Would You Rather?

[Pandion Haliaetus]

Okay, so Chris Clemons got 3 years for 22 mil.

I'd suspect Michael Bennett to get Marshawn Lynch money, 4 years around 32 mil or 8 per.

Now the question would you rather have Michael Bennett or for about the same amount of money re-sign Golden Tate, Clinton McDonald, and Tony McDaniel?

Tate for about 3 years, 16 mil or 5.33 per. Gets a huge pay raise from his rookie deal, and he'll get another chance at a bigger contract when he's in his prime of 28 to 29 years old.

McDonald for about 3 years,10 mil or 3.33 per.

Like Kearly said before around Jason Jones money. It leaves...

McDaniel with 2 year, 6 mil deal or 3 per.

Obviously its not exact science as Bennett would make 8 per and the other three add up to 11.66 per at least for the first two seasons.. But again 1 player will make 32 million for 4 years, while 3 players would make 32 million for an accumaltive of 8 years (4 mil per average).

And that's where I am at, I love Michael Bennett but I rather keep more players than a few players, and losing Michael Bennett would hurt but the Seahawks have some pass rush potential at DT.

1. Jordan Hill. He had 1.5 sacks in 4 games with limited snaps as a pass rusher he's very slippery and active... two strong traits Bennett possesses.
2. Michael Brooks. Was unstoppable in the pre-season and looked as good vs ATL.
3. Gregg Scruggs. Showed some promise in 2012 as a 7th round pick.
4. Kenneth Boatright. Was a LEO prospect as UDFA in '13 but rumor has it that he's beefed up to 275 and expected to compete for a similar role that Michael Bennett held.

 

[Natethegreat]

There is also good talent in the draft that could replace Bennet as well. Rashede Hageman, Aaron Donald(my favorite) come to mind. I know you can't count on getting those guys but I can see us moving on from Bennet as good as he was. So I guess I side on letting him go if he wants more than 6 to 7mill per year.

We would also get a pretty good comp pick if he goes somewhere else as well. Anyone know what round is probable f he were snatched away?

 

[Basis4day]

I want to retain Bennett, but it's not the end of the world if he can't be re-signed. Seattle will be very intriguing to pass rushers who would be willing to do 1-2 year rentals like Avril and Bennett last year.

You save 7.5 million by cutting Clemmons. A likely scenario to retaining Bennett.

 

[HawkFan72]

I would rather have Bennett. He was vital to our success on the D-line last year. With him and Avril we were able to get pretty consistent pressure WITHOUT blitzing (we only blitzed 6 times in the Super Bowl, for example).

McDaniel and McDonald were very valuable pieces this year, but they are replaceable. They just are. Yes they seem to be playing at a better level than they ever have before, but they can be replaced for cheaper.

So basically it's a question of Tate or Bennett.

And I think Bennett is more valuable and more consistent. I want to keep both, but if we had to choose I would pick Bennett.

 

[NorthDallas40oz]

Tate, McDonald and McDaniel are not worth the individual AAV's proposed by the OP, so under that scenario I would rather have Bennett by himself at the proposed 4 years/$8M AAV because he's an every-down player with great pass rushing ability and supreme versatility up and down the D line.

 

[jblaze]

The Hawks are going to have to hit on some pass rushing DE's in this draft and next if they want to be able to keep others like KJ and Malcolm.

 

[Lady Talon]

In a way yes, I'd rather have proven versatile outside + interior pass rushing. Of course he'll be 29.

On the other hand, It might be a mistake to let Clinton McDonald go. 27 and starting to emerge.

Tate and McDaniel are kind of secondary to me, if we don't keep some established interior pass rush, I can't see a repeat in the forecast expecting second year and rookie DT's to make up for the loss of 14 sacks and numerous pressures.

 

[rightbench]

From the way Bennett talks, and the contracts coming up, I'd lay money on him not coming back next year. Unless the market is completely dry (it won't be), we've seen the last of Bennett in our colors.

 

[brettb3]

I think Bennett's coming back. They'll create the cap space necessary to keep him. They can do that while also resigning Tate. It's not an either/or situation.

 

[Hawks46]

In a way yes, I'd rather have proven versatile outside + interior pass rushing. Of course he'll be 29.

On the other hand, It might be a mistake to let Clinton McDonald go. 27 and starting to emerge.

Tate and McDaniel are kind of secondary to me, if we don't keep some established interior pass rush, I can't see a repeat in the forecast expecting second year and rookie DT's to make up for the loss of 14 sacks and numerous pressures.

