A Seahawks & Bills trade proposal involving Frank Clark

March 9th, 2019 | Written by Rob Staton

Are the Bills interested in trading for Frank Clark? According to Jay Glazer they are (and they might not be the only team).

It seems unlikely that the Seahawks would be willing to trade Clark. Pete Carroll has said multiple times, quite firmly, that Clark will be with the team next year. Situations can change, of course. Yet Clark has developed into an integral part of the roster. He’s one of their blue chip players. He’s also clearly committed to Seattle considering he’s spent the last few days pitching to free agents like Landon Collins and Kwon Alexander on Twitter.

According to Jason La Canfora there’s nothing in the Clark/Bills link.

It’s also possible this rumour is in part an attempt to flush out Clark’s representatives. Don’t want to get serious about a deal? We’ll move you, possibly to the team Antonio Brown didn’t want to go to. It’s that time of the year where a lot of bidding is done via the media.

A trade probably isn’t going to happen. The Bills, or anyone else, would have to offer an attractive deal and be willing to pay Clark a mega-contract. The Seahawks if they were to lose Clark would create a major hole on their roster. They’d also be losing a player in his prime (he doesn’t even turn 26 until June).

Still, the point of this blog is to consider situations. What you’re about to read is a great big slice of shameless rosterbation.

What kind of a deal would potentially make sense for both the Bills and Seahawks?

Firstly, any trade isn’t going to be worth more than the cumulative value of the #9 overall pick and Buffalo’s 2020 first round pick. That’s what the Bills would have to pay if they signed Clark to an offer sheet under the non-exclusive franchise tag.

That’s the absolute maximum price. The Bills will be looking for a cheaper trade.

Remember, the idea here is to find something that might work for both teams. So here’s what I think might appeal:

Buffalo trades: #9 (R1), #40 (R2), #75 (R3), #113 (R4)

Seattle trades: Frank Clark, #21 (R1)

Why this might work for the Seahawks
Instead of having four 2019 picks they have seven. They fill out their board and also acquire a rare top-10 pick. While they’d have to replace Clark, they’d suddenly have an extra $17m in cap space to do so (plus plenty of ammunition in the draft). This would also solve one of the potential 2020 problems with Clark, Russell Wilson, Bobby Wagner and Jarran Reed all set to be out of contract.

They could spend their top pick on Ed Oliver to replace some of the rare athletic dynamism missing in Clark’s absence. They might even be able to trade down from #9 to get Oliver. With the free cap space they could target Anthony Barr or one of the other EDGE rushers. They could even add a couple of free agent pass rushers.

You’d also have an excellent haul of picks in rounds 2-5 to make the most of the great depth within this draft class.

A final point — unless they do a long term deal with Clark he can leave for free in 12 months time.

Why this might work for the Bills
Buffalo needs a pass rusher but they also need to help support Josh Allen. Trading from #9 to #21 still enables them to target a receiver or offensive linemen in round one. They could also choose to try and replenish some of their lost stock by trading down. So while they’re taking a significant hit (losing #40 and trading out of the top-10), they’re not completely blowing their 2019 draft for Clark.

Furthermore, the Bills currently have two fourth round picks and two fifth round picks. So trading some of their mid-round stock is less of a problem. From this deal they’d acquire Clark (and have to pay him handsomely) but they’d still have #21 (R1), #132 (R4), #148 (R5) and #159 (R5).

People will want to fleece the Bills in any potential deal. That isn’t realistic. And while you might only make a trade if it’s massively weighted in Seattle’s favour, trades generally happen when there’s a legit reason for both clubs to make a move.

I have no idea whether both parties would be interested in a deal like the one suggested above. I’m not saying that I would necessarily make this move either.

But if the Seahawks are at a point where they think an extension with Clark is unlikely, they have to assess their options. This trade would free up cap room, fill out their draft board, present them with an opportunity to get one of the stud defensive linemen in this draft and solve part of the four-pronged 2020 contract problem.

Look at it this way:

— Seattle loses Frank Clark

— Seattle gains a top rookie D-liner (Ed Oliver?) and has the cap space to sign one or two free agent pass rushers (Anthony Barr?)

— Seattle goes from four picks to seven in the 2019 draft, with a prime opportunity to acquire more, and capitalise on a deep draft class

— Seattle eases the pressure on needing to sign four key free agents before the end of the 2019 season

Food for thought.

You can now support Seahawks Draft Blog via Patreon by clicking the tab below.

Become a Patron!

127 Responses to “A Seahawks & Bills trade proposal involving Frank Clark”

  1. Ghost Mutt says:

    To be honest, even if you took the Bills 3rd rounder out of this deal I’d pull the trigger.

    In this draft, a top 10 pick gets you a good pass rusher on a 5 year deal. We’d recover our lost 2nd, at the very top of that round, free up funds to extend other key players, and still have enough to potentially bring someone like Barr in.

    I love Frank, and his best years are ahead of him. I also know we tend to overvalue draft picks. But he’s going to be massively expensive to keep – the franchise as a whole may be in a better spot if this were to happen.

    Like you say though Rob, unlikely it happens. I’ll just settle into Frank terrorising the edge for another year at least.

    • Snax says:

      Could you make the same argument for trading Wilson? In fact, Brock and Salk were talking about it Friday morning. Saying Russ’s speed is a big part of his game, and he’s getting slower, yet we want to handcuff ourselves to him by making him the most expensive football player ever.

      Difference between Wilson and Clark is age difference and the haul you can get in turn. Do you believe in the rookie that comes in to replace them? And maybe that’s Kyler Murray or Clelin Ferrell.

      Just my personal opinion. I’m REAL nervous about give Russ a 3rd contract. Just look at % of passes in the pocket vs out. I’m still trying to find the stats, but I believe he’s taken more sacks when he leaves the pocket – a sign of regressing speed. Can he adapt and make throwing from in the pocket his strength?

      • Rob Staton says:

        Wilson is different because he’s a franchise QB. A top-five QB. Hard to find those.

        • Snax says:

          I understand. And honestly am already tired of this saga. But Seattle has to stop losing players for nothing. If it’s wilson, fine, it’s gotta be this year though if you’re going to move him. Clark, ok, I can see the rationale. Or even Wagner. Just stop letting these guys walk for nothing/comps.

          • Rob Staton says:

            Completely agree that they need to stop losing players for nothing. They need to churn the roster a bit.

            • Ben says:

              You see the Patriots do this all the time the year before a guy gets paid and it seems to work for them…but they keep the franchise QB and the HC

      • Hawksince77 says:

        Yes, the rational for trading Clark is similar to the rational trading Wilson. The difference is PC’s philosophy. If he trades Clark that will fly in the face of what we tend to think of PC’s winning formula. He needs a dominant defense, Clark is in his prime, and trading him away would be no different than if he traded away Thomas, or Sherman or Cam after their rookie contract.

        If these rumors prove true, even if they don’t actually trade Clark, then I am totally wrong in assessing PC/JS’s philosophy going forward. If I am right, they are far more likely to consider trading Wilson then giving up one of their core defensive players.

        For all the reasons already hashed over, retaining Wilson is problematic for the team, no matter what happens: successive franchise tags, massive extension, or simply letting him walk. If by some miracle they can work a Brady-type extension, that would be optimal for all of us. But if Wilson has other ideas, the Seahawks face a serous conundrum.

        • GoHawksDani says:

          I think it’s a lot more complex than philosophy.
          For PC it might be philosophy, but for Schneider it’s business.

