Michael Bennett reportedly wants around $10 million a year

[Hawks46]

If a team pays him that kind of dough to be THE guy on the DL, he won't be on a team that is winning games, and they won't be getting the production that kind of money would demand. The dude can play, but he has quite a bit of talent taking attention off him on this team.

Am I the only one else who believes this outright? He's good, not great. I love him but he's replaceable. He's not worth that money frankly. 6-7 mil is a fair deal for this team, maybe 8 or even 10 on a less than solid team.

I'm happy we have Avril over a longer period of time.

So explain how he got basically the same stats last year on Tampa's squad that didn't have the defense we did. True, Tampa had McCoy on that DL, but name me one DL that has one elite guy that carries the whole squad. It's always about balance. He most likely had more snaps with Tampa, but if he left, we'd definately feel it.

Maybe we can replace him with a guy like Tuck. Tuck made his name doing the same exact thing. I don't know if he's over the hill or not, but he might take less money to come here for 1 last ring. I think 7-8 mil is a fair deal for Bennett, but honestly, I'm not sure we can afford to pay him 8 mil. We're going to have to cut Clemons and restructure Bryant as it is.

That said, it makes me wonder how much more we can get out of Scruggs. He was coming along nicely until he got hurt. I still don't think he's hit his ceiling. I also think McDonald can improve and I'd like to see us keep him. With his improved production and increase in confidence, I think he can get better.

 

[Jazzhawk]

What do you guys think?.

What I think is this.......

The author of this article:

Ken Kosirowski - Undergrad student at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and Seattle Seahawks and Iowa State correspondent at isportsweb.com. Besides being a huge fan of all my hometown Wisconsin teams, I have a huge attachment to Seattle football and the Cyclones.

Where the heck is he getting this information and how accurate is it from a guy that's an undergrad student in Wisconsin? I mean come on.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

If his goal is $10 million then he'll probably end up settling for $8 million or $9 million. That's usually how goals work and there is some good competition in the pass rusher market.

To all the naysayers let me ask you this, if the Bengals offered us Geno Atkins for a can of tomato soup, would you want JS to take that offer? Because Geno Atkins makes $11 million per year on his current contract extension.

I think when factoring Bennett's versatility and consistency (as well as his extremely high PFF scores) I don't think it's a stretch to put Bennett at the same level, or perhaps very close to the same level, as Atkins. Bengals fans seem pretty happy to watch their team commit $11 million per year to him. Shouldn't we be happy to pay Bennett similar money? It's not like PC/JS have been mining pass rushers the same way they have churned out playmakers in the back seven.

I think if Bennett is obtainable for anything up to $11 million, Seattle should sign the deal and make sacrifices elsewhere. If he comes in at $8 million per, I'd consider it a bargain for whoever gets him.

Geno Aktins is a premier NT and even you know that. Please stop being ridiculous sir.

 

[Sac]

SCRUGGS for the WIN!

 

[ivotuk]

Bengals over paid for Atkins. I've been a huge fan of his since the senior bowl but a couple of extra sacks from the interior aren't worth hamstringing the rest of the defense for. I think Bennett will get 8 - 8.5 here which will be okay. Someone else might pay him 10 though which is only slightly less than Genos 10.54

 

[Laloosh]

No offense to a great football player but best of luck and so long. I'd rather spend that $10M on two $5M lineman that can rotate in and out and keep pressure on a QB for 60 minutes straight.

 

[Penman96]

Not being harsh, but last year this time we had a great team and no one had a clue about Michael Bennett impacting us. Now we have an even better team. With Harvin ready to explode next year we have an offense that will score a lot of points. And we have the best defense in the league. And the best depth in the league across the board.

Bennett being here (or not) isn't a big deal.

 

[CANHawk]

SCRUGGS for the WIN!

Been saying this all along. Scruggs has the tools to be even better than Bennett for pennies on the dollar.

 

[Recon_Hawk]

I hate to question a player's motivation, but I wonder if Bennett will play the next 5 years of a new contract with the same tenacity as he's played the last two (each contract years). It seems in almost every interview I've heard from Bennett (since RRR) he's mentioned money, in some way - either his next contract or not getting a longer term contract. He's not wrong for saying that, that's not what I'm saying. He deserves his next contract and the right to bitch about his last, but it stood out compared to other guys on the team I've hardly ever heard talk about money.

 

[Tical21]

I don't think we could afford 5 million per year.

