Seahawks Rumor Yannick Ngakoue trade

[jammerhawk]

The Jags have now tagged Ngakoue, they have now got to make some roster moves if they plan on keeping this player for the season. Their fire sale will continue, maybe even Calais Campbell will spring loose. They went all in to make it to the SB and fell short and now are having to deal with an impossible cap situation to keep some of their talent.

The singular difference in this situation from the Clowney situation is that if Ngakoue comes here he comes under the tag designation with no restriction on re-tagging him again if the trade doesn't work out. The hawks could have some legit leverage in discussions with Jax b/c of Jax's need to dump cap.

I'm sure the Hawks are interested in at the least talking with Jax and with the agent for Ngakoue.

 

[Largent80]

I don't want to trade first or second round picks for players period. We let Clark walk, clowney will walk. But please use the picks we have in this draft. The Hawks put themselves in this position with a terrible DL pick. McDowell was supposed to be a guy they could count on...a total bummer there. They needed RB a year later and got a great college player in Penny.....

He looks very good. But will be pup TO BEGIN THE YEAR.Collier is just a giant question mark right now.

Can we please get an impact player at 27 and not trade the damn thing away for a couple of 3rds?

This draft is IMPORTANT for the future.

 

[HawkStrong]

We let Clark walk, clowney will walk. But please use the picks we have in this draft.

We traded Clark, just FYI.

 

[Maelstrom787]

Can we please get an impact player at 27 and not trade the damn thing away for a couple of 3rds?

This draft is IMPORTANT for the future.

Your odds of getting an impact player at 27 are usually worse than the odds of getting one with the combined picks you acquire in a trade down. Plus, a trade down opens the possibility of acquiring MORE impact players than just one.

You've said yourself that this is a deep draft at several positions. That would mean trading down to acquire more selections would be the prudent move.

Also, earlier in the thread:

#27 is NOT a first round pick....GET THAT STRAIGHT....Only approx. the first 10 to 15 picks have a first round grade.

It's why they took McDowell, it's why they took Penny, and It's WHY they took Collier. NONE of them were graded first round picks.....#27 is NOT that big of a deal especially when you have 2 second round picks.

First off... I mean, yeah. It's a first rounder.

Secondly, you are asserting here that 27 is not a "big deal" pick. Isn't that an argument which in itself implies that leveraging 27 into multiple selections which (when combined) are of equal or greater draft chart value would be the best move?

 

[Largent80]

We shall see won't we.?...We can speculate all day, but in the end it's where the chips fall. You seem to be a guy that knows a little about the draft and don't you think that 27 this year Will be an impact player?...If you don't then you have homework to do. There's plenty of tape available, I'm not going to provide it. If you have time check it out.

 

[Basis4day]

We shall see won't we.?...We can speculate all day, but in the end it's where the chips fall. You seem to be a guy that knows a little about the draft and don't you think that 27 this year Will be an impact player?...If you don't then you have homework to do. There's plenty of tape available, I'm not going to provide it. If you have time check it out.

Who, specifically, are the impact players in this years’ draft that you think will be available at 27?

 

[Maelstrom787]

We shall see won't we.?...We can speculate all day, but in the end it's where the chips fall. You seem to be a guy that knows a little about the draft and don't you think that 27 this year Will be an impact player?...If you don't then you have homework to do. There's plenty of tape available, I'm not going to provide it. If you have time check it out.

Nowhere did I say that an impact player won't be available at 27, but go to town on that strawman, dude. My argument, using the same points that you've made, is that trading down and acquiring picks that combine to equal value to #27 gives you a better chance of landing an impact player, especially in a draft that can be described as very deep at many positions. Sticking and picking at the end of the first round, rather than trading down into the top half of the second round and picking up more picks, is likely not going to be the best move unless a stud falls hard. After all, you said it yourself, 27 isn't a big deal and only 10-15 guys get a first round grade - acquiring more picks almost certainly allows you to take more players from the same tier of talent, using that logic.

 

[Recon_Hawk]

Paul Gallant believes that Signing Clowney is better than trading for, and signing Ngakoue. He makes a good arguments, saying that you lose a 1st round draft pick, and (I believe a 2nd?) in order to save a few million a year, IF Yannick is cheaper than Clowney.

So you may pay more for Clowney, but you keep your (valuable) draft picks.