          It’s all about roi and risk/reward.

          Do you have better potential for an SB win with Clark (no plus picks and big cap hit), or do you have without him if a reasonable trade comes up (some picks and cap room)?

          How likely that you’ll find a similar or better guy than Clark in the draft? What could you do with the money and picks? How would it affect the locker room?

          And do the same thought process with Russ just for a different role and different return.

          But it’s not offense vs defense.

          It’s about franchise QB vs top5 (?) passrusher DE
          It’s about maybe 3 first round picks vs. trade up in first + 2nd round, 3rd, 4th
          About 30-35 mil for 5 years vs 19-22 mil for 4-5 years
          And so on. So I think it’s 65% Schneider’s game and only 35% PC’s

          I like Frank. I hope he stays. I like Wilson, I hope he stays. But it’s about the numbers. If a trade has really good risk/reward then I don’t mind at all. Also if a player getting a new contract will have pretty good return on investment, then give that man a contract

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’m with you all the way with everything you said here.

  2. EP says:

    The flexibility we could gain from trading him is certainly appealing, however keeping him wouldn’t be a problem for me. Got to trust John Schneider with whatever he does, chances are he’s already 20 steps ahead.

    • McZ says:

      They will lose a pair of former key players to FA this offseason, because they were ill prepared to handle at least the ET situation. Scale that to 2020 offseason, with four players including RW, we talk about crashing the franchise. I hope, he is 20 steps ahead, but I doubt it.

  3. Snax says:

    Rob, would you take this trade:

    Green Bay gets Frank + our 3rd
    Seattle gets #12 and #30

    GB would still have 8 picks and are in win now mode with an aging Rodgers.

    I’d also maybe consider if GB wants to hold on to #30

    Green Bay gets Frank + #21
    Seattle gets #12 + #44 + #144 + 2020 1st

    • Rob Staton says:

      Personally I think it’s highly unlikely a team will give two first round picks for Frank, even if they’re getting a R3 in return. I’m not that keen on owning two first round picks (bad value in this class) and then nothing until round four (missing out to great rounds in this class). They can always trade down, of course. But if I’m doing a deal for Clark I want that to be less necessary not more.

  4. SebA says:

    Thanks for this Rob. Do you think the prioritising of signing Akeem King means he’s who they anticipate starting at slot corner, assuming Coleman gets paid elsewhere? He did some good work covering TEs last year there.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think it’s a hedge for the situation and depth.

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      I don’t think it means anything. King is retained at a relatively modest cost. Most teams resign their RFAs. I don’t expect it factors into who starts at all. Not anymore than retaining Fant means anything relative to Ifedi.

  5. Trevor says:

    I appreciate the article Rob but unless Clark’s reps have told the team he definitely won’t sign a long term deal then trading one of the top 5 pass rushers in the league when he is 25 years old makes zero sense. There is a reason Gruden was universally blasted last year when he traded Khalil Mack and Frank is not holding out. He is doing the opposite in fact and seems fully bought in as a Seahawk.

    Frank, Reed and Bobby are the core identity and leadership of this young and potentially really good defense by trading Clark they would be giving up a huge piece of that and sending a terrible message to the rest of the roster IMO.

    • Rob Staton says:

      We can’t compare Clark and Mack though. One is a really good pass rusher at a good age. The other is a future Hall of Famer who is an absolute game-wrecker. And while Frank seems 100% bought into Seattle they run the risk of losing him for absolutely nothing next year. I don’t want to be sat here in 12 months saying, ‘if only they’d done a deal’. We’ve been there with Sherman and Thomas already and got absolutely zilch. Look at Dallas and Demarcus Lawrence — in a stalemate now.

      I don’t want to trade Frank but they either need to get him signed or consider a deal. Because treading water again shouldn’t be an option.

      • Jeff M. says:

        And in this hypothetical deal it’s for about the same total value OAK ultimately received for Mack (less than they may have expected at the time of the deal if they didn’t expect CHI to contend yet).

        That’s not very good value for Mack but it’s fine for Clark.

      • GoHawksDani says:

        Actually, I thought that Mack is much better. But based on stats…Frank is on the same level (or at least was last year). And he said that he was playing like 60 or 80% only because of an injury? This could be marketing, but Frankie might be golden. But to me it seems like Mack’s production is more stable while Frank is either dominating or he’s lost. So yeah, a bit less of a player than Mack but it’s close

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      It’s a tough call. If you admire how the Patriots work their roster, then you should be comfortable letting any of these players go. They lose similar top shelf players seemingly every year. Sometimes just for comp picks. Sometimes they trade them in their prime.

      They are the embodiment of letting go of their defensive stars a year too early. The natural byproduct is that their team is constantly in position cap wise, to make moves late with cap casualty cuts after teams have exhausted their cap space. Getting relatively cheap one year rentals on veteran players who don’t need a couple years’ seasoning to get up to speed. And letting those rentals go the following year. In essence buying instant production up front for cheap as well as a future comp pick.

      The real issue is going to come down to how the negotiations behind the scenes for our core players are going. Seattle absolutely has to pare that down before this year starts. If Clark is close to a long term deal, then don’t send him off. If not, then we have to be aggressive in rotating that position and cap money to keep the guys we can. We can’t know this on the outside.

  6. clbradley17 says:

    I’m going to comment on the last 2-3 articles, work 6 days/nights a week and it’s hard to keep up. First of all, fantastic mock overall and especially for the Seahawks, Rob. Have really liked most of those players since the Senior Bowl or earlier, a couple just heard of recently in Hill, Thomas and Tell, but had considered a mock with them hearing your praise of them during the combine. Had definitely already wanted to mock WVU’s Jennings and Wesco, also Miller and Samia to us. And if we could’ve traded down another couple times in rounds 2 and/or 3 and gotten 3-4 more picks, definitely agree with the alternatives or additions if we grabbed an extra S in Thornhill or Blair, CB in Savage or Long, Edge/LB in Hollins or Carney, and TE in Sample or Moreau.

    Second, if we have to match or best an approx. 20 mil./yr. contract for Lawrence and other DEs, and it looks like we may lose Clark for nothing like Sherman or ET if we have to choose between franchising him or Russ next year, then yes trade Clark for a couple 1s (2019 & 2020) or the best we can get instead of letting him walk for nothing. But as others have said, sign Reed and BW, Russ too if we can – all 3 ASAP before the draft if possible, so there is only one we may have to franchise next year and not let another great player walk away with nothing in return. Sure would be great to have that 2nd round pick Dallas said they offered early in the 2018 season for ET before he broke his leg.

