What is Frank Clark’s price?

[Mistashoesta]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/1104820443855364104[/tweet]

 

[Jville]

We now have three threads announcing this news.

Also here with responses >>> [urltargetblank]http://seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=153486&start=50#p2266437[/urltargetblank]

And here with responses >>> [urltargetblank]http://seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=153683#p2266435[/urltargetblank]

That should be more than adequate.

 

[Hawkstorian]

Not news. There's no reason to show up until game 1 the way the system works. Hopefully fans don't spend all summer obsessing about this because it isn't a holdout, he can show up whenever he wants.

This isn't a Le'Veon Bell situation unless he misses games which isn't what the report is saying.

And..... if I'm Frank Clark I'm doing exactly the same thing.

 

[daveyoung52]

Trade his sorry ass to Buffalo or Cleveland or Saskatewan, the Seahawks made him, he ought to show a bit of loyalty, John could do a lot with number 9.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

He's good enough to make the Seahawks regret losing him, but not good enough to command #1 DE money. Gonna be interesting.

 

[The Breh]

Trade his sorry ass to Buffalo or Cleveland or Saskatewan, the Seahawks made him, he ought to show a bit of loyalty, John could do a lot with number 9.

"Loyalty" :lol:
"Sorry ass"
You, young lady, are delusional and angry about something that doesn't directly affect your personal life. Carry on with your bitter day of the Lord's rest.

 

[Chawker]

This clears Clark to strike a deal with any team, but at the cost of 2 first round selection by the team he has signed with.

 

[IndyHawk]

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

Don't bet the house on Clark

Maybe Franchise for 1 year but he is not $20M APY player. Remember only a few years ago when had Red Bryant and Chris Clemons. Total was like 8 mil per year, then we had Avril and Bennett for about $13 per year. Price may have gone up but Clark is not a game wrecker like Von Miller, Donald, or Mack

This is how I feel..
He does take games off..It may not be all on him but great players
find a way in big games..
I have a very hard time finding great upside in paying $20 million.

 

[massari]

The Patriots were only able to get a late 2nd (#61) for Chandler Jones in 2016 and he was pretty much the same player and age as Clark is now.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Interesting that Clark's been saying for over a year now that he'd be just fine with being franchised, and now he's not.

So what's changed? My guess is the two sides were far enough apart that the Hawks started putting out the feelers for interested trade partners, and that pissed Clark off.............as well as Antonio Brown just giving every disgruntled player a blueprint for throwing a social media tantrum big enough to get what you want.

Time's are a changin' my friends, and it's all in the players favor now, they are more powerful than they've ever been. Maybe that's good for them, but it's certainly not good for our teams.

 

[AROS]

Interesting that Clark's been saying for over a year now that he'd be just fine with being franchised, and now he's not.

So what's changed? My guess is the two sides were far enough apart that the Hawks started putting out the feelers for interested trade partners, and that pissed Clark off.............as well as Antonio Brown just giving every disgruntled player a blueprint for throwing a social media tantrum big enough to get what you want.

Time's are a changin' my friends, and it's all in the players favor now, they are more powerful than they've ever been. Maybe that's good for them, but it's certainly not good for our teams.

That was my thoughts too. Funny how he has done a complete 180 on his stance. Can we have one drama-free offseason for once please?

 

[TwistedHusky]

The market changed.

2 things happened.

1 - A giant collection of pass rushers have been tagged. That means a good % of them will hit the market next year. It won't be as bad as what the safeties face this year but it will be close. That means the teams get a lot of leverage in negotiations to resign guys, and it likely means a somewhat depressed market for pass rushers (which seems somewhat inconceivable but look at how many guys were tagged this year...)

2 - Bell & Mack started the train, Mack cashed in on it, Brown cashed in even more. Not all players, but difference maker players that were reluctant to hold out (as their career is a wasting asset, the older they get the less effective) are seeing it makes sense to do so. The leverage that teams held over players in being able to sign them to long term deals to keep them at bargain prices later, while being able to cut them when injured, is probably going if not already gone.

Locking in guys at long term deals is much harder now. However, most of these new opportunities only apply to stars or above average players in areas that teams covet.

Clark is easily above average and he is in a coveted position, pass rusher. He has also made comments about playing hurt regularly, so we know he is probably shortening his career anyway. And he is facing potentially entering a FA market that could be saturated with pass rushers - driving his leverage and value down.

Very few pass rushers were available in FA this year, Houston notwithstanding. If there was a time that Clark is going to have the most leverage, it would be now. I am sure he loves his team and made that comment because of it. But this is a business. The best case for him would be to hold out because he would likely get a better deal this year than next.

 

[DJrmb]

To me what we're seeing with Frank's latest statements is just his agent trying to real back in some of the leverage they've lost with his previous comments. I don't think Clark did a full 180, talking about being willing to play on the tag and then after being tagged talking about how honored and thankful he was for it, to being angry and disgruntled. What likely happened is the agent lit into Frank and told him the numbers were far apart because they'd given up all their leverage. I don't believe Frank is truly disgruntled or angry at all. They're just playing the business side of things to get the best deal they can.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

The best case for him would be to hold out because he would likely get a better deal this year than next.

Certainly this is a good leverage tactic if you expect our FO to fold and pay him what he wants.......which I assume is 20M per year, or maybe even more.

But it's also a game of chicken that most times leads to being traded, because your team is now pissed off at the holdout and doesn't want to deal with the distraction, nor the high contract demands.

