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

[RRyder]

I have heard a number of people say this. It very well could turn out to be true, but can you really conclude it at this time? Not to mention that what Graham was paid was not even near top WR money. Graham was paid top TE money, his upside in the Redzone and ability to open up the middle of the field could very well pay dividends for the Packers.

I think if the Packers were sitting with Lewis, Kendricks and Tonyan after the final cut downs, there would be legit concern about the position and legit criticism of Gute that he didn't address the position. So I find it hard to say that the signing of Graham was "horrible".

I never said Graham got paid top WR money. But he is paid as a "good" WR and should be expected to produce as a good WR and the odds of that happening are slim to none.

If your ok with it because it's "top TE money" it's still a ****** deal because he hasn't been a top TE the last few years.... If he ever was. Hes always been just a big WR. The man had a legitimate case for wanting to be designated as a WR when the Saints tagged him which led to his trade to Seattle.

He'll be a good redzone threat that people overhype because "omg look at those TE numbers"

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I never said Graham got paid top WR money. But he is paid as a "good" WR and should be expected to produce as a good WR and the odds of that happening are slim to none.

If your ok with it because it's "top TE money" it's still a ****** deal because he hasn't been a top TE the last few years.... If he ever was. Hes always been just a big WR. The man had a legitimate case for wanting to be designated as a WR when the Saints tagged him which led to his trade to Seattle.

He'll be a good redzone threat that people overhype because "omg look at those TE numbers"

He is being paid the 21st highest WR money in the league, right there with Randall Cobb. I guess we will soon find out if that was a good or a bad deal for the Packers.

I expect him to have a better season (as long as he stays healthy) in the Packer offense with AR at the helm, then he did with the Seahawks. Will he put up the big numbers he did while in New Orleans with Drew Brees? I doubt it, but he could. Given what the options were to improve the TE position, I would say that today, on August 31st, I am happy with the move, despite the cost.

But we digress.....this is the Mack thread.

 

[Dantés]

Jimmy Graham's average annual salary (10M) puts him in the neighborhood of Randall Cobb, Tyler Lockett, and Pierre Garcon. 10M is no longer top WR money. So it doesn't make sense to me to say that he's not worth it if he puts up 700 yards and 12 touchdowns. That's a lot more ROI than any of those receivers are going to bring.

 

[PackAttack12]

Kizer trade wasn't great. Kizer still sucks. Graham signing was horrible. He's a big WR that is a redzone threat but when your paying that much money for a WR you should expect more then 60 catches for 600-700 yards. As for the draft let's give it some time and not forget that many people wouldve preferred a guy like James.

And if he were to trade the house for Mack I would would rate a whopping two moves of his as a good call and that's signing Wilkerson. Whom could easily be credited to him only being willing to sign that deal because of Pettine. Tramon would be rated as the other solid move

You're going to judge him by his production with Russell Wilson and that anemic Seattle offense?

If he caught 10 TD passes from Russell Wilson, imagine the potential playing with a QB like Aaron Rodgers. Do you recall what Graham did in his last season with Drew Brees? I know that was 3-4 years ago, but Rodgers is going to bring out the best in Graham. And regardless of his numbers, his mere presence in the middle of the field will open up opportunities on the outside for Adams and others.

Cutting an aging player in Jordy helped facilitate acquiring Graham/Wilkerson. I'll take that all day.

 

[RRyder]

You're going to judge him by his production with Russell Wilson and that anemic Seattle offense?

If he caught 10 TD passes from Russell Wilson, imagine the potential playing with a QB like Aaron Rodgers. Do you recall what Graham did in his last season with Drew Brees? I know that was 3-4 years ago, but Rodgers is going to bring out the best in Graham. And regardless of his numbers, his mere presence in the middle of the field will open up opportunities on the outside for Adams and others.

Cutting an aging player in Jordy helped facilitate acquiring Graham/Wilkerson. I'll take that all day.

yep because cutting one aging player to sign another aging player that litteraly needs a HoF QB apparently in order to produce is a great idea. (God i can't believe people actually use that as a mark in his favor)

Jimmy Graham's average annual salary (10M) puts him in the neighborhood of Randall Cobb, Tyler Lockett, and Pierre Garcon. 10M is no longer top WR money. So it doesn't make sense to me to say that he's not worth it if he puts up 700 yards and 12 touchdowns. That's a lot more ROI than any of those receivers are going to bring.

And nobody has called Cobb overpaid and wanted to cut him for producing numbers that will still likely be better then anything Graham puts up this year?

