Should We Trade Michael Bennett?

[Hawks46]

Well, to be fair, I think Bennett's opinion of his ranking is about right.

The problem is, he's not noticeably better than he was the year before. The year before he didn't get the market value he wanted, which wasn't set by the Seahawks, it was set by the other teams that didn't offer him a fat contract. If he was considered that much more valuable, someone, anyone, had achance to pay him that value and no one did (I'm not saying he got no offers, but they weren't noticeably better than Seattle's).

With similar numbers, he once again didn't get the FA love he wanted, so he signed his deal with Seattle. Then, guys like Suh got big money and he feels undervalued. It doesn't make any sense....twice he didn't get paid what he wanted at his current level of play, and he signed a contract. If he got traded, it's only logical that he wouldn't get a pay raise because that team had already had a shot at him and didn't pay him....twice. Then the trade value is partly due to a team friendly contract.

I don't always like the off field antics, but I love the on field player. It just reeks of desperation, and it doesn't make sense to me. He doesn't have a choice but to play. There just isn't any greener grass out there.

 

[pmedic920]

Why do you guys keep saying that we have him on a bargain? Look at his actual stats from last season and then check where his pay ranks. He is paid about right and actually a bit high already. Statistically he wasn't even our best DE last season. I'm not saying that he isn't a very good player and I know there is more to this than stats but there are a lot of DL that could match the numbers he put up last season if backed up by the LOB.

I think most experts agreed that the Hawk's got a little hometown deal when Bennett signed his new deal, and he probably could have gotten a little more if he went to free agency. That's not a stretch.

But he knew that, and was fine with it.

A more interesting conversation would be to ask why did his mood and opinion of his own situation change in only 12 months? Was it because we didn't trade for his brother? Because Quinn left? Because we lost the SB and now he can't run around saying he's on the best defense of all time?

All of the above for me.

The Harvin trade may have been an issue as well.

 

[pmedic920]

If one was to take an honest look at the NFL in general, the SEAHAWKS would have to be a top 3-4 choice for any player to want to be a part of.
Homer in me says that the Hawks should be all players first choice, but really, where does he want to go and why.
Seriously, tell me what team has a foreseeable future that is brighter than the Seahawks.

 

[hawkfan68]

I'm not expert but from what I see, I believe that Bennett has more value as a DT than he does DE. If they moved him inside permanently, he'd have much more success and the Seahawks would have consistent pressure through the middle. Thus QBs like Rivers, Romo, Brady, and Manning would struggle as they may not be able to step up into the pocket with Bennett there. I like this DL look - Avril, Mebane, Bennett, Clark better than this one - Avril, Mebane, McDaniel, Bennett.

 

[TwilightError]

I know he is an important player, but he is not irreplaceable. If he wants to be a whining millionaire talking-head on television, and not a great DE, just trade him as an example to eveyone else.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I'm not expert but from what I see, I believe that Bennett has more value as a DT than he does DE. If they moved him inside permanently, he'd have much more success and the Seahawks would have consistent pressure through the middle. Thus QBs like Rivers, Romo, Brady, and Manning would struggle as they may not be able to step up into the pocket with Bennett there. I like this DL look - Avril, Mebane, Bennett, Clark better than this one - Avril, Mebane, McDaniel, Bennett.

That's not how Pete runs his defenses though. Pete specifically drafts and develops his D-lineman to play all across the line in order to not only create mismatches (of which Bennett takes advantage of often)...........but also to make rotating players in and out easier.

btw, that's not something Bennett's mentioned. The fact that no one gave a crap about him until Pete and Gus Bradley got ahold of him and developed him into the top tier D-lineman he is. Before Pete Bennett was a nobody tweener lineman that no one wanted.

 

[hawkfan68]

I'm not expert but from what I see, I believe that Bennett has more value as a DT than he does DE. If they moved him inside permanently, he'd have much more success and the Seahawks would have consistent pressure through the middle. Thus QBs like Rivers, Romo, Brady, and Manning would struggle as they may not be able to step up into the pocket with Bennett there. I like this DL look - Avril, Mebane, Bennett, Clark better than this one - Avril, Mebane, McDaniel, Bennett.

