
Michael Bennett disputed reports he wants a trade, but he does want more money
If there’s one thing we’ve learnt following the Carroll/Schneider regime it’s to expect the unexpected. The high profile trades, the intriguing draft picks, starting a 5-10 rookie quarterback and winning a Super Bowl with him a year later.
Nothing is off the table.
Remember how shocked you were when you found out Percy Harvin was going to the Jets for a late round pick? Remember how shocked you were when you read about the Jimmy Graham deal? Remember how shocked you were when it appeared Marshawn Lynch was on the way out, only for a long drawn-out U-turn and eventual re-signing?
Very little about the last five years has been predictable. And that’s why I’m writing this piece today.
I don’t expect the Seahawks to trade Michael Bennett. In fact it’d be pretty dumb. He really is one of the best defensive linemen in the NFL. Possibly top-five. He was probably the best player on the field in the Super Bowl. The image of him riding a bicycle around Century Link Field after the NFC Championship game is one of the most iconic in Seahawks history. A surreal yet fitting conclusion to a weird afternoon in Seattle.
I’m not sure why Clarence Hill’s sources indicated Bennett wanted a trade to Atlanta and a new contract. I do think, however, that it’d be wrong to write off that report as nonsense simply because the Seahawks and Bennett have denied it.
The Alex Boone/Jim Harbaugh situation is a gentle reminder of the type of thing that goes on in the NFL. If you missed the story, Boone gave a passionate defense of Harbaugh during the season, stating:
“I’m really kind of sick of everybody talking about my coach, especially because he’s like a brother to me. So if I were everybody I’d just keep their mouth shut because they don’t want me coming after them. Especially Jay Glazer, Deion, all these guys. I’m kind of sick of it. Leave my coach alone.”
Here’s what Boone told Andrea Kramer following Harbaugh’s departure:
“He does a great job of giving you that spark, that initial boom… But after a while, you just want to kick his ass… He just keeps pushing you, and you’re like, ‘Dude, we got over the mountain. Stop. Let go.’ He kind of wore out his welcome… I think he just pushed guys too far. He wanted too much, demanded too much, expected too much. You know, ‘We gotta go out and do this. We gotta go out and do this. We gotta go out and do this.’ And you’d be like, ‘This guy might be clinically insane. He’s crazy.’… I think that if you’re stuck in your ways enough, eventually people are just going to say, ‘Listen, we just can’t work with this.’”
I don’t think Bennett was lying when he disputed the report suggesting he wanted a trade. I do think NFL players generally know how to play the media game. At least the intelligent ones do. Especially the intelligent ones hoping to be paid more money.
Now we’re being told Bennett won’t attend the teams voluntary workouts. It’s not a big deal. They are voluntary after all. Are we really expecting Marshawn Lynch to show up? Yet there’s still this bubbling unrest it seems specifically with Michael Bennett.
There really is no obvious solution to this. Bennett can continue to be dissatisfied with a contract he signed only a year ago. He can hold out. It won’t change the situation. He’s contracted until the end of the 2017 season. Seattle set a precedent by not giving in to Lynch’s annual demands for more money. The earliest Bennett can expect to get a new deal is late 2016/early 2017 — when he’ll be 31. By that point the Seahawks might have little interest in extending his contract deep into his mid-30’s.
Trading him could create the kind of bad precedent they want to avoid. While they don’t want to be renegotiating deals with every key player a year or two down the line, they also don’t want to give the impression you can complain your out of Seattle. What’s stopping Richard Sherman, Earl Thomas, Cliff Avril or anyone else pulling a similar stunt in the future?
Even so, it was interesting to see the Seahawks being linked with Mario Edwards Jr recently — a player who can line up inside and out. There seems to be little chance he lasts until #63 — but what if the Seahawks acquired an earlier pick?
Again, let me be clear. I do NOT expect Seattle to trade Bennett. I’m not trying to argue it WILL happen. It’s the 20th April and we need something to talk about over the next ten days. As unlikely as this appears, we would’ve said the same about a “will they trade Percy Harvin?” article after the Cowboys game last year.
You never know what’s going to happen next.
It would cost the Seahawks a dead money cap hit of $6m to trade Bennett. That makes such a move even more unlikely — but it would free up an extra $7.5m in 2016 cap room and $9.5m in 2017. Considering extensions for Russell Wilson and Bobby Wagner are likely to be thin up front in 2015, you can probably make a case either way. The Seahawks had no problem taking a major cap hit after trading Harvin — although there’s no evidence to suggest Bennett is the same kind of locker-room headache that Harvin proved to be.
If the Falcons were willing to cough up their second round pick (#42) and a 2016 pick (possibly another second rounder) would it be a tempting deal? Only if you believe you can pick up the slack. Seattle’s depth on the defensive line isn’t great. You’d need to replace your best pass rusher in a draft where the value is at receiver and the offensive line. If Edwards Jr is even there at #42, he’d have to seriously improve his performance rushing the edge. It’d be the same for Owa Odighizuwa.
You also wouldn’t be receiving any immediate benefit for the trade if you used the #42 pick to directly replace Bennett. You’d essentially be swapping a proven commodity for an unproven rookie while paying a large sum of money for the privilege. It could make some sense, however, if you believed you could replace Bennett at #63 (or lower) and the #42 pick enabled you to target a different position of greater strength in this class (eg wide receiver, O-line). In that scenario you might be able to survive on defense, improve the offense and receive cap and draft stock benefit in 2016.
It’s very unlikely to happen. I know it. You know it. We all know it. Stranger things have happened though. You just never know what’ll happen next with this team.
Elsewhere…
— The Seahawks re-signed Lemuel Jeanpierre today. They needed the extra depth at center and this gives them some flexibility going into the draft. It’s fair to say, however, they’ll almost certainly prioritize adding a new center at some point in a loaded draft class at the position.
— Tony Pauline published his updated rankings today. Pauline is one of the most sourced draft insiders in the biz, so this is worth noting. It’s interesting he now has Ty Sambrailo graded in round three just behind Daryl Williams. It suggests there’s a possibility he’ll make it to #63 if the Seahawks want to add a tackle/guard/center project. Pauline only has one pure center graded in day two (Grasu) and he has Mitch Morse in round five. Also of interest — Dorial Green-Beckham has a round 2/3 grade.
— Pauline also reports the Cleveland Browns are pressing hard to move up to #2 to draft Marcus Mariota and that Frank Clark will be drafted in the top-125 picks.
— With ten days to go my opinion on what the Seahawks do at #63 hasn’t really changed. If there’s a chance to move up for one of the top-8 receivers I suspect they’ll consider it using the fourth rounder acquired from New Orleans. They could just take a receiver in the late second. If not, I think they’ll take the best offensive lineman on their board.
— Mark Glowinski & Chris Conley visited the Seahawks. For a list of visits (defense and offense) check out Davis Hsu’s Twitter timeline:
Chris Conley visited Seahawks Last Week @FieldGulls @zjwhitman pic.twitter.com/mzaxWtDpfK
— DAVIS HSU (@DavisHsuSeattle) April 20, 2015
.@WVUfootball G Mark Glowinski had pre-draft visits w/ @Seahawks Tues & @AZCardinals Weds. Projected mid-round pick @Gil_Brandt @SiriusXMNFL
— Alex Marvez (@alexmarvez) April 16, 2015