Welcome to PatsFans.com

Globe: BB rejects Lions #2 (33) for Cassel

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by borg, Mar 2, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. borg

    borg Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2004
    Messages:
    3,821
    Likes Received:
    50
    Ratings:
    +100 / 3 / -11

    "Lending further credence to the idea that the trade was done in part with an eye toward clearing cap space is the fact that the Lions offered the first pick of the second round (No. 33 overall) straight up for Cassel, according to an NFL source"

    Sanders has room to grow - The Boston Globe
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2009
  2. JSn

    JSn Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2008
    Messages:
    7,449
    Likes Received:
    32
    Ratings:
    +32 / 0 / -0

    Re: Globe:BB rejects Lions #2 (33) for Cassel

    I think we've only seen Pt. 1 of this deal, frankly.
  3. mayoclinic

    mayoclinic PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Messages:
    12,607
    Likes Received:
    145
    Ratings:
    +329 / 0 / -1

    Re: Globe:BB rejects Lions #2 (33) for Cassel

    There's no effective difference between #33 and #34, and it seems like the whole deal with KC was part of a bigger plan. I think that BB wanted to dump Vrabel before his March 1 roster bonus was due, and trading him saved BB the embarrasment of potentially cutting one of the greatest Pats of all time.
  4. fair catch fryar

    fair catch fryar Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2007
    Messages:
    3,112
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +5 / 0 / -0

    No Jersey Selected

    Re: Globe:BB rejects Lions #2 (33) for Cassel

    Precisely, but most won't believe that it was that simple. Add to the fact that BB likes Cassel and was looking out for his best interest by sending him to a now up and coming KC instead of the NFL hinterlands of Detroit over one spot in the draft. If it was Detroit's second 1st at #20 I would be upset, but it wasn't. End of story.
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2009
  5. crowell33

    crowell33 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    2,536
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Re: Globe:BB rejects Lions #2 (33) for Cassel

    The globe article seems to imply that we were willing to take a lower pick if a team was also willing to take Vrabel in the trade. Wouldn't cutting Vrabel have created the same cap room as trading him?
  6. crowell33

    crowell33 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    2,536
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Re: Globe:BB rejects Lions #2 (33) for Cassel

    Maybe trading Vrabel instead of cutting him keeps him from potentially joining the Rat in Cleveland.
  7. BradyManny

    BradyManny Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    9,696
    Likes Received:
    21
    Ratings:
    +32 / 0 / -0

    Re: Globe:BB rejects Lions #2 (33) for Cassel

    At least I think more highly of Detroit now that I know they made an attempt to get Cassel.

    I agree w Mayoclinic regarding the deal and Vrabel. Of course, if Sintim, Barwin, A. Smith, etc. goes #33, I may feel differently ;)
  8. tanked_as_usual

    tanked_as_usual Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2007
    Messages:
    4,981
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    Re: Globe:BB rejects Lions #2 (33) for Cassel

    not to mention the fact that if cassel has a say, he'd probably prefer the chiefs to the lions
  9. Remix 6

    Remix 6 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    7,780
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    Re: Globe:BB rejects Lions #2 (33) for Cassel

    im guessing we wanted to send Cassel to a certain place that would make him happy as well as satisfy us. respecting the player
  10. borg

    borg Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2004
    Messages:
    3,821
    Likes Received:
    50
    Ratings:
    +100 / 3 / -11

    Re: Globe:BB rejects Lions #2 (33) for Cassel

    The four teams that BB was dealing with are all operating under new regimes...Detroit, Denver, Tampa, and KC. Call it rookie jitters, extra patience watching free agency unfold, fear of paying too much, or New Englands track record in the trade market....more likely , all of the above. The undeniable fact is that New England had cap issues and needed to move fast. The Globe article does a nice job pointing out the cap pressure the Pats were under and the Vrabel dilemma. $9 mill for Sanders, $8 mill for Taylor, $12.2 mill for Baker.....adding up to about $11 mill on the 2009 books. Not to mention, according to Reiss, that Moss redid his contract to help out the team.
  11. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,840
    Likes Received:
    90
    Ratings:
    +151 / 3 / -19

    Re: Globe:BB rejects Lions #2 (33) for Cassel


    Bingo.. this has been said time and time again, but sounds about true to this patsfan..
  12. unoriginal

    unoriginal Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2006
    Messages:
    3,209
    Likes Received:
    25
    Ratings:
    +41 / 2 / -1

    Re: Globe:BB rejects Lions #2 (33) for Cassel

    I think it says a lot about the Lions they considered all their current linebackers/DEs a better value than Mike Vrabel.
  13. patsinthesnow

    patsinthesnow PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,241
    Likes Received:
    85
    Ratings:
    +124 / 7 / -0

    #87 Jersey

    Re: Globe:BB rejects Lions #2 (33) for Cassel

    [​IMG]

    .
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2009
  14. Urgent

    Urgent Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,937
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +49 / 0 / -0

    #24 Jersey

    There's no effective difference between #33 and #34?
    Well, actually there is a difference, one pick.

