2025 Preseason Game Day Threads

[Hongbit]

I will be very surprised if they keep 3 QB’s.   I expect Hooker to be out.

[RedRamage]

1 hour ago, Hongbit said:

I will be very surprised if they keep 3 QB’s.   I expect Hooker to be out.

So... from a strategy stand point: Do you want to cut a QB who's been in your system for the years that Hooker has been? This is another factor that makes me think they'll try to hang onto him.

Ultimately I think @1984Echoes makes a good point if they look at it and say: "We REALLY want to keep player-X, but we don't have room unless we cut Hooker," that's a factor against keeping him. But the idea that GB or the Eagles or whomever could pick up Hooker who's been learning out playbook for years is perhaps a reason to keep him around if the team is on the fence with him this year.

[MichiganCardinal]

I think they may try to get something for him before they outright cut him. I doubt he clears waivers. If you can pick up a conditional 6th or 7th it’s probably worth it at this point.

But I don’t see the relative benefit in rostering three QBs, when ideally both are just holding clipboards.

[4hzglory]

22 minutes ago, MichiganCardinal said:

I think they may try to get something for him before they outright cut him. I doubt he clears waivers. If you can pick up a conditional 6th or 7th it’s probably worth it at this point.

But I don’t see the relative benefit in rostering three QBs, when ideally both are just holding clipboards.

I could see him clearing waivers and think it's likely with what he's shown so far (unless picked up by our competition just to learn about the offense.  IMO, I don't think he brings back even a 7th.  At this point, I'd rather have Ewers to develop than Hooker and he went in the middle of the 7th.

[RedRamage]

1 hour ago, MichiganCardinal said:

I think they may try to get something for him before they outright cut him. I doubt he clears waivers. If you can pick up a conditional 6th or 7th it’s probably worth it at this point.

But I don’t see the relative benefit in rostering three QBs, when ideally both are just holding clipboards.

Now that's an interesting possibility. If you trade him for a 7th then you a degree of control where he goes, and it's less likely (certainly not impossible, but at least less likely) that he's gonna get cut from that team and be available to be picked up by our rivals.

I wonder what Ben Johnson's opinion of Hooker is? I wouldn't care about shipping him off to Chicago because BJ already knows the Lions well.

[1984Echoes]

4 hours ago, RedRamage said:

... I wonder what Ben Johnson's opinion of Hooker is? I wouldn't care about shipping him off to Chicago because BJ already knows the Lions well.

I could live with this.

Especially if Holmes could finagle a 6th/ conditional (stays on roster all year) 5th...

[Sports_Freak]

Forget all this Hooker talk, who cares about the Lions 3rd string QB?

Get to the real traing camp possible story, acquiring Hendrickson. Trading for him and making him happy with a guaranteed huge contract would have to make the Lions a heavy Super Bowl favorite. Trade the future for a legit chance for a championship? Yes please. Yeah, it's out of character for Brad, but as fans, we can dream, right?

[CMRivdogs]

Hooker's not going anywhere this season. If it gets to the point he's needed to be the starter, the season is lost anyway. Keep him this year on his current (rookie?) contract and look for someone in the draft next year or pick up someone who gets let go in the offseason. 

Your third string QB is an insurance policy. Nothing more (Unless you get extremely lucky like the '49ers a couple years ago)

[RedRamage]

13 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

Get to the real traing camp possible story, acquiring Hendrickson. Trading for him and making him happy with a guaranteed huge contract would have to make the Lions a heavy Super Bowl favorite. Trade the future for a legit chance for a championship? Yes please. Yeah, it's out of character for Brad, but as fans, we can dream, right?

On one hand: Yeah...we'd definitely be favorites. On the other hand... fate is a fickle mistress. We saw last year how injuries can ruin a season and even in the best of situations the old adage of "any given Sunday" is still true.

Given what we've seen with how Holmes builds the team I'm reluctant to mortgage too much of the future on a "legit chance of a championship" when I feel like we're already almost there.

[4hzglory]

1 hour ago, CMRivdogs said:

Hooker's not going anywhere this season. If it gets to the point he's needed to be the starter, the season is lost anyway. Keep him this year on his current (rookie?) contract and look for someone in the draft next year or pick up someone who gets let go in the offseason. 