I agree on McDonald. I honestly don't think he's hit his ceiling, and even if he has, if he can just maintain the level he was playing at all year long, he's got a ton of value. McDaniel was good but I think we can retain him for little. If the FO is confident in Hill's progress, he'll replace McDaniel on the DL I'm thinking.

Scruggs is another case. He's actually similar to Bennett but he seems a bit more athletic. Bennett seems stronger and anchors better but Scruggs actually seemed to be a bit more explosive. He might be able to fill in and be that versatile guy, but no way is he going to make up for Bennett's production.

 

[Davehawk]

Losing Bennett wouldn't bother me nearly as much as it would seem to bother some people around here. Especially if we can keep a few of the other mid level guys on our team for the price Bennett might be seeking.

We will draft well and be just fine if he leaves for a payday(which I wouldn't blame him for doing).

 

[3Girls'HawkDad]

Who can replace Bennett? No "well maybe" or who is worth keeping over him?

The Defense in 2012 was great. The D for 2013 was legendary.


Where do you cut us short ? What can we sacrifice? Tate?

 

[Mr.Hawkbrah]

bennet at 8.

i honestly wouldnt be mad to see any of them go if they dont want to take team friendly deals. seattle is the place to be, everyone knows that, and everyone that wants a chance at a ring/wants to be in the spotlight for prove it deals will want to come here. you keep signing and replacing key cogs, and locking up guys like sherman, RW, wagner over the next few years, its the only way to keep all your most important pieces like that.

 

[Grahamhawker]

What's saying John and Pete don't find another Bennett? I like the guy, and he came up huge, but I wouldn't sell the farm to keep him.

 

[Lady Talon]

In a way yes, I'd rather have proven versatile outside + interior pass rushing. Of course he'll be 29.

On the other hand, It might be a mistake to let Clinton McDonald go. 27 and starting to emerge.

Tate and McDaniel are kind of secondary to me, if we don't keep some established interior pass rush, I can't see a repeat in the forecast expecting second year and rookie DT's to make up for the loss of 14 sacks and numerous pressures.

I agree on McDonald. I honestly don't think he's hit his ceiling, and even if he has, if he can just maintain the level he was playing at all year long, he's got a ton of value. McDaniel was good but I think we can retain him for little. If the FO is confident in Hill's progress, he'll replace McDaniel on the DL I'm thinking.

Scruggs is another case. He's actually similar to Bennett but he seems a bit more athletic. Bennett seems stronger and anchors better but Scruggs actually seemed to be a bit more explosive. He might be able to fill in and be that versatile guy, but no way is he going to make up for Bennett's production.

I don't know where I see Scruggs in the future, maybe a less effective Bennett, maybe an option for Red Bryant's spot. I'm not that optimistic about Jesse Williams' knees holding up in Red's role but I guess we'll see.

 

[mikeak]

Bennett gets a 5 year $60 million plus with $20 million guaranteed

We can't spend it

 

[Pandion Haliaetus]

In a way yes, I'd rather have proven versatile outside + interior pass rushing. Of course he'll be 29.

On the other hand, It might be a mistake to let Clinton McDonald go. 27 and starting to emerge.

Tate and McDaniel are kind of secondary to me, if we don't keep some established interior pass rush, I can't see a repeat in the forecast expecting second year and rookie DT's to make up for the loss of 14 sacks and numerous pressures.

I agree on McDonald. I honestly don't think he's hit his ceiling, and even if he has, if he can just maintain the level he was playing at all year long, he's got a ton of value. McDaniel was good but I think we can retain him for little. If the FO is confident in Hill's progress, he'll replace McDaniel on the DL I'm thinking.

Scruggs is another case. He's actually similar to Bennett but he seems a bit more athletic. Bennett seems stronger and anchors better but Scruggs actually seemed to be a bit more explosive. He might be able to fill in and be that versatile guy, but no way is he going to make up for Bennett's production.

Here's my train of thought.

I don't think McDonald has hit his ceiling either... why? Because of Dan Quinn... make no mistake our D-Line underperformed in 2012 but was off the charts in 2013. And imo it was Quinn.

He revitalized Red Bryants role, he turned Mebane to a fringe Pro Bowler to a fringe All Pro (even the rest of the country can't see it). McDonald was so productive as the 3rd DT. And he took a career backup in Tony McDaniel and made him into a great player. I'mnot going to discount Travis Lewis? Or is it Jone? Or D-Line coach but Dan Quinn is probably the best coach in the NFL in regards to Defensive Line play.

