What It All Means
Among the many opinions about what transpired over the weekend, there is one indisputable fact: the Raiders traded away their best player. And however you slice it, that is tough to swallow.
Fair points are being made on both sides of the argument as to whether or not this was a terrible move or a reasonable move. The bottom line is that it will take some time before we can get a full accounting of this deal. It all depends on how those first-round picks are used, and how the extra cash is spent.
Yesterday, Gruden cited Carr's salary as a factor in being unable to accommodate Mack. Yes, the Raiders are paying Derek Carr a lot of money. However, numerous competitive teams are paying top dollar for quarterbacks. Click here to see a list of quarterbacks who are making $21 million or more per year. Eight QBs are making as much or more than Derek Carr ($25 million), and four are making more.
So my question is, after all of these years under Reggie McKenzie, why the Raiders are still not in a position to pay the market rate for their best players after fielding a team that went 6-10 last year?
If perennial playoff contenders with high-paid quarterbacks can manage to build (and pay for) winning rosters, why can't the Raiders? If they didn't have enough money for Mack because they'd spent all their money on building a winning roster, that would be one thing. Yet here we are, without (allegedly) enough money for Mack and a team with questionable collective talent that went 6-10 last year.
I suspect that this is what was stuck in Gruden's craw. There have been plenty of persuasive rumors that McKenzie's personnel authority has been stripped, and the Mack deal is the best evidence yet. Gruden just couldn't see a good way forward if they paid Mack the going rate, and he decided that he would rather rebuild the Raiders than try to prop up the house of cards that he believes he inherited. He wanted the picks and the cash to go another way. So he shipped off the best draft pick of the McKenzie era, and sent the best Raider packing to buy picks and financial latitude.
The taste left in our mouths is a bitter one. Mack was a true Raider. A throwback to the good old days when the Raiders were known for terrorizing quarterbacks. The one draft pick in many years where the Raiders hit an absolute home run. He was, by all accounts, a consummate professional in the locker room and on the field. His was a jersey you felt good about buying. And now, as he enters his prime--poof!--he's gone.
It's also a gut punch on the eve of the 2018 season opener. The Raiders are not long for Oakland, and now they seem to be punting the proverbial ball to the Las Vegas era. Gruden has a 10-year contract and apparently the power to go with it. He is taking the long view, and if that means taking a step back this year, then he's saying, "So be it."
E.J. Manuel and Connor Cook? Poof, gone. The quarterback whisperer had seen enough after tutoring them all the way through the preseason, and decided that a Bills castoff was better than both of them. Meanwhile, the Raiders have suddenly become the oldest team in the NFL in at least six years, which is right in line with Gruden's known M.O. He's got his hands all over McKenzie's Legos and he's re-stacking them in his own image.
In other words, what you are seeing is the opening act of what will be The Gruden Show for years to come.
McKenzie did just okay at the personnel helm. He righted a sinking ship early on but the overall results are lacking. One playoff appearance in six years in a league that is built for parity. Let's hope Gruden does better.
(However, Gruden is already off to a questionable personnel start by donating a third round pick to the Steelers for a known head case who won't play a snap for the Raiders. Let's try to pretend that didn't happen?)
The curtain is rising. The Gruden Show is about to begin. We don't know how it will end, but it's hard to give it a thumb's up or down when we haven't even seen the first act yet.
Fair points are being made on both sides of the argument as to whether or not this was a terrible move or a reasonable move. The bottom line is that it will take some time before we can get a full accounting of this deal. It all depends on how those first-round picks are used, and how the extra cash is spent.
Yesterday, Gruden cited Carr's salary as a factor in being unable to accommodate Mack. Yes, the Raiders are paying Derek Carr a lot of money. However, numerous competitive teams are paying top dollar for quarterbacks. Click here to see a list of quarterbacks who are making $21 million or more per year. Eight QBs are making as much or more than Derek Carr ($25 million), and four are making more.
So my question is, after all of these years under Reggie McKenzie, why the Raiders are still not in a position to pay the market rate for their best players after fielding a team that went 6-10 last year?
If perennial playoff contenders with high-paid quarterbacks can manage to build (and pay for) winning rosters, why can't the Raiders? If they didn't have enough money for Mack because they'd spent all their money on building a winning roster, that would be one thing. Yet here we are, without (allegedly) enough money for Mack and a team with questionable collective talent that went 6-10 last year.
