The latest on Jadeveon Clowney and trade partners.

[Sarlacc83]

There is absolutely no question that the pass rush is an issue this year. It was also an issue in 2012 with Chris Clemons being the only consistent DE. (Yes, we had Bruce Irvin. He was awful against the run, and a big part of why we lost at Atlanta in the playoffs was because he couldn't keep contain). However, Seattle manufactured enough ways to win despite that to make 2012 one of the most exciting seasons in Seattle history -- while paving the way for the most exciting season.

Seattle, not being ready to contend this year, can still generate a winning record by stopping the run and using its LBs, Ziggy Ansah, and Jacob Martin to pressure the QB (and possibly Poona Ford will show something up the middle. Reed certainly will when he gets back from his 6 game suspension). Next year, Seattle can almost certainly go after Clowney while keeping their picks, since they'll have the cash to make a competitive offer if they so desire, or they can branch out and try to find the Avril / Bennett's of the NFL world.

(And if pass rush is such a serious problem this year, why not go and get Nick Perry off the couch. It baffles me that he hasn't signed with anyone, but his price might be too high for too low of interest.)

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I'd love to have the opportunity to sign a player of Clowney's caliber to a 4 or 5 year deal with what originally was what we going to pay Clark around 17.5 per year.:

All reports say that Clowney wants what Clark got, 100M+ five year deal. That's 20M, not 17.5M.

My guess is Houston would have already signed him if he wanted less...............AND once he signs his tender we're not allowed to negotiate before or during the season.

Sure we could do a wink wink hey we'll take care of you after the season is over deal, kinda like we did with Brown. But again, if we weren't willing to give Clark 20M+ when his price got too high, why would we do the same deal for Clowney.

I can't imagine Pete and John think of this trade possibility than anything more than a one year rental player that wants to get to free agency next year to max out what could be his last contract.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

We won it all by drafting (or UDFA) 5 all pro's and having them on rookie deals. It was NOT just Wilson as some here want to allude to. It was Sherman, Wagner, Wilson, Chancellor, Baldwin all on rookie deals and playing at a VERY high level (not just average starters like Griffin, Moore, Penny)

You want back in?? IMO then repeat that or close by great drafting. You don't draft great by trading picks away and repeating the same mistakes that caused you to miss the playoffs! :roll: Forget the comp pick, that is 50/50 at best and not money in the bank!

Just say no to Clowney, save the $20M and use it next year to make your big push along with great drafting. Don't get great drafting??....then we are screwed no matter what anyway, we aren't "buying our way in".

:snack:

This gets my vote.

It isn't happening, not again. Shermans and Chancellors don't come in the 5th round anymore. They're 1st and 2nd rounders now, precisely because Pete demonstrated that they can find a system home in the NFL and their value skyrocketed.

And if we're suggesting that we rely solely on rookie QB's...well, that's going to be interesting.

 

[Chawker]

I'd love to have the opportunity to sign a player of Clowney's caliber to a 4 or 5 year deal with what originally was what we going to pay Clark around 17.5 per year.:

All reports say that Clowney wants what Clark got, 100M+ five year deal. That's 20M, not 17.5M.

My guess is Houston would have already signed him if he wanted less...............AND once he signs his tender we're not allowed to negotiate before or during the season.

Sure we could do a wink wink hey we'll take care of you after the season is over deal, kinda like we did with Brown. But again, if we weren't willing to give Clark 20M+ when his price got too high, why would we do the same deal for Clowney.

I can't imagine Pete and John think of this trade possibility than anything more than a one year rental player that wants to get to free agency next year to max out what could be his last contract.

The opportunity to sign Clowney who is comming into his prime. 20 mil sure hes worth it.

 

[McGruff]

Clark was more worth it, which is what makes this wonky to me.

 

[Chawker]

The possibilitys and opportunitys are always there and whatever Pete and John do I've always got there backs.