 

[kearly]

If he actually gets somewhere in the $9-10M range (which would SHOCK me), then you got a good shot at a 3rd round comp pick in return. Would you be willing to surrender $10M cap AND a 3rd to keep him?

The formula that determines comp picks is kept secret, but it's my understanding that it factors a lot of things beyond salary, such as postseason awards and NFL service time. Bennett hasn't been to a pro-bowl or received any other postseason awards, and he's only been in the league for five years. They don't hand out a ton of 3rd round comp picks, I'd be surprised if we got a future 3rd for Bennett. Could happen, but I'd be surprised.

Further, that pick is dependent on what Seattle does in FA. Jared Allen is going to get the Vikings a 3rd round pick coming back when he leaves, so if we let Bennett walk and sign Allen, even if it's to a relatively cheap deal, we can forget about getting the pick back from Bennett. Because the Allen signing would cancel it out. It doesn't have to be a good player like Allen either. Any vet with lots of experience and pro-bowls on his resume would likely wipe out the comp pick. It's a pretty dumb formula, one where Seattle did not get a pick for losing Matt Hasselbeck because they signed a broken down Ben Hamilton.

But even if it did result in getting a future 3rd pick, it wouldn't deter me personally. We haven't had a truly consistent interior pressure generator since maybe Rocky Bernard, Sam Adams or Tez. And both Bernard and Adams were not as effective rushing the QB as Bennett has been. These guys are really hard to find, and Bennett comes with the added flexibility to excel at LEO as well and provided a lot of value beyond his sack numbers (hits, hurries, and forced fumbles in particular).

I am a big fan of Michael Brooks and would be excited to see him get increased opportunity, but I think pinching pennies on Michael Bennett is about as wise as pinching pennies on Earl Thomas. Very important player, very hard to replace. PC/JS have not had much success drafting pass rushers, they've generally leaned on FA/trade to get help there.

SCRUGGS for the WIN!

Been saying this all along. Scruggs has the tools to be even better than Bennett for pennies on the dollar.

I'd really like to see where Scruggs fits in with Dan Quinn. Seems like kind of an odd-ball at 3-tech even with the added size, but he's got the arm length and bulk to maybe be a Calais Campbell type DE. I think I've heard them say they want him to move to 3-tech, but I am genuinely curious about Scruggs in a Red Bryant type role if the extra weight translates into good run defense. Scruggs has made some wow plays both inside and out. He's not yet a good player we can count on, but I am very curious to see how he develops.

Either way, Scruggs is 100% unproven, and we are in a Super Bowl window on a defense that puts a very high value on the 3-tech position. If we had a guy waiting in the wings coming off a 7 sack season inside, that would be one thing. What worries me is the lack of proven options if Bennett leaves. I also noticed that most of Avril's best plays last season occurred on the downs when Michael Bennett was on the field next to him. They were quite the duo, especially in the playoffs.

I actually like Scruggs a lot, but the idea that we can plug in Scruggs and he'll produce like Bennett reminds me so much of people back in the day who said that Porkchop Womack would make us forget about Hutch.

 

[kearly]

Geno Aktins is a premier NT and even you know that. Please stop being ridiculous sir.

There are four errors I counted in this statement. Basic spelling, Atkin's position (he's a 3-tech), statement of my knowledge over said incorrect statement which somehow also incorrectly assumes that I don't think Atkins is a premiere player, and then the 2nd sentence, which is delicious irony.

Last year Seattle couldn't get pressure when they blitzed five. This year they had one of the most disruptive pass rushes in the league (PFF) rushing four almost every down. Avril helped but he actually provided several fewer sacks than Clemons did the year before. Should be kinda obvious to everyone that the difference in our pass rush this year was Bennett and McDonald inside.

Rapaport sounded emphatic when he said Bennett will be retained by Seattle. Maybe he had bad info, but if he's right and Bennett stays, I'm going to enjoy the massive u-turn bitch-flipping the moment Bennett signs that contract, and how everyone thought it was the right, obvious move and how we're all so glad to have Bennett back. It is AMAZING to me how much the tide of opinion here has changed over Bennett ever since he made that one "Costco" statement. Reminds me quite a bit of how casual NFL fans / jabronies went into over-reaction nuclear meltdown over the Sherman rant. (It's times like this that I wish Seatown81 would post more.)

Yup, it's going to be a big cap hit. But way too much is being made of that without putting spending into context. You don't spend money on the stuff that's easy to replace. You spend it on the stuff that's hard to replace. And we haven't had a player like Bennett inside in forever.

