall picks in the draft as compensation. Gruden responded by saying “We think we can get some players who can impact the team this year and for years to come… It’s going to be the bloodline of our organization.” Suffice it to say, the 1998 Draft was not a good one for Oakland, other than using the 4th overall on a future Hall of Famer.

31st pick: Leon Bender
59th pick: Jon Ritchie (Ritchie was picked 63rd and if you can follow the transactions to get from 59 to 63, I applaud you)

http://www.footballperspective.com/khalil-mack-and-stars-switching-teams-in-their-prime/

[hoosier]

Everyone read McKenzie as showing obvious signs of thinking that signing Mack would have been a better option. Gruden might have been fighting against this, indeed, there are reports that he thought the 29th ranked D meant Mack wasn't that important and building for the future was a better idea.

I forget how power over personnel shakes out over in the East Bay between McKenzie and Gruden...Was it McK's call where to draw the line on re-signing Mack? An interview with McK in today's San Jose Mercury indicates that, yeah, they (he) wanted to re-sign him but that Reggie drew the line considerably short of what the Bears were willing to do:

Q: Was their counter offer similar to the deal Khalil got with the Bears — I’m sure you’ve seen those numbers. Is that about right?

McKenzie: You know what, I don’t want to comment on what we offered and all that, the numbers. I just think Khalil got a great deal.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/09/...o-be-a-raider/

The defensive ranking is interesting. It would seem to say either that Mack isn't all that or that an elite defensive player doesn't have the same impact that an elite QB has.