Could this possibly be Belichick's plan for Cassel?

[Rob0729]

Everyone says there's 9-10 teams in need of a QB as of right now.

I'm not quite sure who you see filling all those needs. Derek Anderson and 8 rookies?

Cassel himself (wisely) said that he expects Brady to be the starter ahead of him if he's still on the team. Would teams assume that Cassel no longer has the skills and abilities if Brady starts ahead of him? Do GMs really have such short memories?

There might not be 10 teams in need of a QB - but 5-7? I think so.

Don't forget - in all likelihood, if Cassel collects his $14.65 million this year and enters free agency next year, he might be MORE attractive to teams who might not be so eager to give the Patriots their top draft choice.

And as far as holding the cards, Cassel might not be able to shop himself currently, but we know that's a bit of a joke - his agent is likely still doing that. He holds the most important card - he can block any trade he wants and still collect nearly $15 million this year and likely much more than that next year.... for a two year total that could never come close to what he'd get in the first two years of a long-term deal this year.

I, like you, qualify this with the assumption that Cassel DOES want to start - but his signing of the tender tells me that he's not about to jeopardize his income in the process.

Part of the reason Cassel is so hot right now is because the draft is one of the worst drafts for QBs in years and there are no real QB free agents since Warner said he wants to stay in Zona. Who knows what it will be like next year. What if next year's draft has a QB pool like 2004 (Manning, Roethlisberger, Rivers)? That would take away possibly 3-4 potential suitors. Of the remaining 4-5 teams you state, how many will be willing to trade a first round pick or more and pay Cassel top dollar. Even right now, all of Cassel's potential suitors will not get into the race because of the cost of acquiring him.

Cassel cannot block any trade. That is a falicy. He can block any trade that the team trading for Cassel requires a long term deal to get the deal done. If say the Bucs or Vikings think they are a Matt Cassel away from being a legitimate Super Bowl contender, they might role the dice and take Cassel without a deal. Cassel can't block that.

Cassel staying with the Pats is a gamble. He could be in more demand as you say or he could be in less demand too. That is a big risk for Cassel. It could reward him handsomely or screw him out of millions. I don't see Cassel wanting to take the risk. His agent certainly does not want to take the risk.

 

[Sicilian]

There are two problems with keeping Cassel (either at the franchise number or a long term deal):

1) It's too much money to have stocked in one position.

2) If Brady is healthy, and Cassel sits all year, his value goes WAY down IMO. The reason we're talking about a potential 1st and 3rd is because teams have just seen what Cassel is capable of. He's opened some eyes, but the longer he sits, the more risky he is, the older he is, and the more his value decreases.

Unless we think Brady is definitely not going to play in 2009, we're going to trade Cassel while his value is at its peak.

 

[BradyManny]

The key assumption is that Cassel really was serious when he said that if the Patriots franchise him, he'll be a Patriot in 2009 (i.e., the Patriots do not plan to trade him in 2009).

Signing bonus: $14.6M
2009 salary: $5M
2010 salary: $6.5M
2011 salary: $8M
2012 salary: $9.5M
4-year total: $43.6M

Here's why I think this might work, if they were serious:
(1) It gives Cassel more first-year money than the franchise tag (an extra $5M).
(2) If a new CBA restores the salary cap in 2010, the Patriots should be able to spread out the pain of the extra ~$11M in SB proration over two years, instead of one.
(3) If the salary cap goes away, a team would only have to cough up $25M over three years for Cassel.
(4) It doesn't completely solve the problem, but it does give the Pats an extra $5M or so in cap room, enough to resign three or four vets.

Thoughts?

I basically second Dues' graphical response. I don't see this happening on either end.

I maintain that with or without Brady, Cassel doesn't have the value here that he has elsewhere at organizations that are starved for QBs and have shown an inability to develop QBs.