    Have heard and read more on some of the players mentioned recently. On Tony Pauline’s most recent podcast, he stated that QB Stidham may have risen from 3rd rd. where he had him after a very good Senior Bowl week, into the 2nd after he was so accurate on passes all over the field and hitting the cones they set up 35 yards away at the combine. Conversely, he said QB Grier was terrible at the combine; very inaccurate and may have dropped into day 3 of the draft. Could he be a 4th rounder for us? Also mentioned TCU’s 6’1″ 241 lb. Ty Summers as another LB to consider, ran a 4.51 40 and said you could see his athleticism covering TEs or other players 30 yards downfield. Not sure how he knew since the combine only showed 10 yard splits for DL, but he said OL Opeta had the fastest for OL at 1.66, and WR Terry McLaurin had the fastest he mentioned at 1.45! He also discusses the Cardinals’ Murray/Rosen situation plus winners and losers from the combine. https://bleav.com/podcast/nfl-scouting-combine-wrap-up/

    More on LB Drew Lewis of Colorado as he starts doing his pro day reports at draftanalyst.com, Pauline says “Lewis measured 6011 and 229 lbs, was timed as fast as 4.49 in the 40 and ran a terrific three-cone time of 7.02. His other marks included a vertical jump of 34 inches, a broad of 10-foot-9 and 20 reps on the bench. He spent a lot of time with the Seattle Seahawks, Tennessee Titans and Pittsburgh Steelers over the past 24 hours.” http://draftanalyst.com/pro-day-report-colorado-state-colorado

    Another fast LB to keep an eye on possibly as a late day 3 pick or even a UDFA is Dedrick Young of Nebraska: “I stamped linebacker Dedrick Young II as a priority free agent before the season despite not being graded by scouts, and he showed why today. Young, who measured 6017 and 233 pounds, completed 27 reps on the bench and touched 37 inches on the vertical jump and 10-foot-1 in the broad jump. I’m hearing Young timed as fast as 4.45 in the 40 and just about everyone had him under 4.5.” http://draftanalyst.com/pro-day-report-nebraska

    • Rob Staton says:

      Thanks for sharing those thoughts (and for being prepared to read through the older articles!)

    • drewdawg11 says:

      Dedrick is a kid with whom I’m familiar because he played high school ball at centennial in Peoria, AZ. Really athletic player. Went to Nebraska and and played as a freshman. I coached against his little brother when he was 14 and he was a freak too. My team was vastly superior but he killed us. We won 21-20 and he touched the ball every snap, ran all over us and we won the district that season! Dedrick would be a guy I would take a chance on for sure.

  7. Sea Mode says:

    Jason La Canfora
    @JasonLaCanfora

    The Bills have not and will not attempt to trade for Frank Clark

    5:30 AM – 9 Mar 2019

    • Sea Mode says:

      (Just passing on info, don’t mean to say the exercise of this piece isn’t still useful.)

    • SJVHawk says:

      Seattle could have signed Clark to the same Franchise tag that Dallas used on Lawrence but they didn’t! If nobody is willing to give up 2 1st for Clark it sends a message to Clark that Seattle will use as leverage on Clark. If you trade for Clark there is no guarantee he will sign a long term deal, he could wait another year and enter the open market, it’s not worth the risk. If you really want him the best thing to do is sit down with Clark and try to work out a deal which in the long run will be cheaper than trading for him because Seattle will not trade Clark for a 1st round pick. If Buffalo makes Clark an offer accepts they can still trade DE Hughes or anyone else on their team to acquire a draft pick. Seattle would be stupid to talk about Clark with any team. The Franchise Tag is doing the negotiating for Seattle, remember Clark didn’t have to sign that Franchise Tag, he could have forced Seattle to offer him the 20 million Tag.

  8. Trevor says:

    Really hope there is no franchise tag in the next CBA seems like it just creates drama and the situations rarely end well for the team doing the franchise tag anyways.

    • Rob Staton says:

      There needs to be some protection though and a form of tag. Unless you want the weaker market teams to lose all their talent after 4-5 years and become basket case feeder teams to the big select few.

      • Trevor says:

        I thought that is what the salary cap was meant to prevent. All the tag does is hold up the process one or two years. If a team wants to sign a player they eventually do and if a player wants to move on they eventually do just one year later.

        I dont think I can think of one example where the tag worked out great for all parties and allowed a walker market team to retain a player long term. All it has ever done is give a team one more year of control to try and figure out what to do with the player and prolong the envitable while create a ton of drama within the organization. Who was the last player on a franchise tag played a key role in getting a team to a playoff run? Joyner with the Rams last year but was he really a key cog on that team and then maybe Gostkowski back in 2014.

        I just dont think it is an effective tool for any of the parties in its current form except for Kirk Cousins who played it beautifully while holding the Redskins hostage for 2-3 years.

        • Rob Staton says:

          If there’s no tag any quality player will play out his deal and simply test the market then walk. The tag enables some form of parity because teams like the Bills (for example) can tag players and prevent them from just walking out the door. It’s a vital cog in the NFL unless we just want 10 great teams and 22 bad ones.

          • Kyle says:

            The lack of parity would make the sport a lot more like European football. The big clubs are always on top, and can simply buy their way to more trophies. I think it’s probably one reason why the sport hasn’t caught on in the States to the extent it could or should. In the NFL unless a team has horrible management and an owner that keeps said management in place, there’s usually a chance to be competitive.

          • LLLOGOSSS says:

            Fully agree, it’s an equitable arrangement because a team can build around their own draft picks while the player gets guaranteed money at the top of the market, and there’s every chance both sides can work toward an extension.

            These times are changing, though. We’re seeing quite a lot of leverage going to the players. If anything I’d like to see more protection for the teams (though I certainly don’t begrudge players maximizing their career earnings).

          • Dale Roberts says:

            That situation is still occurring because playing on the tag has become so lucrative. If Russell Wilson wants to get out of Seattle all he has to do is force the tag for a couple of years until the burden become untenable for the team.

  9. clbradley17 says:

    Saw this last month at Field Gulls and keep forgetting to post it. A possible Will LB option that won’t break the bank if we can’t re-sign Wright or Kendricks.

    “Neville Hewitt
    After spending the first three seasons of his career playing mostly on special teams with the Dolphins, Hewitt signed with the Jets as a free agent last spring. Following Darren Lee’s suspension, Hewitt stepped into the starting lineup and impressed, filling gaps aggressively and affecting the opposing quarterbacks as a rusher.

    As an undersized, modern linebacker, Hewitt would be the best fit at WILL linebacker in Seattle among the ‘backers listed here. He has the ability to drop into hook/curl zones and the flats, allowing Mingo to remain exclusively on the strongside and the line of scrimmage (assuming he remains on the roster). Hewitt has the size and athleticism the Seahawks seek at linebacker, and flashed legitimate upside over the final month of the 2018 season. Though he wouldn’t be a surefire bet, there’s reason to believe Hewitt could be more than a stop-gap solution in Seattle.

    Approximate deal: Hewitt played on a one-year, $705,000 contract in 2018, and a reasonable bump should be expected for his new deal. A two-year deal in the $3M range would be a worthwhile gamble for the Seahawks—at the very least, they would be adding depth and a special teams contributor.”

    https://www.fieldgulls.com/2019/2/15/18225329/seattle-seahawks-free-agency-2019-linebackers-targets

  10. BobbyK says:

    A dream scenario for me would be to trade Pocic/Clark to the Packers for 1(12) and Fackrell. And then be able to trade 1(21) and potentially another pick to the Steelers for TJ Watt.

  11. LLLOGOSSS says:

    To be honest if we can get a top-10 pick +, we absolutely should be trying to trade Clark. We’ve been debating this very idea with Russell Wilson for the exact same reason: market value for his services is phoning to get prohibitively astronomical, and we won’t feasibly be able to pay/keep everyone we need to pay/keep if we only have one Franchise Tag to go around next year.

    I think the sensible among us understand that the last thing we want to do is actually trade a top-5 QB.

    Yet something has to give. I love Frank Clark as a player, and it would hurt to lose him, but as Rob said, he can walk in 12 months for free. Russell is not signing a deal; you can sign his name to next year’s franchise tag in ink. Let’s learn from the Earl situation, and get ahead of this conundrum. Get an infusion of cheap talent. A Top-10 pick bolstered by mid-round talent is this draft is a perfect antidote for this roster, in a year where the strength of the draft is high-first pass rush and mid-round depth at every other area of need.

