In hindsight: Khalil Mack

[Passepartout]

Yeah as unless Mack takes a bit of a pay cut, to stay with the team. It could help the Bears sign other players.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Yeah as unless Mack takes a bit of a pay cut, to stay with the team. It could help the Bears sign other players.

Mack's contract isn't structured in a way that the Bears could create additional cap hit by renegotiating it in the near future.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I wouldn't put Z. Smith in a mediocre catagory. I actually think they got it right with him. Young ascending player who wasn't too far off Mack's production last year.

In terms of the conventional stat line including one playoff game each, they were fairly comparable in sacks/QB hits/tackles for loss/tackles. Mack had four more sacks, Smith logged 7 more QB hits. Mack player two fewer games but with more defensive snaps, 755 for Mack compared to 690 for Smith.

The big difference is in interceptions+forced fumbles. Mack 7, Smith 1, with Mack credited with 6 FFs.

 

[RRyder]

So after an offseason, draft and two games we can at least the aftermath of not making the trade is comming into focus.

By my book it was either having Mack (an absolute beast if a player) or having Z Smith, P Smith, Gary and Savage (Amos and Turner couldve still of been fit in)

Personally i go with the latter. Where is everyone else at?

 

[swhitset]

The same place I’ve always been. Glad we didn’t do it.

 

[Phazael]

At the time, I thought we should have traded Mathews and whatever for Mack, especially since Chucky was having a fire sale and likes old discarded Packer players. As of now, I am happy we had the money free to bulk up in a number of positions on D and am glad we have the cap room to maybe deal with the OL or WR need we presently have. I think we would have been fine trading Clayfaker for Mack, though it would have probably prevented McMuffin from being sacked. Really getting rid of McCarthy was the most important move to make last year. But in retrospect, having cap space is better to address our inevitable injuries.

 

[Heyjoe4]

That's a big say.

If we had Mack now with our current team instead of Gary, I'd say SB is a very realistic possibility.

Certainly Mack is everything he’s made out to be.

I don’t think GB adding him last year would have gotten the Pack to the playoffs. I’m glad Gluten saved the cap and the flexibility to be so active in FA on D.

And Mack was added to an already formidable Bears defense. But one player usually doesn’t make that much difference, outside franchise QB.