What is Frank Clark’s price?

[2_0_6]

If someone offered a mid round 1st and a late round pick for him are you taking it?

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Shoot, if they franchise him and someone blows them away w/an offer, they need to consider it. I just don't think he's going to be anywhere but Seattle.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

If someone offered a mid round 1st and a late round pick for him are you taking it?

No, I'm paying Clark, even if I have to overpay by a couple million per year.........he's now a team leader, he's nasty, he works his ass off, he's still young, and he produces (top 10 in sacks this year).

I need that guy on my defense to set the tone and play the 2nd most important position in the NFL now behind the QB, pass rusher.

Now if he wants crazy Aaron Donald money and won't take less and we're nowhere close next year at this time after a year of franchise tag? I'm open to a trade. But if it's the difference between 19-20M per year and 17-18M? I'm paying the difference.

 

[Mick063]

Pay it.

Second best defensive player on the team, although an argument could be made for Reed.

 

[IndyHawk]

Frank Clark is going to get a deal similar to Khalil Mack's, either just under or right at that level. If we don't pay him, someone else will pay his asking price. That is just how the league works. If we want to keep Clark we're going to have to pay to play.

Do I want to keep him? Absolutely, at that price? Eh, probably not. It's a hard decision, because he is our only viable edge rusher. I don't think he is worth Khalil Mack money even in a league that has an ever rising salary cap. Clark can be a bit of an enigma. Not the best against the run, and he tends to pull a disappearing act too often for my liking. That being said he is a pretty strong team leader. People on our team seem to stop and listen when he talks. I personally think the franchise tag is the best option, especially with the new CBA coming up. I'm sure he's thinking the same thing, the new CBA could be huge for him.

I see it pretty much this way..
But I'm not big on overpaying anyone..Trade and build up all around.

 

[Jville]

To me it's been something of a conundrum for any defensive line that likes to rotate in fresh personnel. Do ya pay for a strong rotation? Or do ya pay the toll for what might be a full time super star and accept some rotational weakness.

 

[knownone]

Frank Clark is going to get a deal similar to Khalil Mack's, either just under or right at that level. If we don't pay him, someone else will pay his asking price. That is just how the league works. If we want to keep Clark we're going to have to pay to play.

Do I want to keep him? Absolutely, at that price? Eh, probably not. It's a hard decision, because he is our only viable edge rusher. I don't think he is worth Khalil Mack money even in a league that has an ever rising salary cap. Clark can be a bit of an enigma. Not the best against the run, and he tends to pull a disappearing act too often for my liking. That being said he is a pretty strong team leader. People on our team seem to stop and listen when he talks. I personally think the franchise tag is the best option, especially with the new CBA coming up. I'm sure he's thinking the same thing, the new CBA could be huge for him.

I see it pretty much this way..
But I'm not big on overpaying anyone..Trade and build up all around.

Do you guys honestly think Clark is worth close to 24 million/year? As a free agent, I think he would be lucky to get 17.

If you guys are right about his price range, I'd rather trade him as well. If Mack gets you a 1st and 2nd round value (all things considered), Frank should be worth a 1st and 4th at least.

 

[Fade]

Do you guys honestly think Clark is worth close to 24 million/year? As a free agent, I think he would be lucky to get 17.

If you guys are right about his price range, I'd rather trade him as well. If Mack gets you a 1st and 2nd round value (all things considered), Frank should be worth a 1st and 4th at least.

Free Agency is all about overpaying. Teams would be lining up around the block at @$17M APY for a 25 year old Frank Clark. Nearly every team would be in on that action. So obviously other teams are going to bid higher to win the prize.

Frank Clark is entering his prime at a premium position. If he hits the open market he will get $20M+ APY easy.

The Franchise tag in year one will pay over 17. It will cost more than that if the Seahawks want a long term deal now. If he is franchised he will cost even more down the road. If he has another great, and typical Frank Clark season the price will start hitting the $25M APY range in 2020. The longer you wait the more it costs.

Which is why I have been so confused by the situation in general. What do the Seahawks know that we don't? He should have been signed last off-season.


Reed, Wagner, & Wilson need to be signed to extensions this off-season as well. You don't drag your feet when it comes to signing your best players, as it only ends up costing you more $$$$$ in the long run.

 

[A-Dog]

I've never been sold on Clark. Obviously he had a great year and he's by far the best edge rusher the Seahawks have, but I don't see him as the centerpiece of the defense, a consistent dominator and team leader. I've noticed that a lot of his sacks have come on stunts or by anticipating the snap count. He's also a knucklehead who lacks maturity and makes bad decisions. If he can put together another ~14 sack season and stays healthy then maybe you think about it. That's why you franchise him this year.

