Welcome to PatsFans.com

Is this a viable way to handle the QB situation?

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by JSn, Jan 14, 2009.

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

    JSn Rookie

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

    OK, this doesn't fit the other threads as I'm not leaning one way or the other.

    What I'm proposing here hinges entirely on there being genuine uncertainty about Brady's health. I'm only wondering about this based on that hypothetical. I'm absolutely in the Brady stays camp if he's good to go.

    On to the scenario.

    ----------------------

    Franchise Cassel, let him sign it.
    Build through the draft.
    Extend important pieces where possible, and maybe grab a couple of JAG FA's for competition. The assumption here is that The Pats are in good shape to do some nice FA deals in the uncapped year, unless the draft proves solid and last year's pick up's show improvement.

    This allows a proper evaluation of the QB's and proper time to decide on a trade opportunity and maybe even which QB to trade (based on inside knowledge). Whichever one was traded would result in cap relief and further ability to negotiate with our own FA's.

    ----------------------

    I'm taking the heart out of the equation and just looking at sensible options. The Patriots have to consider their spending power in an uncapped year (not that they have to go hog-wild, but can they if needs-be). They also need to decide which QB best represents the future interests of the franchise based on skill, durability, longevity, and what can be gained from trading.

    In that perspective, it's really just a value break-down.

    So I'm wondering, if Brady is at all uncertain, do you franchise Cassel and keep him on the roster, deferring trade musings in spite of teams ripe for the picking who need a QB? Is that more important than getting picks and putting Tom out there if he's not quite ready?
  2. dhamz

    dhamz Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2004
    Messages:
    3,150
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    I see that as possible.

    If Brady isn't ready to go, I'd be surprised with any situation except Matt Cassel as the starting QB for the Patriots on opening day 2009 playing under the 1 year franchise tender.
  3. Sicilian

    Sicilian Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    Messages:
    4,706
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    All kind of depends on the actual cap numbers which we don't know. I feel like, barring further major injuries, they could probably compete just as well if not better than this year without any big moves. It doesn't give us the BEST chance to win, but trading Cassel and not having Brady healthy would certainly send us the other way.

    What happens to the cap number on Cassel if he's traded at the deadline? Like, keep him for the first three or four weeks, then when Brady is ready deal him. Are we still on the hook for all of his $14m franchise number?
  4. ctpatsfan77

    ctpatsfan77 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,241
    Likes Received:
    33
    Ratings:
    +34 / 0 / -1

    Since the franchise tender is a guaranteed salary, the Patriots would be on the hook for 1/17 of the franchise tender for each week he's on the roster. Once he's traded, the remainder of the salary would come off the cap.

    The other factor that's missing from JSn's assessment is Kevin O'Connell. Physically, he's a Cassel or maybe even a Cassel+, but where is he in terms of football IQ?
  5. Synovia

    Synovia Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    3,922
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    capwise, I think so. No one is going to have $14M open. He's gotta be traded before the season starts, or hes staying.

    If Brady isn't ready to go, and Cassel is the starter at the beginning of the season, its going to be his job to lose.
  6. Tunescribe

    Tunescribe PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    15,910
    Likes Received:
    38
    Ratings:
    +53 / 0 / -0

    #61 Jersey

    I say: get the picks for Cassel while we can. Between Brady, O'Connell and possibly a journeyman veteran game-manager type, things still have a good chance of shaking down suitably at QB without Cassel, even if Tom is not 100 percent in August. I really do believe that O'Connell could be a good one.
  7. Synovia

    Synovia Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    3,922
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Yeah, and physically, Kyle Boller is better than all of them. The physical is so small of a percentage of what makes a QB successful. The mental is much more important, and much harder to judge. Cassel looks to have it, whereas despite the fact that O'Connell has looked decent, its more than likely he doesnt (just because most guys drafted at the position dont)
  8. JSn

    JSn Rookie

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

    Yeah, there just isn't much to go on, and Cassel might be a good measuring rod for the value of keeping a rookie on the bench for a few years under a great QB. To my knowledge that was kind of status quo in earlier times in the NFL.

    There is something to be said for Kevin being #2 all along, despite being a rookie. Maybe Bill will drink some crazy stuff and deal BOTH Cassel and Brady and start Kevin. :D

    Man, I'd have to drink some crazy stuff too, to cope with news like that. lol
  9. BradyManny

    BradyManny Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    9,679
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    I don't think we can afford to keep Cassel on the roster.

    There's a larger point that no one has really brought up b/c we were all so thankful for Cassel's great play during the season - and that's how big a drop off there would be between Cassel and O'Connell. It's all about value.

    While Cassel's play was admirable, the drop off from the preceding record setting season was otherwise unprecedented. A loss of 12 points per game, 5 more losses, 29 less TDs, 3 more INTs, 1200 less passing yards, QB rating drop of 28, 5% drop in completion percentage, 13% more of the yardage coming from YAC.

    What I'm saying is that Cassel's value is perhaps a little inflated right now. There's no doubt he's shown he has strong decision making, strong accuracy and will make a good starting QB somewhere in the league. But given the cast of weapons this offense has, is the drop off between Cassel and Kevin O'Connel worth 14 million dollars?

    Tag Cassel, trade him, get the picks, deal with the 2009 QB situation without even considering him. The guy earned the right to start in the league anyway, so its win win if we deal him.
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2009
  10. JSn

    JSn Rookie

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

    Yeah, if said to you "meet the greatest QB of all time"...

