Yesterday, 06:37 PM
(Yesterday, 03:06 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I kind of get the Bengals side somewhat. That said, I'd pay Trey more.
You can't pay every player that has a great year more money. You just can't. That's what contract incentives and escalators are for.
That said, I think Trey is an exception. He's had 17.5 sacks each of the past 2 years.
The thing is, how many more years can you expect him to play at that level? He's 31 next year. Is he at his peak for 2/3 more years? Or will he decline. It's a risky bet.
Fans are kind of acting like he'll get 17.5 sacks each of the next 3 years. But, if you pay him $35 million a year and he drops down to 8 sacks, then it's a vast overpay.
The data says DEs with his sack #s tend to gradually decline. So if he remains healthy it seems likely he would still be a double digit sack guy for 3-4 years. What i would assume the contract would be for.
But I think we've seen this scenario play out already and I don't expect him to be resigned. I think the no communication is because they just spent 2 first rd picks at the position the past 3 years and that's the plan moving forward. We probably ask him to play out his last year. The best Bengal scenario would be to do that and have Trey be around the top of sack leader this year and Murphy and Stewart combine for a few sacks. Definitely a winning formula.
