Welcome aboard Tre Hendrickson

[fredtoast]

(03-16-2021, 09:50 AM)jj22 Wrote: T

A pass rusher to go along with Lawson would have been a move to improve (since we have to go oline heavy in the draft). Yet we once again see the Bengals use FA not to add to a group, but to replace and keep the Bengals afloat.

Typical jj22.

Bengals sign an All-Pro player and he whines about it apparently because free agency is over after the first day.

[*bfine32*]

Let me see if I can combine the "logic' from a couple threads:

Bengals are stupid. they traded Carlos Dunlap and he's super good

Bengals are stupid: They let Lawson walk and signed this guy

Carl Lawson was less productive than this guy because he was all we had at pass rusher

[*Synric*]

(03-16-2021, 10:26 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Typical jj22.

Bengals sign an All-Pro player and he whines about it apparently because free agency is over after the first day.

Hendrickson isn't an All-Pro.

[jj22]

(03-16-2021, 10:26 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Typical jj22.

Bengals sign an All-Pro player and he whines about it apparently because free agency is over after the first day.

I'm trying to ignore this All-Pro talk because we all know where this spin is coming from, and we all know who we pointed to as recognizing All-Pro players (AP) until a half hour ago it seems.

But hey, back again it seems, at bat and already down a strike....

[Bengalitis]

Now go full defense with the draft.

[*bengalfan74*]

Yes welcome aboard

I must be in the minority but I'm not at all upset they didn't pay Lawson in the top tier of DE's. Lawson has never been able to stay on the field and when he has his production while "good" has never been "great".

[jj22]

(03-16-2021, 10:39 AM)Synric Wrote: Hendrickson isn't an All-Pro.

There's spin going strong that he is as we now consider players named from random sites on their All-Pro team as THE legit All-Pro stamp (even though we know which site the NFL recognizes to label players All-Pro). 

[Au165]

(03-16-2021, 10:39 AM)Synric Wrote: Hendrickson isn't an All-Pro.

People have latched on to the PFWA ALL-Pro listing...even though 99% had never heard about it until we signed Hendrickson. Like the guy is a solid player, but we are reaching for anything we can at this point to make us feel better.

[*rfaulk34*]

(03-16-2021, 09:06 AM)Sled21 Wrote: Hendrickson isn't playing on 2 repaired ACL's. All I'm saying is last year he was a 1st Team AllPro. Maybe give him a chance to see what he does here before crapping all over him. We all know what we had with Lawson..... a great player who struggled to stay on the field. Maybe he remains healthy, but his history does not suggest it. Gambling big money on him is iffy....

It's all part of that context thing. If they Bengals had gone out and addressed the Oline yesterday, then picked up Hendrickson, i'm sure people would be ecstatic. As it is...they did nothing all day, then lost Lawson, then signed a guy to replace him that will more than likely be a 6-8 sack guy with this team, AND they paid him 60M over 4 years. 

[*rfaulk34*]

(03-16-2021, 09:11 AM)Fullrock Wrote: Welcome to Jungle Noise, where we now breakdown a 13.5 sack season into the "He only got them because of other players" category.

You can't...well you can, but it's stupid...stick your head in the sand and say OhHhH, 13.5 SaCkS!!!!11!!! SouperBowlzzzzz.

6 1/2 of his sacks last year were a result of him beating his man and getting to the QB in 3 seconds or less. 7 of his sacks were a result of coverage or another player(s) washing the QB to him and him cleaning it up. A couple of his sacks, it took so long that Brad could have rolled out of the stands and chased the QB down for sack himself. 

If a team is going to shell out 60M for a player, you damn well better believe that i want them to do their homework and see if the guy is truly worth that money. It looks like another Bengals 'let's wait and see' with the typical outcome of disappointment, that should and could have been avoided. 

[Nicomo Cosca]

(03-16-2021, 11:27 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: You can't...well you can, but it's stupid...stick your head in the sand and say OhHhH, 13.5 SaCkS!!!!11!!! SouperBowlzzzzz.

6 1/2 of his sacks last year were a result of him beating his man and getting to the QB in 3 seconds or less. 7 of his sacks were a result of coverage or another player(s) washing the QB to him and him cleaning it up. A couple of his sacks, it took so long that Brad could have rolled out of the stands and chased the QB down for sack himself. 

If a team is going to shell out 60M for a player, you damn well better believe that i want them to do their homework and see if the guy is truly worth that money. It looks like another Bengals 'let's wait and see' with the typical outcome of disappointment, that should and could have been avoided. 

Why are you always trying to bring facts and logic into these things? We don’t do that here!

[*rfaulk34*]

(03-16-2021, 11:31 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Why are you always trying to bring facts and logic into these things? We don’t do that here!

I know man, what can i say? I'm trying to help people. I'm a giver. 

[C0de_M0nkey]

(03-16-2021, 11:27 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: You can't...well you can, but it's stupid...stick your head in the sand and say OhHhH, 13.5 SaCkS!!!!11!!! SouperBowlzzzzz.