That plus it seems kind of silly to me to throw so much team resources at guys like Clemons, Avril, and Irvin, and then when you finally get a guy who is a star in his prime at the most premium pass rush spot of them all you just let him walk? Makes no sense.

 

[Pandion Haliaetus]

If his goal is $10 million then he'll probably end up settling for $8 million or $9 million. That's usually how goals work and there is some good competition in the pass rusher market.

To all the naysayers let me ask you this, if the Bengals offered us Geno Atkins for a can of tomato soup, would you want JS to take that offer? Because Geno Atkins makes $11 million per year on his current contract extension.

I think when factoring Bennett's versatility and consistency (as well as his extremely high PFF scores) I don't think it's a stretch to put Bennett at the same level, or perhaps very close to the same level, as Atkins. Bengals fans seem pretty happy to watch their team commit $11 million per year to him. Shouldn't we be happy to pay Bennett similar money? It's not like PC/JS have been mining pass rushers the same way they have churned out playmakers in the back seven.

I think if Bennett is obtainable for anything up to $11 million, Seattle should sign the deal and make sacrifices elsewhere. If he comes in at $8 million per, I'd consider it a bargain for whoever gets him.

Geno Aktins is a premier NT and even you know that. Please stop being ridiculous sir.

Yeah, I agree.

While no doubt Bennett was an amazing contributor of a relentless pass-rush in 2013. He's just a cog, and can be replacable.

The true talent of our D-Line is Dan Quinn, and it always has been.

DQ even discovered Bennett back in 2009.

DQ was also tasked into developing Clemons, Mebane, and Bryant into their current roles in 2010. He also got the best out of Raheem Brock.

Quinn left in 2011-2012.

I would rate the D-Line above average during that time but not a strength, Seahawks got serviceable years out of Alan Branch, and Gus Bradley didn't stray far from the design Line design Quinn and Carroll built in 2010. Naturally, players progressed in the system and excelled.

Then Dan Quinn came back as DC, and he was tasked with more than the Line but his expertise in the area was still unmatched.

He worked in an injured Clemons and Avril into the mix rather seamlessly.

He took again got the best out of Red Bryant, Brandon Mebane took his game to the next level, he developed a career backup in Tony McDaniel into a productive starter. A player he didn't previously work with Clinton McDonald had the best year of his career and was an impact player coming off the bench.

Above all, the team kept a lot of young, promising D-Line talent, in which I have full confidence Dan Quinn along with his position coach will continue to develop.

Bruce Irvin, started 12 games at SAM, 8 sacks as a Rookie Pass Rusher
Benson Mayowa, stashed on roster
Jordan Hill, stashed on roster appeared in 4 games for 1.5 sacks

Michael Brooks, in every opportunity given he has shined creating int. Pressure
D'Anthony Smith, rather athletic DT Seahawks kept on PS after they traded for him
Dewayne Cherrington, a young but big and powerful run stuffer

Gregg Scruggs, has received solid praise with expectations before his injury
Jesse Williams, another big, powerful run-stuffer but one with considerable quickness
Kenneth Boatright, LEO prospect in '13 pre-season, rumored to have gained 20-25 pounds to be molded as a Michael Bennett type tweener.

So if Bennett is going to cost upwards of 8-11 million per year, I rather the Seahawks make the effort to resign McDaniels and McDonald and let the brevy of young pass-rushing talent compete: Hill, Brooks, Scruggs, Smith, and Boatwright

Seahawks can also add in a draft pick and/or a low risk, high reward free agent into the mix as well.

In my opinion replacing 1 is easier, that replacing 2.

Consider the fact that Clemons and Bryant will likely be cut for Bennett. You are now looking at Bennett costing Clemons, Bryant, McDan, and McDon.

Where as you probably can cut Clemons and that would be enough to resign McDaniel and McDonald.

Re-Signing Bennett keeping 1 at the cost of 4 players

Not Re-Signing Bennett keeping 3 players at the cost of 2 players + a possible high round comp pick in 2015.

 

[UK_Seahawk]

Dont forget your dog Mike.

 

[kearly]

While no doubt Bennett was an amazing contributor of a relentless pass-rush in 2013. He's just a cog, and can be replacable. (etc)

I would say 3-tech has been maybe the most difficult to replace area of this franchise going back a couple decades. Anyone is replaceable, but some guys are much tougher to replace than others.

A lot of those young players you listed were camp bodies who aren't with the team anymore. And though Quinn did discover Bennett and Bennett looked good as a rookie, Bennett basically had to redshirt 3 seasons with Tampa before he became a very good NFL player.

