Khalil Mack thread

Originally posted by English:
Armstead, Ward, a 1st and a 2nd? No. Too much.

If Mack ends up getting traded... I think people are going to be shocked by how little these internet suggested prices match up with reality.

If the Niners (or any team) were willing to give up all of that...they could not give up the players, wait a year, and attempt to sign him as a franchise player. Even if he was given the exclusive tag, they could still work out a trade for less than the internet suggested price.

Originally posted by okdkid:

Originally posted by jcs:

Originally posted by okdkid:

Originally posted by jcs:
Reading that the Raiders might not have the cash on hand to pay him the guaranteed money that he's demanding

+ Show all quotes
Even if they didn't... they could EASILY borrow against future receivables with the new stadium. They would be the most secure loan to make in lending history. So, this is just fan talk. Short term and long term cash flow are a non-issue. The issue is about worth.

They don't even have the money to pay for that LV stadium without concessions and you think they'll be able to borrow $100 million off of it to play a player?

Yes. It would be a 15 minute phone call. Don't be ridiculous. Lenders want to secure their loans. An NFL team moving into a new stadium is a mortal lock.

I get that it's funny to trash the Raiders. And it's even funnier to talk about how little money somebody has. But this is an NFL team sitting on a billion dollar stadium, with GUARANTEED REVENUE provided by the league. I didn't say taking a loan would be smart business. It would be dumb. All I'm saying is if they agreed to terms with Mack...they could easily have the cash on hand to put into escrow and make it happen. This is a fan-narrative. The issue is that the Raiders know they have him guaranteed to be on their roster for the next 3 years at predictable prices. Literally the only thing Mack can do is not play football...which means the Raiders don't have to pay him. Their defense cannot get any worse.

This line of thinking would make sense if they had not already paid the other 2 of the 1st 3 picks from that draft a market rate contract extension when entering their last year. There is an issue with Mac. Either A: there is a personality conflict, B: he is asking for a stupid contract that no team is likely to agree to or C: next years potentially historic pass rush class has the Raiders looking at their financial future sans a huge contract to Mac.

I think the Raiders would probably like to trade him, however, unless a team is in win-now mode I don't see any team willing to pay the price in light of the class of PR that coming in next years draft as well as the potential that some productive younger vets or players with untapped potential are likely to be available in FA at the position. I think teams and especially the 49ers will be patient, kind of like how Kyle didn't panic to get his QB in the building year one and call up Washington offering them a ridiculous trade despite KC being the guy KS really coveted. His patience really worked out well for him.

Originally posted by WINiner:
This line of thinking would make sense if they had not already paid the other 2 of the 1st 3 picks from that draft a market rate contract extension when entering their last year. There is an issue with Mac. Either A: there is a personality conflict, B: he is asking for a stupid contract that no team is likely to agree to or C: next years potentially historic pass rush class has the Raiders looking at their financial future sans a huge contract to Mac.

I think the Raiders would probably like to trade him, however, unless a team is in win-now mode I don't see any team willing to pay the price in light of the class of PR that coming in next years draft as well as the potential that some productive younger vets or players with untapped potential are likely to be available in FA at the position. I think teams and especially the 49ers will be patient, kind of like how Kyle didn't panic to get his QB in the building year one and call up Washington offering them a ridiculous trade despite KC being the guy KS really coveted. His patience really worked out well for him.

Sure, but that doesn't mean the Raiders can't control him for the next three years. Maybe Mack is being unreasonable. Maybe it's the Raiders. We don't know. All we know is that they don't agree. My only point is that this short term cash narrative is total BS.

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by jobiwon:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/vincentfrank/2018/08/15/heres-why-the-49ers-should-offer-the-farm-in-a-trade-for-khalil-mack/#5656cda92899

Armstead, Ward, a 1st and a 2nd? No. Too much.

It's really just a 1st and a 2nd round pick. And would clear some tables in the medical facility.

This. It's actually not enough to make the raiders bite, IMO. Two mediocre players and a 1st round pick that is essentially going to end up being close to an early 2nd round pick plus a 2nd round pick that's basically an early 3rd? The raiders would have to be desperate to accept that. Then again, they are the raiders, so..

Armstead and Ward aren't good enough to be looked at like we're losing good players AND draft capital. These dudes probably won't be on the team next year anyway.

Originally posted by WINiner:
I think teams and especially the 49ers will be patient, kind of like how Kyle didn't panic to get his QB in the building year one and call up Washington offering them a ridiculous trade despite KC being the guy KS really coveted. His patience really worked out well for him.

