Source: Seattle trying to trade Michael Bennett

[vin.couve12]

Matter of fact, hope is exactly what the FO was working off of. Stupid and desperate. The three often go together.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

No one is going to give multiple picks for Bennett and his drama. He is still a decent DL but this team needs to get young and hungry. Let him go.

This team needs to get GOOD. Not young and hungry. Good.

Young and hungry is one possible way to do that. But young and hungry doesn't automatically equal good. This Seahawks defense was young and hungry in 2011 as well as 2013. I think people forget that, and seem to think that 2013 was their first year on the field or something.

Other teams are going to judge Bennett by his value to their team, rather than letting their judgment get clouded by his personal activism as so many fans are doing.

Young and hungry is really our only choice right now. We tried the old and experienced way the last 2-3 years, and it didn't work.

Now we have aging vets soaking up too much cap space, and a coach and GM that leveraged the next couple of years with bad trades.

So what other choice do we have but to try and reload the roster with youth........especially on defense.

 

[Seymour]

No one is going to give multiple picks for Bennett and his drama. He is still a decent DL but this team needs to get young and hungry. Let him go.

This team needs to get GOOD. Not young and hungry. Good.

Young and hungry is one possible way to do that. But young and hungry doesn't automatically equal good. This Seahawks defense was young and hungry in 2011 as well as 2013. I think people forget that, and seem to think that 2013 was their first year on the field or something.

Other teams are going to judge Bennett by his value to their team, rather than letting their judgment get clouded by his personal activism as so many fans are doing.

A player by the name of Colin Kaepernick bet on that also.

That got him unemployed in 2017.

 

[NJlargent]

No one is going to give multiple picks for Bennett and his drama. He is still a decent DL but this team needs to get young and hungry. Let him go.

This team needs to get GOOD. Not young and hungry. Good.

Young and hungry is one possible way to do that. But young and hungry doesn't automatically equal good. This Seahawks defense was young and hungry in 2011 as well as 2013. I think people forget that, and seem to think that 2013 was their first year on the field or something.

Other teams are going to judge Bennett by his value to their team, rather than letting their judgment get clouded by his personal activism as so many fans are doing.

I think Bennett could make another team good who is built around hunger and Bennett could nicely fit in there. But if a 5th or a 6th is all we can get for Bennett then other teams don't see him as a critical component of getting good.

I could care less about the substance of his behavior on and off field. But there's no way that it can be viewed as helping a team get good.

 

[vin.couve12]

A Seahawks 7th, 6th and Bennett MIGHT get you a 4th from another team, but that's a real stretch. It will probably get you a 5th.

I suspect there will be more trades though. Trading down in the draft and possibly another trade or maybe even more. I think there will be subtractions that will make people freak out, but in the end we'll have something to build off of. Wouldn't surprise me to see a slow start and strong finish to next season with the SB still possible.

Trading Bennett might just come down to health. IF they can even trade him pending a physical.

Don't ask me what side I'm on. It's purely roster building. Might be my favorite part of the year.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Young and hungry is really our only choice right now. We tried the old and experienced way the last 2-3 years, and it didn't work.

Now we have aging vets soaking up too much cap space, and a coach and GM that leveraged the next couple of years with bad trades.

So what other choice do we have but to try and reload the roster with youth........especially on defense.

Wait, what?

Earl isn't old. If he's old, so is Wagner, and nobody's crying out for Wagner to be traded for a first rounder. And I'm willing to bet that a big part of the reason nobody's jonesing to "offload Wagner at his prime because Belichick" (seriously, why doesn't the same logic apply to him?) is because he hasn't done anything off the field that fans take the wrong way. I'd bet a buffalo nickel on that.

Nobody wanted Avril gone right up until he got injured, and his particular injury could have happened to Shaquill Griffin. Without the off-the-field concerns, nobody would be seeing anything on Michael Bennett except the 8.5 sacks he supplied us last year. Richard Sherman? Still a shutdown corner. Every one of these stars has been producing at a Pro Bowl level. Nobody is factoring ANY of this in, and nobody has yet offered up any statistical refutation of their performances. This is still a very good group of defenders.