If I suggested trading Russell Wilson and acquiring some young QBs with mid-late round picks to step in for him, that would sound pretty crazy right? It would be one thing if we had a backup who looked like the next Tom Brady, it's another thing when you have a bunch of unproven guys and a starter who was among the best at his position in 2013. Don't get me wrong, I like a couple of our prospects, but if we were really going to take that tactic then I'd want Seattle to franchise Bennett for a year and see if one of the young guys transitions to a "proven" guy first.

I think some people fall into the trap of seeing the 8.5 sacks and think he's just barely above average. You factor the postseason and he had 10 sacks as well as numerous fumbles and fumble recoveries, hits, hurries, plus I think it's pretty clear his presence benefited Avril, and perhaps McDonald. Only two defensive ends scored higher than Bennett last season by PFF's Pass Rushing Productivity rating, and neither of them kick inside like Bennett does. All this from a guy who played half his snaps inside where you don't often see that kind of production. And when you do, you almost never see a team dumb enough to let that guy walk in UFA in his prime, since production inside is very difficult to replace.

You might recall that 3-tech was cited as Seattle's top need last offseason. Seattle spent a 3rd round pick on a DT and brought in several more off the street. They signed Bennett. Yet out of all those new additions, only Bennett made a difference in Seattle's pass rush from the 3-tech spot last season (McDonald stepped up nicely but he's a UFA as well). If we let Bennett walk, how can we say with much confidence that we won't immediately revert to 3-tech being a huge problem again? At least with Browner and Thurmond, we can wave goodbye because of what Byron Maxwell has done by proving himself as a productive player. We don't have that Byron Maxwell type story (yet) from the reserve DTs. I know that hope springs eternal and all that, but the reason we just won a SB is because we have a coach who is proactive and too smart to lean on unknown factors when they can be avoided.

As far as the comp pick, I'm not counting any chickens there until we see how the rest of Seattle's free agency goes. Remember when we thought we'd get a 3rd round pick for losing Hasselbeck? (which, had Seattle stayed pat, they would have almost certainly received). Then the Seahawks signed an old journeyman guard and the formula ended up forfeiting the pick.

 

[Tokadub]

Didn't read the article or all the responses like I normally do before I post. Just gotta say once again like my previous posts, Bennett will be gone so we can keep Tate.

If we do keep Bennett I think it's a one or 2 year deal averaging 6 million per year, probably front loaded this year so we can pay Russell next year. But if we do that we are gonna have to cut more guys than I'd like.

I'm not a straight up Bennett hater like one might expect if you read all my posts. Honestly I think he's a great player, maybe worth 7-8 mill per year for the right team.

HOWEVER on our team he is somewhat replaceable. Our defense is so good that anyone other than Sherman, Thomas, Chencellor, or Maxwell could be replaced if absolutely necessary and we'd still have a damn good defense. Bennett falls into this category. He is just in the wrong place at the wrong time if he wanted to stay here with the best possible payout, it's questionable he even wants to stay here truly, seems at this point he just wants to get paid and retired. Can't blame the guy, he's likely about to start declining physically he wants to be set for life right now.

I just can't see our front office making that mistake for a slightly older player who will begin to regress next season. Bennett is not that much of an athlete, he is just an all out hustling dog as Marsawn would say. Once he gets paid he will lose that intensity and eventually his somewhat average physical prescense will overtake him playing out of his mind every night.

In conclusion I think if we sign Bennett for anything more than 6 million a year ideally for one year it would be a huge mistake and actually weaken our team no matter how good Bennett is.

 

[Lady Talon]

What Kearly said, replacing interior dominance like Bennett will not happen from 3rd year players fresh off IR, the PS, or waivers, or cheap 1 year FA's that will be called out as traitors when they want a larger contract the next season.

If you want cheap you'll get your wish.

 

[kearly]

If a team pays him that kind of dough to be THE guy on the DL, he won't be on a team that is winning games, and they won't be getting the production that kind of money would demand. The dude can play, but he has quite a bit of talent taking attention off him on this team.

FWIW, he was equally productive the year before on the NFL's very worst pass rushing defense. He's produced with a strong supporting cast and with a terrible supporting cast equally.

 

[Tokadub]

If I suggested trading Russell Wilson and acquiring some young QBs with mid-late round picks to step in for him, that would sound pretty crazy right? It would be one thing if we had a backup who looked like the next Tom Brady, it's another thing when you have a bunch of unproven guys and a starter who was among the best at his position in 2013. Don't get me wrong, I like a couple of our prospects, but if we were really going to take that tactic then I'd want Seattle to franchise Bennett for a year and see if one of the young guys transitions to a "proven" guy first.