    This is a very smart tact, in my opinion, if true.

  12. kevin mullen says:

    I don’t like the precedent that’s about to be set if JS finds a great deal for Clark, goes south from locker room perspective. He’s actively recruiting other players, he’s announced that he’s “all in” with our team & city.

    But damn, the appeal of Ed Oliver tho…

    • Aaron says:

      Agreed. A top 10 pick doesn’t come around that often, but Clark is part of the core. Everything they’ve said about him and all he’s done is show he’s a team leader, team player, and integral part of competing for a championship in the years ahead. That said I’d love for at least one trade during FA to get a mid round pick. We have to get 4 picks to 8 to really take advantage of this talented and deep draft.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’m not sure a Pete Carroll locker room would react so badly to that. After all, those guys have their own careers and motivations. They’re not going to jeopardise it because Frank Clark got traded and then presumably paid a fortune.

  13. Edgar says:

    This makes too much sense for it to happen. There are risks in every scenario with Clark.

    If he plays on the franchise tag, Seattle might end up with nothing for him after next season (don’t even mention a comp pick, those are unicorns for the Hawks). If they sign him to a mega deal…..it’s success hinges on Frank being healthy and having 13-18 sack seasons the next 3 years. If they trade him, if frees up cap money, gains draft capital, and allows the Seahawks to sign 1-2 other known commodities off the released/free agent market at less cost. To me…….this option is the best option~

    • Trevor says:

      There is way more risk in a 1st round pick eventually becoming an elite pass rusher much less Frank Clark who is a consistent 10 + per year sack guy that team have to game plan for. Frank is the type of player and team leader all teams dream thier first round pick. Most don’t come close to being that type of player.

      Unless he has made it clear that he will not resign with the Hawks long term and there is no indication of that. Then just sign him at the market rate and enjoy his prime playing years from age 25-30. Not sure any other scenario makes sense.

      • Sea Mode says:

        +1

      • Rob Staton says:

        He doesn’t have to make it clear he won’t sign. He just has to be asking for more money than they’re willing to pay. And in a year, he’ll walk out the door with zero compensation forthcoming.

        • Hawksince77 says:

          This is the key variable when considering trade for Clark: what is he demanding? If it’s too much, and Seattle has little chance of retaining him after 2019, then it makes more sense to trade him now.

          If, however, they are close to agreeing to a long-term extension, that would be preferable for everyone, I would think.

        • Snax says:

          Same with Russell or any player for that matter. If Russell’s camp is asking for $45 mil a year and not budging. Then see if you can get 3-4 first round picks for him and let another team make that mistake. No way no hell should hawks pay that much per year. It will cripple the team, mark my words

      • Edgar says:

        Completely agree about the unknown of the potential 1st round pick and Frank’s leadership qualities. My point is that they would be locked into one premium pass rusher contract with up to 3 years of guarantees sunk in. They could sign 2 on the market quality known players along with paying a 1st round or early second round pick with less of a long-term cap hit with Clark’s money. That to me is the best team option out of all on the table.

      • SJVHawk says:

        Clark signed the Franchise Tag he’s made it clear he’s ready to negotiate with everyone including the Hawks. It’s a done deal we sign Clark in the future for under 20 million or we get 2 1st round pics for Clark, I see no way Hawks pay 20 million for Clark. The key to Glazers information is that teamS are presently calling about Clark, who cares what teams did at the combine, all that matters is where we are right now. If teamS are calling about Clark they are already willing to give up 2 1st round pics they’re hoping Seattle will give them info but Seattle won’t especially after Buffalo pulled out of the deal with Pitt.

  14. DC says:

    If our best players are open to hypothetical trades due to ‘losing them for nothing’ next off season then we ought to visit our best ever LB and future HOF’er Bobby Wagner. The danger, as we all know, is that Wilson, Wagner, Clark & Reed are all slated to be FAs next year. If we lose KJ this offseason I’m going to assume that that might affect Bobby’s decision more than a little bit. Wilson will be the priority to get the tag of those 4. As F’d up as it would be, Bobby is the one I see as the biggest threat of losing for nothing. My question is what would a 29 year old, still in his prime, future HOF MLB net Seattle in a trade? I think he’s got at least 4 good years left and love the guy.

    This regime can’t lose any of these guys for nothing. Personally I think we can afford to pay our 4 best players.

    • SamL says:

      We can’t trade Bobby. Frank could be a top 5 pass rusher but has a few injury concerns. Bobby is the best linebacker in the league and the leader of our defense. Plus there are not many options in the draft to even replace him. I would consider Clark trade but never a Bobby.

    • cha says:

      “If we lose KJ this offseason I’m going to assume that that might affect Bobby’s decision more than a little bit.”

      This is one of the most overblown fan theories that frequently pops up. Players know it is a business. They respect teammates leaving for a better salary because they have been or will be in the same boat.

      • DC says:

        I don’t remember where I read it but I recall Wagner mentioning over the offseason that he would be watching how Seattle treats KJ this offseason and would take that into account. Wish I had the reference. It’s not my ‘theory’ like the theory of relativity. It’s the bond between good friends and understanding that relationship. If I perceive someone is treating my friend poorly, including an employer, it affects my view of them. Simple. I don’t know what Wagner is thinking.

        Like I wrote, we can resign all of our top 4 & I hope we do. Since this is a ‘rosterbation’ thread I’m not asking whether we should or should not, I’m asking what another GM would trade for Bobby Wagner? Take out your personal attachment.

        I could see a late 1st round pick from a contender.

        • Elmer says:

          Wagner is currently the best in the business and rookies are unproven. Some work out and some don’t. I would need a 1 and a 2. No deal otherwise.

      • Sanders says:

        I tend to agree. It’s not like KJ is 25 or 26 years old and we are letting him go while he is still in his prime. Linebackers age like RB in the NFL, short shelf life. IMO players know the shelf life of each position. I would trade Wagner or Wilson before I traded Clark.

        The Steelers #1 priority of need is MLB…if you think Wagner will be upset with KJ not being re-signed, then consider trading him to the Steelers for their 1st round #20 pick and also an additional 3rd or 4th round pick this year.

        That would give us two 1st round picks, one we would use to trade down to acquire more draft picks. Then the other we could stand pat and draft the best player available, be it on offense or defense.

        Keep the Steelers #20 pick and tell Wilson…if you give promise to give us a hometown discount we will draft a WR or offensive lineman at pick #20. WR Marquise Brown or OL Cody Ford.

  15. SamL says:

    I gotta ask Rob, if this trade did happen and the Seahawks had the #9 pick who would you take? All 3 of the Clemson guys would be great. Would we get lucky and rashan Garry get to 9? U like ed Oliver but I’m just a little hesitant because of his size. We could also grab devin white to replace k.j.

  16. mishima says:

    The Seahawks need depth/competition at almost every position, save RB and SS.

    With only 4 picks and little cap room, can they afford not to trade Clark? IMO, great player but not great value (not to be confused with market rate) at $17m+. Pay for dominance not flash.

    If they can trade him, use the picks + cash to fill out the roster with value FAs (Barr + Kendricks), 8 – 10 draft picks with at least 3 in top 45. Instead of few stars / many scrubs, do a true re-load. Do the same next year with Reed.