Ignoring the total lack of run game in the last two years, Wilson's annual faceplant in the playoffs (he's been VERY iffy there, both in 2014 and 2015), the offensive line, and kicker woes as far more tangible factors in our playoff struggles is a mind-blowing development here on .NET.

Don't get me wrong, I am quite impressed that people have found something to bitch about MORE then the offensive line, but the age of the defense is far down the ladder of causes of our playoff woes, especially given that Seattle worked around practically every one of those defensive injuries quite nicely last year. People are howling after one of the least proximate causes here. And I am very strongly of the opinion that it's SOLELY because of injury frustration and off-the-field issues, which are emotional projections and not really based in a real value assessment.

 

[chris98251]

I'm not against trading him for the right reason and for the right price, but what is this infighting or locker room drama that's being thrown around? I've seen nothing to suggest that there have been any locker room problems. The people that seem to have the most problems with him are certain Seahawks fans. Can the locker room claims be clarified with any legitimacy?

There's never been any locker room drama with Bennett between his coaches and teammates. They all love him.

chris is obviously throwing in some protest hyperbole and thinking that's playing into why the team is shopping him. Which IMO isn't true, Bennett's being shopped because he's one of a handful of players that has trade value in order to restock this year's draft.

It was not about Bennett specifically, we have had Sherman, in the Media, we have had guys get DUI's or arrested for intoxication Moffat, Lynch, Hill, we have had guys accused of Domestic Violence, we have had infighting distractions, Tate / Wilson, Baldwin / Harvin, Clark / Ifedi. Then we have Trades, Cary Williams caused a bunch of dissent, then hold outs Kam.

You have distractions every year, so saying the team was not going to have distractions is really just wanting to burn Bennett at the stake, stick that up your Hyperbole.

Exaggerating your point with zero facts about their being locker room drama is hyperbole.

Not one player or coach has said Bennett, or any player has been an issue in the locker room. If you have proof, please offer it up.

I get what you're saying, but Bennett or any player being a locker room distraction is your baseless opinion. btw, I tend to agree with you, I'm tired of the distractions and nonsense to, I'd like to get back to concentrating on football.

But that's also my opinion. There's no proof.

Considering my response was to this post and you guys ran with it.

2017 was supposed to be the season of no distractions... except it wasn't and Michael was at the heart of it.

That's why I'm ready for the Hawks to move on without him.

Why I listed all the things that happen in one way shape or form every season that causes some sort of distraction. Some of you just looking for a argument took off with the Locker room in fighting aspect when it was part of a list of team things.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Wait, what?

Earl isn't old. If he's old, so is Wagner, and nobody's crying out for Wagner to be traded for a first rounder. And I'm willing to bet that a big part of the reason nobody's jonesing to "offload Wagner at his prime because Belichick" (seriously, why doesn't the same logic apply to him?) is because he hasn't done anything off the field that fans take the wrong way. I'd bet a buffalo nickel on that.
.

Right now the core of our defense is Clark, Wagner and Earl............and we're shopping Earl because we don't want to pay him 15M+ per year for the next 3-4 years.

His age is young, but the way he plays he's going down the same injury road as Kam. So like Bennett do you hold onto him hoping he stays healthy while soaking up major cap space, or do you trade him now when;

1. You're rebuilding and desperately need the picks
2. He still has value

And if you believe holding onto guys like Earl, Sherman and Bennett hoping they stay healthy and produce again is the way to go? We did that the last two years when these guys weren't hurt, and weren't very good. What's it going to look in another year or two when we still haven't rebuilt?

And believe me you WILL hear about Bobby being traded this time next year if he like Earl gets hurt again and is barking about an extension/holdout.

 

[Osprey]

7.3 - 5.65 = $1.65 Million gain on the cap.

$5.65 Million is still paying for absolutely nothing.

Now, what are the paying rates for the first year of a 5th or 6th round draft pick and subtract that from the $1.65 million gain against the cap. Then, what does that 5th or 6th round pick net you in terms of productivity? Is that a net gain over the cap savings for this particular year?

