Trey Hendrickson Update

[jj22]

Last disastrous offseason people swore wouldn't bleed into the season and it did.

And here we are again. Hard to believe this won't bleed into the season given last offseason contract issues did.

And those around here who swore last year that it wouldn't don't really have a credible argument to make.

[phil413]

(Yesterday, 01:57 PM)jj22 Wrote: Last disastrous offseason people swore wouldn't bleed into the season and it did.

And here we are again. Hard to believe this won't bleed into the season given last offseason contract issues did.

And those around here who swore last year that it wouldn't don't really have a credible argument to make.

Yeah I'm all for hoping for the best but no reason to be painted negative or "trust the system" when this team is recently notorious for bad starts.  To me, the front office using the media to plead innocence and point to the opposing agent as the victim doesn't get the player on the field. Siging them or trading them are resolutions, not getting your fans to sympathize and starting out 1-3 with no pass rush.  There is still time, Trey will still be up to speed if signed fast.  I'm not against Mike's recent comments on Stewart but those don't equal wins either.  Just do business and spare us the commentary.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(Yesterday, 01:20 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: No way Sled, we would be seeing every thread high jacked saying the exact same thing but loaded with stats the only good thing Fred brought 
to discussions. I don't see any names on here that remind me of this, you?

[XsandOs]

(Yesterday, 12:59 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: He was entertaining to a point. I think he got banned because of a KKK post about our new white and black helmets.

I didn't find it offensive as I don't find anything really offensive, but Fred got banned and I guess never bothered to try and come back 
and I am one who is kind of happy about it. Fred would always take one sentence out of my posts and twist it and he would always high 
jack threads and turn them into the same argument over and over. It was annoying.

I see some on here want him back, I decline lol

Nate, I hear you.

[*rfaulk34*]

(Yesterday, 01:38 PM)NUGDUKWE Wrote: Yes a quick search shows he had the least amount of sack less games of any other DE this past year. I think the negative of Hendrickson compared to others is his lack of explosive negative plays to the offense basically strip sacks or other turnovers caused. But im basing that off memory and that could be wholly incorrect. Also having no one on the team generating any kind of consistent pressure certainly doesnt help in that regard.

Yep. I found the previous posts i was referring to. 

(06-07-2025, 06:03 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: No he doesn't.

In the last 2 years combined, 
Garrett had 16 games where he failed to register any kind of sack.
Watt had 12 games where he failed to register any kind of sack.
Crosby had 12 games where he failed to register any kind of sack and he missed 5 games.


Trey had 8 games where he failed to register any kind of sack. 

Trey is the picture of consistency and some of you jagalope fans need to stop making up all these bullshit narratives that just aren't even close to true.

(06-07-2025, 11:12 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Just to recap. 

Poster says Trey gets his sacks in a few games then disappears. Another poster completely shoots that misinformation down and the 1st poster comes back and says "meh, sacks are overrated". 

Total buffoonery around here. 

And just so we're all clear, over the last 2 years, 
Myles Garrett has had 1 instance of 5 straight games with zero sacks and 1 instance of 4 straight games with zero  sacks.
Watt has 1 instance of 3 straight games with zero sacks.
Crosby has 2 instances of 3 straight games with zero sacks.

Trey has ZERO instances of 3 straight games with zero sacks and ONE instance of 2 straight games with zero sacks. 

In the last 2 years (to match these stats) Trey is tied for 2nd with 5 FF. Garrett and Mack have 7 and Trey and Hunter have 5. 

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(Yesterday, 02:46 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: In the last 2 years (to match these stats) Trey is tied for 2nd with 5 FF. Garrett and Mack have 7 and Trey and Hunter have 5. 

Pst, that's tied for 3rd. Lol

[Stewy]

(Yesterday, 01:16 PM)Sled21 Wrote: I fully believe Fred was back the next day, and still resides here under a different name.

Agree.  Fred actually had several accounts, that he would use to mess with people.  He posted as the most homer Browns account just to rile everyone out.  he also had a mega homer Bengals account, just to drive people nuts.  

Fred just liked to argue.  It is the lawyer in him.  I fully believe he is still here.

[NUGDUKWE]

(Yesterday, 02:46 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Yep. I found the previous posts i was referring to. 

In the last 2 years (to match these stats) Trey is tied for 2nd with 5 FF. Garrett and Mack have 7 and Trey and Hunter have 5. 

Yeah i didnt check that stats. Its probably a byproduct of watching all of the Bengals games while only seeing highlights of the other players that makes one seem less than the other. 

[NUGDUKWE]

(Yesterday, 01:52 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Trey had 7 games last year where he didn't record a sack and he had 1 game with 0.5 sacks. All other games had at least 1 sack. In addition, Trey only had 3 games where he didn't register a single QB hit and 3 where he had only 1. All other games, he had at  least 2 or more. There were also only 6 games last year that Trey didn't record at least 1 tackle for loss. 