I will also repeatedly come back to the thing no one wants to talk about, which is that Cassel's #s by more discerning metrics are just slightly above average, and are below the likes of J. Campbell, Garcia, Seneca Wallace, and Tavaris Jackson. His DVOA, DYAR, YAR & VOA are all below those guys. Granted I think the high sack total is part of the factor driving it down, but part of it is also compensation for level of competition, and the Pats had a brutally easy schedule when it comes to defenses this year. Consider we haven't seen Cassel defeat a top defense at this point. The one time he played a truly good defense, he struggled, whereas Brady at that point in his career was rising to the competition against those kinds of defenses. So are you, as a hypothetical Patriots front office guy, OK with giving him a contract that is on par w Brady's first extension?

Now, let me talk out of both sides of my mouth and explain why other teams should be willing to spend much MORE on Cassel than the contract you lay out. He's big, smart, mentally tough and has been coached extremely well. He's got great intangibles, is a great teammate and has shown football is important to him. He's got solid accuracy and will continue to improve. So if you're one of the many teams who believes that they are a good QB away from getting on track, Cassel makes sense.

And yes, it is talking out of both sides of my mouth - but like most things, the answer lies in the middle. Cassel doesn't have the value to us he has to other teams. Which is why - 14.5 million price tag or not - I don't see him as a Patriot for long. Particularly given we can reap a bounty of picks by moving him.

 

[JSn]

And what if he wins the starting role in camp?

Sounds crazy, sure, but all the pessimists AND optimists (that's right, you're not realists because you simply don't know anything more than anyone else) can only guess how Brady will do.

Expensive or not, why not have a guy you can insert and be champion calibre again immediately if Brady doesn't quickly (or ever) return to form?

Also, if we still have Matt in a few years when Brady starts to slow down, he's a younger, trained option.

I'm a fan of the long-term deal, but it won't happen unless someone tells Matt there's a real chance of him winning the starting role.

I now don my rainsuit as the droolers come out to yell how Jesus, I mean Brady, will be better than ever, based on... NOTHING.

 

[BradyManny]

And what if he wins the starting role in camp?

Sounds crazy, sure, but all the pessimists AND optimists (that's right, you're not realists because you simply don't know anything more than anyone else) can only guess how Brady will do.

Expensive or not, why not have a guy you can insert and be champion calibre again immediately if Brady doesn't quickly (or ever) return to form?

Also, if we still have Matt in a few years when Brady starts to slow down, he's a younger, trained option.

I'm a fan of the long-term deal, but it won't happen unless someone tells Matt there's a real chance of him winning the starting role.

I now don my rainsuit as the droolers come out to yell how Jesus, I mean Brady, will be better than ever, based on... NOTHING.

I'm pretty close to coming to the conclusion that you're just a Matt Cassel fan and not a Tom Brady fan, and maybe not even a Patriot fan. Is Matt Cassel a guy that makes this team a "championship caliber" team? Honestly? As I said in another thread, given the metrics, given his performance against better defenses, I wouldn't be overly comfortable w Cassel as starting QB with next year's schedule, so why should I pay him $14.5 million dollars. The facts, the stats, and his experience do not back up that Cassel is worth that money and could be a championship caliber QB. He may have that POTENTIAL, but the Patriots are not the team that is going to take the risk to find out.

 

[JSn]

I'm pretty close to coming to the conclusion that you're just a Matt Cassel fan and not a Tom Brady fan, and maybe not even a Patriot fan.

Whilst I base my life on the conclusions you reach about me based on my posts on this forum, you don't quite have this one down. Seriously, even with a high bar for asininity, that statement is top tier.

It's because I'm a Pats fan I'm willing to throw it out there.

Would you feel more comfortable with Gutz or KOC hitting the field in September? If Cassel gave us the best chance to win this year, and Brady was out for next year (either based on post-injury performance or the ever popular "setback") why wouldn't Cassel be the best chance to win next year?

That's a worthwhile investment if there's any risk that Brady isn't going to go. I'm excited to see us win a lot of games next year and hopefully a Lombardi. I'll be excited to watch that no matter who is at QB. It seems to me Brady is the reason for the bandwagon fans (I turned up during his time at QB) and yet I constantly get people screaming at me if I suggest anything other than him being 100% and ready to steamroll the league. Bizzaro world.