Your third string QB is an insurance policy. Nothing more (Unless you get extremely lucky like the '49ers a couple years ago)

Only question being if they want to carry 3 QB's on the active roster - they only carried 2 last season until signing Bridgewater late.

[Sports_Freak]

2 hours ago, RedRamage said:

On one hand: Yeah...we'd definitely be favorites. On the other hand... fate is a fickle mistress. We saw last year how injuries can ruin a season and even in the best of situations the old adage of "any given Sunday" is still true.

Given what we've seen with how Holmes builds the team I'm reluctant to mortgage too much of the future on a "legit chance of a championship" when I feel like we're already almost there.

I agree, it's against the nature of Holmes. But it would be so great to be in the position to have teams fear us. Even more...😅

[MichiganCardinal]

The NFL is a week-to-week business. The team that wins a playoff game often isn’t the best team playing (e.g., Commanders over Lions). The Super Bowl Champion often isn’t the best team in the league (e.g., the 2023 Chiefs).

It’s not baseball where you have to win four of seven on multiple occasions. The better team will often find a way to do that, which incentivizes making your team as good as possible for “the run.” It’s single game, put up or shut up.

In such a situation you’re far better off setting yourself up for a decade of continued success, than a single push at four consecutive January to February wins.

If Holmes can figure out a way to bring in Hendrickson and still establish continued success like the current trajectory, I’m all for it. From a lay perspective though I don’t see it.

[RedRamage]

8 minutes ago, MichiganCardinal said:

The team that wins a playoff game often isn’t the best team playing (e.g., Commanders over Lions).

Or any time that Lions beat the Packers, at least according to some Packers players.

[Sports_Freak]

56 minutes ago, MichiganCardinal said:

The NFL is a week-to-week business. The team that wins a playoff game often isn’t the best team playing (e.g., Commanders over Lions). The Super Bowl Champion often isn’t the best team in the league (e.g., the 2023 Chiefs).

It’s not baseball where you have to win four of seven on multiple occasions. The better team will often find a way to do that, which incentivizes making your team as good as possible for “the run.” It’s single game, put up or shut up.

In such a situation you’re far better off setting yourself up for a decade of continued success, than a single push at four consecutive January to February wins.

If Holmes can figure out a way to bring in Hendrickson and still establish continued success like the current trajectory, I’m all for it. From a lay perspective though I don’t see it.

I agree, I don't see it either. But there's no arguing the point that the Lions would be a better team with Hendrickson. In the future, we may not to be able to keep everyone and stay under the cap but that would be a tomorrow problem. Fans who have suffered following this team thru the last 60 years or so may be willing to sacrifice 2026 or 2027 and beyond to give us the best possible chance this year. And I'm in agreement that Holmes doesn't feel this way, he just wants continued success.

[Motown Bombers]

This isn’t Brad Holmes being stubborn. No team can afford $80 million in pass rushers. Not too mention we haven’t gotten to the expensive part of the players they signed, plus needing to sign Laporta, Gibbs, Branch and Williams. You will also be trading away high draft picks that you won’t have to replace those players for a pass rusher over 30. 

[Jason_R]

Imagine the locker room if Trey Hendrickson got paid by the Lions before Aidan Hutchinson. It would ruin the culture they are always talking about building. Hendrickson is not coming. 

For grins I asked AI how the 2024 Lions ranked for injury luck. It told me they had the sixth-worst figure for adjusted games lost on the defensive side of the ball in NFL history (32nd worst in 2024). Of the top twelve teams it listed all time, only Detroit had a winning record, going 15-2 with the #1 seed. This is one of the most astonishing statistics I recall seeing. 

2024 was a historically great season with historically bad injury luck. We do not need Hendrickson. We need a full season from Hutchinson. 