Who man's the position next year? Many are assuming Jordan, which is perfectly sane, but there's still a gamble there. What other alternatives are there? How certain are you that this whole scenario positively affects the Seahawks' chances of winning a superbowl next year?

Your analysis is correct, but it only focuses on the one year.

If the move is made it won't be for next year, but for the additional three years a draft pick(s) would be under contract and hopefully beyond.

 

[Seymour]

This......and $$$$$$$$ is what made Earl "Old".

 

[Yxes1122]

Young and hungry is really our only choice right now. We tried the old and experienced way the last 2-3 years, and it didn't work.

Now we have aging vets soaking up too much cap space, and a coach and GM that leveraged the next couple of years with bad trades.

So what other choice do we have but to try and reload the roster with youth........especially on defense.

Wait, what?

Earl isn't old. If he's old, so is Wagner, and nobody's crying out for Wagner to be traded for a first rounder. And I'm willing to bet that a big part of the reason nobody's jonesing to "offload Wagner at his prime because Belichick" (seriously, why doesn't the same logic apply to him?) is because he hasn't done anything off the field that fans take the wrong way. I'd bet a buffalo nickel on that.

Nobody wanted Avril gone right up until he got injured, and his particular injury could have happened to Shaquill Griffin. Without the off-the-field concerns, nobody would be seeing anything on Michael Bennett except the 8.5 sacks he supplied us last year. Richard Sherman? Still a shutdown corner. Every one of these stars has been producing at a Pro Bowl level. Nobody is factoring ANY of this in, and nobody has yet offered up any statistical refutation of their performances. This is still a very good group of defenders.

Ignoring the total lack of run game in the last two years, Wilson's annual faceplant in the playoffs (he's been VERY iffy there, both in 2014 and 2015), the offensive line, and kicker woes as far more tangible factors in our playoff struggles is a mind-blowing development here on .NET.

Don't get me wrong, I am quite impressed that people have found something to bitch about MORE then the offensive line, but the age of the defense is far down the ladder of causes of our playoff woes, especially given that Seattle worked around practically every one of those defensive injuries quite nicely last year. People are howling after one of the least proximate causes here. And I am very strongly of the opinion that it's SOLELY because of injury frustration and off-the-field issues, which are emotional projections and not really based in a real value assessment.

Montana, you and vin are two of my favorite posters on this board and I hear what you're saying. Earl and Bennett are both still valuable players. You're talking about All-Pro, Top 100 players. Neither will be easy to replace.

But I tend to think of things in terms of the next 3 years. What is better for Seattle in the next 3 years? In the early days John and Pete stressed the 3 year plan and not mortgaging the future for the sake of the present. We did that last year. The reason we are sitting here with a tight cap and lack of picks is because we bet on the old core to get us to the promised land. And it didn't happen.

When I look at the next three years, holding onto Bennett doesn't seem all that valuable. I don't think this roster is competitive within the NFC as currently constructed. This is how I justify trading Bennett. Over the span of the next three years the potential of that pick, as an actual player or ammunition to get a player you want, is more valuable than Bennett.

Could the pick bust? Sure. But we are now firmly in the middle of the pack when compared to the powerhouses in the NFL. Trading Bennett and Earl drops us in the short term, but has potential to help us in the long term. Things may backfire, but I'd rather bet on the future than continue to pay big for these talents when I don't think they get us another ring. I don't think we are a RB away from post-season success.

We finished 9-7 but went 1-3 in December which is historically our strongest month. That loss to the Rams eats at me, and it reminds me of when Seattle trounced the Harbaugh Niners at the end of 2012. It felt like power had shifted. This team has been steadily declining since 2014, it just took 3 years to reach a point where we weren't a post-season competitor. I think that trend continues, even if we kept Earl and Bennett. I think with Bennett, a pick is worth more long term and with Earl, I think a 2nd round pick now, is worth more than a 3rd round comp pick next year. Just my feelings on it.

