Lamur is going nowhere

[T-Dub]

I said many reasons. But I'm sure you know more then them as well.

 

Thanks - I'm sure you do, too. Are you smarter than a 5th grader?

[Big Alice]

This thread is stupid.

Andrew Hawkins didn't get a higher tender last year because he hadn't earned it. Period.

In his first three seasons, he missed 13 games. In 2013 he was targeted 18 times. 18. And had 12 catches. 12 fucking catches.

He projected to be the fourth receiver, and the what? 7th option in the passing game? The Bengals left him out there and said, "If someone wants to overpay you, cool." His cap number last year was $5.8mil. This year, it's $5mil. That's ludicrous.

In retrospect, Hawkins would have been a HUGE plus for the Bengals last year. However, you can't build a roster knowing that you're going to lose your #2 WR and starting TE before half time of Week 1.

Not hanging on to Emmanuel Lamur would be retarded. The Bengals have more than a couple question marks at linebacker right now. Lamur is a contributor with a lot of upside. The plan never was for him to play 900 snaps in 2014. Hopefully, he continues to get better and earns a long-term deal this year.

[Le Tigre]

Not shiny, flashy, PFF-approved enough, Alice.

[MichaelWeston]

This thread is stupid.

Andrew Hawkins didn't get a higher tender last year because he hadn't earned it. Period.

In his first three seasons, he missed 13 games. In 2013 he was targeted 18 times. 18. And had 12 catches. 12 fucking catches.

He projected to be the fourth receiver, and the what? 7th option in the passing game? The Bengals left him out there and said, "If someone wants to overpay you, cool." His cap number last year was $5.8mil. This year, it's $5mil. That's ludicrous.

In retrospect, Hawkins would have been a HUGE plus for the Bengals last year. However, you can't build a roster knowing that you're going to lose your #2 WR and starting TE before half time of Week 1.

Not hanging on to Emmanuel Lamur would be retarded. The Bengals have more than a couple question marks at linebacker right now. Lamur is a contributor with a lot of upside. The plan never was for him to play 900 snaps in 2014. Hopefully, he continues to get better and earns a long-term deal this year.

 

Hawkins had 51 catches in 2012 and had 63 last year. I think it's safe to say we blew that call last year. His cap number was 5 million because we let him go and didn't tender him high enough. All we had to do is tender him at 2.34 and that would have been his cap number. And we could have certainly used him in 2014. It was a terrible decision by the front office. 

[scharm]

This thread is stupid.
Andrew Hawkins didn't get a higher tender last year because he hadn't earned it. Period.
In his first three seasons, he missed 13 games. In 2013 he was targeted 18 times. 18. And had 12 catches. 12 fucking catches.
He projected to be the fourth receiver, and the what? 7th option in the passing game? The Bengals left him out there and said, "If someone wants to overpay you, cool." His cap number last year was $5.8mil. This year, it's $5mil. That's ludicrous.
In retrospect, Hawkins would have been a HUGE plus for the Bengals last year. However, you can't build a roster knowing that you're going to lose your #2 WR and starting TE before half time of Week 1.
Not hanging on to Emmanuel Lamur would be retarded. The Bengals have more than a couple question marks at linebacker right now. Lamur is a contributor with a lot of upside. The plan never was for him to play 900 snaps in 2014. Hopefully, he continues to get better and earns a long-term deal this year.

Eh, it burnt the team. We carried over 8mil cap room after front loading extensions. Last offseason was a nightmare for the team.

[Big Alice]

 
Hawkins had 51 catches in 2012 and had 63 last year. I think it's safe to say we blew that call last year. His cap number was 5 million because we let him go and didn't tender him high enough. All we had to do is tender him at 2.34 and that would have been his cap number. And we could have certainly used him in 2014. It was a terrible decision by the front office. 

Again, you're insisting that $2.34mil was a no-brainer for a guy with 12 catches. I disagree.

