Last weekend, the Raiders were the talk of the NFL after sending star linebacker Khalil Mack to the Bears. While owner Mark Davis and head coach Jon Gruden were the two pushing for the trade, it’s uncertain how much general manager Reggie McKenzie had to do with the deal.
Gruden clearly has the ear of his owner, emphasized by the organization dealing off many of McKenzie’s draft picks. There have been rumblings that the Raiders could be preparing to part ways with the general manager, although Gruden was clear it was an organizational decision to trade off Mack.
For what it’s worth, McKenzie didn’t sound like he was entirely on board with a Mack deal. In an interview with Scott Bair of NBC Sports BayArea, the general manager provided some insight into the trade. The whole interview is worth reading, and we’ve collected some of the notable soundbites below:
On how he was handling the entire ordeal prior to the trade:
“My whole thought process was to get Khalil (signed). It was at the end, in the final hour, that it just hit. It hit hard and heavy. It was not a plan to trade him at all.”
On negotiations with Mack, who ended up signing a six-year, $141MM ($90MM guaranteed) deal after being dealt to Chicago:
“There were some things that weren’t meshing between the two proposals. That made it hard to go into details. We were trying to figure out ways to get it done, but it wasn’t going to look like what Khalil wanted.”
On whether quarterback Derek Carr‘s five-year, $125MM extension impacted negotiations with Mack:
“We knew we had two great players in that [2014] draft a long time ago. We knew this thing was coming. We were trying to plan for this. Sometimes it just doesn’t work out. That scenario did not weight heavily in our decisions.”
On the perception that the organization is unwilling to pay their own players:
“We will pay top dollar. We couldn’t get around giving Khalil what he wanted. We will pay top dollar to top players. We just could not get it worked out with Khalil. When it seemed like it was going that way, we decided to make a move with the trade. We will be able attract players. …We’ll find a way to continue to play good football. We’re not worried about the outside perception of free agency. We will get free agents in here when its time to do that and we will keep our own. Sometimes you can’t keep them all. That’s just the way it goes.”
He overpaid for Carr when he didn’t have to. If he waited a year he could’ve signed both players to similar deals. But who knows, Mack clearly let the dollar signs lead his decisions.
Player in his prime should let dollar signs lead his decisions. If Davis cut Pf Chang’s outta his diet, Mack would be a Raider
“We will pay top dollar.”
False. You had the opportunity to pay top dollar for one of the best defenders in the league, and you wouldn’t do it. Don’t say you will when you won’t. Just say it, we either didn’t want to pay Khalil or couldn’t afford to pay him.
I get it, $60M upfront for him is expensive for this specific franchise and owner. And you won’t be able to get the top players, that’s obvious. Maybe when they are past their primes, but you won’t get the top free agents, or keep your top guys unless you pony up.
The weird thing is, why would you do it for a slightly better than league average QB, but not one of the top defensive players in the league? Raiders being Raiders.
This was a panic deal that makes no sense. There was no reason to trade Mack at this point unless they were getting a player back. They should have waited it out and maybe he would accept their offer a few weeks in. If not, then after after the season more teams would have had the cap space to fit him in their budget and they likely could have gotten a better return in terms of picks.
Are the bears expected to be one of the top 5-10 teams in the league for 2019 with Mack? I don’t like trading elite players away and would have kept him if I were in charge, but keeping a player that doesn’t want to be there even if only for one season is not ideal in the locker room. Gruden wants his players that will buy into what he’s trying to sell. Mack wasn’t on board for that.
Furthermore, even if the bears make a dramatic jump in wins this year, they’re not expected to compete for a playoff spot YET. I’m sure most Raiders fans would rather get the Bears first round picks than the Patriots, Steelers, Saints, Jaguars, Vikings, Eagles, or Packers upcoming first round picks?
No one should be at all surprised by what has transpired in Raider nation. We all knew that as soon as Gruden agreed to leave the broadcasting booth that he would create his own fiefdom and exercise a purge. McKenzie’s authority has been effectively undermined so he has no reason to stay. Derek Carr is probably on borrowed time now and will be the fall guy for Gruden when expectations are not met.
It was a tough business decision and as much as I will miss Mack that is a lot of money to pay one player. He makes a huge difference but the Raiders need to solidify their defense all across the board because Mack alone won’t lead them to a Super Bowl
Yet you have no problem an absorbent amount for a mediocre QB and head coach. I hope the Raiders get everything they deserve in the Gruden era
As sad as it is to see him leave he was putting me before team. It’s very clear he wasn’t coming back until he was the highest paid defensive player. Carr’s contract is fair market value if you look at who’s signed since. When was the last time a record setting defensive contract ever worked out? Albert Haynesworth anyone? Darrell Revis? Having nearly 50 million ties up in two players at nearly 1/4 of your cap doesn’t make sense financially. I agree hey should have paid Mack first but Carr has less years of team control and that deal had to happen faster. Likewise, like it or not but if Carr signed this year his deal would be closer to 30 Mill. It’s a bad situation either way but the silver lining is that if they create a winning culture similar to the Patriots (who never re-sign their high priced Defensive players) the team can have long term success. It’s just my two cents.
I think it creates a culture of “We won’t pay the best defensive player on the team (maybe the entire league), but we will pay a guy who has proven nothing so far, to be our QB.”
Our defense was horrible with Mack that’s alot of guaranteed money for one player. We finally got an actual defensive coordinator which will make a difference. Our last defensive coordinators were scrubs. Cant believe Norton Jr., got another DC job.
It’s funny how no team follows the patriots formula and how no team can show consistent dominance and a winning culture, yes the pats have there share of bad contracts, yet they have still found a way to win year in n year out, they have no terrible huge contracts given out (bad contracts yes, franchise altering no) any team can pay any one player top dollar does that ever mean they’ll win anything? No pats have the best quarterback in the nfl argue all you want he won mvp last year did he not? As it stands he’s the best could that change yes but not until another Mvp is named and he isn’t close to the highest paid qb in the league. Winning isn’t about spending the most and bringing in the best players it’s about a winning culture, players who will sacrifice xyz to win, players who put winning first not money. How many of those top players that the patriots traded left NE and remained elite? No team can compete with NE over the past what 15 years? It’s shocking no other team esp with how many coaches and personnel have left can even mimic in a few year span the success the patriots have had since the early 2000’s at what point do teams realize you can spend all you want and that will never mean you will win. Oak is smart to have dealt him for what they got in return, question is do they have the right personnel to be able to cash in on the picks they acquired and build a winning culture with what should be multiple top young players in the next few years. As an example look at the dodgers in the mlb.. they prove money doesn’t equal winning.
I’m certain the Raiders are delighted to receive praise from a fan of the team that $crewed them with the “tuck rule”.
Funny how you guys can say carr isnt good when his stats say otherwise. He is also young and qbs age better than de’s mack has 3 more good years then will start lossing speed (first thing that goes) seeing qbs play into there 40s show if you have a good one it usually pays off. Carr sports an almost 3 to 1 td to int ratio meaning he doesnt turn the ball over much. Despite last years regresssion due to injury and a spotty line i dont expect that to continue. If carr ended uo walking raiders would be in a worse position and you guys would be saying how dumb raiders are. Chill.
this team is cash poor with the vegas move coming up otherwise there is no logical reason to make this kind of trade. mack who is arguably the best defensive player in the NFL and certainly the pre-eminent ball rusher and the man to disrupt the offensive flow would only represent 10% of the cap during the term of his contract. and then you are going to tell me that 2 raider 1st round choices somewhere equal mack, and your team moves away anyway, good luck