I suspect that this is what was stuck in Gruden's craw. There have been plenty of persuasive rumors that McKenzie's personnel authority has been stripped, and the Mack deal is the best evidence yet. Gruden just couldn't see a good way forward if they paid Mack the going rate, and he decided that he would rather rebuild the Raiders than try to prop up the house of cards that he believes he inherited. He wanted the picks and the cash to go another way. So he shipped off the best draft pick of the McKenzie era, and sent the best Raider packing to buy picks and financial latitude.
The taste left in our mouths is a bitter one. Mack was a true Raider. A throwback to the good old days when the Raiders were known for terrorizing quarterbacks. The one draft pick in many years where the Raiders hit an absolute home run. He was, by all accounts, a consummate professional in the locker room and on the field. His was a jersey you felt good about buying. And now, as he enters his prime--poof!--he's gone.
It's also a gut punch on the eve of the 2018 season opener. The Raiders are not long for Oakland, and now they seem to be punting the proverbial ball to the Las Vegas era. Gruden has a 10-year contract and apparently the power to go with it. He is taking the long view, and if that means taking a step back this year, then he's saying, "So be it."
E.J. Manuel and Connor Cook? Poof, gone. The quarterback whisperer had seen enough after tutoring them all the way through the preseason, and decided that a Bills castoff was better than both of them. Meanwhile, the Raiders have suddenly become the oldest team in the NFL in at least six years, which is right in line with Gruden's known M.O. He's got his hands all over McKenzie's Legos and he's re-stacking them in his own image.
In other words, what you are seeing is the opening act of what will be The Gruden Show for years to come.
McKenzie did just okay at the personnel helm. He righted a sinking ship early on but the overall results are lacking. One playoff appearance in six years in a league that is built for parity. Let's hope Gruden does better.
(However, Gruden is already off to a questionable personnel start by donating a third round pick to the Steelers for a known head case who won't play a snap for the Raiders. Let's try to pretend that didn't happen?)
The curtain is rising. The Gruden Show is about to begin. We don't know how it will end, but it's hard to give it a thumb's up or down when we haven't even seen the first act yet.
posted by Raider Take at 2:51 PM
44 Comments:
RT,
Very balanced and captures my feelings well.
Losing Mack stings as he is everything you described and more. Saturday I was heartbroken.
However after a day or two, I see the rational of the move and also am sympathetic to the Raiders moving quickly rather than having your star holdout which really would screw with the morale.
I am 100% in players corners as it comes to the NFL s the owners treat them like cattle. That being said we will never know exactly what transpired behind the scenes but I do now Mack was not showing up and he was dead set on being the highest paid defensive player---all the power to him.
One small point, there might be 8 qbs who make 20mm (you must have a QB) but there are no teams with two guys making 20mm.
Good news is we have Carr and that is half the battle to being a good team.
Looking forward to the season. All the best
Sandy
Al Davis would say the "QB must go down, and go down hard!" You don't need a superstar QB to win a Super Bowl, you need a consistent QB. To get a consistent QB, you need consistency in coaching. Something the Raiders didn't have this last decade-in-a-half.
Defensive players like Mack, are equivalent to Singletary, Howie Long, Lawrence Taylor, and Bruce Smith. You didn't see their teams let them go on a whim. No, they did everything to keep them on the roster.
I don't think money was the problem here. Ego was. Jon and Reggie's ego. Reggie did it to Penn last season, saying if he's not here, he doesn't get a new deal. Tried the same with the best, and lost the bluff. Gruden saying that the Raiders offer was nowhere near the Bears just shows how out of touch Gruden is with the current state of football. He never believed in strong defenses his first go round, and this is what drove Al crazy about him. The ONLY reason he has a Super Bowl ring is because he inherited a strong defense in Tampa Bay. What did he do after that Super Bowl? You guessed it, dismantled that defense.
This has left a real bitter taste in my mouth. Charles Woodson said, "It is never about one person, it is about us, and what we can do together." Mack made people around him better. He was a leader. He never made it about himself, and he always showed up. Gruden has made this about himself, and that is my problem right now with all of this.