Yes you would sound crazy and here's why.

Russell Wilson put up almost identical college stats to both Andrew Luck and RGIII. Seriously look it up, it's frightening how similar all 3 of their stat lines are.

So Russell Wilson statistically was just as good as the #1 and #2 picks in the draft.

What about Michael Bennett? Oh yeah that's right... he was undrafted.

He was recruited in 2009 as an undrafted free agent by who? The Seahawks...

"Bennett was waived by the Seahawks on October 10, 2009 in order to make room for offensive tackle Kyle Williams, who was signed off of the practice squad"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Be ... ve_lineman)

So we picked him up when nobody else did, and we released him for some guy off our practice squad. If it wasn't for the Seahawks Bennett might have not even made it to the NFL.

His stats were downright AWFUL until 2012... the year before we signed him back. Now he has one decent season when he plays less than 60% of our defensive snaps and he puts up mediocre numbers and wants a huge contract?

I'm so tired of hearing about this guy, he's so overrated. The only reason he's decent is because our defense is legendary, one of the all time greats. You could take a ton of guys and put them in there rested in the perfect situation and they would perform very easily to levels comparable to Bennett.

Comparing Bennett to Russell Wilson is absolutely absurd. And I am looking forward to the day we trade Bennett so I no longer have to hear this nonsense.

The only reason he's so over hyped is because we are such a good team and the media loves drama any way they can get it. The ONLY way the media can get drama is to make Bennett seem like a big deal, he's not.

 

[TXHawkFan]

If I suggested trading Russell Wilson and acquiring some young QBs with mid-late round picks to step in for him, that would sound pretty crazy right? It would be one thing if we had a backup who looked like the next Tom Brady, it's another thing when you have a bunch of unproven guys and a starter who was among the best at his position in 2013. Don't get me wrong, I like a couple of our prospects, but if we were really going to take that tactic then I'd want Seattle to franchise Bennett for a year and see if one of the young guys transitions to a "proven" guy first.

Yes you would sound crazy and here's why.

Russell Wilson put up almost identical college stats to both Andrew Luck and RGIII. Seriously look it up, it's frightening how similar all 3 of their stat lines are.

So Russell Wilson statistically was just as good as the #1 and #2 picks in the draft.

What about Michael Bennett? Oh yeah that's right... he was undrafted.

He was recruited in 2009 as an undrafted free agent by who? The Seahawks...

"Bennett was waived by the Seahawks on October 10, 2009 in order to make room for offensive tackle Kyle Williams, who was signed off of the practice squad"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Be ... ve_lineman)

So we picked him up when nobody else did, and we released him for some guy off our practice squad. If it wasn't for the Seahawks Bennett might have not even made it to the NFL.

His stats were downright AWFUL until 2012... the year before we signed him back. Now he has one decent season when he plays less than 60% of our defensive snaps and he puts up mediocre numbers and wants a huge contract?

I'm so tired of hearing about this guy, he's so overrated. The only reason he's decent is because our defense is legendary, one of the all time greats. You could take a ton of guys and put them in there rested in the perfect situation and they would perform very easily to levels comparable to Bennett.

Comparing Bennett to Russell Wilson is absolutely absurd. And I am looking forward to the day we trade Bennett so I no longer have to hear this nonsense.

The only reason he's so over hyped is because we are such a good team and the media loves drama any way they can get it. The ONLY way the media can get drama is to make Bennett seem like a big deal, he's not.

I don't know what Russell Wilson's or Michael Bennett's college career or Bennett's status as a one time UDFA has to do with anything. Are you claiming that because Wilson put up college numbers comparable to Luck and RG3 it would require a high draft pick to replace him while any schmuck off the waiver wire could replace Bennett because of his college performance and undrafted status? Who the hell cares what Bennett did in college or how he was evaluated at the time, he now has a body of work in the NFL to judge him by and he's been pretty damn impressive the past two years.

I don't think kearly was comparing Wilson and Bennett, only using RW as an example of how foolish it is to just assume that you can simply replace a proven commodity at a valuable position with unproven prospects and expect the same production. And he's right.

I don't believe that Bennett is overhyped and its ridiculous to claim he can be easily replaced. I'm also not sure if he's worth what he's asking or how that will effect being able to sign players like Sherman, Thomas, and Wilson down the road. But I do trust Carroll and Schneider to know that and I guess will find out soon enough what they think.