Originally Posted by pugsnotdrugs19:
Kinda random here but I’m not sure that it’s been brought up.
Clowney currently has 2 sacks on the season for a pretty bad defense.... I only bring this up because I’ve seen many cite the Clark move and say that they should have gotten Clowney.
Well... he’s been pretty damn underwhelming himself.
Well look at the compensation Seattle gave up for him and then look at what we gave up for Clark. If take the Clowney trade over the Clark trade and even if Clark was playing like he did last year, I still would rather do the Clowney trade. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dlphg9:
Well look at the compensation Seattle gave up for him and then look at what we gave up for Clark. If take the Clowney trade over the Clark trade and even if Clark was playing like he did last year, I still would rather do the Clowney trade.
Yep. It's not even close really
The Seattle Seahawks reeled in a huge fish without using much bait.
NFL Network Insider Ian Rapoport reported Saturday that the Seahawks traded for Houston Texans franchise-tagged pass rusher Jadeveon Clowney in exchange for a third-round pick, linebacker Jacob Martin and pass rusher Barkevious Mingo, per sources informed of the situation.
Per NFL Network's Tom Pelissero, the Texans agreed to pay $7 million toward Clowney's salary to complete yesterday's trade with the Seahawks, who agreed not to franchise tag Clowney a second time next year, per source.
The trade is a coup for Seahawks general manager John Schneider.
Not only did the Seahawks secure a pass rusher who fits perfectly into Pete Carroll's system, but didn't have to break up their offensive line or give up a prominent piece to get Clowney. And if Clowney leaves in free agency -- the team can't begin negotiations on any potential long-term deal until after the season -- Seattle could recoup that third-rounder with a compensatory pick. [Reply]
Comparing the compensation for Clowney and Clark is minimally useful.
If you truly believe the Texans would have traded Clowney in Conference, to a team they are contending against, like the Chiefs, for the same price, I think you’re way off base.
The Chiefs would have paid a premium for Clowney compared to the Seahawks (there’s also the matter of timing - The Texans had fewer bidders than the Seahawks). [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
Comparing the compensation for Clowney and Clark is minimally useful.
If you truly believe the Texans would have traded Clowney in Conference, to a team they are contending against, like the Chiefs, for the same price, I think you’re way off base.
The Chiefs would have paid a premium for Clowney compared to the Seahawks (there’s also the matter of timing - The Texans has fewer bidders than the Seahawks).
Besides, it’s been reported that the Texans offered us Clowney for similar compensation (1st & 2nd) before we traded for Clark.
But we were somehow supposed to know they would end up with no GM and that price would drop to a 3rd? [Reply]
Chiefs gave up their 1st and 2nd, which many here say the value of those picks is actually a 2nd and 3rd due to us picking one of the last slots.
If that is your stance on the value, then Veach pretty much made up for that 2nd rd pick compensation with the Martinas Rankin trade.
Rankin was a 3rd rd pick and we traded a cheap FA RB (who embarrassingly fumbled last weekend :-)) for arguably the best LG in the Andy Reid era, who is on his cheap rookie contract until Spring 2022.
I still did not like giving up that added 2nd for him, but this makes me feel better about it. [Reply]
Frank Clark is a much better fit here than Clowney. I think he will come back healthy and will prove all the haters wrong. It sounds like he is a great locker room guy and has the nasty we needed... I will patiently wait, but it is much to early for a final verdict. [Reply]
Originally Posted by IowaHawkeyeChief:
Frank Clark is a much better fit here than Clowney. I think he will come back healthy and will prove all the haters wrong. It sounds like he is a great locker room guy and has the nasty we needed... I will patiently wait, but it is much to early for a final verdict.
Andddddd we have a winner.
The mistake many seem to be making is writing the player off only 9 weeks into the trade/contract.
No less after his most recent game was a dominant performance. If you’re grading the Clark deal at this point as if all is set in stone, that’s your mistake. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
Also, major props to Spags, Veach and the staff for not sitting on their asses after getting Okafor, Clark and drafting Saunders.