As a post-script I do think there is some amount of Pete wanting to reset the culture in the building. To do that you have to change leadership, not only with coaches but with the leaders in the locker room. I don't think Schotty or Ken Norton are upgrades over Bev or Richard from an X's and O's standpoint, but I think they provide a different voice and energy that we can't see. Kind of an intangible measure, but just something on my mind.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

But I tend to think of things in terms of the next 3 years. What is better for Seattle in the next 3 years? In the early days John and Pete stressed the 3 year plan and not mortgaging the future for the sake of the present. We did that last year. The reason we are sitting here with a tight cap and lack of picks is because we bet on the old core to get us to the promised land. And it didn't happen.

When I look at the next three years, holding onto Bennett doesn't seem all that valuable. I don't think this roster is competitive within the NFC as currently constructed. This is how I justify trading Bennett. Over the span of the next three years the potential of that pick, as an actual player or ammunition to get a player you want, is more valuable than Bennett..

This is exactly what I'm saying.

People can't just look at players with blinders on not thinking about important factors like their contract and where our team is right now.

Because where our team is right now is not good.

- no 2nd or 3rd round pick
- major injuries to key players
- an aging defense
- not one position group in great shape other than QB
- holes all over the place

Yes if I'm just evaluating Earl and Bennett as players at this very moment in time? Both good to great players, but that doesn't mean I think it's wise to hold onto either over the next 3-4 years with massive salaries..............because unfortunately I don't think we're competing for SB's any more. THAT window is closed, and now we need to focus on the next window, even if it means losing some players we all love.

 

[RolandDeschain]

It would seem to me that people who don't want to take the good with the bad in terms of what players say, should take that up with the NFL that literally contracts players to talk to the media, contractually has them go out for ceremonies at games, etc.

Oh, come on - get real. I'm contractually obligated to show up at our annual company all-staff meeting, but I'm smart enough to not use it as a pulpit for anything related to politics/war/religion/race. Nor are any of the "stars" in our company who could get away with it due to their positions. Where the hell is it written that you have to take the good with the bad from an employee? In fact, the OPPOSITE is actually written. I believe you need to have a more realistic viewpoint on this.

 

[mrt144]

It would seem to me that people who don't want to take the good with the bad in terms of what players say, should take that up with the NFL that literally contracts players to talk to the media, contractually has them go out for ceremonies at games, etc.

Oh, come on - get real. I'm contractually obligated to show up at our annual company all-staff meeting, but I'm smart enough to not use it as a pulpit for anything related to politics/war/religion/race. Nor are any of the "stars" in our company who could get away with it due to their positions. Where the hell is it written that you have to take the good with the bad from an employee? In fact, the OPPOSITE is actually written. I believe you need to have a more realistic viewpoint on this.

You want to apply standards you abide to NFL players who are under no such restriction. Stop it, you have to know how weak this is.

The days of NFL players being faster stronger regular joes is gone and whatever you imagine is similar between your employment and NFL players employment is likely false.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

and weren't very good.

You're just misrepresenting facts now. Call them brittle if you want, but the stats have something to say if you're going to say they weren't very good.

And believe me you WILL hear about Bobby being traded this time next year if he like Earl gets hurt again and is barking about an extension/holdout.

That's kind of my point. People tend to follow circumstances in this type of thing instead of making a fair assessment. There's a randomness factor to injury and people just want to loop around that.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

and weren't very good.

You're just misrepresenting facts now. I'm disappointed.

Where did I write that?

 

[Seymour]

and weren't very good.

You're just misrepresenting facts now. I'm disappointed.

Where did I write that?

Below...

Wait, what?

Earl isn't old. If he's old, so is Wagner, and nobody's crying out for Wagner to be traded for a first rounder. And I'm willing to bet that a big part of the reason nobody's jonesing to "offload Wagner at his prime because Belichick" (seriously, why doesn't the same logic apply to him?) is because he hasn't done anything off the field that fans take the wrong way. I'd bet a buffalo nickel on that.
.

Right now the core of our defense is Clark, Wagner and Earl............and we're shopping Earl because we don't want to pay him 15M+ per year for the next 3-4 years.

