2018-2019 NFL Season Thread Football • Page 933

I also like what @GreatBeardRecs just said. Yeah if he wanted to set records with his contract then maybe you think about the cap. But he costs about as much as any team would pay a top pass rusher. You SHOULD have 19-20 mill AAV set aside for a top notch pass rusher?? If not that’s poor cap management.

 

I just don't think the salary cap is THAT hard of a thing to navigate for a GM. I think we're overthinking the contracts and how little space teams have to make moves because we're armchair GMs. Teams can manipulate the cap pretty damn easily even without going the whole Cowboys-constant-restructure route.

 

I hated the Mack deal at first because I thought Gruden wanted to compete. But if we're in full rebuild mode than I agree with @CarpetElf. By the time the rest of the roster is built and ready to win, Mack won't be Mack anymore, unless he starts doing TB12 because PLIABILITY. So may as well get a haul for him that can speed up the rest of the rebuild.

 

I just don't agree. The Raiders are a VERY VERY bad team.

Mack is a top three pass rusher for the next four years. That's a great way to put it. Then he's costing you 20+ million at 30+ years old. Meanwhile, four years from now, the top pass rushers in this draft will STILL be four years younger than Mack is NOW.

I'm literally not saying it's bad for a rebuild. I'm explaining the logic behind the move, that's all lol.

hahahahaha nah

 

Out of all the players most likely to have a Brady-esque prime in terms of longevity, I do think Khalil Mack is #1 on that list at this time.

 

My point is they had other players to trade for draft picks. They didn’t need to get rid of an elite player to set Gruden up for a rebuild.

 

Yeah, that's what I'd like to know.

And saying being a GM and managing a salary cap not being that hard? Cmon...

 

Sure, but my point stands that using that now as a negative to a trade months ago doesn't make sense.

 

Pass rushers last a long time. Look at Calais Campbell, look at fuckin Julius Peppers who had double digit sacks at 37 yo last year. Jared Allen was good until 35, etc. We are talking about a position that is still a HIGHLY valuable investment in their lower 30s.

 

Sure it does. When he looked at the roster at the beginning of the year he should have said,

“we just resigned Mack to a reasonable deal given his talent, and he is too good to trade, we won’t find anyone like that in the draft”

“Cooper is in a contract year and he ain’t playin like a round 1 WR so I’d rather trade him than sign him”

The two decisions were made for the same reason. Trading Cooper just made way more sense cause they would have made out much worse on value if they kept him than keeping Mack.

 

I learned my cap knowledge from Madden Franchise

Cap space for dayyyyysssss

 

Campbell - 4 sacks, 17.5 million cap hit

 

it is literally not about that stop repeating this lol

 

Trading good players who are veterans make sense, but not truly elite players who your fan base like to tune in to watch.

I also disagree with the philosophy of tanking in football, I don’t think it’s a wise strategy because it’s a slippery slope to walk on.

 

It doesn't make sense because they had no idea how much they'd get back for Cooper, if anything. It's like looking at All Pros now and criticizing all the teams who passed on them in the past.

 

Unless u trade them

 

Oh I think being a GM is INSANELY hard. I just think a GM is going to be able to manage a salary cap with Khalil Mack on it MUCH better than the Chorus.fm community because a GM has the knowledge to manage the salary cap. I'm definitely not understating the job haha, on the contrary really.

 

You also have to take into account that Conley and Joseph are both on the block with rumors that Carr isn't necessarily a franchise piece either.

So you remove those three and you have what? Kolton Miller, Brandon Parker, PJ Hall, Arden Key, Maurice Hurst, and Johnny Townsend. That's your young core.

 

Please don't jinx us Hopkins

 

My dude

 

Here’s why I don’t like the Raiders tanking idea:

1) so you tank, get rid of known good players, but you mess up in the draft? Now guess what? You’re the pre-2017 Cleveland Browns. If you don’t actually knock the draft out of the park with those first round picks then you look like an idiot getting rid of the only player who would’ve helped you compete.

2) obviously if you’re suggesting that you like the Mack trade, you DONT think they’ll mess up in the draft - so let me get this straight:

You’re saying you trust the Raiders to draft well enough without Mack to start over at pass rusher and get good, but you’re saying you don’t trust them to get good over the 4-5 years of Mack’s prime if they kept him and had normal drafts?

What kind of backward ass logic is that! If Gruden can’t take advantage of Mack’s prime when it just began then fuck Gruden I’m trading HIM. 4 years is PLENTY of time to turn a team around.

 

Now we're onto something

 

I still think you don't understand this haha. That's literally not backwards at all. They want a deeper team. They have NOTHING right now.

 

Can't trust Nuk's opinion anymore now that we know he doesn't know how to do math

 

You keep saying this while multiple people in this thread are agreeing with me. I’m done for now dude haha.

I’m not over here saying YOU don’t understand. A few members have agreed with you as well. It’s different schools of thought