AzPatsFan

No I said exactly what is the Patriots Policy, direct from the owner Robert Kraft. If the QB position has only $100,000 to spend on the position, then its $100,000/annum. If its $50 million allocated to the QB position, then it is $50 million/annum. It is whatever Belichick thinks he can afford, for that position, in a given year. It can and does vary by year.

And it is NOT SOME ARBITRARY "REALISTIC" NUMBER from a Jr. GM. This year the Patriots have ALREADY allocated $29 million to the QB position, SO FAR. That can change, but that "it is what it IS...", to paraphrase a quote from somebody or other.

My unequivocal answer is exactly the same... $29 million, right now. Not $50 million. Is that definitive enough?

Fencer

No. To begin with, you're thoroughly mistaken. The Patriots aren't trying to pay "fair" value; they're trying to get players at bargains. And there's no reason to assume the Patriots plan to pay Cassell the money they're currently on the hook for, at least not as their base case.

Second, I don't believe you're really so stupid as to believe what you're posting in this thread. Instead, you're just sabotaging it by putting words up that are a long-winded way of saying you don't want to think about the question I raised.

Now, it's perfectly fine to have nothing to say about some particular question a stranger raises on a message board. But to paraphrase Tom Lehrer -- if you have nothing to say, why don't you just shut up about it?

PatsFanSince74

I grant what you say. which is more or less tautological.

My only point is that there is no practical import to your question, which, nonetheless, does not invalidate it as a question.

My answer to your (interesting) question is that Cassell's "true value to the Patriots," as you define it, is irrelevant, if it is even possible to be calculated so as to gain consensus approval from a group of reasonable and well-informed observers. There can be no "negotiation" wherein a "threat point," as valid (and complex) as it would be if properly applied in Game Theory, would come into play in this case, given the exogenous circumstances of the CBA and the Tag.

Cassel's worth is what he can receive in the market.

I've already defended you in this thread, BTW, by stating that this is an interesting hypothetical issue. All I've argued is that it is purely theoretical, given the CBA and tag.

__________________
It is what it is. It wasn't what it wasn't.

mgcolby

You obviously didn't get anything, because I was being funny.

Sensitive much???

__________________
Hey, Bill you're wasting Brady's prime years......oh wait....
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Fencer

Thank you for your open mind ... ... but that part is largely incorrect. It's precisely the exogeneous constraints that make the negotiation interesting to analyze.

I once asked for and received -- but did not follow up on -- tentative permission to take the HBS negotiation course materials and teach them at another university. A B-school case on this multi-player negotiation would have fit right in.

Hmm. Actually, no. One of the most interesting factors is that it's unknown which teams truly are or aren't interested in Cassel. I don't immediately see how to roleplay that without leaving some of the students (those portraying unintersted teams) with nothing to do. Nice idea while it lasted ... but I digress.

Anyhow, whether BB sees keeping Cassel as a $6 million loss or a $10 million loss DOES affect how willing he is to play "chicken" in negotiations. Ditto, where other teams think he values Cassel affects their expectations of how far they can push him.

IcyPatriot

The best approximation of Cassel's value is found using String Theory.

A combination of quantum mattchanics and general Casselativity which results in a quantum Mattheory of Casselivity.

Also the calculation Patriots= Matt Cassel squared is usefull.

PatsFanSince74

I'm pretty well done with this. We disagree.

Just curious though. Which course was that? First year or Second Year? There were negotiation modules in a lot of courses when I was there, but which course are you referring to?

__________________
It is what it is. It wasn't what it wasn't.

Frezo

It all hinges on Belinomics. At some point Cassel's trade value equals the value he would have on the Pat's roster. It's not a fixed point and changes relative to Brady's health, the combine, buzz around the league, etc. According to Belinomics a concurrence of events will take place where any decision becomes obvious and action must be taken. Any delay will lead to diminishing returns. IMO the action will be trade.

Fencer

It was whatever Elon Kohlberg taught in 1980-81. But the guy I talked to about it was Howard Raiffa, notwithstanding that Elon was my de facto thesis advisor.

If you know both Elon and Howard, that probably makes reasonable sense to you ...

In those days, the idea of a whole course on negotiation was still somewhat innovative.

Fencer

My wife, who's quite the basketball fan, looks askance at me even so for also liking football -- both because of the violence and because of what she perceives as the brainless or at least anti-intellectual nature of many of its fans.

I'm beginning to see her point on both counts ...