Giving him 18M+ long term with big time guarantees would be a mistake, and there's really no reason to after one very good season.

 

[massari]

The Colts wouldn't blink at giving him $20M+ APY.

If he hits the open market he will challenge Khalil Mack's contract. It's not about who is better, it's about the cap going up every year and who is the next guy up in Free Agency. After QB, pass rushers are the most valued players in the sport.

Derek Carr, Matt Stafford, Jimmy G, etc, all make more money than Russell Wilson, not because they are better but because they were coming up as Free Agents at the most valued position after Rodgers & Wilson signed there contracts.
Then Cousins topped all of them last off-season at a crazy $28M APY fully guaranteed. The same holds true for pass rushers, the 2nd most valued position. The next guy up gets big $$$$$ that is how it works. Frank Clark is the next guy up.

If the Seahawks can sign him for under $20M APY, everyone should be relieved because he would get more on the open market.

Seattle has potentially botched this whole situation because Clark should've been signed after Danielle Hunter got his deal last summer for $15M APY. I say potentially because maybe Clark all along wanted to roll the dice, risk injury this last season, and not do an extension and try to get to Free Agency. If though Seattle balked at paying Clark $15-16M APY last summer, shame on them.

$50M+ of cap room on Wilson and Clark? Wonder what Clark can fetch in a trade after the franchise tag?

I thought a Danielle Hunter esque contract was a lock.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Franchise and trade.... the raiders have picks

 

[MontanaHawk05]

I've never been sold on Clark. Obviously he had a great year and he's by far the best edge rusher the Seahawks have, but I don't see him as the centerpiece of the defense, a consistent dominator and team leader.

Then you haven't been paying attention. That's exactly what he is, according to pretty much every piece of media literature that comes out on him.

I've noticed that a lot of his sacks have come on stunts or by anticipating the snap count.

These are how the best DE's get sacks.

He's also a knucklehead who lacks maturity and makes bad decisions.

Once. Water under the bridge.

If he can put together another ~14 sack season and stays healthy then maybe you think about it. That's why you franchise him this year.

Giving him 18M+ long term with big time guarantees would be a mistake, and there's really no reason to after one very good season.

Nobody's saying he's Aaron Donald, but he's not had one very good season. He had 9 sacks in 2017. Even that is difficult to find in this league, to say nothing of 14.

It's like the QB decision. Yes, Wilson's going to get overpaid, because the difficulty of replacing him is extremely high.

Sometimes when these cost-benefit decisions get made, I wonder if they're being made as if replacements just grow on trees. I grumbled a little bit over Jimmy Graham and Paul Richardson departing, but that turned out to be unnecessary because a good QB (and functional running game) can easily replace said TD's. But QB and pass rusher? Nope. The league has made those pretty much mandatory, and players at those positions are able to freely hold their teams hostage as a result.

 

[TheLegendOfBoom]

Clark is good but he is not the franchise. In fact he can disappear against better competition. We cant afford to pay Clark at this point in the rebuild. It will derail us...... unless we find a guys as dynamic as he is to pair with him. 8 to 10 mil max

While I agree, Clark does sometime disappear in some games, all players, even the "elite" disappear during some games.

You have to pay Clark because he is the most consistent rusher the Hawks have. Without Clark this year, the pass rush would be non existent. Jarran Reed wouldn't have had a big year. Imagine, without Clark, Reed would be double teamed and his numbers (sacks) wouldn't be as high.

You can't afford NOT to pay Clark because you don't have much else.

I'm all for paying Clark maybe top 5, 4-3 defensive ends money.

Pay the man!

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Franchise and trade.... the raiders have picks

If the Raiders weren't willing to pay Khalil Mack, what makes you think they'd trade away picks to get Clark, and give him a huge extension?

We will sign Clark, we need him...........not only as a pass rusher, but as a team leader, of which he's taken over that role on the D.

Unless he wants Aaron Donald money, then all bets are off. But for 17-20M a year? Yep.

 

[Fade]

People freak out about the money way too much. These deals become bargains two years after they are signed.

The key is to not sign bad players to big money. Frank Clark is not a bad player.

Cary Williams, Luke Joeckel, Eddie Lacey, Percy Harvin, etc. Those are the deals that cripple your team in a rolling cap.

That is flushing cap space down the toilet right there.

 

[A-Dog]

Then you haven't been paying attention. That's exactly what he is, according to pretty much every piece of media literature that comes out on him.

1. So media literature is the ground source truth on a player's value/contributions?
2. Bobby Wagner is the leader and centerpiece of the defense. If you listen to quotes from Pete, Jarran Reed is probably next in line. Frank Clark appointing himself to this role by saying "this is my defense" at Richard Sherman doesn't count.