 

[gbgary]

$8-9m is the middling going rate for a wr. add some go to Green Bay and $10m about right. te graham is 2 years younger than jordy and cobb is 5 years younger. they're not over paid.

and nobody has called Cobb overpaid and wanted to cut him...?

only silly people.

 

[XPack]

yep because cutting one aging player to sign another aging player that litteraly needs a HoF QB apparently in order to produce is a great idea. (God i can't believe people actually use that as a mark in his favor)

What Graham brings to the team has been non existent for quite some time. The mismatches he brings to the center of the field and redzone presence is vastly different from what Jordy would have offered. So making a straight comparison between him and Jordy is just plain incorrect. Not just a better QB, but I think this offence will bring out the best in him...and us.

 

[Dantés]

And nobody has called Cobb overpaid and wanted to cut him for producing numbers that will still likely be better then anything Graham puts up this year?

~700 yards and somewhere from ~12 touchdowns would be a whole lot better than what Cobb has been putting up for the last three seasons. The value is primarily in the touchdowns. That's why he's here. If he can't put up big TD numbers, he will be a bust. If he's in the double digits, he will be paying off even if he isn't a 1,000+ yard receiver.

My point is that 10M doesn't buy you as much as it used to in a WR. Lockett literally just got that, and he's never topped 700 yards in a season and has three touchdowns to his name over the last two years. The new elite WR contracts are going to be around twice that much (e.g. Beckham's new deal).

Basically, your criticism of the deal is based on WR value and I think your sense of WR value is out of date.

 

[sschind]

3. As I've explained to other posters, I'm not of the opinion that the Packers should go get Mack regardless of the price tag. The Raiders ask will need to come down (which it will, no doubt-- the question is by how much) and they will have to have a reasonable idea beforehand of what he's going to cost (20M could work; 25M probably won't).

.

I just wanted to address this issue (what it will cost to trade for him) after reading an article by Adam Schein

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...st-trade-khalil-mack-five-viable-destinations.

In the article he suggest the Packers as a logical trading partner for the Raiders citing the two first round picks. Later on he also mentions the Jets but suggests they may be able to pull off the trade with their first and a third. At first it might seem illogical that a trade would cost the Packers two first but the Jets might get the same player for a first and a third but when you consider the Jets pick may be in the top 10 and the Packers in the bottom 10 it makes sense. My point is that a first and a third might get the job done for a team like the Jets but not for the Packers. For the record I'd be very open to a trade for Mack if we could get it done for a first and a third. I'd still be leery about the money but retaining the first round pick would help soften the blow by providing at least 1 other high pick potential upgrade at a cheap price.

 

[XPack]

@sschind below might interest you.

Earlier in August, CBS Sports’ Joel Corry reached out to former Eagles president and Browns CEO Joe Banner about the cost to acquire Mack:

“I think the range is a 1, 3 and 7 on the low end to two 1s on the high end. A lot also depends on how high the 1 is. Maybe it’s a 1 and 2 if it’s fairly high, or two 1s if it’s lower,” said Banner. “Maybe a team would be smart to include a 1 with a quality player. Or a 1, a middle pick and a quality player. He (Mack) is as good or better than any of the players we have seen involved in these kind of trades.”

I reckon Clay will take a pay cut this season....if he doesn't have a monster year. But a Mack contract will be around $75m guaranteed at average, I reckon. A bridge too far?

Mack is reportedly targeting a contract that pays him “in excess of $65 million” guaranteed. The record for guaranteed money for a defensive player still belongs to Ndamukong Suh, who received just shy of $60 million from the Dolphinsin 2015, but Mack wants to top that with a number that only quarterbacks have ever received.

His holdout has coincided with one for Los Angeles Rams defensive tackle Aaron Donald. The 2017 Defensive Player of the Year is reportedly close to a contract that’d pay him $80 million guaranteed and $22 million per year. Mack would likely want a similar amount.

 

[RRyder]

What Graham brings to the team has been non existent for quite some time. The mismatches he brings to the center of the field and redzone presence is vastly different from what Jordy would have offered. So making a straight comparison between him and Jordy is just plain incorrect. Not just a better QB, but I think this offence will bring out the best in him...and us.

I didnt make the comparison. I was responding to the comparison.

~700 yards and somewhere from ~12 touchdowns would be a whole lot better than what Cobb has been putting up for the last three seasons. The value is primarily in the touchdowns. That's why he's here. If he can't put up big TD numbers, he will be a bust. If he's in the double digits, he will be paying off even if he isn't a 1,000+ yard receiver.