My stance is this: if Brady becomes an average QB (and I assume we've seen his peak in 2007) and especially if there is some chance he misses two full years of playing, we might as well get five years younger at the position with a QB who also came up in the system. And if Tom hits camp with a vengeance and it's no contest (more likely than not to us who have no inside info), you have a solid back-up for a year and you can trade him next year. Cassel has value in trade AND as realiable insurance. I don't understand why everyone is either/or on this.

 

[Tunescribe]

Cassel is GOING TO BE TRADED. He is NOT the second coming of Tom Brady and is not worth that kind of money. The Patriots need to unload him quick while he's still a hot commodity, because he's never going to be better than he was this past season. In time, Kevin O'Connell will prove a better quarterback than Cassel. Mark it down.

 

[BradyManny]

Whilst I base my life on the conclusions you reach about me based on my posts on this forum, you don't quite have this one down. Seriously, even with a high bar for asininity, that statement is top tier.

It's because I'm a Pats fan I'm willing to throw it out there.

Would you feel more comfortable with Gutz or KOC hitting the field in September? If Cassel gave us the best chance to win this year, and Brady was out for next year (either based on post-injury performance or the ever popular "setback") why wouldn't Cassel be the best chance to win next year?

My stance is this: if Brady becomes an average QB (and I assume we've seen his peak in 2007) and especially if there is some chance he misses two full years of playing, we might as well get five years younger at the position with a QB who also came up in the system. And if Tom hits camp with a vengeance and it's no contest (more likely than not to us who have no inside info), you have a solid back-up for a year and you can trade him next year. Cassel has value in trade AND as realiable insurance. I don't understand why everyone is either/or on this.

Of course Cassel has a better chance to win games then Gutz or O'C. He's a much better QB at this point in time.

But I also have faith in the coaching staff, the offense, and particularly Moss, who changes everything.

I was one of the people that thought we could still compete without Brady. Perhaps that's why my perspective is different on things. I expected this team with all its talent to still be in the playoffs and in the hunt, particularly w the schedule, and that turned out not to be the case.

Most people were running for the hills and thought this team would turn into bottom dwellers over night, so of course they are overwhelmed by Cassel's performance.

As for Tom hitting his peak, I don't buy it. If anything, he and Moss were just getting started. McD improved since 2007, and I think they would've had a more efficient 2008 had Brady remained healthy.

The problem w bringing Cassel back is a) he's killing the cap for this season b) you could diminish his value. Let's say Brady is PUP'd and Cassel stars the first 6 games (don't think Brady will be PUP'd anyway, but still). As much as I'd like to think Cassel would flourish again, our schedule next year sucks hard, and he may not have such gaudy #s.

Trade Cassel when his stock is high. Develop QBs behind Brady. Its that simple, and its the Patriot way. Paying 14.5 million for a backup is not.

 

[mgteich]

What a great victory! At least the patriots could say they had the power and forced Cassel to take $14.6M to play for the team they chose with the likelihood of another higher bonus in 2010.

Be real! The patriots could a 3rd for doing nothing. The patriots could certainly have more than a 5th if they cooperate with Cassel.

Absolute worst case ? Trade Cassel to, say, Minnesota for a 5th round pick. No brainer for Minnesota even if they don't know if they can re-sign him. And it still works for us, it gets the money off the books and lets us pick his destination. I'd prefer to get a 5th round pick from Minnesota than a 3rd round comp pick and have him playing for the Jets. We absolutely can trade him anywhere, we just wouldn't get that much for him; but by picking his destination we still win.

 

[mgteich]

The patriots are free to trade Cassel to any team for anything they can get. The new team would pay Cassel's compensation of $14.6M guaranteed with no injury clause. Cassel will not sabotage or block this. Could he? Well, he could sit out.

If the patriots think that they can just go out and make the best deal they can, including Cassel's new deal, then they are delusional. Cassel has no reason to accept any deal for himself that he and his agent's did not write.

This is not a matter of trust, payback, loyalty or anything but business. The patriots and Cassel will act with all their rights under the CBA.

"Sabotage" would be a better word than "block".

 

[mgteich]

Cassel's agent didn't think any team would give two firsts and give him an acceptable contract. He didn't think this was enough of a possibility to wait until one week into free agency and find out his worth.