We have no way of knowing that they didn't try to do that, though. It was reported that Dan Snyder wouldn't accept anything the 49ers were to offer because he hates Kyle Shanahan. So, it is entirely possible the 49ers were willing to send a ridiculous amount of stock to Washington for Cousins and Snyder's ego got in the way. It may have been Snyder's ridiculous grudge against Shanny that worked out well for us in the end.

Raiders ain't trading him and have no desire to do so. Worst case he gets tagged and gets to do this all over again next year.

Just a game of chicken.

Create a custom 49ers jersey ⇨

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Raiders DE Khalil Mack will not report to team before its second preseason game Saturday, per source, meaning he will be fined another $814,000, bringing his two missed preseason game total to $1.628 million. More important for both sides: there is no end in sight, per source.

— Adam Schefter (@AdamSchefter) August 16, 2018

But Gruden told me an end was in sight?

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by jobiwon:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/vincentfrank/2018/08/15/heres-why-the-49ers-should-offer-the-farm-in-a-trade-for-khalil-mack/#5656cda92899

Armstead, Ward, a 1st and a 2nd? No. Too much.

LOL.. not for an elite pass rusher. you act like our team would suffer to get rid of those two underachieving bums. and i would be more than happy to give up a first round next year and a second rounder the year after.

Originally posted by TheXFactor:
who the hell uses the term "the farm" when talking about football?

ward and aa are the weeds and or cow manure in our farm

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
I disagree. 2 injury prone, under achieving players coupled with a 1st and a 2nd would be a steal for a DPOY monster off the edge. Do you take issue with the picks, the players or both?

i would like to hear english answer this one. man oh man. i would make that trade in a second. you have a chance to get this guy but some would rather hold onto ward and aa??!!

Originally posted by okdkid:

Originally posted by jcs:

Originally posted by okdkid:

Originally posted by jcs:
Reading that the Raiders might not have the cash on hand to pay him the guaranteed money that he's demanding

+ Show all quotes
Even if they didn't... they could EASILY borrow against future receivables with the new stadium. They would be the most secure loan to make in lending history. So, this is just fan talk. Short term and long term cash flow are a non-issue. The issue is about worth.

They don't even have the money to pay for that LV stadium without concessions and you think they'll be able to borrow $100 million off of it to play a player?

Yes. It would be a 15 minute phone call. Don't be ridiculous. Lenders want to secure their loans. An NFL team moving into a new stadium is a mortal lock.

I get that it's funny to trash the Raiders. And it's even funnier to talk about how little money somebody has. But this is an NFL team sitting on a billion dollar stadium, with GUARANTEED REVENUE provided by the league. I didn't say taking a loan would be smart business. It would be dumb. All I'm saying is if they agreed to terms with Mack...they could easily have the cash on hand to put into escrow and make it happen. This is a fan-narrative. The issue is that the Raiders know they have him guaranteed to be on their roster for the next 3 years at predictable prices. Literally the only thing Mack can do is not play football...which means the Raiders don't have to pay him. Their defense cannot get any worse.

Sorry okdkic, I am with jcs on this one. It has been reported ad nauseam that the Raiders simply do not have the liquid funds to sign Mack. They need the money now. Future guaranteed revenue is not something that helps in this situation in the slightest bit.

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

I disagree. 2 injury prone, under achieving players coupled with a 1st and a 2nd would be a steal for a DPOY monster off the edge. Do you take issue with the picks, the players or both?

i would like to hear english answer this one. man oh man. i would make that trade in a second. you have a chance to get this guy but some would rather hold onto ward and aa??!!

No one cares about them. The issue is why would the Raiders trade for them?

Originally posted by mojave45:

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
I disagree. 2 injury prone, under achieving players coupled with a 1st and a 2nd would be a steal for a DPOY monster off the edge. Do you take issue with the picks, the players or both?

i would like to hear english answer this one. man oh man. i would make that trade in a second. you have a chance to get this guy but some would rather hold onto ward and aa??!!

No one cares about them. The issue is why would the Raiders trade for them?

maybe they see all this amazing potential they allegedly have,. maybe they think a four for one deal is good. maybe they have confidence they can make ward and aa into good football players, for those who do not like the idea floated by forbes, is it cuz you do not want to give up the draft picks or the players. i think you need to swing for the fences,. many feel we have some amazing offense. why not solve the biggest issue on the team in one move. we can also afford him long term as well cuz we have money unlike the raiders

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Sorry okdkic, I am with jcs on this one. It has been reported ad nauseam that the Raiders simply do not have the liquid funds to sign Mack. They need the money now. Future guaranteed revenue is not something that helps in this situation in the slightest bit.

1) That is not what has been reported. That is what has been speculated. They are not the same thing.

2) Guranteed future money for an NFL franchise will always help secure short term money. That's how loans work.