These are how the best DE's get sacks.

Disagree. The best DE's can consistently win one-on-one with speed, power, and technique. Cliff Avril consistently did this. I have not seen this from Clark (although he certainly made a leap this year). Clark more often than not needs help to get his sacks (although again, he was better this year - let's see if he can repeat it).

Once. Water under the bridge.

Are you forgetting about the time he injured Ifedi during a TC fight and was benched as a result? Or the time he had to apologize twice after a tweet threatening a reporter's job when she wrote about his history with domestic violence? Is tweeting "That boy a bitch, I can't wait to play his punk ass" a sign of maturity?

Nobody's saying he's Aaron Donald, but he's not had one very good season. He had 9 sacks in 2017. Even that is difficult to find in this league, to say nothing of 14.

28 players had nine or more sacks this season, and 11 players had 13 or more. So yes, I would say 9 sacks is a "good" season, 14 is a "very good" season, and 20.5 (the number Aaron Donald got) is a "great" season.

I would be fine paying Aaron Donald what he got paid. He's unique, and consistently the best in the league. I am not fine paying Frank Clark 90% of that money. Agree that finding a replacement will be really hard, but hey, we found Chris Clemons, Cliff Avril, and Michael Bennett. EDIT TO ADD: PFF has four UFA edge rushers rated above Clark on their top FA list (and six in their top 10 overall), so they are out there. This draft is flush with Edge rushers as well.

It's like the QB decision. Yes, Wilson's going to get overpaid, because the difficulty of replacing him is extremely high.

I don't think it's like our QB situation at all. Wilson has been at a high level consistently for years. He's also a rock as a teammate, leader, and member of the community. There is little risk that he will suddenly be be dramatically less productive. Also, while 4-3 EDGE is a premier position, QB is in a class of its own. Not a valid comparison.

Look, I'm not saying let him walk. I'm saying let's franchise him and see if he can keep it up. Giving him a near Aaron Donald deal would cripple the franchise if he can't.

 

[rcaido]

At max 17mil, no way we spend that much on a player. We let Sherman & Earl walk for way less and they impact the defensive side much more then Frank Clark. Sheldon Richardson & Bennett were making less then half.

Instead of doing the franchise, maybe sign him to a multi year & then trade him after the 2019 season. If he produces like we are expecting im sure we can get a lot of high pics for him. We also need him in 2019 as i think we can go all the way next season!

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

While not a great solution, Seattle could also opt for a transition tag.

One thing to bear in mind, is that this draft is exceptionally rich at DT/DE this season. While all teams are always looking for pass rush help, it is likely that the market for DEs is going to be relatively soft. And it's probably going to be a lot softer after the draft as teams add successors to expensive DEs under contract. Expect a fair few big names to be cap casualties in May/June.

Seattle could end up letting Clark test the waters, even get signed to a mega deal elsewhere. And then end up signing an Everson Griffin/Derek Wolfe/Robert Quinn/Malik Jackson/Gerald McCoy type player where their team drafts a cheaper version and needs the cap space (almost all of those listed has very little dead money and 11M+ in cap savings if cut.

Getting a late cap casualty after the draft would be relatively cheap. As teams will have generally exhausted their cap space already.

If Seattle isn't willing to franchise tag Clark in an expected soft market -- this might be a scenario that Seattle pursues. Although there is definite risk involved, as there is no guarantee that even moderately comparable options present themselves after May/June.

We may well resign Clark for the 17-18M he seems worth today. But I have a strong suspicion that there will be great value to be had for really patient teams that have cap space after June 1 cut date.

 

[IndyHawk]

People freak out about the money way too much. These deals become bargains two years after they are signed. The key is to not sign bad players to big money. Frank Clark is not a bad player.

Cary Williams, Luke Joeckel, Eddie Lacey, Percy Harvin, etc. Those are the deals that cripple your team in a rolling cap.

That is flushing cap space down the toilet right there.

This is the type of thinking that got us here today..
Salaries are out of whack and this is why I'm seeing pretty
much piss poor football.

 

[Seymour]

People freak out about the money way too much. These deals become bargains two years after they are signed.

The key is to not sign bad players to big money. Frank Clark is not a bad player.

Cary Williams, Luke Joeckel, Eddie Lacey, Percy Harvin, etc. Those are the deals that cripple your team in a rolling cap.

That is flushing cap space down the toilet right there.

Kam and Bennett weren't bad players either. But signing them became the beginning of the end, and for different reasons I might add.
I'm still on the fence on Clark, and over paying him could easily cost us a Sweezy or Fluker from the roster.