I agree that Cassel is no more proven than the other QB's you mention, and I agree that he is worth more to other teams than the patriots. He is a fine young prospect. His success is greatly overrated. He took a fine team with one of the weakest schedules ever and didn't make the playoffs, primarily because he couldn't win any games against last year's AFC division winners. But that doesn't matter much. He is indeed a fine prospect.

I basically second Dues' graphical response. I don't see this happening on either end.

I maintain that with or without Brady, Cassel doesn't have the value here that he has elsewhere at organizations that are starved for QBs and have shown an inability to develop QBs.

I will also repeatedly come back to the thing no one wants to talk about, which is that Cassel's #s by more discerning metrics are just slightly above average, and are below the likes of J. Campbell, Garcia, Seneca Wallace, and Tavaris Jackson. His DVOA, DYAR, YAR & VOA are all below those guys. Granted I think the high sack total is part of the factor driving it down, but part of it is also compensation for level of competition, and the Pats had a brutally easy schedule when it comes to defenses this year. Consider we haven't seen Cassel defeat a top defense at this point. The one time he played a truly good defense, he struggled, whereas Brady at that point in his career was rising to the competition against those kinds of defenses. So are you, as a hypothetical Patriots front office guy, OK with giving him a contract that is on par w Brady's first extension?

Now, let me talk out of both sides of my mouth and explain why other teams should be willing to spend much MORE on Cassel than the contract you lay out. He's big, smart, mentally tough and has been coached extremely well. He's got great intangibles, is a great teammate and has shown football is important to him. He's got solid accuracy and will continue to improve. So if you're one of the many teams who believes that they are a good QB away from getting on track, Cassel makes sense.

And yes, it is talking out of both sides of my mouth - but like most things, the answer lies in the middle. Cassel doesn't have the value to us he has to other teams. Which is why - 14.5 million price tag or not - I don't see him as a Patriot for long. Particularly given we can reap a bounty of picks by moving him.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

A blast from the past that has nothing to do with ctpatsfan77's drug use, but looks like something fun to use later on this year when they come out with new rankings...

:bricks:

Don't forget - in all likelihood, if Cassel collects his $14.65 million this year and enters free agency next year, he might be MORE attractive to teams who might not be so eager to give the Patriots their top draft choice.

Right now, he wouldn't be.

If Brady is healthy, and Cassel sits all year, his value goes WAY down IMO. The reason we're talking about a potential 1st and 3rd is because teams have just seen what Cassel is capable of. He's opened some eyes, but the longer he sits, the more risky he is, the older he is, and the more his value decreases.

I'm not sure it would--remember that Schaub got his deal after the 2006 season basically on the strength of one game early in the 2005 season.

Would you feel more comfortable with Gutz or KOC hitting the field in September? If Cassel gave us the best chance to win this year, and Brady was out for next year (either based on post-injury performance or the ever popular "setback") why wouldn't Cassel be the best chance to win next year?

I'm not at all sure who would be better come September 2009, Cassel or O'Connell.

Trade Cassel when his stock is high. Develop QBs behind Brady. Its that simple, and its the Patriot way. Paying 14.5 million for a backup is not.

Let me be clear on my position. I am firmly of the belief that:
(1) The Patriots cannot keep Cassel at the franchise number.
(2) They do not intend to do so.
(3) They will most likely trade him.

The only other way that they can lower Cassel's cap number is to sign him long-term. I'm just wondering if, maybe, they think that--given the alternatives--hanging on to Cassel in 2009 might be their plan.

 

[JSn]

Cassel's agent didn't think any team would give two firsts and give him an acceptable contract. He didn't think this was enough of a possibility to wait until one week into free agency and find out his worth.

I agree that Cassel is no more proven than the other QB's you mention, and I agree that he is worth more to other teams than the patriots. He is a fine young prospect. His success is greatly overrated. He took a fine team with one of the weakest schedules ever and didn't make the playoffs, primarily because he couldn't win any games against last year's AFC division winners. But that doesn't matter much. He is indeed a fine prospect.

Does the ridiculousness of this statement need to pointed out?