As for a comparison, let's take a look
Trey Hendrickson
46 tackles 17 sacks 19 TFL 36 QBHits

TJ Watt
61 tackles 11.5 sacks 19 TFL 27 QBHits

Myles Garrett
47 tackles 14 sacks 22 TFL 28 QBHits

Micah Parsons
43 tackles 12 sacks 12 TFL 23 QBHits

I don't know; I used to think Trey shouldn't get as much money as Garrett or Watt but after looking at the stats (for last year only), I'm wondering if maybe Trey shouldn't be paid the same as them. Granted, age is definitely a factor, but I was one who only thought of Trey as a sack man but now maybe he does more than we realize.

Yeah it's easy to watch the talent on the field and get accustomed to it and undervalue it thinking it can be replaced easier than it can. The Bengals have done this and I've done it as a fan. I'm not sure where Hendrickson should be paid but in my opinion he deserves to be happy and feel appreciated so whatever that takes within reason is good with me.

[SunsetBengal]

(Yesterday, 01:52 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Trey had 7 games last year where he didn't record a sack and he had 1 game with 0.5 sacks. All other games had at least 1 sack. In addition, Trey only had 3 games where he didn't register a single QB hit and 3 where he had only 1. All other games, he had at  least 2 or more. There were also only 6 games last year that Trey didn't record at least 1 tackle for loss. 

As for a comparison, let's take a look
Trey Hendrickson
46 tackles 17 sacks 19 TFL 36 QBHits

TJ Watt
61 tackles 11.5 sacks 19 TFL 27 QBHits

Myles Garrett
47 tackles 14 sacks 22 TFL 28 QBHits

Micah Parsons
43 tackles 12 sacks 12 TFL 23 QBHits

I don't know; I used to think Trey shouldn't get as much money as Garrett or Watt but after looking at the stats (for last year only), I'm wondering if maybe Trey shouldn't be paid the same as them. Granted, age is definitely a factor, but I was one who only thought of Trey as a sack man but now maybe he does more than we realize.

I brought those non-sack numbers up much earlier in the discussion, only to have them rationalized away by the defenders of the team management.

[*Au165*]

I have said this all off season, and I know many disagree, but statistically speaking pass rushers over 30 fall off a cliff. They essentially will produce one good year sometime over the span of this contract and based on injuries and other factors sometimes it's early and sometimes it's late but it is RARE, even for the most elite, to produce more than one good year after 30 over the last 10 years.

Odds are that out of Trey, Garrett, and Watt one may have multiple good years left in them and it's most likely Garrett because of the age. It would however not be surprising if none of the break 10 sacks again though just looking at historical outputs. Which is always the issue with paying players based on past performance, it is not an indicator of future success especially late in careers.

[Clark W Griswold]

(Yesterday, 03:07 PM)Au165 Wrote: I have said this all off season, and I know many disagree, but statistically speaking pass rushers over 30 fall off a cliff. They essentially will produce one good year sometime over the span of this contract and based on injuries and other factors sometimes it's early and sometimes it's late but it is RARE, even for the most elite, to produce more than one good year after 30 over the last 10 years.

Odds are that out of Trey, Garrett, and Watt one may have multiple good years left in them and it's most likely Garrett because of the age. It would however not be surprising if none of the break 10 sacks again though just looking at historical outputs. Which is always the issue with paying players based on past performance, it is not an indicator of future success especially late in careers.

Forget a cliff, Trey would have to fall into the Grand Canyon this year to make me not want him out there. They might have to pay for some lesser years but aren’t they all in? They paid big $ to the offensive stars so pay Trey. He may suck in 3 years but oh well. Try something new and go for it while you have studs at the key positions.

I also have no proof of this but I think he may age a little better than others because he’s not an athletic freak. He probably uses more effort/technique than the other guys because he’s not as physically gifted. I think this may benefit him as he ages because he’s doesn’t rely on the athleticism as much.

[*Au165*]

(Yesterday, 03:15 PM)Clark W Griswold Wrote: Forget a cliff, Trey would have to fall into the Grand Canyon this year to make me not want him out there. They might have to pay for some lesser years but aren’t they all in?  They paid big $ to the offensive stars so pay Trey. He may suck in 3 years but oh well. Try something new and go for it while you have studs at the key positions.

I also have no proof of this but I think he may age a little better than others because he’s not an athletic freak. He probably uses more effort/technique than the other guys because he’s not as physically gifted. I think this may benefit him as he ages because he’s doesn’t rely on the athleticism as much.

JJ Watt went from 16 sacks to 4 the following year in an injury shortened season, which isn't uncommon for guys over 30. The following year though when he played all 16 games he only recorded 5 sacks. Von Miller went from 14.5 to 8 the following year and has never hit 10 sacks again. Let me use an all time great like Demarcus Ware, he went from 19.5 sacks at 29 to 11.5 at 30 then only broke 7.5 sacks (10) one other time the last 4 years of his career. 