6 1/2 of his sacks last year were a result of him beating his man and getting to the QB in 3 seconds or less. 7 of his sacks were a result of coverage or another player(s) washing the QB to him and him cleaning it up. A couple of his sacks, it took so long that Brad could have rolled out of the stands and chased the QB down for sack himself. 

If a team is going to shell out 60M for a player, you damn well better believe that i want them to do their homework and see if the guy is truly worth that money. It looks like another Bengals 'let's wait and see' with the typical outcome of disappointment, that should and could have been avoided. 

How many of Carl Lawson's sacks were the result of him beating his man? I'm pretty sure it's less than 6.5 since he only had 5.5 sacks to begin with. It doesn't matter if we spent $15 million on 6-8 sack Henderson instead of 6-8 sack Lawson. I'm glad the franchise strategically attempted to save money on Lawson instead of blindly throwing $15 million at him. It was a low risk, high reward move since we had a backup plan anyways.

[Au165]

Here is an article from PFF explaining some of the analytic issues with paying for sacks.

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-teams-are-still-paying-for-sacks-in-free-agency-and-the-edge-defender-market-is-suffering-because-of-it

[XenoMorph]

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/03/16/trey-hendricksons-deal-has-no-guarantees-beyond-2021/

The Details

Quote:Per a source with knowledge of the terms, Hendrickson will receive a $10 million signing bonus and a $6 million roster bonus, both of which are guaranteed. The deal also has a base salary of $3.8 million in 2021 (non-guaranteed, but guaranteed as a practical matter), along with $200,000 in per-game roster bonuses.

That’s a total payout of $20 million for one year. The Bengals can escape the rest by moving on before the fifth day of the 2022 league year, when another $6 million roster bonus comes due. The total payout for 2022 is $12 million.

The deal pays $13 million in 2023 (that includes an early $3 million roster bonus) and $15 million in 2024. It’s still a one-year-at-a-time contract for the Bengals, which makes sense given that Hendrickson had three so-so seasons before exploding in 2020, with 15.5 sacks.

[*rfaulk34*]

(03-16-2021, 12:00 PM)C0de_M0nkey Wrote: How many of Carl Lawson's sacks were the result of him beating his man? I'm pretty sure it's less than 6.5 since he only had 5.5 sacks to begin with. It doesn't matter if we spent $15 million on 6-8 sack Henderson instead of 6-8 sack Lawson. I'm glad the franchise strategically attempted to save money on Lawson instead of blindly throwing $15 million at him. It was a low risk, high reward move since we had a backup plan anyways.

Of course it matters, when you're throwing that much money at someone. 

You can't call it low risk, high reward when the pieces won't be in place for him to produce the same here. That's exactly where context and study come into play. A raw stat isn't always indicative of a players ability. 

If you're fine just throwing money at a guy and then waiting to see how he plays, fine. I'm not. I want the team to be smarter than that. 

Just don't complain when he has a Sam Hubbard type of year next season. 

[*rfaulk34*]

(03-16-2021, 12:05 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/03/16/trey-hendricksons-deal-has-no-guarantees-beyond-2021/

The Details

Good. At least the contract gives them an out when they finally realize he's not that guy. 

Just a bunch of wasted time, which is typical for this team. 

[C0de_M0nkey]

(03-16-2021, 12:06 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Of course it matters, when you're throwing that much money at someone. 

You can't call it low risk, high reward when the pieces won't be in place for him to produce the same here. That's exactly where context and study come into play. A raw stat isn't always indicative of a players ability. 

If you're fine just throwing money at a guy and then waiting to see how he plays, fine. I'm not. I want the team to be smarter than that. 

Just don't complain when he has a Sam Hubbard type of year next season. 

We didn't throw money at anyone. We came into free agency with a plan to re-sign Lawson and went with the backup plan when that didn't work out. We would have overpayed either way.

Hendrickson outproduced Lawson's raw numbers last year using your own metrics. If you did an apples to apples comparison and took away Lawson's coverage sacks too the difference would be even more pronounced. 

And let's not pretend that Hubbard and Hendrickson are equivalent. Or that Lawson hasn't played with the best defensive linemen in franchise history for most of his career. Do you think Hubbard would have come second in NFL sacks if he played for New Orleans last year?

[*bfine32*]

Mouth

Left Side: Pay no attention to that All Pro award it's not NFL official


Ride Side: Hey don't worry about the official sack stat look what PFF says about....

[*rfaulk34*]

(03-16-2021, 12:04 PM)Au165 Wrote: Here is an article from PFF explaining some of the analytic issues with paying for sacks.

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-teams-are-still-paying-for-sacks-in-free-agency-and-the-edge-defender-market-is-suffering-because-of-it

Good article but i don't believe that 11 of his sacks were considered "clean up". I watched each one on GamePass and, admittedly a liiiitle bit generouisly, gave him 6 1/2 legit sacks. Slightly less than half his total.