What is Cassel worth in trade part 4

[BradyManny]

Reiss updates with more analysis, this time from Dan Reeves:

Part IV: What is Matt Cassel worth in a trade? - Reiss' Pieces - Boston.com

While I do agree with some of the caveats Reeves lists, I still think ultimately we are likely to get a 1st - if not this year, then 2010 - which frankly, would be almost preferable.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

opinions are like bungholes.....everyone has one

 

[BradyManny]

opinions are like bungholes.....everyone has one

True, but at least Reiss is asking pretty informed guys.

Here's a recap:

Lombardi: High first rounder + more
Mariucci: First rounder + more
Miller: Second rounder as a conditional which could become first
Reeves: Second rounder

I'd throw Kiper in there, but his opinion is generally worthless, so I'll stick to the four above. The average opinion would be at least a first rounder, and as we all know, it only takes one team to up the ante.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

I'm gonna miss this goofball

YouTube - Larryoke 2008 - The Right Stuff

 

[CanadianPat'sFan]

I'm gonna miss this goofball

YouTube - Larryoke 2008 - The Right Stuff

Wow after that I would expect at least three first rounders after that performance

On a serious note to get a successful NFL QB on you roster has to be worth a first and a second at least so I think Mariucci is the closest.

 

[nantucketguy]

I dont think we WANT a 1st rounder for '10. We need players now. if you think about it, we have a unique window here...2-3 years left before I think we start to see a decline in the team. Dont get me wrong, I have faith in BB! and I think we'll continue to be good. But we have a GREAT team now. Moss has got 2 years left on his contract and prob only two years before something goes. Same with our OL. Brady...who knows. This, I think, was supposed to be our SB year, especially after last year, but we trade Cassel...we need players now! Some draft picks are good, but we need defensive starters to have run at a couple more SB's. I love the Pats, but anything less than 2 outta the next 3 SB's, we're in it...or its dissappointment.
I know alot of you might not agree, but dynasty's dont last forever. Its a miracle they come at all with the cap. What we get for Cassel might determine how good we are next year. Harrison is done, Seau and Bruschi done. Even tho TB is coming back, I only see him idealy in 3rd down and short situations. AND we all know our corners suck. Sorry no other way of putting that. Even Vrabel and thomas were not the players this year that they were 07. Other than our DL, mayo, thomas, and meriwether, our current guys need to be next years back ups!

 

[nantucketguy]

and I think we look into the rights for Vick. We trade a 5th pick for his rights, redevelop him as our back up, then this time next year, we trade him too.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I know alot of you might not agree, but dynasty's dont last forever.

The Patriots philosophy is not about dynasties. It's about being in the playoff hunt every single year, and seeing as the last time the Patriots played a regular season game when they were eliminated from the playoffs was in 2000, I'd say they've done a good job of that.

If BB decides that 2010 picks are more useful (if the Pats go deep into the playoffs, then their ability to sign UFAs will be limited unless a new CBA is worked out), then IBBIT.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

and I think we look into the rights for Vick. We trade a 5th pick for his rights, redevelop him as our back up, then this time next year, we trade him too.

:wha: :bricks:

 

[nantucketguy]

:wha: :bricks:

Falcons want to trade his rights

 

[Deus Irae]

Falcons want to trade his rights

From a chat on NFL.com today:

Brandon, Philadelphia 02:05 PM ET
What teams might be interested in trading for Michael Vick?

Pat Kirwan, NFL.com
As you may have seen today, Falcons GM Thomas Dimitroff stated they are looking to trade Vick's rights. Good luck with that. Nobody will trade for Vick on multiple levels. One, his contract calls for $9 million in 2009, $10.5 million in 2010, and $12 million or more in the following three years. Nobody is going to pay that money. Two, we're not even sure if the commissioner is going to suspend him when he's released from prison. Three, we're not sure he doesn't have diminished skills. He will eventually get a chance in the NFL after he's released -- but on a veteran's minimum contract.

 

[ScottieC]

and I think we look into the rights for Vick. We trade a 5th pick for his rights, redevelop him as our back up, then this time next year, we trade him too.

:wha: Everyday someone should get the award for dumbest post (I'm sure I would win a few times myself).

Today, if that award existed - That is the winner, hands down.