    I’ll change my mind tomorrow.

    • Volume12 says:

      ‘Look at how New England does it every year’

      If more teams were like the Pats, it wouldn’t make New England who they are would it?

      • Volume12 says:

        Oops.

        That’s wasn’t supposed to be in response to mishima.

      • Sanders says:

        They are the model for trading a player a year too early. Except for when they traded DE Chandler Jones, Jones was the same age as Frank Clark. That trade the Patriots got OG Jonathan Cooper that they ended up releasing the same year…then they had two draft picks from that trade that turned out to be a WR that was cut and a eventual starting OG.

    • AlaskaHawk says:

      With our draft picks so few – it does make it tempting. I would like to have those extra draft picks as Rob has outlined. I would also like to keep Clark, but I have this gut feeling that the team is somehow screwed on both draft picks this year, and cap next year. Signing Clark this year may mean one of our other favorites doesn’t get signed next year. Really tough decision that I would hate to make.

      • mishima says:

        Agree. For me, it’s not about Clark, but rather the need to re-sync the roster.

        They may need to lose some talent (Clark) to replace the talent lost without compensation (Sherman, Bennett, Thomas, Chancellor, Avril). Need to hit on 3-4 picks every draft, 1-2 UDFAs and find value in free agency.

        2-year plan to restock the roster (esp. the defense) with size, speed, dog.

      • Sanders says:

        Schneider threw this years draft picks to try to be competitive this past year, our re-tooling year. Drafting legit QB and DE are the two most important positions in the NFL. To be so nonchalant about trading one of the top young pass rusher in the NFL, is crazy.

        • Bigten says:

          Correct me if I’m wrong, but the picks were actually in an attempt to be a contender the year prior to this last year. At least that’s where the second rounder went. And I don’t think anyone is being nonchalant about trading a solid DE in Clark. Clark will have all the bargaining power next year, and is more than likely to walk in FA. Hawks will have zero leverage for him and he will be able to wait an extra year and have the price tag of DE increase, and exceed whomever signs in the mean time. The best option, is to get what we can for him now and attempt to replicate his success. Whether it be through the draft, or a couple FAs that can make up for the lost sacks. Personally, I think 2 guys at 8 sacks a piece is better than one at 16, because those 2 are fresher on other downs. Sacks aren’t the only thing that make a solid DE in our scheme.

  17. Sea Mode says:

    Like.

    How Drue Tranquill Dominates Life
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOBiwCeJpZs

  18. SebA says:

    Interesting that NFL.com said the Seahawks were interested in Dwayne Allen before he signed with Miami, shows that Rob was right that TE is an area they’ll be looking to add to.

  19. DC says:

    The Seahawks are in this position (4 draft picks) because of miss calculating a lot of things. Whatever, water under the bridge. Let’s take our medicine now and stop carrying the damage forward. Trading our best players to gain draft picks & cover our past mistakes seems like… a mistake.

    Now if you believed that you were going to lose one or more of them next year for nothing then yes, gaining something makes sense.

    • 12th chuck says:

      well said

    • Volume12 says:

      Great point.

    • Lil'stink says:

      That’s the thing; if we handle the Wilson/Clark/Reed/Wagner scenario as poorly as the ET3 situation, it could set this team back a year (or more). PCJS can’t afford any more mistakes.

    • McZ says:

      Rob wrote that part about how Cousins changed the game forever.

      I fear, that’s true not only for QBs, but for any player being (or believed to be) a cornerstone of his franchise. We had a full season to sign Clark to a new contract, and we were not able; his agent said, they are okay with playing under the tag. There is no incentive to strike a deal early, and I just cannot see Wagner or Reed bargaining any softer than Clark. This piles up more and more pressure on the Seahawks org.

      If this works our for Clark, it will kill this franchise.

      You may argue it could be possible to spend 100m+ on the top 5 players of the team. This keeps this team in the “post-2015 just sneak into postseason win nothing limbo”. We will continue to live on a mortgaged future. Talking about mistakes, I can easily see them pulling for players using 2020 picks, just to keep the boat afloat.

  20. astro.domine says:

    Can you imagine being one of the GMs that actually has to make these decisions?
    They’re literally uprooting entire lives based on abstract valuations like, “1st Round”.
    With one phone call they can change the course of not only an NFL franchise, but dozens of young men and millions of dollars.

    Just the thought of that much responsibility makes me queasy.

  21. Volume12 says:

    I asked Georgiahawk a couple months ago if he paid any attention to GA-Tech. Reason was, 2 guys.

    DT Brandon Adams is a dude and EDGE Anree St. Amour.

    Amour at a regional combine was 6’1 1/4, 256 lbs., 4.60 40, 34″ vert, 10’1 broad, 7.02 3 cone, 4.43 SS, 79″ wingspan. Could be a nice project in UDFA.

  22. GerryG says:

    I’m guessing the problem with stalemate right now is there are now 4 franchised top pass rushers and Flowers about to hit FA.

    None of these guys wants to sign first. The conversation between Frank and Jon might be great, but he’s still gonna wait.

    Once Flowers signs we may see some deals be made, but there is little reason for any of these tag guys to go first

    • charlietheunicorn says:

      This is a fine point. No one wants to set the market, then immediately not be the top paid guy after a week…. due to the next guy to sign “resetting” the market. I’m not sure which agent represents which guy available or tagged right now, but some agents are notorious for being a pain in the ass to work with and others tend to get “stuff” done quickly and quietly.

  23. vancouver fan says:

    Dear Rob,

    Your reply would be good as a read your blog very often, you have great insight into the drafting needs for the Seahawks.

    As I understand the Franchise Tag, any team can offer Frank the $$$ and the Seahawks have the right to match to keep him or let him walk for 2x 1st round picks.

    I don’t understand your trade scenarios, why doesn’t the Seahawks take 2 x 1st round in consecutive years.

    I can see for John Schneider using the Bills (no. 9) and Seattle’s (No.21) in 2019 draft and moving back on BOTH of their No. 1s and picking up late 1st round picks or early 2nd round pick and add another 2-4 picks in the round 2-5.

    John Schneider can do this again in 2020, when he will have 2 x 1st round picks (Seattle and Bills), by moving back in the draft. With the Seattle’s own 7 picks, they can add another 2-4 picks by moving back on BOTH of the 1st round picks.

    Schneider is the “Master” of moving back, picking up draft picks and hitting on many of them and Carrol turning them into players.

    Your thoughts?

    • Rob Staton says:

      In order for this to happen the Bills would have to sign Clark to an offer sheet that Seattle refuses to match. The Bills or anyone else is very unlikely to do that. Any prospective trade partner will likely be offering less than two first round picks.

  24. icb12 says:

    AB to Raiders for a 3rd and a 5th
    New contract 3 years 30.125 million guaranteed.

    Seems like a win for the raiders.
    Manage to keep all three of your 1st round picks, and get a very talented receiver (albeit a prima Donna).
    Wonder how gruden and AB will gel?

    • charlietheunicorn says:

      This is an old AL DAVIS RAIDERS type move. I love it, low cast (draft picks) for high upside player.
      Not sure if he will like playing on a “loser” team this year however. But it makes sense for both teams. And, it was not the Bills….. LOL.

      • Volume12 says:

        AB is gonna be making a guaranteed $30 mil. I don’t think he’s too concerned with W’s.

    • SoCal12 says:

      I think Gruden and Brown will gel pretty well since they both have similar large gregarious personalities.