My point is that 10M doesn't buy you as much as it used to in a WR. Lockett literally just got that, and he's never topped 700 yards in a season and has three touchdowns to his name over the last two years. The new elite WR contracts are going to be around twice that much (e.g. Beckham's new deal).

Basically, your criticism of the deal is based on WR value and I think your sense of WR value is out of date.

By this logic nobody should think Mathews is overpaid. I mean once Mack gets a 24 million a year deal Mathews and his 7 sacks would just be the going rate for a middling pass rusher.

Graham is a big WR that needs a HoF QB throwing him the ball in order to be effective. I'm not even a big Wilson fan but people arguing that his fall from grace is the product of him going from a HoF QB to just a pretty good one is laughable. Wilson isnt a scrub so if Graham was truly a difference make his impact wouldn't have seen nearly the hit that it did

I'll put it bluntly. If a pass catcher cant be a difference maker unless he's playing with one of the best throwers ever to walk the planet he is not worth big money.

The love for Graham is a product of fantasy football. He's not a bad player and does do things that help a team. Just that his impact is vastly overrated because he's "listed" as a TE

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

6'7" 265 pounds... 4.56 40 and a 38.5"vert, 35" arms... Unblockable with #12 tossing the ball.
(Cobb 5'10" 191 4.46 33.5" vert 31" arms)

He is definitely a te. A freak of nature. I'm expecting 1000+ yds and 10+ tds. With the possibility of a career year for him and #12 both.

Graham>Cobb.

 

[Dantés]

I didnt make the comparison. I was responding to the comparison.



By this logic nobody should think Mathews is overpaid. I mean once Mack gets a 24 million a year deal Mathews and his 7 sacks would just be the going rate for a middling pass rusher.

Graham is a big WR that needs a HoF QB throwing him the ball in order to be effective. I'm not even a big Wilson fan but people arguing that his fall from grace is the product of him going from a HoF QB to just a pretty good one is laughable. Wilson isnt a scrub so if Graham was truly a difference make his impact wouldn't have seen nearly the hit that it did

I'll put it bluntly. If a pass catcher cant be a difference maker unless he's playing with one of the best throwers ever to walk the planet he is not worth big money.

The love for Graham is a product of fantasy football. He's not a bad player and does do things that help a team. Just that his impact is vastly overrated because he's "listed" as a TE

I just picked guys in that neighborhood of annual average. If you don’t like Cobb’s example because it’s too old of a deal (fair), how about Lockett? He literally just signed his deal and his average is the same as Graham’s.

Graham’s effectiveness regressed in Seattle because they tried to use him as a traditional in line tight end. It has nothing to do with Wilson not being good enough. Wilson is great. But like you say, Graham is basically a big wideout. The Saints used him as such to devastating effect. The Seahawks found success with him when they followed suit, but they spent a lot of time trying to shove a square peg in a round hole.

But to the original point— your argument is that Graham’s deal should be assessed against wide receiver deals because that’s basically what he is. Ok, so when we compare his deal against similar wide receiver contracts being signed right now, it looks pretty good, allowing that he produces the way that most expect.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The Bears are paying Trey Burton $8M/year. He was regarded as maybe the second best TE in the FA class.

In 4 years in NFL Burton stats:

63 receptions
629 yards
10.0 yds/catch
6 TD's

Now I suppose someone is going to say the Bears got a much better deal due to Burton's potential.

 

[RRyder]

The Bears are paying Trey Burton $8M/year. He was regarded as maybe the second best TE in the FA class.

In 4 years in NFL Burton stats:

63 receptions
629 yards
10.0 yds/catch
6 TD's

Now I suppose someone is going to say the Bears got a much better deal due to Burton's potential.

Other bad contracts dont justify handing out bad contracts yourself. It's one of the most mind numbingly frustrating things around these parts. "player x got this much so player y contract isnt that bad"..... Nope. Just cause one deal is worse doesn't make the other one good

I just picked guys in that neighborhood of annual average. If you don’t like Cobb’s example because it’s too old of a deal (fair), how about Lockett? He literally just signed his deal and his average is the same as Graham’s.

Graham’s effectiveness regressed in Seattle because they tried to use him as a traditional in line tight end. It has nothing to do with Wilson not being good enough. Wilson is great. But like you say, Graham is basically a big wideout. The Saints used him as such to devastating effect. The Seahawks found success with him when they followed suit, but they spent a lot of time trying to shove a square peg in a round hole.

