Trey Hendrickson Update

[Luvnit2]

(Yesterday, 11:42 PM)Isaac Curtis: The Real #85 Wrote: But the D that played LAR was tons better. D has fallen off WAY more than the O has improved. 

I don't disagree, but to compare apples to oranges, how was our defense ranked in 2020 before we turned it around in 2021 and went to the Super Bowl?

Did you predict the hhe turn around in 2021 or were you busy trashing the FO based on 2020?

My point is units do improve and units get worse? You seen to think the Bengals FO does little to help us get better. But, if I awrong NP nd either way you opinion is as valauable as anyone else in the forum. it just depends on the lens being used by others to form your opinion.

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(Yesterday, 10:59 PM)J24 Wrote: Do you think Rivers can play RG?

I personally think he could, but I believe the team feels he's a left-side guy at this point. 

(7 hours ago)Soonerpeace Wrote: Excellent response to rfaulk. I’ve been on here 4-5 years and the negativity surprises me after signing Tee & Chase. I get Trey & Stewart but I don’t know what’s the major source of it. I have no problem with rfaulk’s comments. It’s his opinion and he backs it up well. There’s no question the OL optimism could be ill founded. But I think this OL is better than the one in the SB which isn’t hard. As good of as poster rfaulk is Karras>Hopkins OBJ > Jonah Mims> Reiff. Anybody>Carman. And if memory serves me some didn’t play in SB due to injury.

You were spared the mothership. 

[Whatever]

(Yesterday, 06:06 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: True, but they also did not adequately address LT, then the guy got hurt and they had no great option for a back up so they moved Thuney. Even great orgnizations make bad roster decisions.

They drafted Kingsley Suamataea in the 2nd last year to be their LT of the future, but he's been a disaster so far.  In '23, they spent a 3rd on Wanya Morris, who has also looked bad when he's gotten on the field.  This year, they spent a 1st on Josh Simmons, giving up on those two already.

KC 's attempts to replace Orlando Brown at LT really put the Bates situation in perspective, though.  

[3wt]

(8 hours ago)SunsetBengal Wrote: He looked decent when filling for Brown at Tackle, he was worse than Volson at Guard.

Well that's just a bummer.  Everyone else has been saying he acquitted himself well at all his positions last year.

Hoping that Peters has answers for both Volson and Ford.   Otherwise their approach to right guard is only a hope and a prayer... which it appears to be.

[Soonerpeace]

(5 hours ago)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: I personally think he could, but I believe the team feels he's a left-side guy at this point. 



You were spared the mothership. 

That’s true

[*ochocincos*]

(Yesterday, 10:00 AM)Isaac Curtis: The Real #85 Wrote: Remember, our functional cap space is gonna be around $9 mil less than whatever figure is bouncing around on OTC/spotrac. 

You have to count 53 instead of 51 (+$2 mil-ish), you have to count the practice squad (+$3-$4 mil), you have to count guys on IR (All, over $1 mil), and you have to remember Stewart and Knight are signed yet, so they are not top 51 atm (+$1-2 mil over replacement). 

Our REAL cap space is more like $22-$23. 

And remember, those rewoeked deals did not save us much, cap wise. Volson's cap hit went from $3.8 to $3.1. Moss's a little more savings, but he is still $3.1 as well, and I *think* hexwas right around $4 mil to start. 

Point being, we could have saved twice what we did by cutting one of them. And we could still net nearly $2.5 mil by cutting Volson. 

I agree that now, we are unlikely to cut either after the renegotiations, but it is just bad cap management to pay RB3-4 and OG 4, who are just barely aboce practice squad level, over $6 mil a year. 

It is even sillier when you draw a line in the sand with the best pass rushing DE in the league. Sure, in a perfect world, I'd like to keep everyone for better depth. But if I have to choose, I would need to think hard, or long. Pay Trey, move on from the overpriced, underperforming depth. 

Heck, if I could turn that Moss/Volson $$ into a reliable starter level player elsewhere (Hernandez, Risner, Scherff, Blackmon) I think that would have been money much better spent. Don't you? 

I would argue they could flip Volson to Dalton Risner with the same amount as money saved from cutting Volson and it'd be an upgrade for the starting OL, as I think Risner would be better than Patrick or Ford.
I gave Volson a benefit of the doubt his rookie year and partway through his sophomore year, but he's been basically the same dude throughout his 3 years now at this point.
Time to move on.

I too don't understand the purpose of keeping Moss and his 3.3 YPC. And before anyone says it was the OL, Chase Brown had an entire 1 YPC higher in the same offense.
But if there's one thing the Bengals like, it's familiarity.
They'd rather roll out there with someone who knows the offense/defense, team, and organization than take a chance on someone who doesn't.

