[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by staylor26

Dude, ignore the ****ing grade. I’m talking about the fact that the Texans had to move him around to get a whopping 9 sacks.

Clark is the better pass rusher because he’s been more productive. And because I’ve watched them both and can see it. It’s really simple.

So you're going to cite PFF except for when they don't say what you want them to and then insist you ignore that they actually considered Clowney a far superior player every year of their respective careers?

That seems...reasonable.

And part of the reason people are so big on Clark is because the Seahawks moved him around. Suddenly you're seizing on Clowney's versatility as a negative? That's especially odd seeing as I specifically noted Clowney's ability to be more dynamic than Clark inside as a positive for him.

I'm not shitting on Clark. I'm not saying he's a bad player - I've said he's probably a very good one and would be elated if he's a great one. I'm not even saying he may not be a better pure rusher than Clowney (at least I'm pretty sure I haven't said that; I'm largely undecided there). I'm saying that Clowney is at least a comparable player, the idea that Clark is more 'well rounded' isn't supported by...anything really, and that by paying roughly twice as much in trade for Clark as Clowney may have been available for, we overpaid.

And more than anything I'm just really intrigued by how low people can push the bar for what constitutes a successful transaction here before all is said and done.

I mean if he goes out there and is just a slightly better version of Duane Clemons, just how much are we gonna have to exaggerate his run defense to put a feather in Veach's cap?