Quote:
Originally Posted by ctpatsfan77
Well, they don't exactly want to be on the hook for $14.6M, either. . . .
|
Maybe they don't want to pay 14.6M for a backup, but at some point the Pats must have discussed the possibility that Cassel could be a 14.6M backup and that this scenario would be an acceptable way to preserve the value of their assets. Should any offer for Cassel materialize, I'd also expect the Pats to try to maximize the value of that offer.
2nd, Dunn is obligated to maximize the remuneration of his own client, Cassel. Presumably, he's done that already by advising Matt to sign the franchise tender. And if the Pats are willing to trade Cassel (and we all think they are) then Dunn will be obligated to get Cassel the best offer he can get.
3rd, and this is the interesting part as far as i'm concerned. The suitors for Cassel must engage in separate negotiations with Dunn and the Pats for what looks to me like the same transaction. They exchange value in the form of draft picks to the Pats and they exchange money with Cassel that impacts their cap and bottom line. If I were the potential suitor I'd evaluate the entire deal, both what I have to give up to the Pats and what I have to give up to Matt Cassel. If the deal in total isn't attractive then I wouldn't be interested.
So that's why I thought it was interesting (after reading this thread and learning that subterfuge wasn't necessary to trade a franchised player) that BB said, "We look forward to working with Matt again in 2009." BB wants to make sure that the Pats get the better end of the total transaction in what could be a 14.6M dollar game of chicken.
Then again, I could attribute all this to too much free time and an overactive imagination.
-F