So what in the world is happening with the Raiders?

[mrt144]

A Raiders fan put it to me like this: Would you give up a winning lottery ticket for 4 lottery tickets? I know that doesn't cover the nuance of the situation at hand but it's kind of where I am at - you have a great known quantity, and it has a lot of upkeep expenses, but...you're banking on hitting at 2/4 on those picks to meet or exceed that known quantity 3 to 4 years down the road? If this was not Mack and say Frank Clark I'd take the picks no doubt but I think Mack is great and even if his salary demands are a bit outlandish, taking a proactive approach to set the table 3-4 years down the road is just too unknown. Of course I also have my doubts on Gruden lasting even 5 years let alone 10 to realize his vision so that tinges it.

I get it, but in the NFL it has more to do with whether you think you're in or out of your SB window.

Like we did last year, and the Rams are doing this year, you take chances on leveraging and compromising your cap in order to win NOW. Because that's the state of the league now, you're either building for 2-3 years down the road, or you're going for broke, there is no middle anymore.

No better way to lose your job as a GM and/or HC than to just go 7-9 or 8-8 in perpetuity.

It's obvious that Gruden and McKenzie don't think they're ready to go for broke and compete for a SB this year hamstringing their cap. My guess is they want to go into Vegas as strong as possible having their cap right and getting the best young nucleus as possible.

I think you're on the money with the expectations being more dichotomous but I think it's kind of a hilarious tragedy that several of the teams that go down the path of building for the future on a longer timeline wind up treading water in that mediocre zone or jettisoning the architects of that rebuild 2 to 3 years in just to repeat the process and the mantra of 'for the future'.

I think I have PTSD from Sam Hinkie and the Sixers even as a passive bystander with no rooting interest. It has given rise to the notion that you, the fan, simply need more patience, endless patience, to suffer through some baffling moves and awful games to get a chance to seize the ring at some nebulous point in the future. If the team sucks, it's by design and screw you for not trusting in the apparatus to deliver the goods. Like I said, I'm not even a Sixers fan but that whole thing rubbed me wrong where even years later now, the Sixers are better than the darkest days of Hinkie's tenure but they're not appreciably closer to realizing the promised end goal that seemingly justified the whole detour. (52 wins this past season in the East is great, sure, but cmon, the West's 6th best team would probably smoke them heads up, not to even invoke the Dubs or Rockets or whoever else. And were those previous seasons worth a semi bounce now?)

Not that I'm looking out for the Raiders interests here but man, it's going to be funny and sad at the same time if 5 years from now the Raiders have moved on from Gruden, or Gruden realizes he loves the booth more and they weren't even in the wildcard hunt during his tenure.

 

[adeltaY]

Paying Mack that much money doesn't have to cripple their cap. They have Trubisky for four more seasons at a very low cost. With good management and drafting, you can have good, cheap players and older elite players and contend. That's exactly what this team did, what the Eagles did, and what the Rams are trying to do. I think people are overestimating the impact of the $ amount because it looks so large. This will become the going rate for star DEs soon. Bosa will probably get close to that, as will Clowney.

If Frank Clark gets 12+ sacks and continues his trajectory of improvement, we're looking at $17M APY minimum.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

I like what Jon Gruden is doing. Seriously not joking.

The Raiders defense was garbage with Khalil Mack. So there was no point in paying him, if you can get a king's ransom in return. And they did.


They can now rebuild their defense with FOUR 1st rd picks over the next two years. $60-70M in cap space next off-season to spread around to some vets. Individually none of these acquisitions will be better than Mack, but collectively they will be a much, much better team. This move will allow them to contend for years to come.

Belichick trades overpriced players all the time and no one bats an eye. The Pats traded Chandler Jones to AZ for much less, and Jones has totaled more sacks than anyone since moving to AZ. AZ has sucked, NE has been going to Superbowls.

Casuals will overreact negatively to this trade. Sort of how the casual media & public is overreacting to the Seahawks losing a bunch of big name washed up defenders this off-season that hardly contributed last year anyway. Save for Bennett he is the only legit loss to the defense, but even he was trending downward, and was a locker room problem.


Tom Cable is the only worry I have for the Raiders. The quicker they fire him the better.

Khalil Mack Trade Grade

Raiders: A-
Bears: B-

Why? Explain please.

 

[Fade]

Tom Cable is the only worry I have for the Raiders. The quicker they fire him the better.

Why? Explain please.

Explain why Tom Cable is terrible?

 

[Seahawkfan80]

Tom Cable is the only worry I have for the Raiders. The quicker they fire him the better.

Why? Explain please.

Explain why Tom Cable is terrible?

I know he is terrible..but why the quicker they fire him the better? Would it not be in our interest for him to stay there and deplete their resources and show bad coaching to the extreme?

uh oh...click, the light went on. You are saying FOR the Raiders it would be better for them to cut bait with Cable than retain him for very long. I was thinking from a Seahawky point of view.

Thanks Fade.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I think you're on the money with the expectations being more dichotomous but I think it's kind of a hilarious tragedy that several of the teams that go down the path of building for the future on a longer timeline wind up treading water in that mediocre zone or jettisoning the architects of that rebuild 2 to 3 years in just to repeat the process and the mantra of 'for the future'.
.

Sure, you still have to have the right people in the organization to take advantage of the rebuild process.

Look at the Browns, they've wasted more first round picks than the rest of the league combined over the past decade. Because they have horrible people in place in the FO and sidelines.

The rest of the AFC East is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Because of the Pats the rest of the division is perpetually in a confusing "do we rebuild or try to compete." So all three teams are trying to do both, take on expensive free agents AND rebuild.

Doesn't work, that's why the Dolphins, Jets and Bills are always 6-10 to 9-7 seemingly every year.

That's what I see the Bears trying to do now. They're nowhere near ready to compete with the Vikings or Packers, so why give up two #1's to get a DE?

 

[Atradees]

This was a great move bye Gruden. It's straight out of the Jimmie Johnson play book. Raiders can own the draft for two years. Trade up or down and build the team.

Carr is no Russell Wilson. He's doomed bye Cable.