I said it in my last post. He said in his press conference that $90 million guaranteed is a lot of money for a defensive player; and yet failed to answer his own $100 million guaranteed for a non-player. It was never about paying/nor paying Mack. It was about Gruden not liking how Mack wanted his business handled. Gruden never reached out to him. Mack indicated from Day 1, he felt Gruden didn't want him there. Why? Mack was bigger than Gruden. Mack overshadowed Gruden. The one constant thing that drowned out Gruden's press was "When are you going to sign Mack?" Gruden wants it to be about him, which is why DC is still on the team, because DC makes it about Gruden. I'm not sure this will bode well for the Raiders. I will continue to hope and root for them, but I have a bad feeling about this; and it makes me sick to my stomach.
Thanks, Sandy.
"One small point, there might be 8 qbs who make 20mm (you must have a QB) but there are no teams with two guys making 20mm."
Yet most of those teams with high-paid QBs are perennial winners. So where has all of our non-QB money gone if not to Mack? To building a 6-10 worthy roster? Apparently, and that's probably Gruden's frustration.
I understand both sides on this. I hate to be wishy washy on this one, but there are just too many unknowns at this point. Maybe there's an ego factor, as Nate suggests.
Which brings us to Nate's point. A bird in the hand beats two in the bush, as they say. Mack makes us better today, and he's gone.
It confirms a seismic shift in the power structure and ultimately the direction of the Raiders.
We were all hoping that Gruden would try to take the Oakland Raiders to the promised land. Instead, it looks like he's rebuilding with the hopes of taking the VEGAS Raiders to the promised land. Call it stupid, shortsighted, egotistical, reasonable, brilliant or whatever.
But that's what the tea leaves of the Mack deal are telling us.
No mystery here about my opinion on this. It was a BS move filled with lame excuses. As Nate said, you don't trade Mike Singletary, Howie Long, Lawrence Taylor, or Bruce Smith. Mack is all these guys and still in his prime.
There are so many ways to analyze this move but my favorite analogy has been the lottery ticket. McKenzie/Gruden win the lottery (Mack!) and instead of cashing in their ticket, they ask to exchange for more lottery tickets.
Classic case of cutting off your nose to spite your face. Take a known commodity and exchange it for pure speculation. Brilliant!
It's been written six ways to Sunday how the Raiders could afford Mack without mortgaging their future. Bears cap hit this year is Mack's pre-existing rookie contract. Raiders already had that on their books, and another $8.0 million to help lower the cap hit in following years; and there were many other mitigating factors as well. This is just stupid.
And paying Mack wasn't just about Mack. As Nate points out, Mack's presence boosts the players around him. This was the perfect year for that to play out, with PJ Hall, Mo Hurst and Key. Vanderdose, Edwards and others were never worthy of Mack's talent.
Lest we forget, Mack is the guy with five sacks in one game against Denver. The guy that gets doubled and tripled regularly, effectively reducing an offense to 9-10 players.
This thing went south when Mack didn't show up for a single off-season or pre-season event. That's when Gruden's ego kicked in and he cashed in Mack's pay stub for more lottery tickets. Problem now is that Gruden the GM doesn't have nearly the clout as Gruden the coach. Just ask Bucs fans.
Another crazy irony here is that you trade for a team's draft picks while also lowering their draft stock by making them a better team. Bears defense is loaded with talent. Raiders fans have to hope their young QB falls on his face in order to keep their draft value high. (My guess is the Raiders pick will probably happen before the Bears pick in 2019.)
Mack was McKenzie's legacy. By extension, trading Mack is Gruden's legacy (no matter how much Gruden tries to deflect responsibility).
So when Mack is inducted into the HOF, he'll be wearing a Bears' jersey. We'll all have to live with that.
2018 Raiders took several major hits last week, and they were mostly self-inflicted. Let's hope this week is better!
Take a look at the Raiders' drafts. This is nothing less than a complete dismantling; for better or for worse.
The latest move, Hester for Price is a lateral move, at best, as it removes a roster player who spent the entire offseason with the program and replaces him with an undrafted player with minimal pro experience who has never seen the Raiders playbook.
https://www.silverandblackpride.com/2018/9/2/17812648/jon-gruden-has-re-enacted-the-purge-with-reggie-mckenzie-raiders-draft-picks
Hester was a guy that just seemed to keep getting better. This is another headscratcher.
Indeed, for better or worse, it's clearly The Gruden Show now.