So I trust him to continue to develop those guys on the back end and make them into players I mean the Seahawks basically stashed Mayowa and Hill for the year on the roster, and still kept 3 DTs on the PS in Smith, Brooks, and Cherrington. While also keeping 3 DL stashed on the IR in Boatwright, Scruggs, and Williams.

I just rather keep McDaniel and McDonald over Bennett because they are cheaper and give the Seahawks depth. If the Seahawks can't restructure Red Bryant and cut him, McDaniel can play the 5 with McDonald moving up in the starting line-up.

I also trust Quinn to make Cliff Avril and Bruce Irvin (if he returns to DE) to turn them into top grade LEOs. Again, Clemons was a solid player but both those guys have much more athleticism and explosion than Clemons.

I also trust Quinn with Carroll and Schneider to find and uncover gems that will fit into the system and compete on the DLine or identify cheap free agents.

Let's say Bennett does sign a lucrative deal and has a great year that's a possible 3rd round draft pick if the Seahawks don't sign enough free agents.

As for Tate, I definitely want to keep him, and unlike others here, I don't think we need a big WR especially if we get another solid athletic TE to pair with Luke Willson. Tate, Baldwin, Harvin, Kearse, and Lockette is a great corps to me and are players who can make the type of plays with type of QB Russell Wilson is. Frankly, I don't see us keeping Harvin the length of his contract so... if we can promise Tate another contract down the road along with Baldwin I think both players will be more apt to stay on shorter deals with good but not great money.

We'll see how this plays out but I don't think Bennett is a must sign dude.

 

[Lady Talon]

In a way yes, I'd rather have proven versatile outside + interior pass rushing. Of course he'll be 29.

On the other hand, It might be a mistake to let Clinton McDonald go. 27 and starting to emerge.

Tate and McDaniel are kind of secondary to me, if we don't keep some established interior pass rush, I can't see a repeat in the forecast expecting second year and rookie DT's to make up for the loss of 14 sacks and numerous pressures.

I agree on McDonald. I honestly don't think he's hit his ceiling, and even if he has, if he can just maintain the level he was playing at all year long, he's got a ton of value. McDaniel was good but I think we can retain him for little. If the FO is confident in Hill's progress, he'll replace McDaniel on the DL I'm thinking.

Scruggs is another case. He's actually similar to Bennett but he seems a bit more athletic. Bennett seems stronger and anchors better but Scruggs actually seemed to be a bit more explosive. He might be able to fill in and be that versatile guy, but no way is he going to make up for Bennett's production.

As for Tate, I definitely want to keep him, and unlike others here, I don't think we need a big WR especially if we get another solid athletic TE to pair with Luke Willson. Tate, Baldwin, Harvin, Kearse, and Lockette is a great corps to me and are players who can make the type of plays with type of QB Russell Wilson is. Frankly, I don't see us keeping Harvin the length of his contract so... if we can promise Tate another contract down the road along with Baldwin I think both players will be more apt to stay on shorter deals with good but not great money.

I mostly agree with the DL thoughts, aside from Bennett is extremely useful not only in pass rushing but in defending the run. We will miss that as defenses figure out the strengths and weaknesses of a young DL rotation. Especially as NFC West teams get used to it.

As for the WR position, I disagree. Even if we have Harvin, healthy for the entire season, we do need a tall weapon at WR that can threaten in the red zone, fight for the ball, and win single coverage. A TE will be of little use to us as long as defenses have little problem cancelling out our smaller, slower WRs as we'll be using him to block and not as a target. If Harvin does get injured, at least our smaller slower receivers don't have to deal with #1 CBs.

The auto blitzing slows down our offense too much, either abusing Wilson or as an added benefit, getting to Lynch in the backfield because he can no longer bounce it outside and beat defenses to the edge. IMO we either go drastic OL upgrade, or we find enough weapons to force even top defenses to shy away from so much interior blitzing.

 

[volsunghawk]

I think all of the other players mentioned in the OP are far more replaceable than Bennett. I'd rather keep him.

 

[oasis]

If re-signing Bennett costs us Tate, we can make lemonade and draft a starting receiver who is tall and can catch jump balls at the high point. Pair that with a healthy and more seasoned Luke Willson while Percy Harvin tilts coverage on slants, and we have an elite red-zone offense to pair with a consistent pass-rush on our D. I just can't wait til we land ourselves some big bodies at WR next year. I'm already in uber-antsy mode for the draft.

And our DT's, elite as they are, seem replaceable. Especially compared to what Bennett brings to the team.