You also have to consider losing Clowney in FA would, by itself, net a 3rd round comp pick the following year, so there is some additional return in going the Ngakou trade route and lettng Clowney walk.

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

You also have to consider losing Clowney in FA would, by itself, net a 3rd round comp pick the following year, so there is some additional return in going the Ngakou trade route and lettng Clowney walk.

This is not very likely. When you have a lot of cap space, that means you have a lot of vacancies. Most teams end up filling them with qualified UFAs.

It is not likely that Seattle will end up getting any comp picks in 2021. Because we'll be signing a lot more UFAs than otherwise.

The alternative is, not sign Clowney. But also sign street FAs, post June UFAs. So that means downgrading at multiple other positions with players that approximate Ziggy Ansah's quality.

If a team has a lot of cap space, and they have quality players of their own as UFAs, it's almost always better to resign them (and save the UFA loss) than to lose them, and sign a slightly cheaper UFA option.

If Seattle is to retain one or two comp picks, they will end up having to spend heavily on cap casualty type players. It's why the Greg Olson signing was potentially a good one. But they'll have to do the same elsewhere for DE and OT. Those positions don't generally present a lot of appealing options. Just expensive poor ones.

Seattle doesn't have a lot of qualifying UFAs that are expected to be signed away before the June 1 designation. Most are either replacement level players or guys that have serious questions (Kendricks/Ansah/Gordon). So our ability to retain comp picks and fill the roster is poor. Looking at our list of UFAs, it kind of looks limited to Reed, Ifedi, Fant, Clowney and maybe Jefferson that are likely to move as qualified UFAs. That's not many. We currently have 19 UFAs from last years' roster. That's a lot of holes to fill. Way more than a rookie class can fill.

 

[nepahawk]

With Yannick being franchised and Campbell being traded, does re-signing Clowney become our top priority?

 

[Sgt. Largent]

With Yannick being franchised and Campbell being traded, does re-signing Clowney become our top priority?

Yannick being franchised doesn't change anything.

Remember we franchised Clark before we traded him, just allows the Jags to keep him under team control until they can find the best trade deal.

But yes, I don't think re-signing Clowney was ever NOT priority #1. If that gets too rich for our blood, we move onto plan B and Plan C, which I imagine is moving on down the list of other DE free agents and trade prospects.

 

[Recon_Hawk]

You also have to consider losing Clowney in FA would, by itself, net a 3rd round comp pick the following year, so there is some additional return in going the Ngakou trade route and lettng Clowney walk.

This is not very likely. When you have a lot of cap space, that means you have a lot of vacancies. Most teams end up filling them with qualified UFAs.

It is not likely that Seattle will end up getting any comp picks in 2021. Because we'll be signing a lot more UFAs than otherwise.

The alternative is, not sign Clowney. But also sign street FAs, post June UFAs. So that means downgrading at multiple other positions with players that approximate Ziggy Ansah's quality.

If a team has a lot of cap space, and they have quality players of their own as UFAs, it's almost always better to resign them (and save the UFA loss) than to lose them, and sign a slightly cheaper UFA option.

If Seattle is to retain one or two comp picks, they will end up having to spend heavily on cap casualty type players. It's why the Greg Olson signing was potentially a good one. But they'll have to do the same elsewhere for DE and OT. Those positions don't generally present a lot of appealing options. Just expensive poor ones.

Seattle doesn't have a lot of qualifying UFAs that are expected to be signed away before the June 1 designation. Most are either replacement level players or guys that have serious questions (Kendricks/Ansah/Gordon). So our ability to retain comp picks and fill the roster is poor. Looking at our list of UFAs, it kind of looks limited to Reed, Ifedi, Fant, Clowney and maybe Jefferson that are likely to move as qualified UFAs. That's not many. We currently have 19 UFAs from last years' roster. That's a lot of holes to fill. Way more than a rookie class can fill.

If Seattle does a trade and extend deal for Ngakou, re-signs Reed and potentially Ifedi (or Fant), there's not a lot of cap space left and the bulk of the starting roster will then be settled. Any additional FA signings would then most likely be low-key FAs that would equalize losing Fant & Jefferson, who both might see bigger contracts then we think.

Also, as you mentioned, Seattle likes to look at waived/cut players that don't affect the comp calculations (like Jordan Reed and T.J. Carrie, both connected to Seattle so far)