NY,
You are the guy who has consistently and often correctly criticized Reggie's drafts. Now you are upset that some of those crap players are being purged? Gilchrist for Obi, Rucker for Hester, Whitehead for James, PJ Hall for Edwards Jr. Cromartie for whoever was in our DB last year. Sounds good to me.
Sandy
How many years did we live under a mantra of "build through the draft" only to become the oldest team in recorded NFL history.
To be sure, McKenzie has made some bonehead decisions, but he's also made some good ones, like drafting Khalil Mack. That's ancient history now. A few more draft picks out the door and the Raiders will be completely void of the McKenzie era.
And it wasn't Rucker for Hester. It was Price from the Cowboys for an established roster player on his way up the ladder.
I want to make one thing clear. Even though I am extremely upset with Gruden for trading Mack; I am still a Raiders' fan, and will always be a Raiders' fan. Win, Lose, or Tie; Raiders til I die!
With that said, I fear that this is going to be a black eye for the Raiders, and it is going to hurt more than it helps. I'm not drinking the Kool-Aid of the Front Office with this move; but come Monday Night, I will be screaming for the Raiders. I hope the Raiders defense will prove me wrong, and get a high # of double-digit sacks and place high on the defensive charts. My initial reaction, Raiders defense has struggled with QB pressure since before Reggie took over. Mack helped change that, even when the rest of the team struggled, Mack kept us in the game, and even won some games single-handedly for us. I am not sure a rotation of DT's and Tank Carradine/Arden Key is going to change this. At the same time, I cannot say that Arden Key is not Khalil Mack; he has to prove it. JON GRUDEN put this team in the most detrimental position since the Raiders traded Gruden to Tampa. This is why Reggie should still have control over the team/roster, to keep Gruden's ego in check. This is a sad day in Raider Nation, and I hope it is short lived by winning. JON GRUDEN NEEDS TO WIN MONDAY NIGHT!
Nate, if you can't say it, I will; Arden Key is NOT, and never will be, Khalil Mack. Key is more of a specialist. He's an edge rusher by trade, and as green as they come... playing his first NFL game this week.
Mack is a monster of defense. He can do it all. The guy can curl an offensive lineman with his bicep. My favorite Mack move is his bull rush. The highlight reel they've been repeating on NFL Network shows Mack tackling Broncos QB and lineman at the same time.
Mack can take anyone in the NFL and push them right into the QB. Don't expect Key to do that. Maybe PJ Hall or Hurst once they get their feet under them.
I expect PJ Hall to be the prize of the rookie class. In addition to pressures, he will block passes, kicks, etc. He plays smart.
News Flash: Tank Carradine replaces Mack at DE, with Fadol Brown and Frostee Rucker as depth.
Carradine was a cast-off from the 49ers. Looked decent in preseason, but I'm about to lose my lunch thinking he's Mack's replacement.
This can't be happening! I'm still Stage 1: Denial.
This is a great quote of Peter King on the Dan Patrick Show today:
"You draft players to develop them into Khalil Mack on and off the field."
Is Arden Key Khalil Mack? No, but they drafted him in hopes to be like Mack, which is why I say Key has to prove it now. He can be like Mack if he puts in the work like Mack did. He definitely has the potential, but does he have the character.
Another thing this trade does is keep quality players from coming to Oakland. They all know that Gruden will not pay what it takes to get Super Bowl quality players. Like I said, this will be the thing that haunts Gruden his coaching career. This trade was worse than Al Davis trading away Marcus Allen for Harvey Williams. I say worse because Al got another RB in return with NFL experience, just not Marcus Allen experience. Look how that turned out for us. The only difference is we won't face Mack twice a season like we had to with Marcus. Good thing too, because if we did, I don't think Carr would last long against Khalil.
Mack is a truck. Key is tall and slender, much lighter than Mack. Key's not an every down player, and probably never will be. IMO, with a little experience already under his belt, Calhoun might be a better edge rusher option right now... and that's kind of scary.
The depth chart speaks to what I suspect about the rookies. PJ Hall will be the star of this class. He pushes with quick bursts into the backfield. He's gonna be fun to watch develop.
Agreed, I think Hall has an immediate positive impact on the team this year, and dare I say, maybe even Rookie of Year honors. Miller might turn out to be not so bad, but I want to reserve judgment until he gets games under his belt.