That implies Tom couldn't win important games against the Colts or Giants and is therefore overrated. In fact, the kicker really won us two of our Lombardi's. Maybe we could do better with a QB who can win games without kickers and rule-based technicalities?

 

[BradyManny]

Let me be clear on my position. I am firmly of the belief that:
(1) The Patriots cannot keep Cassel at the franchise number.
(2) They do not intend to do so.
(3) They will most likely trade him.

The only other way that they can lower Cassel's cap number is to sign him long-term. I'm just wondering if, maybe, they think that--given the alternatives--hanging on to Cassel in 2009 might be their plan.

I think its a nice exercise and you put forth about as good an effort towards presenting a reasonable way Cassel is here long term as I've seen - I just think too much is stacked against it.

As I've said before - I really wish Cassel were here long term. I think he is a great guy, great teammate, and he has high upside and potential. If he were in year 2 of a 4 or 5 year deal now, he's worth more to us than he is in trade.

Its unfortunate that the team did not realize what they had in Cassel last season and sign him to a longer term deal as a backup - but how could they know given what little time he had?

This is just how its played out, and nonetheless it'll work out well for Cassel, the Patriots, and some team needy of a QB.

 

[BradyManny]

Does the ridiculousness of this statement need to pointed out?

That implies Tom couldn't win important games against the Colts or Giants and is therefore overrated. In fact, the kicker really won us two of our Lombardi's. Maybe we could do better with a QB who can win games without kickers and rule-based technicalities?

I know you've been galvanized into some Anti-Brady stance, but the absurdity of your comments are killing any chance at looking objective.

 

[Deus Irae]

Cassel's agent didn't think any team would give two firsts and give him an acceptable contract. He didn't think this was enough of a possibility to wait until one week into free agency and find out his worth.

This is one possible speculative interpretation, but nothing more than that.

 

[JSn]

I know you've been galvanized into some Anti-Brady stance, but the absurdity of your comments are killing any chance at looking objective.

Again, the things you "know" are impressive.

Anyway, how is what I'm saying any more absurd than saying Cassel couldn't win against the division winners? Last I heard it was a team sport. And the defense handed over a near miraculous come-from-behind-win #12 (Jets 2.0). Are we pinning that loss on Cassel also?

My point is we won the same amount of Lombardi's this year as last. Are we saying it's QB play that was the result? Is that the reasonable assessment here?

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I think its a nice exercise and you put forth about as good an effort towards presenting a reasonable way Cassel is here long term as I've seen - I just think too much is stacked against it.

Obviously I didn't make myself clear enough--I'm not even trying to argue that the Pats intend to keep him beyond 2009. As I stated at the beginning, if they signed him to this contract, they could then easily dangle him as trade bait in 2010 (think about it--the Pats have already paid all the guaranteed money, so the only cost to the new team would be his salary, and Cassel would still make $26M by the end of 2010). The only downside I can see to signing him to a multi-year deal (regardless of whether he actually stays long-term) is that the signing bonus would then preclude the possibility of trading him in 2009.

 

[BradyManny]

Again, the things you "know" are impressive.

Anyway, how is what I'm saying any more absurd than saying Cassel couldn't win against the division winners? Last I heard it was a team sport. And the defense handed over a near miraculous come-from-behind-win #12 (Jets 2.0). Are we pinning that loss on Cassel also?

My point is we won the same amount of Lombardi's this year as last. Are we saying it's QB play that was the result? Is that the reasonable assessment here?

I haven't pinned any losses on Cassel. In fact, if you noticed during the season - even before being on the Cassel bandwagon was the "in" thing around here, I was saying Cassel was doing everything that was asked of him and then some. And he did, basically every game during the season, except the Steelers game.

But there's a big difference between not being responsible for a loss and being responsible for a win. I'll let you figure out the rest, but apparently a 16-0 regular season isn't as big an achievement as an 11-5 one in your mind.

 

[BradyManny]

The only downside I can see to signing him to a multi-year deal (regardless of whether he actually stays long-term) is that the signing bonus would then preclude the possibility of trading him in 2009.

That's what makes trades tough in the NFL - the signing bonus money would be killer. How are roster bonuses treated in a trade? That could make a difference...