      I think it’s a great move for the Raiders. People are counting AB’s large contract as a potential negative, but they can afford it with so many first rounders they’re about to accumulate, bonus if they can pick up a rookie QB like Murray. I don’t see any downside to this deal at all for Oakland/Vegas.

      • Volume12 says:

        It is a great move for the Raiders. Even if he is a diva, still one of the best WRs in the game and they still have 4 picks in the top 50. Basically 4 1st rounders if they keep ’em all.

        I like your idea of potentially trading for Kyler Murray because they seem like a franchise that’s trying to hit homeruns.

    • Saxon says:

      The AB deal is a reminder that even elite players are not commanding the draft compensation they once did. I am dubious that we can get anything close to the windfall Rob suggests. Khalil Mack aside, teams are more conservative than ever with their draft picks since picks provide cheap labor.

      If that type of deal were offered then we should immediately, unhesitatingly, rush to submit it to the league.

      • Sea Mode says:

        I don’t see it that way at all. AB killed his trade value with his antics and, above all, his contract demands. The Steelers took what they could get while they could still get it, just like we (esp. in hindsight) should have with Earl.

  25. jb9 says:

    The Bills would be crazy to give up #9 for Clark. Doubt they’d even trade #9 for Clark+3rd rd pick.

  26. Jared Marshall says:

    Hi Rob; I’m pretty sure this is the first time I’ve ever commented on here. Before I get to talking ball, there’s been something I’ve long felt I owed saying to you. About five years ago I came down with a rare and pretty awful disease. It made it so I basically couldn’t leave the house anymore in my mid-20s. I had already been a huge fan of you and this page, but let’s just say it took on an entirely new meaning after that. Watching and reading about football was already my favorite pastime — but a pastime became the way I got through my days. What you do here is special.

    It wasn’t long after I got sick that I found a meaning in life — writing. That I know I can directly attribute to you. Reading the incredible content you churn out so regularly gave me something to aspire to. I’ve spent the last four or so years honing that ability. You have always been the benchmark. Basically I owe you an immense amount of gratitude. Not only has your page been the most consistent bright spot in an incredibly dark time — outside of a girlfriend who stuck with me through all this — you also inspired me to do what makes waking up worth doing. Thank you Rob, thank you! You’ll never know what your work has meant to me.

    I really did come here to talk ball: What brought me here was an article I wrote when the news broke that the Seahawks had franchise tagged Frank Clark. The idea of trading him had been nagging me ever since you sounded the alarms on the Russell Wilson negotiations. I thought for that reason tagging Frank Clark wasn’t an option. Then when the Buffalo rumors swirled, I did a fanpost on Fieldgulls for the first time in a bazillion years; and saw you had a dedicated post to this topic, and decided to share it as an excuse to break seven years of ice. Why didn’t I comment up until now? I really can’t say; humans are weird. When you lurk for so long, the tendency is just to keep doing it.

    Anyway I’ll let me from a few days ago make most of my points for me. Apart from actual trade rumors involving Buffao, and then Buffalo bowing out and being replaced by Indi; not a whole ton has honestly changed. As you mentioned; Clark still appears to be recruiting players to Seattle even since the tag. That stands I’ll post what I wrote below. I don’t think the pros and cons of trading Frank Clark

    • Rob Staton says:

      Thank you Jared, for being a loyal reader over the years and for taking the time to comment. Also thank you for letting me know you’ve taken something from the blog. I spent a lot of time recently wondering about this place and whether it retains the impact it seemingly used to have. Reading your post made me realise that it’s still a force for good. Thank you, and I hope you’re feeling better. Keep up the writing and please keep commenting. Great to hear from you 👍🏻

      • Jared Marshall says:

        You are very welcome. Feel free to delete this comment or the one below it. I had a case of premature publication. Your page is absolutely a force for good in this world, and the wonderful caliber of people consistently in your comment section is a testament to that. You bring a lot of joy to a lot of people — just maybe a little more to people in shoes like mine.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Thanks man. Thanks a lot 👍🏻

          • Saxon says:

            Jared thanks for sharing your story. I pray you recover from your illness. That’s a tough situation but it seems you’re attitude is right and you’re making the best of it. Props.

            Rob, it’s disconcerting that you have been questioning whether your blog has the same impact. I do not see your traffic reports, Google analytics, etc, but I do know that I am a life long sports fan whom has read a ton of articles over multiple decades and you are far and away the best – ever. Better than Kiper, King, et al, despite this just being a part time hobby for you. Therefore, very selfishly, I hope you continue your superb work.

            If your readership isn’t growing it is mainly because your site needs a rebrand, as has been discussed, along with someone talented at SEO/digital marketing. I’d be willing to put money toward that project if the right developer was found… though that is no mean feat. Tough to find reliable developers. You can count on me for at least 1k toward the project. Perhaps a Go Fund Me page can be created?

            • Jared Marshall says:

              It never quite seemed like Rob knew he was the best in the biz. I suppose it has to do with the fact that he’s the one person who comes here every time but doesn’t get to experience it from the consumption perspective. He doesn’t get to be one of his readers. Sports media to me can easily be described like the beer industry: You’ve got your low-end mault liquor, your mass-production American piss, your corporate-bought craft beers, and your legitimate craft beer that attracts the hipsters. Rob isn’t on that scale. Rob is more like the beer-making monks who make that $100-a-bottle stuff. The product is the top shelf of the top shelf. What needs to happen is the temple needs some paint, and some signs pointing to it need to be erected. Rob, if you ever doubt what you’re doing here — look around the internet. Just look around!!! It is a tacky and shallow place. What you have here is an oasis of civility, intelligence, and class. Outside of some very classy Facebook pages, I don’t know anywhere else to find that. Certainly not for football (much less my beloved Seahawks). If you’re niche but revered — you’re probably doing it at the highest level.

  27. Jared Marshall says:

    Hi Rob; I’m pretty sure this is the first time I’ve ever commented on here. Before I get to talking ball, there’s been something I’ve long felt I owed saying to you. About five years ago I came down with a rare and pretty awful disease. It made it so I basically couldn’t leave the house anymore in my mid-20s. I had already been a huge fan of you and this page, but let’s just say it took on an entirely new meaning after that. Watching and reading about football was already my favorite pastime — but a pastime became the way I got through my days. What you do here is special.

    It wasn’t long after I got sick that I found a meaning in life — writing. That I know I can directly attribute to you. Reading the incredible content you churn out so regularly gave me something to aspire to. I’ve spent the last four or so years honing that ability. You have always been the benchmark. Basically I owe you an immense amount of gratitude. Not only has your page been the most consistent bright spot in an incredibly dark time — outside of a girlfriend who stuck with me through all this — you also inspired me to do what makes waking up worth doing. Thank you Rob, thank you! You’ll never know what your work has meant to me.

    I really did come here to talk ball: What brought me here was an article I wrote when the news broke that the Seahawks had franchise tagged Frank Clark. The idea of trading him had been nagging me ever since you sounded the alarms on the Russell Wilson negotiations. I thought for that reason tagging Frank Clark wasn’t an option. Then when the Buffalo rumors swirled, I did a fanpost on Fieldgulls for the first time in a bazillion years; and saw you had a dedicated post to this topic, and decided to share it as an excuse to break seven years of ice. Why didn’t I comment up until now? I really can’t say; humans are weird. When you lurk for so long, the tendency is just to keep doing it.