 

[nantucketguy]

From a chat on NFL.com today:

Your right, his old contract would have to be thrown away. Which he might do to get back in the game. It would be a one or two year deal 1-2M. And it is more likely that his only option would be in a back up role anyway. Why not us. second, the trade would HAVE to be conditional upon his eligibility of course. Prob be a 2010 pick. Third, yeah he would have to work hard to get back into shape and get sharp, but a 80% Vick is better than most back ups in the league! Give he's cleared by the commish, I don't think its a huge gamble.

 

[Jimke]

Your right, his old contract would have to be thrown away. Which he might do to get back in the game. It would be a one or two year deal 1-2M. And it is more likely that his only option would be in a back up role anyway. Why not us. second, the trade would HAVE to be conditional upon his eligibility of course. Prob be a 2010 pick. Third, yeah he would have to work hard to get back into shape and get sharp, but a 80% Vick is better than most back ups in the league! Give he's cleared by the commish, I don't think its a huge gamble.

It would be a cold day in hell before Belichick and Kraft would

have a scum bag like Vick on their team.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Your right, his old contract would have to be thrown away. Which he might do to get back in the game. It would be a one or two year deal 1-2M. And it is more likely that his only option would be in a back up role anyway. Why not us. second, the trade would HAVE to be conditional upon his eligibility of course. Prob be a 2010 pick. Third, yeah he would have to work hard to get back into shape and get sharp, but a 80% Vick is better than most back ups in the league! Give he's cleared by the commish, I don't think its a huge gamble.

Ummm . . . seeing as we have a backup who (A) runs almost as well as Vick, (B) is a better passer, and (C) isn't mentally disturbed, I'll pass.

 

[BradyBranch39]

Ummm . . . seeing as we have a backup who (A) runs almost as well as Vick, (B) is a better passer, and (C) isn't mentally disturbed, I'll pass.

YOu mean (at the moment) our third-stringer?

 

[ctpatsfan77]

YOu mean (at the moment) our third-stringer?

:yeahthat:

 

[Zeus]

1. Cassel's value will be determined on the open market by the highest bidder. The demand for quality QBs far outstrips the supply, so it doesn't seem likely that a lowball bid could win.

2. I would bet that NE has put a value on Cassel and will not trade him for something lower. Implicit here is that NE is willing to keep Cassel on the roster if no one ponies up appropriate value. This also means that the Patirots will be patient and let the market come to them.

3. Cassel's motivation in signing the tender is two-fold. First, he hasn't made a lot of money in his career (by NFL standards) and he can lock in lifetime security with this guaranteed contract. Second, he has increased the likelihood that NE will trade him simply because they would prefer not to tie up so much money for QBs. The minimum value set by NE should be somewhat lower because Cassel has signed the tender.

4. The best action may well be found in the NFC North. There is no dominant team and three of the teams do not have a bonafide NFL QB. If these teams perceive that Matt Cassel tips the balance of power in this division for the next 2-3 years, you could see a bidding war - a great scenario for the Patriots.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

1. Cassel's value will be determined on the open market by the highest bidder. The demand for quality QBs far outstrips the supply, so it doesn't seem likely that a lowball bid could win.

2. I would bet that NE has put a value on Cassel and will not trade him for something lower. Implicit here is that NE is willing to keep Cassel on the roster if no one ponies up appropriate value. This also means that the Patirots will be patient and let the market come to them.

3. Cassel's motivation in signing the tender is two-fold. First, he hasn't made a lot of money in his career (by NFL standards) and he can lock in lifetime security with this guaranteed contract. Second, he has increased the likelihood that NE will trade him simply because they would prefer not to tie up so much money for QBs. The minimum value set by NE should be somewhat lower because Cassel has signed the tender.

4. The best action may well be found in the NFC North. There is no dominant team and three of the teams do not have a bonafide NFL QB. If these teams perceive that Matt Cassel tips the balance of power in this division for the next 2-3 years, you could see a bidding war - a great scenario for the Patriots.

Of course, it would help if logic didn't go flying out the window whenever fans of other teams start talking about Cassel. . . .

 

[VJCPatriot]

Of course, it would help if logic didn't go flying out the window whenever fans of other teams start talking about Cassel. . . .

I laughed out loud when I read one Viking fan post that he thought they could get Cassel for Tavaris Jackson and a 3rd rounder! First of all Tavaris Jackson stinks so the Pats wouldn't want him and the throw in 3rd rounder isn't going to be enough either. Another case of overvaluation of draft picks.