With Rookie Camps getting underway Wednesday, it's time to talk about the 2026 CFL season!

5 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

I agree about the Merc thing...it's not as clear cut as he just chased the money. He made it clear he was planning on retiring a Bomber but it didn't seem to be a shared dream from the Bombers....anyway...Basically everything else you have said could be matched up with most/all of the top receivers. (which speaks to the lack of talent we had) He's a bit long in the tooth and if I'm picking a WR to bring in, he isn't the #1 choice. I'm not sure giving a 32yr old WR a 3 yr deal will work out. I very much doubt he sees the full amount or if he does, if Hamilton gets the full value. Injury concerns are part of the context on why the deal might not be a great one for Ham.

Did he make that clear by leaving to play with Edmonton or leaving to play with Hamilton?

7 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Because I don't think you can throw out things like yards per target and yac, and catch % in a vacuum without giving at least some context to a players usage. Might not change the interpretation, but it needs to be addressed IMO.

All of those numbers speak to usage.

The context is there in terms of targets. He gets more passes directed his way than anyone else on the field. In terms of stats, the only way for a receiver to get catches and yards is to be targeted.

What numbers do you think give context to usage?

17 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

I agree about the Merc thing...it's not as clear cut as he just chased the money. He made it clear he was planning on retiring a Bomber but it didn't seem to be a shared dream from the Bombers....anyway...Basically everything else you have said could be matched up with most/all of the top receivers. (which speaks to the lack of talent we had) He's a bit long in the tooth and if I'm picking a WR to bring in, he isn't the #1 choice. I'm not sure giving a 32yr old WR a 3 yr deal will work out. I very much doubt he sees the full amount or if he does, if Hamilton gets the full value. Injury concerns are part of the context on why the deal might not be a great one for Ham.

yup...clock is ticking there and thats a lot of scratch for this juncture in his career...and if we were/are to throw top dollar at a receiver now...it be for a guy not 30 yrs old yet

13 minutes ago, Jesse said:

Did he make that clear by leaving to play with Edmonton or leaving to play with Hamilton?

He made it clear when he said as much to ed tait.

11 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

All of those numbers speak to usage.

The context is there in terms of targets. He gets more passes directed his way than anyone else on the field. In terms of stats, the only way for a receiver to get catches and yards is to be targeted.

What numbers do you think give context to usage?

a lot of his targets too, are in 2 and 3 man coverage....so excessive yac is not gonna happen regardless who you are, and a lot of the catches are contested too, to some extent

Just now, Bigblue204 said:

He made it clear when he said as much to ed tait.

When? After he already signed in Ham?

Kenny is going to always get a lot of targets because he make crazy catches. When in doubt, chuck it up there.

1 hour ago, blue85gold said:

When? After he already signed in Ham?

I believe so.

4 hours ago, Mike said:

"Best and most impactful" is literally an opinion, not a fact. He was not the most productive receiver in the league in 2025, either by volume or on a per-game basis. He is what he is at this point and I'm really of the belief that he's more of an electric highlight reel receiver than a winner, not to say he's not productive but he's not a player I'd be looking to add to my roster. He's a target vacuum who catches a relatively low percentage of the balls thrown his way.

One stat I've become a fairly big fan of is yards per target and Lawler registered at 10.02 last year.

Dohnte Meyers 12.13, Justin McInnis 10.82, Nic Demski 10.88, Keon Hatcher 11.64, Dejon Brissett 10.67 all more productive per target and all with a better balls caught % than Lawler too ... Lawler wasn't even the most reliable target on his team, he caught less of his targets (59.7%) than Kiondre Smith (73.5%) and Tim White (66.6%) and to me, that's a statistic that becomes even more impactful when you consider that he was 2nd in the league in targets with 144. The only receiver who really even comes close to being as unreliable as him with a comparable level of productivity is Eugene Lewis. Couple that with the fact that despite being targeted 144 times, Lawler didn't even rank in the top 25 in the CFL in YAC.

He's a highlight reel receiver, but he's not a winning football player. His numbers all point to the fact that he's productive, but he's also a relatively unimpressive player once the ball is in his hands and he's a drive killer. It's not a smear opinion on Lawler, I think he's a hell of a receiver and he's got some of the best go up and get it ability I've seen in a long time, but I just don't think it's anywhere near a fact that he's the "best" receiver in the CFL.

Thanks for the football talk, you've given me something to chew on.

Sheed gets a player development coaching job in d2 with west chester pen. That dude was born to coach kids. I bet he gave the dr a motivational speech when he was born.

3 hours ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

All of those numbers speak to usage

Yes but they weren't used to talk about usage, they were used in the context of performance.

In my opinion it's simply a case where there needs more discussion surrounding all those stats.

15 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Not at that price.

You are assuming that he would have not signed with the Bombers for anything less.

43 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Yes but they weren't used to talk about usage, they were used in the context of performance.

In my opinion it's simply a case where there needs more discussion surrounding all those stats.

Nothing you've said in this discussion makes any ******* sense and the lack of countering with something you think speaks to what you say wasn't discussed makes it just that much more pointless.

Edited 29 minutes ago29 min by JuranBoldenRules

4 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

Nothing you've said in this discussion makes any ******* sense and the lack of countering with something you think speaks to what you say wasn't discussed makes it just that much more pointless.