The Khalil Mack thread -- now a Bear for $155million

[Pokerbrat2000]

The Packers could cut someone other than clay even if that seems like a bad idea. Both Cobb and Bulaga could be cut and the Packers could have room. I dont think the Packers get Mack but i would love to have a top end player on that defense. Mack was rated at the 7th best player by pff this past year. You put him and Rodgers on the same team you have one of the best offensive and defensive players to go with Bahk, Adams, Daniels, Clark, Graham, Bulaga, etc. This team becomes even more formidable. It is a long shot but it is one of the few times I would actually be on board with a big splash like this

We kind of kicked this idea around last week and cutting either Cobb or Bulaga at this point probably weakens 2 positional groups that I wouldn't want to see thinner. Matthews makes the most sense given that Mack takes his spot.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I don't think there is any way any team is doing to get Mack without giving up a first round pick no matter who they throw in. If the Packers picks are going to be in the mid 20's or higher it might even take both of therm. I don't think a first and Matthews would get it done either but if it would I say go for it. The problem is could the Packers afford the highest paid offensive and defensive player in the league and have any money left over especially since they also have a few other high priced players as well.

That is the part I have a problem with. The 2 first round picks would be well worth Mack in my mind. Just look what our first round pics have netted us in the last how many years.

However, the kind of cap that both Mack and Rodgers would be eating up is the scary end of it and I would trust that Ball is very well aware of how it would or wouldn't work now and into the future.

 

[bigbubbatd]

We kind of kicked this idea around last week and cutting either Cobb or Bulaga at this point probably weakens 2 positional groups that I wouldn't want to see thinner. Matthews makes the most sense given that Mack takes his spot.

Oh I am not saying I would do that but I am saying a team just cant no for sure what the Packers will do. So they cant know for sure Matthews would be available

 

[AmishMafia]

That is the part I have a problem with. The 2 first round picks would be well worth Mack in my mind. Just look what our first round pics have netted us in the last how many years.

However, the kind of cap that both Mack and Rodgers would be eating up is the scary end of it and I would trust that Ball is very well aware of how it would or wouldn't work now and into the future.

Next year will be the year of the pass rusher. Good DEs and OLBs will be available throughout the first round. People always overdraft CBs, OTs, and especially QBs. With both of our picks we can get a guy who may be very good. Doubt they will be as good as Mack, but we will get them each for 1/20th the cost.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Next year will be the year of the pass rusher. Good DEs and OLBs will be available throughout the first round. People always overdraft CBs, OTs, and especially QBs. With both of our picks we can get a guy who may be very good. Doubt they will be as good as Mack, but we will get them each for 1/20th the cost.

That is always the hope "With both of our picks we can get a guy who may be very good"

If you get one guy out of the 2 picks that ends up being close to as good as Mack, mission accomplished. 4-5 "cheap" years for a quality player. But if you were looking for a QB to run your offense and the Packers had Rodgers on the trading block, would you try to trade for him or roll the dice in the draft? Obviously, the QB position is the most important one on the entire team, but still a huge investment.

I would gladly trade the 2 draft picks for Mack, but not so sure I would want to part with all that money and put your team in a position of being way over leveraged on 2-3 guys in Rodgers, Mack and Adams.

 

[LambeauLombardi]

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

This will probably change soon but if you go to his wikipedia page it has Packer colors on the right part of the screen saying he is the DE for them lol

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

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

This will probably change soon but if you go to his wikipedia page it has Packer colors on the right part of the screen saying he is the DE for them lol

Nice!! They even gave him Nick Perry's Number! I would think he would just keep #52, since it will no longer be needed.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[AmishMafia]

That is always the hope "With both of our picks we can get a guy who may be very good"

If you get one guy out of the 2 picks that ends up being close to as good as Mack, mission accomplished. 4-5 "cheap" years for a quality player. But if you were looking for a QB to run your offense and the Packers had Rodgers on the trading block, would you try to trade for him or roll the dice in the draft? Obviously, the QB position is the most important one on the entire team, but still a huge investment.

I would gladly trade the 2 draft picks for Mack, but not so sure I would want to part with all that money and put your team in a position of being way over leveraged on 2-3 guys in Rodgers, Mack and Adams.

There is always risk, even with trading for Mack. There is no guarantee he will continue to work hard once you hand him $40m signing bonus. Or that he will not avoid the mysterious Ashwaubenon Triangle and suffer a major injury. Giving up a ton of draft capital and a huge chunk of salary cap room on any player is a huge risk I cant normally see doing. Too many eggs in one basket. Mack, though, maybe worth the risk.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

This signing will probably "seal the deal on Mack's fate". No way do I sign Mack for $25 M/year!

https://www.silverandblackpride.com...-contract-extension-could-khalil-mack-be-next

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

There is always risk, even with trading for Mack. There is no guarantee he will continue to work hard once you hand him $40m signing bonus. Or that he will not avoid the mysterious Ashwaubenon Triangle and suffer a major injury. Giving up a ton of draft capital and a huge chunk of salary cap room on any player is a huge risk I cant normally see doing. Too many eggs in one basket. Mack, though, maybe worth the risk.

I would roll the dice on the draft picks VS Mack. However, I wouldn't pay the kind of Money that Donald is reportedly going to get, with Mack possibly even getting more.

I guess we just hope the Packers pick the Next "Mack- Donald" in the 2019 Draft with their 2 first rounders.....Supersize me baby!