[MichiganCardinal]

8 hours ago, Sports_Freak said:

I agree, I don't see it either. But there's no arguing the point that the Lions would be a better team with Hendrickson. In the future, we may not to be able to keep everyone and stay under the cap but that would be a tomorrow problem. Fans who have suffered following this team thru the last 60 years or so may be willing to sacrifice 2026 or 2027 and beyond to give us the best possible chance this year. And I'm in agreement that Holmes doesn't feel this way, he just wants continued success.

I get that frustration, I may not be 60 but I want them to win the Super Bowl this season as much as anybody else.

But I’d also like to compete next season, and the following season, and the one after that, and so on. If you have ten years with a roster that looks like the Lions have had the last three years, you’re bound to win one eventually, and you may just happen to win more than one.

Putting the eggs in a single basket opens you up to one Divisional Round exit after the entire defense gets hurt and your outgoing OC calls a WR pass in the most important game of the season. And then what?

Edited Wednesday at 04:12 AM by MichiganCardinal

[RedRamage]

7 hours ago, MichiganCardinal said:

Putting the eggs in a single basket opens you up to one Divisional Round exit after the entire defense gets hurt and your outgoing OC calls a WR pass in the most important game of the season. And then what?

I think it's fair to also point out that we have a new DC and OC this season. Now we hope that this isn't going to be a major speed bump, but we honestly don't know. I tend to think our new OC and DC, with Campbell's leadership and the skillful players we have, will be able to keep the train rolling down the tracks, but we obviously won't know for sure until the season is under way. 

All of this is to say that we might trade of Hendricks because this is our year to go for it and then see the offense totally collapse under Morton. (Given that Sheppard is a hire from within and given that in this senario Hendricks is on the team, I don't see the defense as being as big of a liability.)

[Motown Bombers]

All this talk about Hendrickson and Za’Darius Smith is still sitting there. He had 10 sacks and was 10th in the league in pressures. He would be a good number two to rotate with Davenport. 

[RedRamage]

7 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

All this talk about Hendrickson and Za’Darius Smith is still sitting there. He had 10 sacks and was 10th in the league in pressures. He would be a good number two to rotate with Davenport. 

Totally agree, and he seems to want to be here. I'm just unsure why the Lions don't seem to want him.

[4hzglory]

2 hours ago, RedRamage said:

Totally agree, and he seems to want to be here. I'm just unsure why the Lions don't seem to want him.

I wonder if they have an agreement in place for him to sign after all of the rosters are finalized and they make sure they are more likely to be able to pass someone through to the practice squad that they want to keep.

[Mr.TaterSalad]

I'll say a few things regarding the cap and a trade scenario involving Trey Hendrickson. If we don't get Trey Hendrickson I am perfectly fine with that. I trust Brad Holmes, I love the job he has done, and if he doesn't want Hendrickson here, nor want to pay him gobs of guaranteed money, I am fine with that. I have been one of the fans on the Hendrickson bandwagon for the last year so I figure I'd comment and try to back up my desire for Hendrickson. I don't necessarily think bringing in Hendrickson means we'll be in cap hell for years to come. Nor do I believe it means having to let 3 or 4 of our recently drafted players walk. I do believe we probably have to give Hutch his due before trading for Hendrickson. I also believe we will probably let 1 of their marquee players Holmes drafted walk and have a significant cap casualty in my scenario.

Right now the cap is $279 million according to Over the Cap. They project it at OTC to go up to $311 million by the 2027 season. That's an over $40 million jump in salary cap. We currently have $47,832,225 in cap space with Hutch likely getting a new deal in the near future. My guess is that Hutch's overall number and cap number will be somewhere between what Maxx Crosby and Myles Garrett got. I don't think he'll demand to be the highest paid DE/Edge in the league.

I am going to go with a 4 year deal of $150 million with $125 million guaranteed for Hutch. Some of that money will be incentive-laced and some of that will be structured so there are higher and lower cap hits depending on the year. I have zero clue how any of that would eventually work and break out. For the sake of argument, I am going to say around $31.25 million/year in-terms of a guaranteed money cap hit. It won't be that way in the end because the contract will be structured in all sorts of different ways, but for this example it is. So roughly $30 million guaranteed up front over the next 4 years for Hutch.