But to the original point— your argument is that Graham’s deal should be assessed against wide receiver deals because that’s basically what he is. Ok, so when we compare his deal against similar wide receiver contracts being signed right now, it looks pretty good, allowing that he produces the way that most expect.

We definitely differ on how devastating he was in NO. He was a really good #2 WR behind Colston. Effective. Pretty good. But no where near devastating once the TE label is shedded.

Hes a good player and yes he will make some plays. But he isnt nearly the impact player hes being made out to be and yes I do think they could've used that money elsewhere to much greater effect and not really lost a whole lot considering we also lost a legitimate deep threat (what appears to be our offenses greatest weakness right now) for a guy who will be a really good redzone target (also something the guy we let go was good at). In other words we actually opened up a hole in the offense in order to stay even in a skillset. Not to mention redzone offense has been pretty good for the most part under Rodgers

FYI I wasn't against cutting Jordy. But doing it to bring in Graham opens up a hole to solve a problem the offense didnt have. Hence why I view it as such a bad deal.

As for Mack I agree it comes down to cost so we'll see. But when people are now acting like all of Gutes moves so far are beyond reproach I'm going to take issue cause theres plenty to be skeptical about

 

[rmontro]

Remain patient, and wait for the asking price to drop.

Generally speaking, I'm less considered with what we giving the Raiders than what we'd be paying Mack. Which is not to say we should get reckless about it.

 

[Snoops]

Idk if we gonna get him but we are engaged In trade talks at the moment browns have gathered most to offer and they just got involved we shall see what happens tmrw I feel like it’s gonna be a big day regardless

 

[Deleted member 6794]

[TWEET]https://twitter.com/TomPelissero/status/1034947024620269568[/TWEET]

Source. Would you give our 2 first rounders for him?

I would be fine with the Packers giving up both first round picks in 2019 to acquire Mack but most likely it would take too much money to sign him.

Mack is a known quantity...we all know draft picks aren't. how long have we been lamenting the lack of a pass rush. there's only one reason to extend Rodgers and that's to win a SB in the near future. now is the time to go all-in.

With Rodgers being under contract for another six seasons now isn't the time to go all-in.

2020 we have 58 million. Take away 20 for Mack another 20 for Daniels and Clark and we are down to 18 and so on.

I have a feeling the Packers won't re-sign Daniels once he hits free agency again.

Call up the Jaguars and offer them a 2nd and a 5th(or Clay) for Donte Fowler Jr. And then lock him up to a 4 year 50-55 million deal before the season starts. Hes another up and comming pass rusher that's got hurt his rookie year but definitely shows potential and the Jaguars cant/wont be able to come close to matching what he will probably be offered next offseason in FA so I could definitely see them moving him.

It doesn't seem the Jagurs are interested in trading Fowler, therefore that might be a moot point to discuss.

The safety market would make keeping/replacing HHCD pretty easy (a lot of quality players sat out there this offseason and ended up signing team friendly contracts).

It took the Packers close to three years to find an at least adequate replacement for Collins in Clinton-Dix. I wouldn't be a non-issue to find another decent safety without having a ton of cap space to make a move.

yep because cutting one aging player to sign another aging player that litteraly needs a HoF QB apparently in order to produce is a great idea. (God i can't believe people actually use that as a mark in his favor)

Fortunately Graham has a future HOFer throwing him the ball in Green Bay.

We definitely differ on how devastating he was in NO. He was a really good #2 WR behind Colston. Effective. Pretty good. But no where near devastating once the TE label is shedded.

You're kidding, aren't you??? Graham ranked fifth in receptions, 10th in receiving yards and second in touchdowns in the entire league while with the Saints from 2011-14.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The Raiders are trading Khalil Mack to the Bears.

 

[Firethorn1001]

Sucks that it is the Bears, but always made the most sense that it was the Bears, Jets or Browns given cap space.

 

[XPack]

Please god no. Now the NFC North will be the hardest division of all to win. Would have preferred Jets or Browns or any team in AFC, tbh

 

[Snoops]

The Raiders are trading Khalil Mack to the Bears.

Just saw that well now he gets to wreck havoc on Rodgers

 

[Snoops]

The Raiders are trading Khalil Mack to the Bears.

Would u try and get Thomas from Seattle for a second?

 

[Mondio]

it's just talk till the ink dries

 

[Mondio]

Would u try and get Thomas from Seattle for a second?

I've been thinking this in the back of my mind. I think a ballhawking safety right now helps this D a lot. and will be a lot cheaper in trading and compensation