GO SEAHAWKS Cheers :0190l:

 

[Seymour]

We won it all by drafting (or UDFA) 5 all pro's and having them on rookie deals. It was NOT just Wilson as some here want to allude to. It was Sherman, Wagner, Wilson, Chancellor, Baldwin all on rookie deals and playing at a VERY high level (not just average starters like Griffin, Moore, Penny)

You want back in?? IMO then repeat that or close by great drafting. You don't draft great by trading picks away and repeating the same mistakes that caused you to miss the playoffs! :roll: Forget the comp pick, that is 50/50 at best and not money in the bank!

Just say no to Clowney, save the $20M and use it next year to make your big push along with great drafting. Don't get great drafting??....then we are screwed no matter what anyway, we aren't "buying our way in".

:snack:

This gets my vote.

It isn't happening, not again. Shermans and Chancellors don't come in the 5th round anymore. They're 1st and 2nd rounders now, precisely because Pete demonstrated that they can find a system home in the NFL and their value skyrocketed.

And if we're suggesting that we rely solely on rookie QB's...well, that's going to be interesting.

Poor attitude that "it can't be done"!! :177692:



The positions do NOT have to be at DB!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We have to find high level players that contribute at a high level at ANY HIGH COST SAVINGS POSITIONS. (No not punter!!)

Then use that savings to fill in the roster with Clemons / Bennett level bargains not Clowney level top contracts.

 

[iigakusei]

Clark was more worth it, which is what makes this wonky to me.

That is exactly why it makes no sense to me either unless we get him from Houston with a lowball offer.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Well, it hasn't happened yet, so at this point it's just a bunch of media speculation. Unfortunately, in the times we live in w/all the social media crap, teams have fans freaking out over stuff that never happens. And likely trades that often never WERE going to happen. Getting angry w/the front office about speculation is pretty common as well. Meh

 

[Chukarhawk]

We won it all by drafting (or UDFA) 5 all pro's and having them on rookie deals. It was NOT just Wilson as some here want to allude to. It was Sherman, Wagner, Wilson, Chancellor, Baldwin all on rookie deals and playing at a VERY high level (not just average starters like Griffin, Moore, Penny)

You want back in?? IMO then repeat that or close by great drafting. You don't draft great by trading picks away and repeating the same mistakes that caused you to miss the playoffs! :roll: Forget the comp pick, that is 50/50 at best and not money in the bank!

Just say no to Clowney, save the $20M and use it next year to make your big push along with great drafting. Don't get great drafting??....then we are screwed no matter what anyway, we aren't "buying our way in".

:snack:

This gets my vote.

It isn't happening, not again. Shermans and Chancellors don't come in the 5th round anymore. They're 1st and 2nd rounders now, precisely because Pete demonstrated that they can find a system home in the NFL and their value skyrocketed.

And if we're suggesting that we rely solely on rookie QB's...well, that's going to be interesting.

love your posts and find myself agreeing with you most of the time but this is patently false. We mold these 5th rounders into all pros by our system and coaching. its why seemingly great secondary talent leaves Seattle and are never as productive as they are here. We will continue to find find diamonds in the rough as long as Pete and john are here, especially when were talking defensive back field talent.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Well, it hasn't happened yet, so at this point it's just a bunch of media speculation. Unfortunately, in the times we live in w/all the social media crap, teams have fans freaking out over stuff that never happens. And likely trades that often never WERE going to happen. Getting angry w/the front office about speculation is pretty common as well. Meh

It's fun to talk about new shiny FA and trade rumors, even if they don't end up coming here.

Nothing about this trade makes sense to for me, unless like I said Houston's willing to just take a 2nd or 3rd rounder for Clowney, and no starting O-linemen or WR's.

Not for a one year rental player that wants to hit FA, and not for a team that I still think is a year or two away from SB contender unless the defense can really step up and surprise us this year.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Yeah, I can see both sides of it. I'd love to see it at the right price. But at the same time, if it doesn't happen, I won't be surprised at all. If I was forced to predict, I'd say he ends up elsewhere.
I'm right there with you, a pick in the 2nd or 3rd only is worth considering. But adding another solid player AND a high pick? No thx.