He did have 63 catches last year. He was also the #1 option in Cleveland's passing game for most of the year. What's your point?

Yes. Andrew Hawkins would have been a nice luxury. However... Projecting him BEHIND A.J. Green, Marvin Jones, Mo Sanu, Tyler Eifert, Jermaine Gresham, and Gio Bernard, how many balls would that leave for Hawkins? Enough to justify $2.34mil? Even if the answer is "yes", there's another part to it.

A one year deal really would have just been kicking the can down the road. The Bengals were definitely interested in keeping Hawkins around long-term, but only at a reasonable number. They figured that if Hawkins negotiated something with another team, they could just match it and hang on to him.

What they didn't count on (and shouldn't have) was Cleveland offering something stupid.

Please don't misunderstand me. I LOVE Andrew Hawkins. He has a skill set that creates a matchup problem every time he steps on the field. However, just like everything else, there's a limit to how much it's worth.

The Bengals took a measured risk last year. They didn't "lose" as much as Hawkins "won". It has NOTHING to do with what they've done with Emmanuel Lamur. There aren't 3 guys ahead of him on the depth chart. Losing Lamur crest an actual hole that has to be filled. Kicking THIS can for another year accomplishes two things. It gives them another year to see if he's a long-term answer, and gives everyone else vying for that job another year to win it.

[MichaelWeston]

Again, you're insisting that $2.34mil was a no-brainer for a guy with 12 catches. I disagree.

 

12 catches when he was hurt for most of that year

He did have 63 catches last year. He was also the #1 option in Cleveland's passing game for most of the year. What's your point?

 

He had 51 for us the year before

Yes. Andrew Hawkins would have been a nice luxury. However... Projecting him BEHIND A.J. Green, Marvin Jones, Mo Sanu, Tyler Eifert, Jermaine Gresham, and Gio Bernard, how many balls would that leave for Hawkins? Enough to justify $2.34mil? Even if the answer is "yes", there's another part to it.

 

You keep 5-6 wide receivers for a reason. Insurance. That played out last year. Hawkins offered a skill set no other player on the roster could offer. You don't give up assets for nothing when you have another choice. 

A one year deal really would have just been kicking the can down the road. The Bengals were definitely interested in keeping Hawkins around long-term, but only at a reasonable number. They figured that if Hawkins negotiated something with another team, they could just match it and hang on to him.

 

You think about 2015 when 2015 comes. The world is full of chaos. So is the NFL. Injuries, players beating their kids, guys doing stupid things at casinos and strip clubs. You hold on to your assets on the cheap for as long as possible, let the chips fall where they may and then wen they fall as you project you are happy. If they don't you live yourself in the best position possible.

What they didn't count on (and shouldn't have) was Cleveland offering something stupid.

 

They never should have put themselves in the position for that to happen.

Please don't misunderstand me. I LOVE Andrew Hawkins. He has a skill set that creates a matchup problem every time he steps on the field. However, just like everything else, there's a limit to how much it's worth.

 

There are several times this year that Hawkins would have been our number 2 or even number one target on the field. That is worth 2.34 million even if you or I couldn't project it in 2014's offseason.

The Bengals took a measured risk last year. They didn't "lose" as much as Hawkins "won". It has NOTHING to do with what they've done with Emmanuel Lamur. There aren't 3 guys ahead of him on the depth chart. Losing Lamur creates an actual hole that has to be filled. Kicking THIS can for another year accomplishes two things. It gives them another year to see if he's a long-term answer, and gives everyone else vying for that job another year to win it.

 

They lost. I watched the Colts game. Your last sentence is the same thing with Hawkins. Eifert is still an unquestionable question mark. We don't really know what we have with him. Jones had one big year.

 

We wanted Hawkins back and could have had him back at a very good price but decided to try to save like 800,000K or something dumb...I don't even think that was that amount. I don't think you ever allow viable weapons to go for next to nothing. Which is what we did. You can never have enough offensive weapons.