At the end of the day though, if the goal is just to make space for Hendrickson new deal, they have the space to get one done. They just gotta negotiate the details.

[3wt]

(5 hours ago)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: I personally think he could, but I believe the team feels he's a left-side guy at this point. 



You were spared the mothership. 

LOL you're not wrong!   Speaking of which has anyone had a Fred sighting or rumor?

[*ochocincos*]

(Yesterday, 11:13 PM)J24 Wrote: They could role it over until next season, maybe?

I mean they can, but we've seen in the past where rolling over just basically becomes constant rolling over year-to-year rather than actually spending to the new cap the following year or two.

If they keep undercutting how much they will spend, they're going to continue limiting their potential to get to the promised land and put A LOT on the shoulders of the current players and coaching staff to get by with what they have.

[3wt]

(5 hours ago)Whatever Wrote: They drafted Kingsley Suamataea in the 2nd last year to be their LT of the future, but he's been a disaster so far.  In '23, they spent a 3rd on Wanya Morris, who has also looked bad when he's gotten on the field.  This year, they spent a 1st on Josh Simmons, giving up on those two already.

KC 's attempts to replace Orlando Brown at LT really put the Bates situation in perspective, though.  

Yeah, the "no one is irreplaceable" concept is simply not true.

[Essex Johnson]

(5 hours ago)ochocincos Wrote: I would argue they could flip Volson to Dalton Risner with the same amount as money saved from cutting Volson and it'd be an upgrade for the starting OL, as I think Risner would be better than Patrick or Ford.
I gave Volson a benefit of the doubt his rookie year and partway through his sophomore year, but he's been basically the same dude throughout his 3 years now at this point.
Time to move on.

I too don't understand the purpose of keeping Moss and his 3.3 YPC. And before anyone says it was the OL, Chase Brown had an entire 1 YPC higher in the same offense.
But if there's one thing the Bengals like, it's familiarity.
They'd rather roll out there with someone who knows the offense/defense, team, and organization than take a chance on someone who doesn't.

At the end of the day though, if the goal is just to make space for Hendrickson new deal, they have the space to get one done. They just gotta negotiate the details.

but what space are we talking about ? the space the Bengals view or Trey, that is the issue, it seems the Bengals and Trey do not agree on his value, so that is the real issue  plus what impact the contract can have on future resigning etc, im sure the Bengals are looking down the road also.

[SunsetBengal]

(5 hours ago)3wt Wrote: Well that's just a bummer.  Everyone else has been saying he acquitted himself well at all his positions last year.

Hoping that Peters has answers for both Volson and Ford.   Otherwise their approach to right guard is only a hope and a prayer... which it appears to be.

Who knows, maybe with a little improvement in the hand and footwork department, Peters just might be able to salvage something out of those guys. Peters seems to be big on tactile teaching/learning, it's worth waiting to camp to see if these guys were able to make any noticeable improvement. There is still time and a few quality Guards left on the market, if indeed it is time to sound the alarm.

[Essex Johnson]

(5 hours ago)ochocincos Wrote: I mean they can, but we've seen in the past where rolling over just basically becomes constant rolling over year-to-year rather than actually spending to the new cap the following year or two.

If they keep undercutting how much they will spend, they're going to continue limiting their potential to get to the promised land and put A LOT on the shoulders of the current players and coaching staff to get by with what they have.

I thought we were at win now mentality with this team, we have ability to keep him for next two years so to me that is win now, if he decides to sit, we do save some $$ that we can use in the short term also, correct ?

[*rfaulk34*]

(9 hours ago)Sled21 Wrote: So since this line has never played together and there is no way to say they're better than the Super Bowl line, then how can one say "We aren't winning the Super Bowl with this line? If one is an unknown, certainly the other is as well. 

They're both unknown. My original point to Essex was that they've not played a snap together and i asked "how do you know they're better?" That was the point Luvnit jumped up, all in his feels and accused me of shooting down Essexes point and having minions and all kinds of other crazy stuff. 

I even conceded in a later post that they could be better. Right now i'm in an open-mind 'wait and see' mode because it could go any way. 

[*ochocincos*]

(5 hours ago)Essex Johnson Wrote: but what space are we talking about ? the space the Bengals view or Trey, that is the issue, it seems the Bengals and Trey do not agree on his value, so that is the real issue  plus what impact the contract can have on future resigning etc, im sure the Bengals are looking down the road also.

The actual cap space remaining, which is $32.6 mill, per Spotrac. That's 8th highest remaining in the league.

Hendrickson won't really care what the cap space itself is, just that he gets his money.
And he likely wants it either frontloaded or more guaranteed in event he may get moved before the end of his potential new deal.

If Bengals don't want to guarantee as much, they should restructure and plan to frontload up to an extra $20-25 mill this year and drop down the subsequent years.
They have the cap space this year to bump up Trey's 2025 cap hit from $18.67 mill to $35-45 mill without going over.

[*ochocincos*]

(5 hours ago)Essex Johnson Wrote: I thought we were at win now mentality with this team, we have ability to keep him for next two years so to me that is win now, if he decides to sit, we do save some $$ that we can use in the short term also, correct ?

WE have that mentality, not sure the FO does though.

[Essex Johnson]

(5 hours ago)Whatever Wrote: They drafted Kingsley Suamataea in the 2nd last year to be their LT of the future, but he's been a disaster so far.  In '23, they spent a 3rd on Wanya Morris, who has also looked bad when he's gotten on the field.  This year, they spent a 1st on Josh Simmons, giving up on those two already.

KC 's attempts to replace Orlando Brown at LT really put the Bates situation in perspective, though.  

Well one year evaluation of a rookie is not concrete, also they did trade Thuney so my guess is they are going to kick Kingsley to guard but he did struggle last year as a rookie.  As for Bates, it was a very 50/50 decision to sign a big contract or let him go, i don;t think it helped Bates that he actually played worse his last two years vs first two year.  So in someways maybe same thinking as KC but opposite, why give Bates a larger contract when he regressed vs taking a chance on a rookie and using $$ that they saved on Bates say for Burrow extension..

[*rfaulk34*]

(7 hours ago)Soonerpeace Wrote: Excellent response to rfaulk. I’ve been on here 4-5 years and the negativity surprises me after signing Tee & Chase. I get Trey & Stewart but I don’t know what’s the major source of it. I have no problem with rfaulk’s comments. It’s his opinion and he backs it up well. There’s no question the OL optimism could be ill founded. But I think this OL is better than the one in the SB which isn’t hard. As good of as poster rfaulk is Karras>Hopkins OBJ > Jonah Mims> Reiff. Anybody>Carman. And if memory serves me some didn’t play in SB due to injury.

You could certainly claim they're better on paper and i doubt you'd get much if any argument. It remains to be seen if that translates to on the field. 

I guess my feeling is, if the SB line was a 2 out of 10 and this line ends up being a 4 or 5 out of 10...sure it's improvement but it's still sorely lacking. 

[*rfaulk34*]

(5 hours ago)Essex Johnson Wrote: Yes they have ,  you have four players on the line that played together last year,

3. Both guards will be new (most likely).

[*ochocincos*]

(4 hours ago)rfaulk34 Wrote: 3. Both guards will be new (most likely).

Agreed.
It's likely Fairchild at LG, Patrick at RG barring either of them getting beat out by Volson/Ford.
I've raised my concerns on Patrick in recent past, so I won't delve back into it other than to say it's been a while since he's played significant snaps at RG.
Out of LG, C, and RG, his best performance and experience is at C.
And Fairchild is a 3rd round rookie, and while I have optimism in his long-term potential, it's typically dangerous to expect solid-or-better performance come Week 1 for a mid-round rookie.

I know ultimately it's not about how you start but how you finish, but the Bengals have had multiple seasons where they started so slow that it kept them ultimately out of the playoffs, so they do need to worry about how they start, and there might be growing pains.


Hopefully TC and preseason we see plenty of Fairchild and Patrick so they really can get as prepared as possible to gel with this OL and perform well.

[Sled21]

(5 hours ago)ochocincos Wrote: I would argue they could flip Volson to Dalton Risner with the same amount as money saved from cutting Volson and it'd be an upgrade for the starting OL, as I think Risner would be better than Patrick or Ford.
I gave Volson a benefit of the doubt his rookie year and partway through his sophomore year, but he's been basically the same dude throughout his 3 years now at this point.
Time to move on.

I too don't understand the purpose of keeping Moss and his 3.3 YPC. And before anyone says it was the OL, Chase Brown had an entire 1 YPC higher in the same offense.
But if there's one thing the Bengals like, it's familiarity.
They'd rather roll out there with someone who knows the offense/defense, team, and organization than take a chance on someone who doesn't.

At the end of the day though, if the goal is just to make space for Hendrickson new deal, they have the space to get one done. They just gotta negotiate the details.

I think if the organization fires their O-line coach and hires a new one, and their new hire says he likes a player and can fix him, then he deserves to have that opportunity. Otherwise you are just disenfranchising the new coach before the season ever starts.