    There could be a player that the Pats want at #34 who goes at #33. I don't recall the Pats ever offering "after you" during the first 200 or so draft picks, for no compensation.

    As noted, the Pats could have achieved the exact cap outcome by trading Cassel for the #33, and releasing Vrabel.

    Further, after trading Cassel, there was no short-term salary cap imperative to release Vrabel. With $14.6mm in additional space, a further $3mm was not needed this weekend.

    If the Patriots were concerned about Vrabel re-uniting in Cleveland with Mangini, they could trade him to any other team, hell, for a 2012 7th round pick or something. Given six months, they probably could have found a partner. It's possible one team valued Cassel more than KC, and maybe another team valued Vrabel more than KC. Or asked him to restructure. Before the trade, I think there were fewer "trade Vrabel" threads than "trade Brady" threads - there was no great clamor to dump Vrabel to save the defense and cap a week ago.

    In the past, the Patriots seemed far less concerned about where a player ended and far more about maximizing the value of the return. The Drew Bledsoe trade is a pretty clear example of this approach.

    The facts seem to show that the Pats did not maximize value in this deal. You can argue how much value - oh, it really was only a little value that they gave up. But this is a competitive organization in a competitive league. Strange to see this approach.
  15. primetime

    primetime Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2005
    Messages:
    4,985
    Likes Received:
    47
    Ratings:
    +123 / 19 / -8

    #18 Jersey

    Re: Globe:BB rejects Lions #2 (33) for Cassel

    I doubt the Lions even know Vrabel would be part of the package. Like others have said, I think this was about getting Cassel somewhere where he would be happy. One spot worse doesn't make much of a difference.
  16. jeffd

    jeffd Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    336
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Re: Globe:BB rejects Lions #2 (33) for Cassel

    CASSEL DID HAVE A SAY!!! No team would trade for him w/o agreeing to a long term deal first. If BB wanted to make the deal w/ Detroit but Cassel refused to agree to a long term deal Detroit wouldn't go through with it. Why give up the #2 overall pick for a 1 yr QB at a cost of 14mil?
  17. ctpatsfan77

    ctpatsfan77 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,401
    Likes Received:
    110
    Ratings:
    +180 / 4 / -5

    The point, though, is that once you get beyond even the top 10 picks, the utility difference between pick N and pick N + 1 is relatively meaningless.

    Also, remember that Vrabel was due $1M today. By trading him to KC, even if the Cassel trade went elsewhere, the Patriots ensure he gets all his money, which would likely not have happened if they released him.
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2009
  18. BPF

    BPF Rookie

    Joined:
    May 13, 2006
    Messages:
    2,469
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    Good read on this story and Wetzel gets in a couple of shots on Mort, which is always good:
    Belichick hasn't lost his mind - NFL - Yahoo! Sports

  19. PatsFaninAZ

    PatsFaninAZ Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,097
    Likes Received:
    5
    Ratings:
    +5 / 0 / -0

    Isn't the ability to control where Vrabel goes worth one spot in the second round of the draft?

    I suppose there's nothing to prevent KC from cutting Vrabel once the trade was done, but if (1) BB believed that was unlikely, and (2) he wanted to avoid a situation with a prior defensive captain being out on the market, then giving away one spot in the draft for some protection is not an unsound move.

    This all assumes, by the way, that Cassel was willing to negotiate with Detroit.
  20. PatsFaninAZ

    PatsFaninAZ Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,097
    Likes Received:
    5
    Ratings:
    +5 / 0 / -0

    They needed to release Vrabel by midnight last night or else they would have had to pay him over $1 million in a roster bonus.

    By trading him, they ensured that the team that took him would basically have to cut him immediately or, once they got to March 2, they were basically all in and had to keep him. So, by including him in the deal, they kept him out of the division.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>