Frank Clark back? YES PLEASE!

[GGotskill]

All I’ll say is this….

I saw several plays last season that made me wish we still had him.

Jealous in fact.

Do you have any specific plays in mind?

 

[RiverDog]

Come on Pitt, that was a GREAT deal for the Hawks. And at the Salary he got in KC? No thanks.

I agree that Clark wasn't worth it and that we were wise to trade him, but the problem is that we never replaced his production after he left (didn't we use KC's pick to draft LJ Collier? Ugh.) as our pass rush got much worse, so it's difficult to trumpet it as a great trade.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

At the time, excellent trade. What they did with the draft picks really has nothing to do with it is all I'm saying.

 

[knownone]

Are we sure Clark wasn't worth it for the Chiefs? He's third all-time in playoff sacks and fourth in pressures.

 

[GGotskill]

Are we sure Clark wasn't worth it for the Chiefs? He's third all-time in playoff sacks and fourth in pressures.

He definitely showed up during the playoffs for KC.

 

[pmedic920]

Do you have any specific plays in mind?

No

Unfortunately my mind doesn’t work in that fashion, (limited brain cells to dedicate) I simply remember more than once wishing he was still a Seahawk.

 

[Ozzy]

I wouldn’t mind it for the right price and Seattle needs some of what he brings attitude wise but they have zero
Money and not even enough to cover their draft. I’m sure they have a plan but it would be tough

 

[oldhawkfan]

No

Unfortunately my mind doesn’t work in that fashion, (limited brain cells to dedicate) I simply remember more than once wishing he was still a Seahawk.

Pretty much pick any defensive play from 2022 and ask yourself, would FC help this defense?

 

[sdog1981]

Frank Clark only plays hard in conference title games and Super Bowls.

 

[BASF]

Darrell Taylor has better numbers than Clark the last two seasons, including having more sacks over the three seasons, while Taylor was injured for the first season. Sure, Clark finally shows up for two or three games a season when it matters most. But, for a young team, you do not bring in guys who dog it in the regular season as a horrible example for your players.

 

[RiverDog]

At the time, excellent trade. What they did with the draft picks really has nothing to do with it is all I'm saying.

By definition, a trade has two sides to it. You can't just look at one side and declare it "good". Otherwise, you could say that a good trade for the Indians to trade Manhattan Island for $24 worth of beads.

Why was the Herschel Walker trade a "great trade"? Because they parlayed the draft picks they received from it into 1 HOF'er and 3 Pro Bowlers, leading them to 3 World Championships. I think that POV is widely recognized.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Fair enough. It was a long time ago, I think it was a solid trade at the time.

 

[massari]

Darrell Taylor has better numbers than Clark the last two seasons, including having more sacks over the three seasons, while Taylor was injured for the first season. Sure, Clark finally shows up for two or three games a season when it matters most. But, for a young team, you do not bring in guys who dog it in the regular season as a horrible example for your players.

More sacks in the regular season, but Clark had a slightly higher pressure %, slightly higher pass rush win rate while getting doubled at a slightly higher rate than Taylor.

For the right price (Bobby Wagner type deal) I'd sure hope they bring him back with how clutch he is in the big games.

 

[pittpnthrs]

I'll take a pass rusher who is mediocre in the regular season and great in the playoffs......

Exactly. Clarks better than anything Seattle has right now,

 

[Jerhawk]

Exactly. Clarks better than anything Seattle has right now,

Nuh uh, Darrell Taylor has more sacks therefore he's better!

 

[JPatera76]

I’ll pass… if I want someone who disappears frequently in games I’ll go after Clowney again. Prob cheaper too

 

[Shane Falco]

I don't think they are signing anybody. They've got to create some money.

 

[AgentDib]

By definition, a trade has two sides to it. You can't just look at one side and declare it "good". Otherwise, you could say that a good trade for the Indians to trade Manhattan Island for $24 worth of beads.

Why was the Herschel Walker trade a "great trade"? Because they parlayed the draft picks they received from it into 1 HOF'er and 3 Pro Bowlers, leading them to 3 World Championships. I think that POV is widely recognized.

I can't get on board with this logic at all. You are referring to the final outcome, but good outcomes and good decisions are distinct concepts. You can have one without the other, and often do when variability is high as with draft selections.

 

[evergreen]

I think we traded Clark and then got Clowney. Seemed like a great deal at the time.

 

[balakoth]

Nuh uh, Darrell Taylor has more sacks therefore he's better!

Huh? Its not even witty at this point