He didn't fare to bad in preseason, even though he had some hiccups, he quickly recovered. He has good foot movement, and hip placement when squaring up to block. Speed rushers do get the better of him at times, and he has to work on hand-to-hand. I am not sure how well he can read defensive packages, but maybe Rodney Hudson and Osemele will communicate responsibility to him more in that arena.
The bottom line, his learning curve should be short and tight. We cannot afford to have Carr lost to an injury. I think this is why Gruden will have more roll-outs, QB runs, etc; to help alleviate some of the busted blocks. If that doesn't work out, then Penn will move back to LT, and we'd have to pursue a RT.
The only way I move on from Mack is if our defense produces consistent QB pressure/double-digit sacks as a team, and we move near the Top 10 defense in the League. Anything short of this is unacceptable, and if it is doesn't happen in more than a year, then Gruden should lose his job over it.
Mark Davis doesn't have the nuts for that. Let's face it, Gruden is his own boss. And even if the Raiders D improves, speculation over the impact of losing Mack will linger for a long time, maybe years. Unless the Raiders win a SB, hardcore Raiders fans will be lamenting the decision to trade Mack thru his entire career and eventual induction into the HOF. Trading Mack was a game changer, no matter how you slice it.
http://www.optimumscouting.com/news/three-takeaways-from-nfl-agents-on-the-khalil-mack
Here is a great article on the perspective of the Mack trade from agents. #2 says it all to me.
I don't want this to come out wrong, but Mack was a great player on a losing team. Mack was a great player on a bad defense. I don't fault him for those things, but maybe better to have 11 men on defense playing together, than one great player and 10 lamp posts.
00 it's okay to have your cake and eat it too. Patriots, Steelers, Cowboys, etc. do it all the time. Like you said, it's not Mack's fault. Just the opposite. He's a team player to the core.
Raiders replaced Downing with Gruden and Norton/Del Rio with Guenther. They add PJ Hall, Mo Hurst and Arden Key to the line, then swap out the secondary with mostly vets. There's no way Mack doesn't make that lineup better.
2016 when the Raiders went 12-4, Mack won one game single-handed with a late game stuff, and made huge contributions in others. His presence might be worth 1-2 wins a season. For a sound roster under good coaching, that could easily be the difference in making the playoffs, or more.
If just being an NFL team is all the Raiders aspire to, then trading Mack was a good move. They save a bucket of cash (even though the CBA mandates spending it). However, if winning games is important too, they went backwards with no guarantee of recovering.
NYR...I agree. Would have loved to see Mack with this group, and this DC, Guenther.
Also hope its true Raiders are phasing out Reggie. He came with mandate to tear down roster, and restructure salary cap. He did both, and made two great picks in Carr and Mack. But there was really not much else positive to speak of.
Everyone knows good NFL teams are built on picks in rounds 2 to 5. Aside from Carr, what did Reggie have to show for his drafts ? Nothing. He deserves to go.
Good point. How can McKenzie be retained after this latest roster purge? McKenzie's fingerprints are all but gone. Gruden will want his own guy.
Just so you know, it was Gruden's call to trade Mack; so be careful what you wish for here. If Reggie goes, the Raiders will still need a GM that will keep Gruden's ego in check. I tell you what too, with Cooper's contract coming up, you know he is sweating bullets.
I think Gruden is grooming Guenther and Brian Callahan to possibly be head coaches; so do not plan on them being here "long term" unless Gruden becomes the GM and one of these guys becomes the next Head Coach of the Raiders. I think Gruden has some lofty aspirations. Since Mark Davis took over for the Raiders, I have always felt like if the Raiders won a Super Bowl, he would try and sell the team. Reggie is hoping to get him there, and has done a fabulous job with the cap and (agree with it or not) the roster. Our roster is (and has been for the last 3 season) more competitive than the last decade. That is a contribution of Reggie. Unfortunately, we had a coaching staff that was way over its head last season.
It wouldn't surprise me if the Raiders win a Super Bowl in the near future, Mark Davis hangs a "For Sale" sign on the team. He wants a Super Bowl win because it will add value to the team, which is decreasing in value with every losing season. If it happens, hopefully it will come with some markers like not changing the name brand/color scheme. But it wouldn't surprise me if someone close to the team right now is vying for a position to buy the Davis family out, similar to how Al Davis bought the Raiders back in the day. I will be interested to see how this plays out, but remember you read it here first.
