More Mallett Chit Chat

[Sciz]

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...t-raiders-trade-qb-terrelle-pryor-to-seahawks

That sets the market for back-ups - a 7th rounder for Terrelle Pryor to be the back up in Seattle is a good deal for Seattle which already had a veteran back-up. Pryor may be converted to a receiver position, or could be good trade bait if the Seahawks want to move up in some round.

Mallett can't command better than that with no live action experience.

All the Pryor trade does is set the market for gimmick players who should never be expected to attempt to win a game by throwing the ball. It does nothing to the trade market for legitimate quarterbacks.

 

[supafly]

You said it yourself though. Whatever team gets him will get a full season to evaluate him and then decide if they want to extend him to a long term deal. Add on top of that a weak QB class where Bortles is probably the best guy available and guys like Bridgewater, Manziel etc. have their stock plummeting.

I very much doubt Mallet will go anywhere though. As lowball offers of 3rd/4th round picks will just get rejected out of hand. Having an experienced insurance policy at backup QB is very important as we saw in Matt Cassell's unexpected year as the Patriots starter.

Actually, VJC--I said the opposite, that if some team gave up a 2nd/3rd round pick (as suggested by the poster whom I responded to), the odds are pretty high that they'd want to extend him, and would be considering him a starter or the odds on favorite to win the job in competition. At least that's what I was attempting to say, anyway

However, your scenario may be plausible just as well, particularly in this specific situation. Normally, when someone gives up a pick as high as what was suggested, they aren't going to gamble by waiting until free agency to sign him to a new deal. They just gave up a major pick, and when that's done in the final year of a contract, more often than not that person is immediately extended. How any team would feel about this happening with a QB is up in the air, so I could see either scenario playing out.

 

[goheels22002]

Ah, there's the rub. We don't know if Mallett is a legitimate quarterback. He might be, and if a couple of years with Brady, Belichick, and one each with O'Brien and McDaniels, are worth anything, he should be. But who knows?

Pryor is an interesting QB to me. He's got the physical skills to do the job, but his time in Oakland is such a crapshoot, it's hard to know what the Seahawks have on their hands.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I hope they trade Mallett to the Browns so I can make a Lombardi joke.

I'd do Mallett for Hoyer and a 2nd/3rd in a heartbeat.

 

[supafly]

I'm still trying to figure out why any team would trade any pick for a guy that's just going to be an FA next year, let alone any pick. Further, if it's not a second rounder, why would Belichick trade away the only viable back-up option he has with experience in the system? The only way I could see that is if they're targetting a quarterback early.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[supafly]

I'd do Mallett for Hoyer and a 2nd/3rd in a heartbeat.

I'd crawl from Pittsburgh to carry him on my back to Logan, should that kind of offer come up. It'd be an ideal setting to be able to have a QB with experience in our system come back. Unfortunately, both Cassel and Hoyer have their sights set on becoming opening day starters for their teams.

 

[supafly]

Ah, there's the rub. We don't know if Mallett is a legitimate quarterback. He might be, and if a couple of years with Brady, Belichick, and one each with O'Brien and McDaniels, are worth anything, he should be. But who knows?

Pryor is an interesting QB to me. He's got the physical skills to do the job, but his time in Oakland is such a crapshoot, it's hard to know what the Seahawks have on their hands.

Setting my dislike of Pryor aside, I think this was a decent low risk gamble for the SEA Seahawks. Pryor for a 7th round pick is probably just as good as any other player they'd have gotten in that round.

 

[AzPatsFan]

The Patriots didn't get a 2nd rounder for Cassel they got a 2nd rounder for Cassel and Vrabel. Cassel's post NE career has overall been a disappointment which is why a guy who lead our team to 11-5 was brought in as a backup after failing in KC.

This isn't me telling you how I want the world to be, it's how I see it. I liked Cassel but if it still takes Cassel + Vrabel after Cassel went 11-5 I just don't see how Mallett is going to magically be viewed as having value having done jack **** other than backup our QB and throw an INT that wasn't his fault.

BB was looking for a place for one of his favorites in Vrabel.. Cassell trade involved taking Vrabel and his big contract, giving him a job on lieu of another pick, So Cassell might have really been more valuable than just a second.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Do you think that Belichick would be okay with paying Matt Cassel that kind of money that he just signed for, just to be our backup? When Cassel signed the deal last month, he was under the impression that he would probably be the starter in MIN; or at the very least the odds on favorite to win the job in training camp.

That'd be an awful lot of money to pay for a backup QB in my opinion. I think he's making 3.5m per year with his brand new deal.

Get used to the current going price for a backup QB. That is why Mallett will not be moved this year. Why would BB use up $ 5 million or so and essentially every spare CAP dollar he has and have to dump some other players to afford a Mallett change?

Answer he doesn't, despite what the Draftnik non gurus want, while never thinking things through.

 

[AzPatsFan]

I heard that the Pats have been talking about an extension for Mallett. So they must like something about him.

Where did you hear that?