His age is young, but the way he plays he's going down the same injury road as Kam. So like Bennett do you hold onto him hoping he stays healthy while soaking up major cap space, or do you trade him now when;

1. You're rebuilding and desperately need the picks
2. He still has value

And if you believe holding onto guys like Earl, Sherman and Bennett hoping they stay healthy and produce again is the way to go? We did that the last two years when these guys weren't hurt, and weren't very good. What's it going to look in another year or two when we still haven't rebuilt?

And believe me you WILL hear about Bobby being traded this time next year if he like Earl gets hurt again and is barking about an extension/holdout.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

But I tend to think of things in terms of the next 3 years. What is better for Seattle in the next 3 years? In the early days John and Pete stressed the 3 year plan and not mortgaging the future for the sake of the present. We did that last year. The reason we are sitting here with a tight cap and lack of picks is because we bet on the old core to get us to the promised land. And it didn't happen.

But WHY didn't it happen? That was the question posed by my post. Especially when you consider that Earl, Sherman, Avril, Kam, and Bennett (whom I'm not as attached to, BTW) were still producing at Pro Bowl levels while they were on the field, Russell Wilson and Bobby Wagner had career seasons, and those "mortgage signings" (Sheldon for Malik, Brown for Fant, Maxwell for Sherman, McDougald for Kam) were solid additions by consensus of everyone here?

When you consider the Cable factor, the injury to Chris Carson, and the bottomed benefit-cost ratio of the Lacy, Joeckel, and Walsh signings, it becomes a lot easier to blame the season on THOSE things.

And I think a lot of people are just subconsciously refusing to attribute 2017 to those things because doing so doesn't provide a handy, comforting silver bullet to fixing the team. It was just random injury and/or bad personnel decisions. I cannot believe that people watched the historically bad running game Seattle fielded last year and yet keep jumping to blame an aging defense that was playing statistically well.

So, when you talk about not mortgaging the future, I agree with you. But we have to correctly identify what went wrong in the present in order to keep from jettisoning elements that were helping rather than harming. I hardly think that all of Earl, Sherm, Kam, Avril, and Bennett will still be Seahawks in 2018. In fact, I think only two of them will be. But I also think we're going to be finding out the hard way just how good a thing we had going, even with them struggling to stay healthy.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

and weren't very good.

You're just misrepresenting facts now. I'm disappointed.

Where did I write that?

And if you believe holding onto guys like Earl, Sherman and Bennett hoping they stay healthy and produce again is the way to go? We did that the last two years when these guys weren't hurt, and weren't very good.

I'm actually sure now whether you were referring to the players or the defense as a whole, now that I read the sentence structure carefully, but either way, I don't think you're going to have an easy time casting the defense as "not very good". We've been solid, at worst, since 2012 statistically. The exception was Earl's injury in 2016, and that's an injury he bounced back quite nicely from in 2017.

The offense deserves way more blame than the defense for 2017.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

and weren't very good.

You're just misrepresenting facts now. I'm disappointed.

Where did I write that?

Below...

Wait, what?

Earl isn't old. If he's old, so is Wagner, and nobody's crying out for Wagner to be traded for a first rounder. And I'm willing to bet that a big part of the reason nobody's jonesing to "offload Wagner at his prime because Belichick" (seriously, why doesn't the same logic apply to him?) is because he hasn't done anything off the field that fans take the wrong way. I'd bet a buffalo nickel on that.
.

Right now the core of our defense is Clark, Wagner and Earl............and we're shopping Earl because we don't want to pay him 15M+ per year for the next 3-4 years.

His age is young, but the way he plays he's going down the same injury road as Kam. So like Bennett do you hold onto him hoping he stays healthy while soaking up major cap space, or do you trade him now when;

1. You're rebuilding and desperately need the picks
2. He still has value

And if you believe holding onto guys like Earl, Sherman and Bennett hoping they stay healthy and produce again is the way to go? We did that the last two years when these guys weren't hurt, and weren't very good. What's it going to look in another year or two when we still haven't rebuilt?

And believe me you WILL hear about Bobby being traded this time next year if he like Earl gets hurt again and is barking about an extension/holdout.

We were 10-5-1, got spanked by the Falcons and went 9-7 last year and didn't make the playoffs. For the expectations and talent level on this roster? That's not very good.