They could have easily said “okay we’re good here.” but they kept looking and ended up raping John Dorsey for Emmanuel Ogbah.
I still can’t beliebe Dorsey agreed to give this guy up for Eric freaking Murray :-)
Ogbah had not been doing much for three years in Cleveland. You could say the same about Murray in KC. Sometimes, players benefit from a change of scenery. That doesn't mean that Ogbah would have been as good with the Browns as he is now. And I haven't watched Murray but his 61.2 PFF rating suggests he has been decent.
The Charvarius Ward for Parker Ehinger is a trade where Veach hosed the Cowboys. The Cowboys should have never done that trade most likely.
You cannot say the same about Ogbah, a player who is on his last year of his contract on top of that.
As for Clark, as others have said, fans need to be patient. You see plenty of players in this league start off cold and become great and vice versa and at any point in their career or even during any one season. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Buckweath:
Ogbah had not been doing much for three years in Cleveland. You could say the same about Murray in KC. Sometimes, players benefit from a change of scenery. That doesn't mean that Ogbah would have been as good with the Browns as he is now. And I haven't watched Murray but his 61.2 PFF rating suggests he has been decent.
The Charvarius Ward for Parker Ehinger is a trade where Veach hosed the Cowboys. The Cowboys should have never done that trade most likely.
You cannot say the same about Ogbah, a player who is on his last year of his contract on top of that.
As for Clark, as others have said, fans need to be patient. You see plenty of players in this league start off cold and become great and vice versa and at any point in their career or even during any one season.
I think what makes the Ogbah trade look worse is the Zeitler for Vernon trade. They should've just kept Ogbah and Zeitler considering how bad their OL is and Ogbah has been more productive at a cheaper price than Vernon. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Buckweath:
Ogbah had not been doing much for three years in Cleveland. You could say the same about Murray in KC. Sometimes, players benefit from a change of scenery. That doesn't mean that Ogbah would have been as good with the Browns as he is now. And I haven't watched Murray but his 61.2 PFF rating suggests he has been decent.
The Charvarius Ward for Parker Ehinger is a trade where Veach hosed the Cowboys. The Cowboys should have never done that trade most likely.
You cannot say the same about Ogbah, a player who is on his last year of his contract on top of that.
As for Clark, as others have said, fans need to be patient. You see plenty of players in this league start off cold and become great and vice versa and at any point in their career or even during any one season.
We got Ward because of karma and us losing David Irving to them a few years back [Reply]
Originally Posted by BossChief:
We got Ward because of karma and us losing David Irving to them a few years back
First off, Irving is a head case and out of the league. I’ll take Ward all fucking day.
Second, we got him because Veach identified a talented young player stuck in a deep group buried on the depth chart. He gets the credit for that, not “karma”. [Reply]
Originally Posted by staylor26:
First off, Irving is a head case and out of the league. I’ll take Ward all fucking day.
Second, we got him because Veach identified a talented young player stuck in a deep group buried on the depth chart. He gets the credit for that, not “karma”.
Originally Posted by Buckweath:
Ogbah had not been doing much for three years in Cleveland. You could say the same about Murray in KC. Sometimes, players benefit from a change of scenery. That doesn't mean that Ogbah would have been as good with the Browns as he is now. And I haven't watched Murray but his 61.2 PFF rating suggests he has been decent.
The Charvarius Ward for Parker Ehinger is a trade where Veach hosed the Cowboys. The Cowboys should have never done that trade most likely.
You cannot say the same about Ogbah, a player who is on his last year of his contract on top of that.
As for Clark, as others have said, fans need to be patient. You see plenty of players in this league start off cold and become great and vice versa and at any point in their career or even during any one season.
Murray sucks dude. He was terrible. And he was a 4th rd pick compared to Ogbah, who was almost taken in the 1st rd.