The question is if we look back in 3 years and we got let's say 24 sacks out of him on this contract for around 96 million are we going to be happy about that? Especially if say 10-12 came in year 1?

We should have taken the 2nd round pick for him and cap space. Grabbed another vet and doubled up on pass rusher with Shemar (I guess) and one of the other 6 pass rushers taken in round 2. We could have replaced him through volume of rushers as the Eagles do.

[WeezyBengal]

(Yesterday, 03:25 PM)Au165 Wrote: JJ Watt went from 16 sacks to 4 the following year in an injury shortened season, which isn't uncommon for guys over 30. The following year though when he played all 16 games he only recorded 5 sacks. Von Miller went from 14.5 to 8 the following year and has never hit 10 sacks again. Let me use an all time great like Demarcus Ware, he went from 19.5 sacks at 29 to 11.5 at 30 then only broke 7.5 sacks (10) one other time the last 4 years of his career. 

The question is if we look back in 3 years and we got let's say 24 sacks out of him on this contract for around 96 million are we going to be happy about that? Especially if say 10-12 came in year 1?

We should have taken the 2nd round pick for him and cap space. Grabbed another vet and doubled up on pass rusher with Shemar (I guess) and one of the other 6 pass rushers taken in round 2. We could have replaced him through volume of rushers as the Eagles do.

This is where the compromise from Trey's camp needs to come in to play. 

Give Trey the years and dollars he wants, but only guarantee the first year and maybe get creative with the other years. 

Trey needs to understand that hes not a 20 something in his prime seeking his second contract. 

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(Yesterday, 03:25 PM)Au165 Wrote: JJ Watt went from 16 sacks to 4 the following year in an injury shortened season, which isn't uncommon for guys over 30. The following year though when he played all 16 games he only recorded 5 sacks. Von Miller went from 14.5 to 8 the following year and has never hit 10 sacks again. Let me use an all time great like Demarcus Ware, he went from 19.5 sacks at 29 to 11.5 at 30 then only broke 7.5 sacks (10) one other time the last 4 years of his career. 

The question is if we look back in 3 years and we got let's say 24 sacks out of him on this contract for around 96 million are we going to be happy about that? Especially if say 10-12 came in year 1?

We should have taken the 2nd round pick for him and cap space. Grabbed another vet and doubled up on pass rusher with Shemar (I guess) and one of the other 6 pass rushers taken in round 2. We could have replaced him through volume of rushers as the Eagles do.

JJ Watt also had 0.0 sacks (age 28 season) the year before the 16 and 1.5 sacks (age 27 season) the year before that because he played 5 and 3 games those years.

Hendrickson has missed 1 game due to injury in his 4 years here.

[THE PISTONS]

(Yesterday, 03:31 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: This is where the compromise from Trey's camp needs to come in to play. 

Give Trey the years and dollars he wants, but only guarantee the first year and maybe get creative with the other years. 

Trey needs to understand that hes not a 20 something in his prime seeking his second contract. 

The problem is he's about the same age as TJ Watt and he sees what he got.

It's hard to say...hey you're not 20. When Watt got the contract he did at basically the same age as Trey. (They're basically 1 month apart in age.)

When Watt signed that contract, it made getting a contract done with Trey that much harder.

[*rfaulk34*]

(Yesterday, 02:51 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Pst, that's tied for 3rd. Lol

Depends on how you want to split the hair...

[3wt]

You make a very good point. But it is still worth paying him. He's going to be a necessary part of the Bengals defense this year - as will Stewart - if he signs

The issue is not whether he will be as good as he was last year and even next year. The issue is they have no one that is as good as you are projecting he will be. And we need at least that to compete this year. And it's going to cost them some money to get THAT done.

The end of the Burrow window is approaching faster than they think.

[THE PISTONS]

(Yesterday, 03:47 PM)3wt Wrote: You make a very good point.  But it is still worth paying him.  He's going to be a necessary part of the Bengals defense this year - as will Stewart - if he signs

The issue is not whether he will be as good as he was last year and even next year.   The issue is they have no one that is as good as you are projecting he will be.  And we need at least that to compete this year.  And it's going to cost them some money to get THAT done.

The end of the Burrow window is approaching faster than they think.

Should have atleast 7 more good years of Burrow unless he's injured.

I think Chase and Tee playing at an extremely high level will be shorter lived. Maybe 2-3 more years of that.

Look at AJ Green. His top production was on his rookie contract. Then, downhill.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(Yesterday, 03:31 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: This is where the compromise from Trey's camp needs to come in to play. 

Give Trey the years and dollars he wants, but only guarantee the first year and maybe get creative with the other years. 

Trey needs to understand that hes not a 20 something in his prime seeking his second contract. 

Watt just got $108m guaranteed.
If Trey only got the first year guaranteed, he'd be getting about $68m LESS guaranteed than Watt, or about only 37% of what Watt got.

I don't think that is "compromise" so much as just giving up and accepting being vastly underpaid compared to the market and with no real future security at all.