How did Marshawn Lynch get on the injury report? He spent the entire pre-season watching from the sideline.
Raiders off to a dubious start. Rams are playoff contender and predicted by most to roll over the Raiders in Week 1. Highest scoring team last year. And unlike the Raiders, they have their star lineman... which is really more than just Donald. The Rams are loaded with talent on both sides of the ball.
Raiders will need to pull a significant upset to take the sting away from losing Mack.
Mack already making an impact on the Bears defense, was part of a play where Rodgers was injured and eventually carted off. And just recovered a fumble off DeShone Kiser.
His lack of presence will hurt the Raiders. I hope Gruden is watching and asking himself, "What have I done?"
And a pick 6
I hope Gruden is enjoying the Bears game. Mack has been a one-man wrecking ball in the first half.
Gruden probably should be fired, tonight. Giving away Khalil Mack was as dumb as it gets.
Draft picks are meaningless when you already had the best player.
I wish Gruden was in my living room, so I could smack him upside his head and ask, "WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?"
It will hurt worse if the Raiders have no pressures, or double digit QB sacks as a team this season. At least Rex Ryan is not our Head Coach. Then again, he wouldn't have traded away Khalil Mack.
Once the Packers adjusted to Mack, you saw the reason why you don't pay QB money to a defender. Mack was not able to create anything and the Packers took over.
The Packers had not game-planned for Mack in the 1st half and that is why he looked so dominant. Once the adjustment was made, Mack was a non factor.
Yes, K-Mack is a great player, the position he plays does not make him as dominating in a game play as much as a QB. Quick passes, chip blocks and the like take Mack out of the game.
If the Bears QB turns out to be a flop, the Raiders will have great draft picks to choose from.
Raider
Mack is only supposed to be a gog in the wheel. And, let's face it, not every QB in the league is Aaron Rodgers. Mack was a difference-maker in this game - highlighted by a strip sack and a TD - but the Bears could not capitalize. Bears scored three points in the second half. Sounds more like their offense let them down. No way you play the Packers and not expect to trade scores.
Not only is Mack a one man wrecking crew but he makes the players around him better. So let's please not pretend for a second we are better off without him.
At the end of the day (i.e., end of the game, in this case), we should all be happy that the Bears lost. One step closer to a high round draft pick.
Correction: Bears scored 6 points in 2nd half.
Mack's stats:
-Sack
-INT
-Forced fumble
-Fumble recovery
-Defensive TD
And that's one half in a game which Mack was used sparingly since he didn't practice with the Bears, nor participate in pre-season. What happens when he gets up to speed?
The embarrassment for Gruden and the Raiders is gonna linger.
..............
No worries, Raiders will pick up Mack when he's a free agent. McKenzie will still be GM, and the Raiders will get the deal they sought this year.
Mack continued to pressure Rodgers all night, even the second half. Mack was in pass coverage and chased down Cobb and hit him before he got in the End Zone. Mack was all over the field last night. Not his fault the Bears offense went 3 and out, and are inexperienced. Raiders offense wouldn't have blown a 20-0 lead like that.
NY is right, just wait until Mack gets into football shape and becomes familiar with the Bears scheme and plays every down. I'll place the bet now, they demolish the Packers next time they face them.
I will say it again, this will all be easier, not just with winning, but a top ranked defense that consistently pressures and sacks the opposing QB. I fear that the Raiders as a team won't get double-digit sacks this season. Reports are that the Raiders could have signed Mack in February to $65-70 million guaranteed. Pretty significantly less. I refer back to the Peter King quote last week on the Dan Patrick show:
"You draft players to develop them into Khalil Mack on and off the field."
What happens IF the Raiders get another defensive player like Mack? Do they pay him, or let him walk? Raiders said they could replace him with 3 or 4 players; but these 3 or 4 players can't be on the field, in the same position at one time. To try and fumigate this trade as no big deal is absurd. This is going to hurt the Raiders more than it helps. Let's not forget the Raiders gave the Bears a 2nd Round pick for this too. STUPID!
You guys sound a lot like that Levi Damien guy, this site keeps pushing as the voice of the Raiders. He wanted the Bears to win so he could brag about being right in his critique of the Mack trade and I was checking twitter last night and he was getting blasted as a traitor. The Raiders had 1 good year with Mack and that was because the Offense was so good. I have to say that the contributors to this site seem to want the Raiders to fail and want castoffs to succeed, are you really Raider fans here?