 

[Chawker]

Yeah, I can see both sides of it. I'd love to see it at the right price. But at the same time, if it doesn't happen, I won't be surprised at all. If I was forced to predict, I'd say he ends up elsewhere.
I'm right there with you, a pick in the 2nd or 3rd only is worth considering. But adding another solid player AND a high pick? No thx.

:ditto:

 

[Rat]

IOur circumstances now are completely different. We are flush with cash now. And we're going to be far more flush in the next year. We also have the advantage (if one can call it that), of not really having players worthy of a franchise cap type of salary coming due in UFA in 2020 outside of Reed. So where we didn't have the realistic ability to retain Richardson after acquiring him -- we have that in spades for a Clowney sized deal next year.

This is an important point that I think people are not considering. The way we've signed our core guys and managed the cap so well, the risk has been largely reduced, as we can get Clowney without losing anyone essential in free agency. We could franchise him if we needed to.

Excellent overall post, btw. I agreed with all of it.

 

[McGruff]

Clayton saying it is down to us and the Eagles.

 

[jammerhawk]

The Hawks are in a far better position as far as the cap is concerned than the Eagles are for 2020. So they could be in a position to keep the player if he was traded to them.

Still it bears restating that there is no guarantee that Clowney would want to stay and a deal could be reached, so the price Houston gets for the player is lower than that paid by KC for Clark.

Once again his addition cost wise could be in part offset by releasing Mingo and even TE- Dickson. The team as well does have some OLine depth and WR depth that could interest Houston.

 

[sutz]

Well, it hasn't happened yet, so at this point it's just a bunch of media speculation. Unfortunately, in the times we live in w/all the social media crap, teams have fans freaking out over stuff that never happens. And likely trades that often never WERE going to happen. Getting angry w/the front office about speculation is pretty common as well. Meh

Yeah, I'm getting the feeling that this is gonna go well into the season, kind of like Brown worked out.

Looks like Ansah is getting close to practising. Saw reports he was in individual drills yesterday.

 

[AgentDib]

It isn't happening, not again. Shermans and Chancellors don't come in the 5th round anymore. They're 1st and 2nd rounders now, precisely because Pete demonstrated that they can find a system home in the NFL and their value skyrocketed.

I think you're attributing too much to our scheme advantage. It's a valid point but underlying uncertainty about the draft is the more important piece of the puzzle.

I just took a second look at the 2017 draft and there were still 20+ steals all the way down.

4th round picks: S Eddie Jackson (CHI), RB Tarik Cohen (CHI), LB Ben Gedeon (MIN), OT Julie'n Davenport (HOU), RB Jamaal Williams (GNB)

5th round picks: TE George Kittle (SF), LB Jayon Brown (TEN), LB Matt Milano (BUF), DT Davon Godchaux (MIA), RB Aaron Jones (GB)

6th round picks: OT Sam Tevi (LAC), OC Chase Roullier (WAS), S Xavier Woods (DAL)

7th round picks: K Harrison Butker (CAR), RB Chris Carson (SEA)

UDFA's: Keelan Cole, Trevon Coley, Matt Skura, Eddie Yarbrough, Matt Brieda, James Burgess, Adam Butler, Jesse Davis, Austin Ekeler, Olsen Pierre, Chase Allen, Corey Clement

 

[SNDavidson]

[youtube]KmOaPdpl0_M[/youtube]

:stirthepot:

 

[Yxes1122]

I'm in the for the trade camp.

1. His age is about perfect. Should be entering the most productive period of his career.

2. His health concerns are almost exclusively the byproduct of his injuries incurred before his rookie season and his second season. In the last three seasons, he's played as many games as KJ Wright did in his first three seasons. He's been available.

3. On the 'one year rental' concerns. These are valid. But they aren't a fait accompli. We traded for Richardson under very different circumstances. The team was entering cap hell and everyone that paid close attention to that side of the game could foresee it. We added him with no real ability or intention of resigning him. In addition, we were in full on blow up the defense mode following that year. It made little to no sense to resign him.

