Schefter with the details about Rams offer to Raiders for Mack

[XXXIVwin]

OTOH, realistically, Mack would probably have gotten a signing bonus if he actually signed, which would mean an accelerated cap hit that would really hurt the Rams in 2019.

This is the part that makes no sense to me.

No way Mack signs without a huge (40M or higher) signing bonus.

And a $40M signing bonus would cripple the Rams’ future cap if he’s traded.

Don’t understand how this trade was even theoretically possible. Never heard of a team signing a player to a major multi-year extension while PLANNING on trading him after the first year. Weird.

 

[Rams43]

What if they had intended to keep Mack?

Hell, that’s the only reason to do it in the first place it seems to me.

The Goff extension crunch isn’t until ‘21, really.

It would necessitate Demoff massaging a few contracts maybe. Not maybe, but rather definitely. And Snead would have to draft extremely well for years to overcome the inevitable losses of current players that could not necessarily be extended because of the Mack/AD/Gurley contracts.

But Geez, what a D that would have been!

It was doable, I think. But woulda cost at least two 1sts+. Depends on one’s preference of elites vs multiple “very good” players. I can see both arguments.

 

[Akrasian]

This is the part that makes no sense to me.

No way Mack signs without a huge (40M or higher) signing bonus.

And a $40M signing bonus would cripple the Rams’ future cap if he’s traded.

Don’t understand how this trade was even theoretically possible. Never heard of a team signing a player to a major multi-year extension while PLANNING on trading him after the first year. Weird.

More and more, I think it's more likely that Mack would have been spun off immediately, making it a three way trade. I just don't see how it would work out otherwise. If the Rams still had a franchise tag to use, I could see them figuring him not reporting until 6 games left, dominating in the playoffs, then traded after the season. But that wasn't an option for them. And yeah, having a $32 million or more cap hit after he was traded next year wouldn't make sense either.

 

[SteveBrown]

1st and 3rd for a one year rental, not worth it.

Keep those picks and draft our own dominant edge rusher.

They would have traded him for a #1 and maybe #2 or #1 next year after they transition tagged him

 

[Memento]

It's a shame that we didn't get Mack and trade him after the season, but give credit to Snead for even attempting it when other Rams GMs of the past - I'm looking at you, Zygmunt and Devaney - wouldn't have the guts to try it.

 

[Akrasian]

They would have traded him for a #1 and maybe #2 or #1 next year after they transition tagged him

They couldn't. They already used the Franchise Tag this year, can't use both the franchise and the transition tag in the same season. My understanding is that they would have needed to either sign him or trade him immediately. He wanted to surpass Donald in both total and guaranteed money, likely in signing bonus too. Since giving him a huge signing bonus would have accelerated 80% of the signing bonus into next season's cap if they traded him, I figure the Rams would have retraded him immediately, figuring the first they'd get would be better than the first they gave up, even factoring in a third also.

 

[XXXIVwin]

More and more, I think it's more likely that Mack would have been spun off immediately, making it a three way trade.

In the NBA, sure, but the NFL? Can’t remember the last time I saw a 3-way trade (for a vet player, not just draft picks).

Again, something seems fishy about this report, there’s just no good explanation yet for how the Rams could have pulled this off.

 

[Ellard80]

1st and 3rd for a one year rental, not worth it.

Keep those picks and draft our own dominant edge rusher.

The idea is to get higher draft picks... the Rams likely to be lower.

And rent the beast which is Mack

It was a good idea.

 

[Ellard80]

Rams giving up a 1st and 3rd rounder, pay Mack 14 million for one year only, then trade him. Does not make sense.

Because they thought they could trade him for lower picks than they gave up.

Like.. getting the Bears two 1st round picks....


Which it didn't end up working because the Raiders didn't want the Rams picks which they assumed would be too low.

 

[Turducken]

This is the part that makes no sense to me.

No way Mack signs without a huge (40M or higher) signing bonus.

And a $40M signing bonus would cripple the Rams’ future cap if he’s traded.

Don’t understand how this trade was even theoretically possible. Never heard of a team signing a player to a major multi-year extension while PLANNING on trading him after the first year. Weird.

I imagine there was a second step that wasn't revealed to schefter. Maybe like a trade of Barron to free up salary cap room.

 

[pmil66]

Assuming they got a first round pick in return, it's basically what they are giving Suh, plus giving up the 3rd rounder.

That is what NE did with Cooks, traded for him, gave up a 1st rounder, kept him for 1 year, traded to the Rams, got the 1st round pick they gave up for him. Mack is a great player, if the Rams had traded for him, would want to keep him long term, not turn around and trade him. Wonder if NE regrets trading Cooks.

 

[Akrasian]

I imagine there was a second step that wasn't revealed to schefter. Maybe like a trade of Barron to free up salary cap room.

I was assuming Barron would be cut to save money. If possible that is, since he's hurt right now. But if Mack insisted on a big signing bonus, there would still be the cap issue next year. And it's still the case that the franchise tag was used on Joyner, so couldn't be used on Mack.

Either they were fantasizing that they could sign Mack with a small signing bonus and a lot of guaranteed money in future years, or they were figuring on trading him immediately.

 

[pmil66]

Because they thought they could trade him for lower picks than they gave up.

Like.. getting the Bears two 1st round picks....


Which it didn't end up working because the Raiders didn't want the Rams picks which they assumed would be too low.

Would want the Rams to keep Mack, a great player, long term if traded for him. Rams have found some very good players 3rd round and below the past couple of drafts. Grob Tavon & Quick were high round draft picks, Kupp, Johnson, Noteboom were 3rd rounders.

 

[ReekofRams]

Call me pessimistic, but it I'm correct this the Ram's personnel aren't allowed to talk about what was all involved in their trade offer. So sport's analyst like Schefer can say anything and the Rams wouldn't be able to refute it. We're the Rams going to trade him after trading for his services for one year? I'm worried you were Mack would you do that. Was there some type of of conditional picks involved in the trade? And where in hell were the Rams going to come up with the money to pay Mack? Last time I checked, the Rams didn't even have enough money for a high priced whore. There's provably a lot more to this trade offer than no one but the personnel of the Rams and the Raiders knows about.