As much as everyone's piling on the Steelers for now losing both Bell and Brown, they obviously have a hardline organizational rule of never negotiating with a player that's not in camp, nor re-doing deals with multiple years left on them.

Patriot's are the same way. You complain publicly, and you're gone.

So I think this may backfire on Frank, especially if he REALLY does want to be here. Because if he carries on with this threat to hold out, then a VERY possible outcome is he's traded. He still will get paid, but it will no longer be here.

 

[TwistedHusky]

Not sure he has much choice.

Isn't Wilson's contract over after 2019? So we almost certainly have to tag him, if we cannot sign him.

That leaves Frank hitting FA next year UNLESS we get a contract done this year.

His leverage will only exist this year, unless you feel hitting FA in a year where 4-5 top pass rushers hit the market is still not going to dilute the market enough for Clark to get a top tier contract?

Add in that he regularly plays hurt, and he probably knows he has to get his big contract now if he is going to get one.

While he likely loves the Seahawks, he would be leaving a team that is basically a wild card team. There are plenty of other teams that have as good prospects or that have better chances at doing well in the playoffs. Most of those teams need a pass rusher. Some of them have some cap room to spare.

If he does get traded, it would likely be to a team looking to fill in that missing piece for a playoff run. Bottom tier teams look to tank for the chance for the QBs, they have no incentive to trade for Clark. Maybe a team like Buffalo looking to jump into the next tier would add a Frank Clark but the chance of making an equal or lateral move even if you get dealt by the Seahawks is pretty high. It isn't as if he would be leaving a contender and going to a team that has no chance.

There is a risk of going somewhere like the Packers but I cannot see us trading him to a team like that.

If you put yourself in Clark's shoes, his best course is probably the one he is taking now.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Tre Flowers at $16-$17 mil is a better deal than what Frank wants. Trade him!!!!

 

[TwistedHusky]

This is supposed to be a ridiculously deep draft for DE and pass rush specialists.

So I don't know that bad teams will take a good to very good DL pass rusher in trade, at high cap #s, when there are potential rookie contract studs available.

I think the better teams will though because look back at the draft that Budda Baker and King went in, supposedly one of the deepest drafts for secondary players in years. And admittedly, tons of starters came out of that draft - but not as many All-Pros as you would expect.

You could certainly argue it was a great draft for RBs though. But most people pegged it for the DBs.

It could be a repeat with pass rushers, like it was that year with DBs. Maybe the stars all come at different positions.

I think teams that are one step away or need to fill a gap, will willingly step up for Clark. I don't see bottom feeders biting on a trade for him, because they likely think they can get a great DE in the draft IF they are not outright tanking for a QB.

Trading him isn't a great outcome for the Hawks though.

There are not many circumstances where losing Clark does not materially hurt the Hawks. Trading him might help us in dealing with the cap, but it is going to hurt on-field results at a time we are just on the edge trying to even be a viable team to do anything past the wild card.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

There are not many circumstances where losing Clark does not materially hurt the Hawks. Trading him might help us in dealing with the cap, but it is going to hurt on-field results at a time we are just on the edge trying to even be a viable team to do anything past the wild card.

If we don't give Clark his extension, then doesn't it fly in the face of what Pete's always said? "We take care of our own guys."

Pete's always preached that if you get drafted or come here, bust your ass then we'll reward you. Especially a player like Clark that he sees as a cornerstone player and team leader.

So I'd be shocked if we trade Frank, it'd signify a total 180 on how Pete and John want to operate and pay players going forward. This would be far more of a Patriot way of you just don't give into player demands, and trust your system, scouting and schemes to get the same results.

 

[Seymour]

There are not many circumstances where losing Clark does not materially hurt the Hawks. Trading him might help us in dealing with the cap, but it is going to hurt on-field results at a time we are just on the edge trying to even be a viable team to do anything past the wild card.

If we don't give Clark his extension, then doesn't it fly in the face of what Pete's always said? "We take care of our own guys."

Pete's always preached that if you get drafted or come here, bust your ass then we'll reward you. Especially a player like Clark that he sees as a cornerstone player and team leader.

So I'd be shocked if we trade Frank, it'd signify a total 180 on how Pete and John want to operate and pay players going forward. This would be far more of a Patriot way of you just don't give into player demands, and trust your system, scouting and schemes to get the same results.

No. Not if he is asking us to overpay well beyond where they put his max ceiling at.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

There are not many circumstances where losing Clark does not materially hurt the Hawks. Trading him might help us in dealing with the cap, but it is going to hurt on-field results at a time we are just on the edge trying to even be a viable team to do anything past the wild card.

If we don't give Clark his extension, then doesn't it fly in the face of what Pete's always said? "We take care of our own guys."

Pete's always preached that if you get drafted or come here, bust your ass then we'll reward you. Especially a player like Clark that he sees as a cornerstone player and team leader.

So I'd be shocked if we trade Frank, it'd signify a total 180 on how Pete and John want to operate and pay players going forward. This would be far more of a Patriot way of you just don't give into player demands, and trust your system, scouting and schemes to get the same results.

No. Not if he is asking us to overpay well beyond where they put his max ceiling at.

What elite cornerstone player under Pete and John hasn't gotten paid for his 2nd contract? We let Tate walk, that's about all I can think of.

So yeah, I do think this would signify a more hardcore front office in dealing with contract extensions.