Our circumstances now are completely different. We are flush with cash now. And we're going to be far more flush in the next year. We also have the advantage (if one can call it that), of not really having players worthy of a franchise cap type of salary coming due in UFA in 2020 outside of Reed. So where we didn't have the realistic ability to retain Richardson after acquiring him -- we have that in spades for a Clowney sized deal next year.

4. He is a productive talent. And he's the kind of talent that fits what Seattle covets. An incredibly strong two way player. Unlike a patently obvious mismatch of talent as Graham was. It's a gross mistake to prop up the Graham and Richardson results and think that those deals' failures necessarily apply to a potential Clowney deal. Circumstance and player fit were paramount factors in those failures.

5. Where are we as a franchise? We're already in the prime of Wilson's career. No telling how long that may last. But it's definitely finite. What is the value of a 2nd round pick in 2020? Or really even a 1st round pick in the hands of Pete and John? Assume for a second that they miraculously manage to not get players like Penny/Green/McDowell/Pocic. Those are the last two years worth of top 2 picks we have managed to acquire -- at least on record.

If they do get a good player, it's likely they aren't going to be even good until 2022.


I believe there are plenty of differences between the bad trades we've historically entered into, versus the kind of deal this one presents. I don't see those failures tainting future deals. Any more than I necessarily think that our pick failures in 2017/18 necessarily color the outlook of 2019s head of the class. Judging this deal on it's own merits -- I think this deal makes a lot of sense and makes our team better. Potentially even more so in the next few years.

I don't have a problem sending a 1st for Clowney. If I can conditionally protect that pick that would be preferred. Circumstance robbed the team of burning the 21st pick on a rookie DE. So it's kind of safe to assume we'd be willing to use next years' first on a DE. And then watch him take a couple years to blossom as most DEs entering the league require. So that you get an expected good 3rd and 4th year before you have to sign him to approximate franchise tag type money.

I think it's preferable to use that pick on a young DE who has already matured. But also a player who is still 4 years shy of 30. And one that fits what we want. And one that has undeniable upside even among his critics. It's easily arguable that Clowney's best football is still to come. And he's already in the top ten of TFLs in the league.

In a vacuum I agree with a lot of this but I still don't think trading is the right decision.

First, we are not as cash rich as we think. We are not far removed from wondering how we were going to pay for Frank Clark. Remember John Schneider admitted that keeping Frank, Bobby, Russell and Reed would be very difficult. Can we do it? Yes, but it makes roster construction much more difficult. You still have contract decisions on Ansah, Carson, Fant, Reed, Kendricks, Quill etc. in the next year or two. None of those are as sexy as Clowney at the moment, but Carson, Reed, Kendricks and Ansah all have ceilings that could make them very expensive.

Second, we are not a deep team. We are maybe league average on a good day. Seattle's starters make us a playoff team but many of our starters are injury risks. How many players can we really lose over the course of a season and still be competitive? We are an injury to Bobby away from being a train wreck on defense. Even with Clowney I don't think we have a reliable defense over the course of the season. KJ and Bobby are both coming off knee issues, Reed is out 6 games already, Ansah is coming off shoulder reconstruction and a groin injury. Kendricks broke his leg last year. Does Clowney without Ansah or Bobby justify a 2nd round pick? I don't think so.

Third, you can scheme around less talented defensive ends the same way you can scheme around limited QBs. Sean McVay and Doug Peterson have gone to Super Bowls by scheming around non-elite QBs. Baltimore and Buffalo had elite defenses without Frank Clark/Clowney caliber DEs.

I just don't think this team is in a situation that merits a trade like this. This team needs another massive infusion of talent before it even has the depth to absorb the blows that come in sixteen games. I'd rather ride out this year, see if any of the young guys pop and address pass rush next year. Pete and John are still in a rebuild and this feels like a ready now move.