Raider
"I have to say that the contributors to this site seem to want the Raiders to fail and want castoffs to succeed, are you really Raider fans here?"
Huh? Based on what? The fact we wanted to keep Khalil Mack on the Raiders? More like opposing opinions are ignoring the fact that Mack is as advertised, and they're trying to mitigate a stupid move by Jon Gruden.
First, we should all be rooting for the Bears to lose every game. Even if they do, the Raiders will have to make good on the draft pick, which history tells us is a major challenge for any team. (A 2019 1st rd pick is all the Raiders received clear of other compensation.)
Second, embracing the notion the Raiders defense wasn't good with Mack - as Gruden suggested - is ridiculous. It's a team sport. You need a good TEAM to be successful. The coordinating duo of Ken Norton (fired mid-season) and Todd Downing tell us all we need to know about the 2017 Raiders. The fact they won any games is a miracle.
When the Raiders were good in 2016, Carr and the Raiders offense took the lead late in games and Mack finished them off. That's what separates good teams from great teams. Anyone who's been a Raiders fan more than a couple years knows that all too well.
What I don't understand is, since when did Raiders fans become complacent about casting off their best players? Perhaps 14 years of losing wasn't enough.
To borrow a movie quote, "thank you sir, may I have another."
Bottom line: Trading Mack didn't make the Raiders better now, nor in the future.
Based on the raging against everything the Raiders do, like writing that Gruden should be fired when they haven't even played a game yet.
What you refuse to acknowledge is that by trading Mack, the team will not be strapped to a cap that would be hard to build around with 2 major contracts like Carr's and Mack's.
Gruden sent a message, by trading Mack, it is now all Carr's team, Carr is the undisputed leader.
Last night showed 2 tales. 1st half showed what Mack can do when a team does not prepare for him. 2nd half showed how Mack can be taken out of a game. You fail to recognize this and it showed why you cannot pay a defender QB money. But, you will totally ignore that and rail about losing the best player.
It's done, it's over and the Raiders move on, can you?
Raider
Are you a capologist and a Raiders fan too?
I'm fascinated that fans are so concerned about the Raiders future cap. The "we're better off trading Mack because of cap" is speculation, at best... particularly, with all the press that the Raiders are not strapped and could have made it happen much cheaper back in Feb.
"It's done, it's over and the Raiders move on, can you?"
Far from it. Trading the team's star player will be Gruden's legacy. Mack has his entire career ahead of him, then HOF induction. If you think this won't be spoken again, you're solely mistaken.
Hell, even Gruden has to be second guessing this thing right now.
Just looking at what is the best interest of the RAIDERS and cap is one of the aspects that need to be taken into account, which you refuse to do. It's that it straps the team in it's future and we all know that 2 high paid superstars do not guarantee wins.
Gruden's legacy will be how the team does on the field. If it's a bad product on the field, the Mack trade will always be used as the reason why Gruden failed, if he does.
Gruden knows that the Packers were not prepared for Mack in the 1st half. Gruden saw Mack neutralized in the 2nd half and his point was made. I'm sure Gruden slept fine last night.
Raider
Lots of conjecture about the cap and what Gruden was thinking. I don't believe the Raiders were strapped, and even less so if they'd gotten it done back in Feb. That's when the decision should have been made to trade (or not trade) Mack. The Bears pick was slotted and the value was known.
My take is simply that I'd rather the Raiders win. Mack clearly gives them a better chance.
Frankly, giving the ole "I told you so; Mack can't make the Bears win" after Aaron Rodgers has possibly the best game of his career is a bit rich.
I'm just thankful the Bears lost. 15 more losses to go! And even if they lose all 15, I won't be blaming Mack.
Raider,
I think you are missing the point. Cap was not an issue. Reggie managed the cap, and brought it back to earth. The Raiders had the money to pay Mack $65-70 million guaranteed through his contract life. Gruden didn't want to pay Mack that much, just like he didn't want to pay Marquette King his money. I get it, do I like it? NO! I think letting Mack walk is a HUGE mistake.
The last 4 years, without Mack, our defense would not have any turnovers, QB pressures, or double-digit QB sacks. It is a fact, go check it out. Not to count the games that Mack played and won the game based on his play (much like what he did last night).