 

[supafly]

Get used to the current going price for a backup QB. That is why Mallett will not be moved this year. Why would BB use up $ 5 million or so and essentially every spare CAP dollar he has and have to dump some other players to afford a Mallett change?

Answer he doesn't, despite what the Draftnik non gurus want, while never thinking things through.

I'm a bit confused by your comment here, AZ.

Cassel signed a new deal for 3.5 million per year for 2014 and 2015, and he is expected to be in the range of QBs who are starting caliber backups, who have a chance to win the job for opening day. As you say, that range is anywhere from about 3-5 million.

Belichick would much rather bring someone in the draft for peanuts on the dollar, and take his chances that way for our backup QB. There would never be one thought of paying someone 3-5 million dollars per year. I don't know anyone who would advocate paying a backup 3-5 million.

The "current price" as you say has nothing to do with backup QBs--outside of maybe DAL and their stupid decision to pay Kyle Orton, which is likely changing this year with the fact that they brought Brandon Weeden in. Those QBs were paid that kind of money to compete for the starting job. The high majority of true backup QBs is nowhere near 3-5 million dollars.

 

[PP2]

I think Pryor did well in Oakland, considering this context, OAKLAND.

The fact that Seattle gave only a 7th for him tells little in this story, Oakland sucks at trades, it's different markets, Seattle have a franchise QB. The rumors around Mallet link him to franchises in a need of a new QB, and for a QB who are familiar with a specific system, which is completely different from what they run in Oakland (do they have such a thing like a system there?) and Seattle.

Oakland doesn't only suck at trades, they suck at player development. They threw Pryor right into the fire without even allowing him to develop his mechanics, develop some consistency. Oakland has always been about you either sink or swim or run fast.

IMO, Seattle made a good trade. They can afford to rebuild Pryor from the ground up and bring him along slowly.

 

[supafly]

Get used to the current going price for a backup QB. That is why Mallett will not be moved this year. Why would BB use up $ 5 million or so and essentially every spare CAP dollar he has and have to dump some other players to afford a Mallett change?

I fully agree with all of your thoughts on Mallett. We agree on the fact that in a perfect world, it'd be nice to sign Mallett to an extension and keep him on for the backup spot, as ridiculously low as the odds of that happening are from Mallett's standpoint. We also agree that there's not much reason to trade Mallett this year, unless someone offers a higher round pick (3rd round) that blows Belichick away.

Where you totally lose me though is the thought that we'd somehow have to run out and pay a new backup 5 million dollars...I don't see any relationship whatsoever to moving Mallett and having that remotely considered.

 

[Triumph]

Not that I was particularly high on Cassel but people keep talking like he was the sole reason for the Chiefs being abysmal conveniently ignoring the less than stellar coaching jobs of Haley and Crennel and the reasonably average proliferation of talent Cassel had to work with. He had a few players of note (two who are RBs) on O; Dwayne Bowe, the often injured Tony Moeaki, Jamaal Charles and Thomas Jones.

I'm not defending Cassel but he had considerably more talent to work with during his season with New England. He also had better coaching and a better system around him. That's the beauty of Belichick. He coaches guys to their max.

Using Cassel as any gauge of Mallett's NFL-ability is, in my opinion, unwise. It's not fair to Mallett (and I sit on the a pie would be great return in a trade for Mallett).

Cassels fumbles and INTs are on him and not the HC, GM or OC.

Some Cassel games took until the 3rd quarter before the Chiefs made a 1st down.

 

[Triumph]

Awesome. If anything indicates that the Patriots are going to get a 2nd for Mallett it is this.

The Pats should laugh all the way home from the draft if they do.

Im all for trading him now and placing the best team possible on the field today.

 

[102 Pat]

If Mallett gets traded, what will most of the board talk about?

 

[Deus Irae]

If Mallett gets traded, what will most of the board talk about?

His replacement

 

[mmasterkillah]

Mallett is a great prospect, so I think it makes sense to hold onto him unless we get "an offer we can't refuse."

First off, if he really isn't valued that highly around the league, we may be able to keep him for a decent price after this season.
Secondly, if he is really valued around the league, we should get a fantastic compensatory pick anyways, and the last year of his service probably offsets the difference between any deal we could possibly get anyways.

Draft David Fales late.

 

[ausbacker]

Cassels fumbles and INTs are on him and not the HC, GM or OC.

Some Cassel games took until the 3rd quarter before the Chiefs made a 1st down.

No, interceptions are not always the fault of the Quarterback. Fumbles, well yes, they are. You appear to be conveniently forgetting the tone of the post in your zest to diss Cassel.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

No, interceptions are not always the fault of the Quarterback. Fumbles, well yes, they are. You appear to be conveniently forgetting the tone of the post in your zest to diss Cassel.

Most fumbles, but not even all of those are the QB's fault.

And I agree 100% that INTs aren't always on the QB: there's a reason the Pats released Visanthe Shiancoe and not Mallett after Mallett's INT against the Texans.