Questions for Floyd Reese - New England Patriots Forums

***Miguel*** · 03-01-2009, 12:35 PM

On January 12th you were quoted as
"It would have to be multiple choices and very high choices to get Cassel," ESPN analyst and former Tennessee Titans general manager Floyd Reese said. "Two first-rounders, or a one and a two and a three ... It'll be something very, very expensive."

Reese claimed the Patriots could wait as long as they wanted and still have eager trade partners.

"It's definitely a seller's market," Reese said. "A team like New England can sit back and bide their time.

"If you take the actual number of franchise quarterbacks in the NFL, there's maybe 15. Who's Detroit's starting quarterback? You can go down a long list. All of those teams would be in the bidding.

"You don't have to be in a hurry. There's always teams out there in need of a quarterback, teams who'll think 'We don't like this guy. We can't win with him.'"

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/afceast/0...t-rounder.html

1.) Since you traded Cassel for something that was not "very, very expensive", was your January valuation of Cassel incorrect??
2.) Why did New England, your current employer, not bide their time??

upstater1 · 03-01-2009, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miguel

On January 12th you were quoted as
"It would have to be multiple choices and very high choices to get Cassel," ESPN analyst and former Tennessee Titans general manager Floyd Reese said. "Two first-rounders, or a one and a two and a three ... It'll be something very, very expensive."

Reese claimed the Patriots could wait as long as they wanted and still have eager trade partners.

"It's definitely a seller's market," Reese said. "A team like New England can sit back and bide their time.

"If you take the actual number of franchise quarterbacks in the NFL, there's maybe 15. Who's Detroit's starting quarterback? You can go down a long list. All of those teams would be in the bidding.

"You don't have to be in a hurry. There's always teams out there in need of a quarterback, teams who'll think 'We don't like this guy. We can't win with him.'"

Cassel trade talk opens with high 1st-rounder - AFC East - ESPN

1.) Since you traded Cassel for something that was not "very, very expensive", was your January valuation of Cassel incorrect??
2.) Why did New England, your current employer, not bide their time??

If I get a question related my prospective employer's assets, I too would talk them up. If I'm interviewing for a job at, say, the Boston Herald, I would note how brilliantly they handled the aftermath of the Spygate-Tomase fiasco.

Absurdly Metro · 03-01-2009, 12:38 PM

A very astute question Miguel. One I think many of us would love to have answered. Unfortunately I won't be holding my breath on one forthcoming from Foxboro anytime soon.

***cstjohn17*** · 03-01-2009, 12:40 PM

Aren't you letting BB off the hook? I thought he had ultimate authority on personnel moves.

Basically SP undressed them in front of the rest of the league. It is what it is, nothing can be done about it now.

dtbrks · 03-01-2009, 12:40 PM

Guess he was wrong

Lampshade · 03-01-2009, 12:41 PM

Unfortunately a team cannot accept hypothetical trade offers.

Michigan Dave · 03-01-2009, 12:44 PM

I look at it like this:

Had the Pats let Cassel walk, they'd likely get a compensatory 3rd round pick in 2010. That's effectively a 4th rounder, as those are end of the round picks. Instead, they franchised him right away and moved him right away for effectively a compensatory 1st round pick, as the #34 is early in the 2nd round. If you consider the difference between what the realistic best-case situation was (I'd say a pick in range of #20 overall, maybe a 3rd as well?) and what we received, and the fact that waiting for that offer ties up such a significant portion of the available money...I'm completely OK with what we did. We can better judge this deal in a couple of months when we see the totality of the off-season, and what we do with 4 first-day picks and this space under the cap.

***jmt57*** · 03-01-2009, 12:47 PM

It seems to me that the Pats had two options:

1.) Hold out for the best offer, as Reese had outlined earlier - and miss out on potential free agents and re-signing of current players due to salary cap limitations; or

2.) Trade quickly, sacrificing the best potential return in trade value in order to obtain immediate cap space and the ability to sign more players.

I don't think it was a case of Reese's January evaluation of cassel being incorrect; I just think BB decided the flexibility of immediate cap space had a higher value than the improvement in exchange for Cassel at a later date.

Michigan Dave · 03-01-2009, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmt57

It seems to me that the Pats had two options:

1.) Hold out for the best offer, as Reese had outlined earlier - and miss out on potential free agents and re-signing of current players due to salary cap limitations; or

2.) Trade quickly, sacrificing the best potential return in trade value in order to obtain immediate cap space and the ability to sign more players.

I don't think it was a case of Reese's January evaluation of cassel being incorrect; I just think BB decided the flexibility of immediate cap space had a higher value than the improvement in exchange for Cassel at a later date.

Exactly. It was a balancing test to me. Option #2 won out over option #1.

BlitzFritz · 03-01-2009, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michigan Dave

I look at it like this:

Had the Pats let Cassel walk, they'd likely get a compensatory 3rd round pick in 2010. That's effectively a 4th rounder, as those are end of the round picks. Instead, they franchised him right away and moved him right away for effectively a compensatory 1st round pick, as the #34 is early in the 2nd round. If you consider the difference between what the realistic best-case situation was (I'd say a pick in range of #20 overall, maybe a 3rd as well?) and what we received, and the fact that waiting for that offer ties up such a significant portion of the available money...I'm completely OK with what we did. We can better judge this deal in a couple of months when we see the totality of the off-season, and what we do with 4 first-day picks and this space under the cap.

Exactly. And making the deal quickly was important to get out of cap hell and reduce risk of NOT being able to trade later. I'm ok with this, I think some people are being babies about this tough market and deal....