A stat I saw this morning on Twitter. Since 2000, here is the list of defensive players who, in 1 game, had a sack, forced fumble, forced fumble recovery, and a pick six:
Khalil Mack (last night, and vs Carolina Panthers)
Charles Woodson (2009 with Green Bay)
How can I, as a Raider fan, not lament having this guy on our team? How can I, as a Raider fan, look at this as a good move? I can't. It has nothing to do with the Raiders failing, or the Bears failing, or anything stupid like that. It has to do with letting our best player go for nothing. We gave up Mack, a 2020 2nd round pick, and a 2020 5th Round pick; for 2 first Rounders, 2019 6th round pick, 2020 3rd Round pick and some cash. Not a good trade, with Gruden and Reggie pointing fingers at each other. But somehow, you expect me to accept this as a good thing? I don't understand. Please explain how this is a good thing? Especially with "Salary Cap" not being an issue.
Nate, there's a false premise out there that salary cap was the reason. That's the basis of "Raider's" issue with the move.
My contention is that Mack made the mistake of not showing up for any off-season or pre-season events, and it rubbed Gruden the wrong way.
If money was the issue, Raiders could have held Mack to his rookie contract and there's not a thing Mack could have done to stop that. They could have saved a bundle. They could have also franchised him to two years after. Again, nothing Mack could do. If he held out, his season wouldn't count and he'd have to start over next year with the final year of his rookie contract. His holdout would have frozen his contract.
But Mack is too high-character to allow his contract to interfere with his game product, so I don't think this would have been too contentious. He deserved a better deal, but the Raiders were under no obligation.
The trade caught everyone by surprise, including Mack. All he had to do was show up. This would have resolved itself.
Think about this, too. CA state income tax is like 13% for Mack's salary. Right? When the Raiders move to LV next year (or the year after), Mack could have made an extra $2.0 million or more per year based on no wage tax in Nevada.
ok, I see I am wasting my time here, good bye.
Raider
Wow, because we have different opinions?
Maybe we're all correct. It's possible that all the above played a role in the Mack trade.
The trade kinda says the Raiders never intended on making a fair offer. The ball was always in their court. Which goes back to the point they should have traded before the 2018 draft, when the draft value was known.
While the Bears lost yesterday, they do not look like a team in dire straights. They will win games and lower their draft stock.... and only get better in 2020.
Only time will tell.
Here's a quote from Gruden that speaks exactly to my point; Gruden was pissed that Mack never showed up. Hence the trade.
“Obviously, Khalil Mack didn’t want to play here,” Gruden said. “That’s what’s being missed here. He was under contract, Lisa. He was under contract. He never showed up for an OTA, never showed up for a training camp and it was obvious he wasn’t going to show up for the season. Don’t forget that. We have to get ready to play and I want players that want to be here, that want to help us put this thing back in high gear.”
A fair point about not showing up but dead wrong about not wanting to play in Oakland with his Raider family, Carr, Irving et al.
Something could have and should have been worked out.
Being pissed about not showing up proves that this was all about Gruden's ego. Players do it all the time to try and gain leverage. Carr was under contract, but wasn't worried about making more $$ when he got a deal. Penn was under contract and held out until the week of Preseason game 4, and got a deal. Reggie and company pounded the drums all last season how they were going to work a deal out for Mack, and then the only thing that changed was Gruden. When Gruden came in, all of a sudden the Raiders weren't willing to pay.
Mack holding out all offseason may have played into this, but the Raiders expected it. Even what Gruden said about the Raiders offer and Mack's counter-offer were no where near each other, with the Raiders never reaching out after that. It wasn't about not having the money, it was about Gruden not wanting to pay that money for Mack. He screwed the pooch, and now is trying to justify it with weak @$$ excuses.
Let's hope the Raiders win tonight. Let's hope our defense plays absolutely stellar with multiple picks, sacks, and QB pressure.
I will still pull for the Raiders, and I will always pull for the Raiders; but it doesn't mean I have to like or agree with this crappy trade. We would have been so much better with Mack; but Gruden's ego couldn't see it.
Even Guenther seemed miffed by the trade. His anticipation to have Mack on his defense had to have been sky high. After the trade went down, he appeared to uncomfortably downplay it.
Yet the Raiders will be better on defense by virtue of having Guenther as DC. Need the rookies to step up!
GO RAIDERS!
Post a Comment
<< Home