    Anyway I’ll let me from a few days ago make most of my points for me. Apart from actual trade rumors involving Buffao, and then Buffalo bowing out and being replaced by Indi; not a whole ton has honestly changed. As you mentioned; Clark still appears to be recruiting players to Seattle even since the tag. That stands in stark contrast to the impasse I imagine the team and his camp must be at. Franchising Clark has to have been a last resort right? I think there is a wider conversation we as fans should be having about this topic right now, and I think there are pros and cons to trading him that are being brushed over because it just doesn’t seem like a possibility. I’ll leave the piece I wrote in a separate comment below.

  28. Jared Marshall says:

    ***Here’s what I wrote when it was announced Clark was tagged. We’ve had time to digest trade rumors, but the core logic is intact. If it sounds a little pitchy, that’s because it is a pitch. I’m curious if you guys think I’m making way too much of the significance of the franchise tag, or if you think we underappreciated the sense of urgency about that deadline like I do.***

    “First off; this is not an article I want to write. What has happened since Frank Clark joined the Seahawks’ organization as a young man with a concerning past and some potential maturity issues is literally a best-case scenario. Outside of a Twitter spat you would certainly prefer he didn’t engage in, Frank Clark has been a model citizen in Seattle. Model citizen doesn’t even do it justice honestly. Frank Clark hasn’t just been able to overcome some checkers in his past and not be a headache, he has become an incredible person period. There’s no need to quality anything by citing his past either — he is a great presence and team leader by great presence and team leader standards.

    I think that’s a really important backdrop for this conversation. While there are some incredibly logical reasons to consider trading Frank Clark, the best reasons not to might be intangible ones. Anyone who has followed this team knows its demise as a should-have-been dynasty was deteriorating morale (as well as some horrific missteps in personnel decisions). Last year was a breath of fresh air. The toxic and contentious atmosphere felt almost completely exorcised. While maybe not as talented, this team was hungry and fun to watch. And while you can cry over spilled milk — this team still has a young and talented nucleus to build around. I think it’s fair to credit Frank Clark with a lot of that newfound spirit. I can and will make a case on paper to trade him, but there’s no guarantees it won’t destroy this great chemistry we all felt.

    With all that necessarily said, everything going exactly right may not be enough to overcome circumstances. Let’s get to weighing that case for trading Frank Clark: I won’t go deep into detail on these things, but needless to say the Seahawks are severely lacking in in draft capital because of bad trades and stubborn non-trades. I’m sure you already know we are in a bind. I’m equally sure you are aware of the huge contracts on the horizon. If Frank Clark plays on the franchise tag this year, it will mean he joins Russell Wilson, Bobby Wagner, and Jarran Reed as free agents. That leaves us with only one franchise tag — and using it on Clark would mean using it for a second time. If this happens, all these guys will be able to leverage off of one another; driving up their asking price, and forcing the Seahawks into paying unrestricted free agent rates. More realistically it means losing some of them for nothing.

    Frank Clark has little incentive to sign a long-term deal right now, and the Seahawks cannot allow him to walk for nothing, or add his leverage to the already difficult situation next off-season holds. If a long-term deal can’t be reached with Clark, it damn-near forces the hands of the Seahawks to trade him. The idea hasn’t been thrown around much, but there’s no way the FO isn’t aware and considering this. I pray that’s the case anyway. At the very least their best bargaining chip right now is the threat of shipping him off to Buffalo or Oakland. They have to be willing to do that, and have to make his camp acutely aware of it. Frank Clark cannot be allowed to play this year on the franchise tag under any circumstances!

    I believe the deadline for Clark to sign a long-term deal is the day of the draft. Failure to have him locked up or traded by draft day would signify another astronomical mistake by this front office that will negatively impact the team for years to come. It’s the difference between zeroing in on Russell Wilson next year while your only other major priorities are a LB and a DT, and being forced to choose between a second tag on a prize DE or tagging your franchise QB; all while Wagner and Reed watch keenly to see if you’re over a barrel or not. That just can’t happen. There’s not much more road to kick cans down; the franchise tag only bought weeks to avert catastrophe.

    The emergency logjam of expensive players coming next off-season isn’t the only reason though. When I originally thought to write this piece, I anticipated at least one of Demarcus Lawrence and Jadaveon Clowney would reach free agency. As much as I feel Frank Clark is superior to those players, I think it is fair to question whether Frank Clark alone is more valuable than a similarly-priced FA at his position plus a top-ten pick and change. Obviously those guys got franchised, but Tre Flowers is still out there. I think the same logic still applies; Frank Clark for over $18M APY, or Tre Flowers for similar money plus a Quinnen Williams, Josh Allen, or Christian Wilkins-type player (not that you have to go DL, and not that there’s any guarantee all of them would be there).

    Obviously this all hinges on being able to trade him for a mint. On one hand, teams will likely realize the bind we’re in and try to lowball. But ultimately there would be no shortage of suiters. Elite DE’s are almost never available for trade — especially not ones who are 25. I think Clark could easily command similar compensation as Mack did. Either a top-ten pick, or a late 1st and at least a future 2nd along with mid-round picks to fill out our board. The logic isn’t hard to see — both options involve signing a similar talent at a similar price at the same position. It’s just one of those options comes with a treasure-trove of draft picks when we need them the most. It’s impossible to know if this is the right thing to do or not, but as promised I made a case that makes sense on paper.

    Are there flaws with this plan? There absolutely are. For starters this puts you in a position where you basically can’t be outbid for Tre Flowers. That’s certainly not ideal — especially with teams like the Colts flush with cash. This draft may be rich in DL talent, but you can’t lose Clark and not replace him with a known commodity. This also brings me back full circle to where I began with how important he is in the locker room. You don’t want to have elite, home-grown talent that also couples with oozing leadership and character, only to ship them off. Frank Clark is the kind of player you want to reward — and not rewarding him isn’t a message you want to send.

    I didn’t want to write this. I’ve thought this was a possibility for quite a while, but I avoided saying as much because I assumed Clark would be signed before the franchise tag deadline. I thought the Seahawks would even be willing to overpay because of the macro. My guess is they tried, and Clark’s team wasn’t willing to concede this unique leverage he has right now. That’s a huge problem! The importance of not tagging Clark was so great that there’s good reason to think a trade may be the only recourse left! All the red flags that a shocking trade could not only be possible — but likely — came to the forefront when a deal wasn’t reached in time. Now the clock is ticking. That the last player the Seahawks tagged was Olindo Mare tells you all you need to know about how dire this is — especially with our track-record of paying homegrown defensive stars. It is a distinct possibility that Clark will not be a Seahawk, and it’s time we smell the coffee.

    Unfortunately the threat of trading Clark is the only real leverage the FO has to avert the looming disaster of losing more elite cornerstone players for nothing. Our team cannot withstand another debacle where they are too stubborn to trade players and end up with nothing to show for it. JS cannot be willing to blink here. There has to be an ultimatum, and it has to be absolute. I hope this is their position, and I hope they have learned from previous mistakes, and have become unwilling to come away with empty bags again. If not, then we are in severe trouble. Even before the coming contract apocalypse, there was already a good case to be made that a FA and top-ten pick is better than Clark on his own. Combine the two situations, and this has to be a hill you are willing to die on.”

    • Dingbatman says:

      Great post! Keep up the writing!

    • Sea Mode says:

      Wow, out of the woodwork… 👍 nice to have you (or know we have had you lurking…)

      I also think that Clark’s camp is just playing the waiting game. Ask for the moon until Lawrence or Clowney set the market, then just ask for what they got.