Next, after we sign Hutch, we trade for Trey Hendrickson. Before I trade for him I am getting guarantees that he will sign here for the long-term (ie the next 3 seasons) and will accept the potential contract we're going to offer him right away after the trade, so as not to hold out on us as well. According to reports from the likes of Tom Pelissero and others the Bengals are listening to trade offers and want a 2026 1st + a young defensive player in return. My initial offer would be Jack Campbell and a 2026 1st round pick. For the sake of argument again, let's say that works, the Bengals accept, and we get Trey Hendrickson.

Now, we've got to sign him. Again, I'm not trading for him until I am certain we can meet his demands and he will 100% assure us he's signing here immediately after the trade and not holding out. Reports suggest Trey wants 3 years of guaranteed money in any deal he signs. For this mock scenario, I'll give him exactly that. In-fact, I'll give him more than what Maxx Crosby got in his 3 year, $106.5 million dollar extension. Hendrickson is a slightly better player than Crosby. My Trey Hendrickson contract would look something like 3 years at $115 million with $95 million guaranteed. So it would roughly equate out to $31.6 million in guaranteed money over the 3 years.

This would mean the team is now paying $220 million in guaranteed money to two DE/Edge players and that is a heck of a lot. I can understand why people wouldn't want to commit that kind of money to one position. To afford this I would be foremost relying on the cap going up over the next 3 seasons in the 26, 27, and 28 offseasons. I would also be restructuring Goff's current contract and extending him out to lessen the cap hit. I would also cut or restructure Taylor Decker after this season. Finally, Williams would be a player that ends up walking and being a cap casualty.

You new defensive starting 11 would look something like this for the upcoming season.

Left DE - Hutchinson, Right DE - Hendrickson, Left DT - McNeill (when healthy), Right DT - Williams

WLB - Anzalone, MLB - Cunningham, SLB - Barnes

Left CB - Arnold, Right CB - Reed, NB - Robertson, SS - Branch, FS - Joseph

Edited Wednesday at 09:41 PM by Mr.TaterSalad

[Motown Bombers]

The Lions are over the cap next year by $43 million. You're not accounting for the fact that Goff, St Brown, and Sewell have significant increases next year. Surely the Lions will restructure their contracts, but you can't just add more big contracts. They still haven't signed Hutchinson, Laporta, Branch, Gibbs, Williams or Campbell. They can't afford Hendrickson. 

Edited Wednesday at 10:49 PM by Motown Bombers

[Motown Bombers]

Goff's cap number jumps from $32 million in 2025 to $69 million in 2026. St Brown jumps from $13 million to $33 million. Sewell's jumps from $9 million to $28 million. That's $76 million being added to the cap among just three players. 

[NYLion]

14 hours ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

 

I am going to go with a 4 year deal of $150 million with $125 million guaranteed for Hutch. Some of that money will be incentive-laced and some of that will be structured so there are higher and lower cap hits depending on the year. I have zero clue how any of that would eventually work and break out. For the sake of argument, I am going to say around $31.25 million/year in-terms of a guaranteed money cap hit. It won't be that way in the end because the contract will be structured in all sorts of different ways, but for this example it is. So roughly $30 million guaranteed up front over the next 4 years for Hutch.

Next, after we sign Hutch, we trade for Trey Hendrickson. Before I trade for him I am getting guarantees that he will sign here for the long-term (ie the next 3 seasons) and will accept the potential contract we're going to offer him right away after the trade, so as not to hold out on us as well. According to reports from the likes of Tom Pelissero and others the Bengals are listening to trade offers and want a 2026 1st + a young defensive player in return. My initial offer would be Jack Campbell and a 2026 1st round pick. For the sake of argument again, let's say that works, the Bengals accept, and we get Trey Hendrickson.

 

Hutch is going to get over $40m/yr so on a 4 year deal it's likely $160m or possibly a good deal more than that depending on what Parsons signs for if he's up first.

Also, Campbell is going to be a huge part of the Lions defense going forward so there's absolutely no way he's being traded for anything most likely and certainly not for a 30 year old Hendrickson due for a huge extension. Adding a 1st? No chance no way no how.

Edited Thursday at 11:49 AM by NYLion