Sources: The #Seahawks and #Chiefs are deep in talks on a trade to send star Frank Clark to KC. The compensation would include a 1st rounder, a 2020 2nd rounder and a swap of mid-rounders. To complete it, the franchise tagged player and Chiefs must hammer out a deal.
Originally Posted by kccrow:
I do have an issue with giving up THAT much draft capital AND having to pay somebody. For that price, the Chiefs likely could have gotten up into the mid-teens to take a pass rusher in the draft and had 5 years of low cost. They are getting a very good football player but I don't see him as a tremendous upgrade over Houston so that's where I scratch my head. Injuries can happen to any player, but Houston was every bit as productive on the field and you could have had a young pass rusher learning with him. I like Clark, but if I'm about to hand a guy 105 million I'm not also trading two starting caliber draft picks away to get him. The plus is that Clark is only 25 and he's definitely a consistently good player. Let's hope it stays that way.
Yes, we could have traded up and drafted a pass rusher who we'd have cheap for 5 years. But he's not coming in day one and being a terror. The chances of that happening with players outside of the top 5-10 are slim. Clark gives us a presence at DE day 1. [Reply]
KC believes the addition of Clark to the d-line rotation of Speaks, Ogbah, Okafor on the edge & Chris Jones, Derrick Nnadi & Xavier Williams inside gives them a chance to win in Jan.
Plus, KC still has 3 top 100 picks this year to address S/CB/MLB/DT or even WR/TE/C.
Originally Posted by The Franchise:
Yes, we could have traded up and drafted a pass rusher who we'd have cheap for 5 years. But he's not coming in day one and being a terror. The chances of that happening with players outside of the top 5-10 are slim. Clark gives us a presence at DE day 1.
And his contract fits perfectly within the "Mahomes Window" [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
I do have an issue with giving up THAT much draft capital AND having to pay somebody. For that price, the Chiefs likely could have gotten up into the mid-teens to take a pass rusher in the draft and had 5 years of low cost. They are getting a very good football player but I don't see him as a tremendous upgrade over Houston so that's where I scratch my head. Injuries can happen to any player, but Houston was every bit as productive on the field and you could have had a young pass rusher learning with him. I like Clark, but if I'm about to hand a guy 105 million I'm not also trading two starting caliber draft picks away to get him. The plus is that Clark is only 25 and he's definitely a consistently good player. Let's hope it stays that way.
The value of the picks traded was 20-22 in the first this year (and that assumes those clubs are willing to trade for equal value). My guess is Veach poked around and knew exactly where he could get to and whom he thought was going to be available. And none of them seemed compelling. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TwistedChief:
I think the problem was there was a school of thought and complacency around the idea that "this defense can't be any worse." And yes, if you're the 32nd ranked defense, that's true. But you can be much worse because the goal is not defensive rankings but giving up fewer points. And whatever you thought about Ford and Houston, the guys made a lot of plays that changed the face of games this past season and forced the other teams to adjust. Do you really think Jones was going to have the success he did rushing the passer without those guys on the edge?
We just didn't have enough talent in my view to be a clear upgrade from last season all considered. Now I'm completely convinced we'll be better and potentially much better.
Sincere thank you for posting this. People suggested that losing Ford and Houston wouldn't hurt because "we can't get any worse", which of course is nonsense. We have to replace their production or we could very well be worse, even if not in terms of ranking. This trade helps to do that, without question. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
I do have an issue with giving up THAT much draft capital AND having to pay somebody. For that price, the Chiefs likely could have gotten up into the mid-teens to take a pass rusher in the draft and had 5 years of low cost. They are getting a very good football player but I don't see him as a tremendous upgrade over Houston so that's where I scratch my head. Injuries can happen to any player, but Houston was every bit as productive on the field and you could have had a young pass rusher learning with him. I like Clark, but if I'm about to hand a guy 105 million I'm not also trading two starting caliber draft picks away to get him. The plus is that Clark is only 25 and he's definitely a consistently good player. Let's hope it stays that way.
1+2 gets them to uh, 19 I think. It's not a given they would get an edge rusher they wanted there. [Reply]
Originally Posted by The Franchise:
We apparently should have traded up in the 1st.....spending draft picks like we are now....for an unproven player that may or may not be there.
For sake of the 2020 pick, let’s say the 49ers improve and end up with the 14th pick in round 2: value: 440
If the Chiefs are in the bottom five of round 2 again, you’re looking at value ranging: 292-270 (+150-170)
Let’s keep the numbers round and say they end up gaining 200 draft value points overall. That’s the equivalent of a mid-3rd round pick.
... (edit)
Which means the overall payout in draft pick value equates to basically a mid-2nd
In this context it doesn’t seem like a bad deal at all. Prior to this year (contract year for Dee) people didn’t even want his 5th year option & were seething at the tag. We’re in win now mode with Pats rookie deal. I’m here for it! [Reply]