  29. clbradley17 says:

    A speedy day 3 LB we could draft is Ty Summers of TCU. He finished with 318 tackles (2nd most in TCU history), 23.5 tackles for loss, 10.5 sacks, 11 pass deflections, 2 interceptions and a forced fumble. Tony Pauline praised him as a combine winner on his latest podcast and he’s 6’1″ 241, ran a 4.51 at the combine, with a 36″ vertical jump and 10’3″ broad jump. https://bleav.com/podcast/nfl-scouting-combine-wrap-up/
    2018 highlights – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uxlst44PkK4

    LB Blake Cashman of Minnesota 6’1″ 237, had similar numbers as Summers at the combine. Also ran a 4.5 40, had a 37.5 vert. and 10’4″ broad jump, a 6.94 3 cone and 4.12 20 yd. shuttle. Seahawky tough with a chip on his shoulder, went from a walk-on to team captain and 3rd team all big ten LB his senior year. 2018 he had 104 total tackles (62 solo), 15 TFLs, 2.5 sacks, 1 FF, and 5 PDs. 2018 highlights – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAboiSO4Cuw

    • HawksBill says:

      Their short arms will probably put them in day 3, but I am all for more LB depth. Reserve LBs are core special teamers and needed as short yardage reinforcements.

  30. Largent80 says:

    Any player demanding more than the team is willing to pay can exit stage left IMO, unless you are a franchise QB (which Wilson IS).

    The way college football is churning out DL, I say get what you can for Clark.

    • lil'stink says:

      I can’t imagine the Bills giving up that bounty.

      If Clark isn’t in a Seahawks uniform come September it will be because we traded him to the Colts. They have cap space, their front office could see a guy like Clark as being the guy to get them over the top, they have a low 1st rounder this year, and an extra 2nd rounder this year.

  31. McZ says:

    No player on a football team, regardless if core or not, is untradable. This includes Russel Wilson, Doug Baldwin, Frank Clark and Bobby Wagner.

    Our current situation is a pretty uneasy one, with Clark getting 17m through franchise tag, and certainly wanting a contract in the 20m area. This is pretty much unmanageable with another three or four core players entiring FA next year. This could, no, this will turn out really nasty.

    So, if #9+40+R3+R4 for Clark+#21 is offered, with this deep class of really good DL talent, I would take it in a heartbeat. If we could spare #21, the better.

    And people telling me about locker room issues about this should ask themselves, if we are capable of paying Wagner, Reed, Clark, all in a 20m range, plus Wilson in the 40m range. Plus Ifedi in a 10m range, next to the big tickets we already carry. No, we are not.

    Trading Clark could give us the only real leverage rolling into Wilsons contract nightmare… making clear, that we are prepared to move on. Plus, it would be a very Seahawky move, bringing us into control over the draftboard, where it really matters. #9 could net us a late R1 pick and numerous R3 and R4 picks, which is this drafts sweet spot.

    Even if we don’t trade, #9 could be Christian Wilkins and #40 could net us a guy like Anthony Nelson, DE, Iowa (has he been mentioned before on the blog?) or Zach Allen.

    I call that a no brainer.

    • McZ says:

      Btw, a player on the chopping block is definitely Germain Ifedi. He is still only average, and we may be facing the plateau of his career. This draft has a couple of really promising dedicated RT, and Ja’wuan James could be our man for 7 or 8m.

      I expect our FO to really manage this team, for the good of the franchise.

  32. Rob Staton says:

    Adding to the legitimacy of this suggestion…. Buffalo were willing to swap #9 for #20 in a trade for Antonio Brown… https://twitter.com/jasonlacanfora/status/1104737389342277632?s=21

  33. Sea Mode says:

    Not quite the size (5103, 201) we are looking for, but this guy’s got speed (4.48) and explosion (39.5 vert, 10.83 broad). Wide-legged running style and balance that reminds you a bit of a guy who wore the same number.

    Check out this play and then at the 6:04 mark:

    https://youtu.be/7fJHWyMNAjc?t=75

  34. What if you could trade Frank and 21 for #9, #40 and more? Then sign Barr and Suh. Say you could get those two for $25 million a year. You could the have Barr, Reed, Suh, ??? as your front four. Then you have options with that #9 pick and you dont have Frank chewing up a large portion of your cap. Maybe Gary or Oliver for that 5 tech and maybe Christian Miller at #40? Or maybe White as a LB at #9 and a TE or WR at #40? You could have alot more flexibility for sure.

  35. SebA says:

    Why has Damien Harris’ value seemingly gone down from last year? We were talking about him as roughly a 2nd round RB last year but there doesn’t seem to be much buzz around him this year.

    • Sea Mode says:

      Because Jacobs outshone him.

      • SebA says:

        Ah of course, thanks – didn’t catch this season of college football, been too busy at college/university myself ^^

        • Sea Mode says:

          He should still go R2-early R3 though. A solid, all-around back with explosive traits who is good enough in pass pro to start right away. I could see PC being very interested in him or Rodney Anderson if we pick up an extra R3 pick and they are still on the board. Esp. if we lose Mike Davis.

          Devine Ozigbo has caught my eye later on in the draft as well.

          RB shelf life is short, so having Carson and Penny I don’t think should rule out adding another back if the draft value is good.

    • SoCal12 says:

      At least he’s doing better than Bryce Love, who seemed like a guaranteed Rd. 1-2 pick last year, but has basically fallen off the map now due to an unfortunate injury and will maybe go Day 3 now.

      This just tells me if you’re a RB (well any position really, but especially RB), you should just go and declare if your stock is high. Dedicating yourself to school just costs you millions if you wear yourself down or get injured.

    • Kenny Sloth says:

      I imagine he returned to school largely based on the draft advisory committee’s grade of him. Probably felt like he had unfinished business as the lead back.

      I suspect he’ll be a steal in the third or fourth. If not as a lead back, then certainly as part of a committee

      He still pops every time I watch him, but it’s hard to seperate the back from that Bama system and project their production

  36. Madmark says:

    I can see this could deal helping the team one way and yet I can see it not happening at all. If the trade was offered like this I would have to take it. In taking the deal I think we would help in the cap space to resign a Russel Wilson, Bobby Wagner, and Jarran Reed. I can see this would put them in a great draft position like they haven’t seen since the first year PC/JS drafted. This could put this team back to a more comfortable position with key leaders and competition that they would draft. What could they get for next four years with a top-10 pick in the 1st, Early-2nd, 2-3rs, 2-4th, and 1-5th. Those picks I believe, the way PC/JS draft could be the true reset we were hoping for.

  37. Trevor says:

    According to Ian Rapoport today if Frank does not get a long term deal he will not be reporting to camp etc.

    If that is the case it changes my thoughts on the situation completely. I think PC/JS make thier best and final offer prior to the draft if Frank turns it down put him on the market and trade him before the draft. The last thing this team needs is more hold outs and drama from one of its leaders.

    I thought Frank was on board and would be coming to camp etc. Really disappointed in both Frank and PC/JS if that is the case. Frank should have been locked up last year as sooner as Danielle Hunter signed with the Vikings on a similar deal.

    As far as that goes If they don’t plan to extend Bobby and Reed this year then put those guys on the block too because you will loose them next year for nothing as you can’t tag Russ , Bobby and Reed
    next year.

    That excitement from last season is already starting to seem like a distant memory.