 

[Mondio]

No thank you.

 

[rodell330]

Khalil Mack is not happy.

Khalil Mack wants a new contract.

He has not reported to camp.

The Raiders are not negotiating with him.

They haven't even talked to his agent since February.

John Gruden hasn't even met him.

SO! The Packers should trade one of their 1st round picks in 2019 and Clay Matthews to the Raiders for Khalil Mack.

Mack is a 27 year old, elite pass rusher. He's one of the most valuable players in the league. In his four years in the league, he has totaled 40.5 sacks, including 36.5 in the last three seasons. He's also an elite run defender. He has never missed a game.

The Packers could afford to fit a contract in for him if they unloaded Matthews' money. The Raiders seem to have a legitimate fetish for older players (especially Packers). So you unload Matthews in a contract year, free up his salary, and pick up Mack for a 1st rounder. You'd have to pay him, but you're talking about 4-6 years of a bonafide premier pass rusher, right in the heart of Rodgers' remaining years.

If they traded for him, they'd likely be looking at a 5 year, 100 million dollar investment, with around 50 million guaranteed. He's worth it.

I am not generally keen on these types of ideas, but this one makes all sorts of sense. They really should do this.

In a heart beat no second thought goodbye Clay you can go back to your home in Cali .

 

[PackerDNA]

In the debate over two first round picks or Mack , I would think it comes down to what does one subscribe to; a bird in the hand, or two in the bush?

 

[Mondio]

when concerning draft picks yes. But i'm not sure I want to commit 2 elite QB money contracts to 2 players. It's difficult to pay 1 QB and field a strong team and sustain it while winning. I know Mack is good, but OLB's do not affect a game like an elite QB. They can have their moments, but sacks aren't TD's and he better be getting 15+ regularly to earn that type of money. Which he hasn't.

 

[PackerDNA]

If Donald is really about to get $24M per year with 65-70M guaranteed, and Mack will then get more, that at least has to give you serious pause. You could end up with the highest paid players on O and D, both could get player of the year, and you wouldn't sniff a Super Bowl.

 

[AmishMafia]

In the debate over two first round picks or Mack , I would think it comes down to what does one subscribe to; a bird in the hand, or two in the bush?

The decision must also depend on money. 2 late first round picks is definitely worth an elite stud at OLB. It's the huge amount of money that has to be committed that decreases Mack's value. If you do the deal and he gets injured, the Packers are screwed for the next several years. It is a big risky move.

If I was Gute, I think I swing for the fences. Maybe one 1st round pick and Clay. I would extend Mack's contract at $25m per year for 4 years. So we have him for 5 yrs at $102m or a little over $20M per year. But I get it, it's a huge amount of risk.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

My only push back to clay being just a toss in is that he will perform at a fairly solid level when healthy and even if the Raiders dont resign him someone will pay Clay money and then the Raiders would get a decent comp pick in 2020. Obviously that is a ways out but solid production and 4th round pick doesnt seem like a toss in.

Is that you, Ted Thompson???

The Packers could cut someone other than clay even if that seems like a bad idea. Both Cobb and Bulaga could be cut and the Packers could have room.

Matthews is the only player making any sense to offer the Raiders in a trade for Mack as the Packers can't afford to lose a quality starter either at receiver or right tackle.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

In my opinion while the idea of acquiring Mack is definitely enticing I would prefer the Packers to hold on to both first round picks in 2019 if he's asking for $20+ million a season. Gutekunst could package those selections to move up into the top 10 and hopefully draft an elite edge rusher while saving close to $100 million of cap space over five seasons.

 

[Dantés]

In my opinion while the idea of acquiring Mack is definitely enticing I would prefer the Packers to hold on to both first round picks in 2019 if he's asking for $20+ million a season. Gutekunst could package those selections to move up into the top 10 and hopefully draft an elite edge rusher while saving close to $100 million of cap space over five seasons.

Then you're basically saying that you don't want Mack, right? Because there's no way he takes less than 20M.

 

[Dantés]

I want you all to know that when this goes down, I will be taking full credit for the move.

 

[rmontro]

I want you all to know that when this goes down, I will be taking full credit for the move.

On First Things First on FS1 today, they were saying the Packers were the most likely team to acquire Mack. That means less than nothing though.

 

[Mondio]

We basically have vegas odds makers generating news. and dantes, but he's different

 

[Dantés]

On First Things First on FS1 today, they were saying the Packers were the most likely team to acquire Mack. That means less than nothing though.

Here's what I really want to know-- is this all just people dot connecting the need, cap space, "win-now" window, and draft capital? Or is there some information out there in league circles that's driving this speculation. Commentary on a TV show doesn't make me think anything. A vegas oddsmaker... that's something else.

 

[Jerellh528]

A young team searching for their way, I prolly would not trade the 2 firsts and pay Mack what he wants. But on a contender with Aaron Rodgers turning 35, I would do that deal and pay the man his money. We got the best player in the nfl and he’s only won a single super bowl because of our bad defense, we get the chance to upgrade a premier position on defense by adding a top 5 defensive player in his prime. Sure it’s a risk, but a risk worth taking imo.
After Cobb and Matthews our cap looks pretty healthy as far as not so great contracts go, we just gotta be extra careful about what players get paid for the next few years.

 

[PackAttack12]

The thought of Rodgers on one side of the ball and Mack on the other.....