That's not how Pete runs his defenses though. Pete specifically drafts and develops his D-lineman to play all across the line in order to not only create mismatches (of which Bennett takes advantage of often)...........but also to make rotating players in and out easier.

btw, that's not something Bennett's mentioned. The fact that no one gave a crap about him until Pete and Gus Bradley got ahold of him and developed him into the top tier D-lineman he is. Before Pete Bennett was a nobody tweener lineman that no one wanted.

It's true that PC likes versatility. However, I believe they were forced to play Bennett at DE more than they would have liked because they let Bryant and Clemons go. Had they kept one of those guys, Bennett probably plays more DT. He is being paid as a DT. Contracts are starting to become positional battles, especially among tweener types. Jimmy Graham was attempting to get a contract as a WR (when he was franchised) but he lost that because his position is listed at TE. Bennett wants a new contract because he played mostly DE last year versus DT. He's paid like a top DT but DE contracts are more. Thus wants the increase. Someone mentioned that earlier in a post and it makes sense looking at it from that angle. However, I don't believe Bennett is all that great as a DE. So I don't think he deserves it.

 

[IrishNW]

Trade him. Take the money he was getting and give it to more deserving players. Sweezy could use a new deal!

 

[SeaChase]

Yes, trade him back to Tampa, or the Cleveland...

 

[Lords of Scythia]

No.

Rhetorically should the Vikings trade AP? No because it is impossible to get equal value.

Moses Bread led the league or was among the league leaders in pressures, if he is traded the Seahawks would be a worse football team.

Let's trade Bennett for AP.

 

[Shadowhawk]

Trade him now? Hell no! Even if we somehow got market value for him in trade it would likely come in the form of draft choices that wouldn't help the team until next season. We'd be making ourselves worse in 2015 for no reason.

Now next year? If Marsh, Hill, and/or Clark all step up this year (preferably all three) then that is something to seriously consider if he is still squawking about wanting a new deal.

 

[Jville]

I think there was once a quasi stable compensation model for 3 or 4 starting linemen plus backups. The continuing and unfolding story of teams going to rotations has destabilized compensation models. Perceived value of a rotation lineman is in a state of constant flux because combinations and participation is in a constant state of flux.

Consider the top 7 ranking percentages for snaps played for 2013 verses 2014.

Rank........... 2013................................................2014 ..........

1st ..............57.5 <<<<< Michael Bennett >>>>> 84.7 ...........
2nd .............54.7.................................................73.0............
3rd...............52.8.................................................44.7............
4th ..............50.9.................................................40.9............
5th ..............50.8 ................................................36.8 ...........
6th ..............50.6.................................................34.6 ...........
7th ..............46.1.................................................28.4 ...........

Doesn't surprise me that this is a rotating position group where an individual market value can fluctuate a lot. It might help explain why there is so much interest in supplemental short term contracts among this position group.

Data Source >>> [urltargetblank]http://www.footballoutsiders.com/[/urltargetblank]

 

[gmor]

No.

 

[jblaze]

Gregg Bell ‏@gbellseattle 13m13 minutes ago

Michael Bennett is only sort-of skipping #Seahawks OTAs to (semi) protest deal. Sherman says DE's in team HQ, just not coming out onto field

 

[TVHAWK]

OMG- These guys piss me off- They want the security of signing a 4 year deal, and then a year later, want a new deal....What planet are these guys from ?? They could sign a 1 or 2 year deal, but no, They want it both ways..And if they are worthless the first year, the team still has to pay in full..They should not cave in to terrorist demands from spoiled rich brats....I'm sick of the greed- BE A MAN,and honor your commitments- Period :les:

 

[hawknation2015]

Gregg Bell ‏@gbellseattle 13m13 minutes ago

Michael Bennett is only sort-of skipping #Seahawks OTAs to (semi) protest deal. Sherman says DE's in team HQ, just not coming out onto field

Seriously? This makes me think he is doing this more for public attention that to actually pressure the FO into giving him more money. He must know by now that he has no leverage and a pretty weak claim for deserving more money.