Hendrickson, Higgins, and Chase

[cincygrad]

At this point you would take that? Lol.

He's over 30 on the last year of his contract and wanting huge money or he'll hold out....

As a Lions fan I'm only reading this thread for news about how talks are going. I'd absolutely love Hendrickson on the Lions, but I wouldn't even give up a first for him. At least not without getting something back.

But why not? The Lions are a contender. They were the best team in the league for much of last season and were basically undone by injuries. If you're the Lions you could give up a low first rounder for a guy that has been among the best pass rushers in the league for the past 3 seasons. It would hedge against Hutch recovering slowly and the two of them would be a force in the postseason. What are you going to get at the end of the first round that's going to help as much? Does it sacrifice the future a little? Sure.... But this is a team that's never been to the Super Bowl. If I was a Lions fan, I'd give up a piece of the future for putting all the chips in on this team right now.

 

[Cincyfan78]

At this point you would take that? Lol.

He's over 30 on the last year of his contract and wanting huge money or he'll hold out....

As a Lions fan I'm only reading this thread for news about how talks are going. I'd absolutely love Hendrickson on the Lions, but I wouldn't even give up a first for him. At least not without getting something back.

I mean - a 1st and a 3rd is more then reasonable for a known quantity that has 35 sacks over the past 2 years. If you are wanting to hedge against him being 30, then that really sides more with the Bengals point than it does Trey...and further proves their own point.

Garrett was talked about, before being signed, with MULTIPLE high level picks. While Trey isn't quite Garrett, he also isn't far off.

Lastly, the Bengals hold all the cards. He's under contract, and they can still tag him next year. He'll turn 31 this year. Long-term, I don't see sitting out as a viable option. This isn't a young guy in his prime, it's an aging veteran who may be at the peak and likely coming down off that peak over season 2-3 and 4, if applicable.

Trey has said he doesn't want Garrett type money - and I agree that the Bengals should give some leeway to signing him. That said, to get rid of a guy that has produced 35 sacks over the past 2 seasons is going to cost draft capital. The fact that the other team is going to have to sign him long-term really isn't the Bengals' issue - that's the issue for the new team.

So, loathe as I am to side with the owners on this - they hold more of the cards and better options than Trey does at the moment. We'll see how this plays out - but if he's not signed by the draft, and they do NOT take a DE in round 1 ... suffice it to say, IMO, they will go to camp with Trey. Now, whether he'll be there (likely not for camp) is another story. In the end, though, I don't see him sitting out much of the regular season, it just doesn't bode well for him personally or his long-term future.