2019 Offseason Roster/Depth Chart and organizational moves

You really think we could have signed AB, Tyrel Williams, and Trent Brown? Or are these the exception to "most of these moves" part of your post.
If we were smart last year and cut bait on a few guys we paid, like Cook and Irvin, you bet your ass we could have had them. Minus William's, but let's face it is he a huge loss as a number 2 with what's available in the draft this year?

We spent some dumb money on roster filler players too in 2018.
 
You really think we could have signed AB, Tyrel Williams, and Trent Brown? Or are these the exception to "most of these moves" part of your post.

We're sitting on $28m in cap space for the season. His cap hit is $11.9.

Or are we getting around to admitting Mark has a cash flow problem?
 
Jimmy Durkin

✔@Jimmy_Durkin


Interesting note as I'm going through the Raiders' draft information: Their current roster only has three players on it who were selected in the first round (by any team, not just the Raiders) — Karl Joseph, Gareon Conley and Kolton Miller.
 
If we were smart last year and cut bait on a few guys we paid, like Cook and Irvin, you bet your ass we could have had them. Minus William's, but let's face it is he a huge loss as a number 2 with what's available in the draft this year?

We spent some dumb money on roster filler players too in 2018.

We're sitting on $28m in cap space for the season. His cap hit is $11.9.

Or are we getting around to admitting Mark has a cash flow problem?

So instead of being 4-12 last season we could have been 5-11 or maybe, just maybe, 6-10.

*I think the cashflow excuse is legit, TBH.
 
So instead of being 4-12 last season we could have been 5-11 or maybe, just maybe, 6-10.

*I think the cashflow excuse is legit, TBH.

You're moving goal posts. I was speaking strictly to whether it was a one or the other thing with Mack vs. our new additions.
 
You're moving goal posts. I was speaking strictly to whether it was a one or the other thing with Mack vs. our new additions.
I'm not picking up what you're putting down about goal posts. I'm saying that had we extended Mack to the contract that he got, not the one that was floated to him at the beginning of last year by RM, but the one he got from CHI, we would NOT have been able to sign the consensus difference makers (AB, Williams, Brown) that we did this off season in addition to the scrubs, and not to mention the scratch set asisde for rookie contracts. Admittedly, I am not a capologist so if I am missing something, please enlighten me. But if I understand you correctly you are saying that we could have signed Mack, and the afrementioned studs, and remained at or near the limits of the cap. Is that what you are saying?
 
I'm not picking up what you're putting down about goal posts. I'm saying that had we extended Mack to the contract that he got, not the one that was floated to him at the beginning of last year by RM, but the one he got from CHI, we would NOT have been able to sign the consensus difference makers (AB, Williams, Brown) that we did this off season in addition to the scrubs, and not to mention the scratch set asisde for rookie contracts. Admittedly, I am not a capologist so if I am missing something, please enlighten me. But if I understand you correctly you are saying that we could have signed Mack, and the afrementioned studs, and remained at or near the limits of the cap. Is that what you are saying?

Yes, that is what I'm saying.

Even with the additions we have the cap space right now to fit him under the cap and still sign our draft class.

Goal posts is in reference to talking what our record would have been if we had re-signed him. That's a different point entirely.
 
We're sitting on $28m in cap space for the season. His cap hit is $11.9.

Or are we getting around to admitting Mark has a cash flow problem?
Yes, we could have deferred money just like Chi did. Mack’s cap hit this year was far greater before his new contract was restructured.
 
Mack’s cap hit this year was far greater before his new contract was restructured.

And now it's not. If he's ok pushing money out in Illinois I'm sure he'd be fine doing if for Nevada.
 
And now it's not. If he's ok pushing money out in Illinois I'm sure he'd be fine doing if for Nevada.
Yep.

I’m guessing Gruden’s ego might now be interfering with any trade for Clark. Gruden “took slings” to get Mayock 3 first round picks. He’s not going to give away a 1st and 2nd (or whatever) now for Clark.

Also don’t know what the plans are for what we have left in cap space. Are they planning on using some of it to restructure Hudson, for example? Are they going to roll it over to help pay for deferred Vegas dollars? How much do we leave in play for preseason deals?

Real issues.
 
Yep.

I’m guessing Gruden’s ego might now be interfering with any trade for Clark. Gruden “took slings” to get Mayock 3 first round picks. He’s not going to give away a 1st and 2nd (or whatever) now for Clark.

Also don’t know what the plans are for what we have left in cap space. Are they planning on using some of it to restructure Hudson, for example? Are they going to roll it over to help pay for deferred Vegas dollars? How much do we leave in play for preseason deals?

Real issues.

Lot's of variables of course not the least of which is whether Mark has Gruden on a budget regardless of cap space, which is a legitimate possibility. Lame, but certainly possible.
 
Yep.

I’m guessing Gruden’s ego might now be interfering with any trade for Clark. Gruden “took slings” to get Mayock 3 first round picks. He’s not going to give away a 1st and 2nd (or whatever) now for Clark.

Also don’t know what the plans are for what we have left in cap space. Are they planning on using some of it to restructure Hudson, for example? Are they going to roll it over to help pay for deferred Vegas dollars? How much do we leave in play for preseason deals?

Real issues.
It just doesn't sound like he's on our radar for whatever reason (domestic abuse, cost of picks, salary). Only place it's a story is here.
 
Yep.

I’m guessing Gruden’s ego might now be interfering with any trade for Clark. Gruden “took slings” to get Mayock 3 first round picks. He’s not going to give away a 1st and 2nd (or whatever) now for Clark.

Also don’t know what the plans are for what we have left in cap space. Are they planning on using some of it to restructure Hudson, for example? Are they going to roll it over to help pay for deferred Vegas dollars? How much do we leave in play for preseason deals?

Real issues.
Keep it open in case there's a draft day trade for a veteran.
 
And now it's not. If he's ok pushing money out in Illinois I'm sure he'd be fine doing if for Nevada.
Mack isn't pushing money back. He's making money now, just shifting the cap number. So he had bigger numbers the rest of the contract.
 
I think Clark is a good player but a 1st and his contract alone is plenty. A 1st and 2nd? Go ahead and pay him then, Pete.

Yeah he's looking at 15-20 million.

I'd offer up 35 and maybe the Bears 2020 3rd rounder if I had to.
 
Yeah he's looking at 15-20 million.

I'd offer up 35 and maybe the Bears 2020 3rd rounder if I had to.
I'd offer 35 and if they don't take it move on. Supposedly we're not really in the mix so hopefully that means Mayock is controlling the room.
 
Yeah he's looking at 15-20 million.

I'd offer up 35 and maybe the Bears 2020 3rd rounder if I had to.
Fine. That’s the equivalent of #31. Clark will get us an extra victory to pay for that 3rd and knock the price back down. More concerned now that Clark wants $20M+ per year. If KC wants to deal a 1st and a 2nd, and pay that salary, so be it.
 
Last edited:
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top