Bernie: Deal in Place for Bennett

*.ramfan.* · #1 (**permalink**) -27-06-2006

This is taken from the RRF forum:
------------------------------------------------------
Per Bernie on his radio show just minutes ago--

The Rams and New Orleans have a deal in place to bring Michael Bennett to STL as backup to Steven Jackson. Bernie doesn't know the details -- i.e. if it will be a 3rd rounder, 4th rounder exchanged, but the parameters are in place.

The Rams are waiting on the Saints to give the green light right now -- New orleans will not pull the trigger just yet because of some remaining concerns - particularly to make sure Deuce is healthy, etc., they would like to get Bush signed.

But Bennett played under Linehan in Minn. and knows the system. This would be a good signing. It could take some time to get done - but Bernie wishes he could tell us it was a done deal now, but he obviously cannot.
------------------------------------------------------

**HUbison** · #2 (**permalink**) -27-06-2006

Quote:

if it will be a 3rd rounder, 4th rounder exchanged

Seems awful high for a 28-year-old back who has had exactly 1 solid and healthy season in his career.

**AvengerRam** · #3 (**permalink**) -27-06-2006

"There's a deal in place." What does that mean?

It sounds like the teams are talking, but there are still contingencies that might prevent the Saints from completing a trade. To me, that doesn't sound like a "deal," but rather a "contingent agreement," at best.

I like the idea of bringing Bennett on board. He would be a very good change-of-pace back behind Jackson. A bit of "Thunder and Lightning," if you will. Not sure he's worth a third rounder, as he's had some injuries, but a fourth round pick would be a fair trade.

I wonder if Faulk's status is also one of the contingencies that is preventing a deal from being completed.

*RamsFan16* · #4 (**permalink**) -27-06-2006

Not 3rd, but a 4th heck yes. We'll have one heck of a Tandem in Jackson, Fisher, Bennet

**HUbison** · #5 (**permalink**) -27-06-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by RamsFan16

Not 3rd, but a 4th heck yes. We'll have one heck of a Tandem in Jackson, Fisher, Bennet

I don't know that I would even give a 4th at this point. He just hasn't been healthy since 2002. But as Nick mentioned, maybe his health problems is more of a durability issue which would be eliminated with Jackson as the feature back.

IF this is true (big IF), then Linehan could be setting the stage for yet another RB-by-committee, as he has done everywhere else.............which of course would not set well with SJ.

**txramsfan** · #6 (**permalink**) -27-06-2006

One heck of a tandem? What has Fisher ever done? Bennett has never sat the league on fire either. This is becoming a weird RB setup for me actually. I guess a healthy Bennett is better than a surgery rehab Faulk as a backup.

*RamsFan16* · #7 (**permalink**) -27-06-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by txramsfan

One heck of a tandem? What has Fisher ever done? Bennett has never sat the league on fire either. This is becoming a weird RB setup for me actually. I guess a healthy Bennett is better than a surgery rehab Faulk as a backup.

No but they have the talent to be, dang

**AvengerRam** · #8 (**permalink**) -27-06-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by txramsfan

Bennett has never sat the league on fire either.

Not entirely true. He did have a season with 1,296 yards and a 5.1 ypc average. Of course, that was back in 2002. Since then, he has not been able to stay healthy or carry the load of a primary back. As a situational back-up, though, he could be a good fit.

**HUbison** · #9 (**permalink**) -27-06-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by RamsFan16

No but they have the talent to be, dang

Everyone has the talent to be good. If they didn't they'd be sitting at a desk typing out posts on Internet message boards.

What these three do have are solid receiving skills. Jackson and Fisher were both in the top 10 among RBs for receiving last year, and Bennett has had decent receiving numbers in his limited time on the field.

Is Linehan going to help open his vertical game with backs in the flat? Something to watch for.

*OldRamsfan* · #10 (**permalink**) -27-06-2006

I've always thought Bennett ran well and hard as long as he could stay healthy ... Like the way he runs with power and change of direction with speed ...

**Nick** · #11 (**permalink**) -27-06-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by .ramfan.

Bernie doesn't know the details -- i.e. if it will be a 3rd rounder, 4th rounder exchanged, but the parameters are in place.

Talk about a steal for New Orleans. Sign a guy to a two-year $3 million contract and then trade him away for a third or fourth rounder. If the Rams sacrifice one of those picks for Bennett, I don't believe I'm going to be all that happy about it.

**txramsfan** · #12 (**permalink**) -27-06-2006

The more I think about this Nick, the more I'm not liking it either.

Why can't we find lightening in a bottle like Pittsburgh did last year with that one RB?

*ramsbruce* · #13 (**permalink**) -27-06-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick

Talk about a steal for New Orleans. Sign a guy to a two-year $3 million contract and then trade him away for a third or fourth rounder. If the Rams sacrifice one of those picks for Bennett, I don't believe I'm going to be all that happy about it.

I tend to agree with you Nick. But who else would you suggest we go after instead?

**Nick** · #14 (**permalink**) -27-06-2006

There really aren't a lot of options in the free agent market, though I'm not sure we need to bring in another 'back if it turns out Faulk can and will play in 2006.

But that said, I just don't enjoy the idea of trading a third or fourth round pick on a guy we could have signed as a free agent. It's one thing to trade a seventh rounder for that kind of player, as we did with Ragone.

To trade a third or fourth would be pretty significant. Maybe I just overvalue draft picks, but I don't like watching us trade first or early second day picks for guys we could have signed much earlier.

*ramsbruce* · #15 (**permalink**) -27-06-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick

There really aren't a lot of options in the free agent market, though I'm not sure we need to bring in another 'back if it turns out Faulk can and will play in 2006.

But that said, I just don't enjoy the idea of trading a third or fourth round pick on a guy we could have signed as a free agent. It's one thing to trade a seventh rounder for that kind of player, as we did with Ragone.

To trade a third or fourth would be pretty significant. Maybe I just overvalue draft picks, but I don't like watching us trade first or early second day picks for guys we could have signed much earlier.

Right, I agree the picks are too high. I was assuming when I asked my question that if we did sign Bennett that Faulk won't play this year. Maybe we will have to overpay because we are out of options. :down: