Trey Hendrickson Update

[Sled21]

(Yesterday, 05:04 PM)NotBigzo Wrote: They should've had the foresight to see this impasse and trade the guy.

That this has dragged so long is ***** malpractice.

Is it a disgrace in Pittsburgh that they have not reached a deal with Twatt yet?

[Bengalitis]

(7 hours ago)Sled21 Wrote: Is it a disgrace in Pittsburgh that they have not reached a deal with Twatt yet?

just prepare yourself for all the hoopla with Rogers over there now and start winning a few... they are gonna relish on the squeelers 24/7. gad help us.

[Luvnit2]

(Yesterday, 09:37 PM)Joelist Wrote: Good point. Trey's drama kinda debunks the whole idea of signing players early to get better deals - if they're just going to push for new deals early then when the market moves what is the point?

Spot on

Bengals in the minds of some suck if they sign a fair market value contract at the time and are asking the player honor it or accept a raise of $12 million or if they wait a year and pay Chase a fair market value costing the team more money.

[Luvnit2]

(Yesterday, 10:17 PM)J24 Wrote: You do realize that when a player hits the open market their price goes up right? 

True, you do realize the Bengals determine if or when Trey can hit the open market. They could force him to honor the existig contract, then franchise him for 25 million or less in 2026m then di it again for 30 million in 2027.

Simply as I keep saying, Bengals FO has 100% control of Trey's future, but Trey appears to be negotiating like he is holding a/a in a hand of holdem going all in when he really has 2/7 and hopes the Bengals fold because if they don't , he is likely screwed.

I want it resolved as I have said, but Trey needs to be realistic in his demands, if not, it is his fault as team never had to offer to renogotiate, hey could have simply said no, we have no interest.

[Isaac Curtis: The Real #85]

(Yesterday, 05:54 PM)ERIC1 Wrote: It would appear that the majority of NFL teams did not feel that trey was worth the asking price..and frankly aside from 5-6 games when he accumulates all his sacks..he dissapears..

I think you are flat out drawing the wrong conclusions here. 

The Bengals set a price that they knew no team would meet for a player his age. The whole "free to seek a trade" thing had zero to do with wanting to make a trade, and everything to do with attempting to make signing Trey easier by showing him what is true value (trade/$$$) actually is. 

Clearly, the Bengals were correct on the 1st round pick park, but wrong on the $$ part. It seems teams were willing to pay Trey more than we are offering (so far), but not willing to pay him AND give up a first. And since we are post-draft and mostly done with FA, the trade ship has sailed. 

Now, you seem to be thinking that because no one coughed up a 1st, Trey is somehow not a great player and not worth the money. And hence, the FO is right to play hardball? Now, to my eye test, and every pass rush metric I know of over the last couple years, that is Looney Toons. But, I guess everyone is entitled to their own opinion. 

What clearly is NOT Looney Tunes is the fact there were some games he did not dominate, true enough. But the same is true for any great player (Burrow & Chase as well), especially defensive guys. I think that is the wrong standard to use, no one is gonna dominate every game. And you can scheme guys out and the other guys get paid, too. 

But if you are gonna let other teams set the value, you are ignoring the fact that there were other teams willing to pay him the $$. Just not the $$ and the pick. His value on the open market is $35 mil, minimum. Hunter money. 

[Isaac Curtis: The Real #85]

(6 hours ago)Luvnit2 Wrote: True, you do realize the Bengals dtermine if or when Trey can hit the open market. They could force him to honor the existig contract, then franchise him for 25 million or less in 2026m then di it again for 30 million in 2027.

Simply as I keep saying, Bengals FO has 100% control of Trey's future, but Trey appears to be negotiating like he is holding a/a in a hand of holdem going all in when he really has 2/7 and hopes the Bengals fold because if they don't , he is likely screwed.

I want it resolved as I have said, but Trey needs to be realistic in his demands, if not, it is his fault as team never had to offer to renogotiate, hey could have simply said no, we have no interest.

You are not wrong on the leverage part. 

[ERIC1]

(Yesterday, 06:18 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Those don't count, none were completed in 2025. 

They do count and the nonsense that the bengals are cheap..is just that...nonsense

[ERIC1]

(4 hours ago)Isaac Curtis: The Real #85 Wrote: I think you are flat out drawing the wrong conclusions here. 

The Bengals set a price that they knew no team would meet for a player his age. The whole "free to seek a trade" thing had zero to do with wanting to make a trade, and everything to do with attempting to make signing Trey easier by showing him what is true value (trade/$$$) actually is. 

Clearly, the Bengals were correct on the 1st round pick park, but wrong on the $$ part. It seems teams were willing to pay Trey more than we are offering (so far), but not willing to pay him AND give up a first. And since we are post-draft and mostly done with FA, the trade ship has sailed. 

Now, you seem to be thinking that because no one coughed up a 1st, Trey is somehow not a great player and not worth the money. And hence, the FO is right to play hardball? Now, to my eye test, and every pass rush metric I know of over the last couple years, that is Looney Toons. But, I guess everyone is entitled to their own opinion. 

What clearly is NOT Looney Tunes is the fact there were some games he did not dominate, true enough. But the same is true for any great player (Burrow & Chase as well), especially defensive guys. I think that is the wrong standard to use, no one is gonna dominate every game. And you can scheme guys out and the other guys get paid, too. 

But if you are gonna let other teams set the value, you are ignoring the fact that there were other teams willing to pay him the $$. Just not the $$ and the pick. His value on the open market is $35 mil, minimum. Hunter money. 

Obviously the coaches and management do not agree with your assessment of hendrickson..nothing more to be said..and thise great pass rushers you speak to...even when they are not getting their sacks..they are disruptive...trey is not

[NUGDUKWE]

(6 hours ago)Luvnit2 Wrote: True, you do realize the Bengals dtermine if or when Trey can hit the open market. They could force him to honor the existig contract, then franchise him for 25 million or less in 2026m then di it again for 30 million in 2027.

Simply as I keep saying, Bengals FO has 100% control of Trey's future, but Trey appears to be negotiating like he is holding a/a in a hand of holdem going all in when he really has 2/7 and hopes the Bengals fold because if they don't , he is likely screwed.

I want it resolved as I have said, but Trey needs to be realistic in his demands, if not, it is his fault as team never had to offer to renogotiate, hey could have simply said no, we have no interest.

Only the Bengals would operate this way out of the entire league. Do you think that's a good sign? We are the number 1 FO in the league? How many other teams have theyre 1st rd pick taking shots at the team in the media? 

[NUGDUKWE]

(3 hours ago)ERIC1 Wrote: Obviously the coaches and management do not agree with your assessment of hendrickson..nothing mote to be said..and thise great pass rushers you speak to...even when they are not getting their sacks..they are disruptive...trey is not

Not only did he have the most sacks he was responsible for creating the most sacks for his team. Yes hes disruptive. 

[Soonerpeace]

(4 hours ago)Isaac Curtis: The Real #85 Wrote: I think you are flat out drawing the wrong conclusions here. 

The Bengals set a price that they knew no team would meet for a player his age. The whole "free to seek a trade" thing had zero to do with wanting to make a trade, and everything to do with attempting to make signing Trey easier by showing him what is true value (trade/$$$) actually is. 

Clearly, the Bengals were correct on the 1st round pick park, but wrong on the $$ part. It seems teams were willing to pay Trey more than we are offering (so far), but not willing to pay him AND give up a first. And since we are post-draft and mostly done with FA, the trade ship has sailed. 

Now, you seem to be thinking that because no one coughed up a 1st, Trey is somehow not a great player and not worth the money. And hence, the FO is right to play hardball? Now, to my eye test, and every pass rush metric I know of over the last couple years, that is Looney Toons. But, I guess everyone is entitled to their own opinion. 

What clearly is NOT Looney Tunes is the fact there were some games he did not dominate, true enough. But the same is true for any great player (Burrow & Chase as well), especially defensive guys. I think that is the wrong standard to use, no one is gonna dominate every game. And you can scheme guys out and the other guys get paid, too. 

But if you are gonna let other teams set the value, you are ignoring the fact that there were other teams willing to pay him the $$. Just not the $$ and the pick. His value on the open market is $35 mil, minimum. Hunter money. 

Part of the trade snafu was Trey’s insistence on a long term deal. But a lot you were right on.

[ERIC1]

(2 hours ago)NUGDUKWE Wrote: Not only did he have the most sacks he was responsible for creating the most sacks for his team. Yes hes disruptive. 

Trey was a good player on a very bad defense...if they can keep him great..yet..unless they correct a multitude of defeciencies ..it wont matter

[BIGDADDYFROMCINCINNATI]

(Yesterday, 12:52 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: 28 million is a 12 million dollar raise as his guaranteed base is 15.6 million. He was already paid the rest of the cap hit in 2022 signing bonus.

I am not saying he is not worth it, but the question becomes ho much in 2025 to get him to sign an extension for 2026 and possibly 2027.

That's the reason why I suggested the "Likely to be earned bonus."  If Trey is in the top 3 in the NFL, then he deserves top 3 money, but I like it as a bonus.  If he doesn't produce in the top 3, the bonus gets rolled into the next year's cap. 

[Luvnit2]

(2 hours ago)NUGDUKWE Wrote: Only the Bengals would operate this way out of the entire league. Do you think that's a good sign? We are the number 1 FO in the league? How many other teams have theyre 1st rd pick taking shots at the team in the media? 

OK


In all seriousness, the Browns own the team, not the media, fans or players. i don't agree with all they say or do. I also try to see all sides even though I don't agree with players, coaches or the FO at times. I see no relevence of a 1st round pick bashing any NFL FO. To me, it is like yelling at the surgeon seconds prior to him cutting open my chest, it may headlines and draw attention, but the risk outweights the action so I praise the surgeon knowing he has total control.

I loved Chad the football player, but hated his off field antics. I see great players should talk on the football field and leave trash talking against the owners and FO to their agent. You may admire Stewart for speaking out, others like me now think he made an ass out of himself.

[Luvnit2]

(46 minutes ago)BIGDADDYFROMCINCINNATI Wrote: That's the reason why I suggested the "Likely to be earned bonus."  If Trey is in the top 3 in the NFL, then he deserves top 3 money, but I like it as a bonus.  If he doesn't produce in the top 3, the bonus gets rolled into the next year's cap. 

I understand bonus offers and have suggested quite a few. I think the problem is Trey wants his money guaranteed, starting with 100% in 2025. Maybe I am wrong. Also, I am not sure Trey is the top 3 DE/EDge/outside LB's in the NFL. He is an awesome pass rusher, but against 40 to 45% of the defensive snaps being runs, he is rated good at best ad not close to elite.

Is he better than all these guys?

Garrett
Watt
Parsons
Will Anderson Jr.
Leonard Williams

He definitely is against the pass, but how well do his do against the strong runing games like the Ravens he plays 2x a year. Is he a strength or a liability against Henry and Jackson?

I am not dishing Trey, he is a great player and outplayed his current deal, but he is not a complete DE in my opinion. He will get paid for his pass rush ability in spite of his liabilities defending the run.