    [​IMG]
  11. tanked_as_usual

    tanked_as_usual Banned

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

    if the pats tag cassel, they don't have a choice to 'let him sign it or not'

    if the pats tag him, they will trade him.........that's it

    the next question will be 'what if brady........?'

    the pats will add a vet QB to the roster as insurance, but the bottom line is that the pats had enough regard for kevin o'connell to make him a 3rd round pick which is much higher than any other QB they have ever drafted.......he has been in the program for a year and will be ready to execute the same way brady was ready to execute after a year and cassel after a few years......

    the bottom line is that if cassel could execute a decent offensive set for this team, then so can o'connell..........

    cassel is gone and that's that
  12. ctpatsfan77

    ctpatsfan77 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,241
    Likes Received:
    33
    Ratings:
    +34 / 0 / -1

    The team can renegotiate a new contract with Cassel; they're not obligated to honor the tender. (Otherwise, they'd just be renting Cassel for a year.)

    That said, I don't think the Patriots want Cassel still on the team at the franchise salary come the start of TC.
  13. Halifax_Pats_Fan

    Halifax_Pats_Fan Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,000
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    I respect this opinion but definitely disagree with it. If he was a Cassel+ we would have saw him for 16 games last year.

    Good post Jsn...interesting...it just rots me to think of watching this team without Brady under centre next year, no disrespect at all to Cassel
  14. Patsrock

    Patsrock Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    1,325
    Likes Received:
    5
    Ratings:
    +5 / 0 / -0

  15. Patsrock

    Patsrock Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    1,325
    Likes Received:
    5
    Ratings:
    +5 / 0 / -0

    Can only renegotiate a new contract till 4pm July 15th. After that it is only a 1yr franchise deal and can not be extended till after the regular season.
  16. Synovia

    Synovia Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    3,922
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Thats a silly way to look at it. Points per game is as much a measure of the defense as it is the offense. The Patriots offense this year had drastically worse starting field position than the team last year because the defense was so bad.


    According to DVOA, the Patriots offense last year was the best ever, at 42.6% DVOA. The Colts offense has traditionally been about 30%. The best teams this year were around 23%. Now, I don't think there was any way the Patriots offense wasn't going to have some amount of decline. I'd guess they would have been 35% or so this year, slightly better than the 2006 colts. Best offense in the league by a large margin.

    They finished this year at 15%, good for 9th in the league. If you use weighted, which weighs the end of the season more than the beginning, they were at 21.7, good for 5th in the league. Theres a very good chance, that with Cassell as a starter next year, they're the best offense in the league.


    Yes, right now Cassel is still a drop off from 100% healthy Brady, but if Brady can't start immediately, and Cassel plays 4 preseason games and 6 more regular season starts, I'm not sure that can still be said. If Brady can't move in the pocket like he used to, then I doubt that it can.
  17. Metaphors

    Metaphors Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Messages:
    3,670
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    :agree: Unless you believe the Pats will need Cassel long-term, his value in a trade will never be higher. I guarantee you that GMs are suspicious that Cassel could be a one-year wonder. Cassel is positioned as a young QB with the stuff to lead your team to the SB and with an elite ceiling. Nothing that Cassel can do in the short-term can raise that evaluation, but he can sure do a lot to damage it (<cough> Derek Anderson <cough>).

    If you can get a 1st round pick for Cassel, you surround him with bubble wrap and ship him next-day air. If you can get an early 2nd round pick, you negotiate a little but you still take it. Anything later than that you can afford to hold onto him and wait for an injury.

    Agree with your assessment of the 2009 QB situation. I also believe O'Connell will eventually be a solid starting QB. If he isn't ready to fill in a little early this year, there are plenty of QBs that can babysit the position until Brady is ready to go.
  18. ALP

    ALP Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    Messages:
    7,401
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

  19. BradyManny

    BradyManny Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    9,679
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    Co-sign. Well put.
  20. ctpatsfan77

    ctpatsfan77 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,241
    Likes Received:
    33
    Ratings:
    +34 / 0 / -1

    If he were a Cassel+ mentally--which I didn't even try to argue--I'd agree with you. But I was referring only to physical talent.
  21. ctpatsfan77

    ctpatsfan77 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,241
    Likes Received:
    33
    Ratings:
    +34 / 0 / -1

    If I understand things correctly (Miguel?), that only applies to the team that franchises him; the Patriots could trade him to another team, who renegotiate a longer-term deal.
  22. Synovia

    Synovia Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    3,922
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Cassell and Derek anderson are hardly comparable. There were red flags all over anderson.


    Cassel 2008:
    327/516 63.4% 3647 yds, 21 TD 11 INT 47 Sacks
    Anderson 2007:
    298/527 56.5% 3787 yds, 29 TD 19 INT 14 Sacks


    56% is not an NFL QB, and 20 Ints in a year is just not acceptable. They're completely different looking players.


    Now, Cassel does have one glaring red flag, and thats the Sacks. The big thing about that though, is that while Cassel was still getting sacked a bit at the end of the season, he was getting sacked a lot less than at the beginning, and it was mostly against better teams. Cassel was sacked 25 times in the first 6 games, and 22 in the last 10 games.
  23. JSn

    JSn Rookie

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

    And frankly, despite being sacked, it rarely resulted in turnovers. Take away the Steelers game it maybe only resulted in a turnover ONCE.

    I suspect this stat will not scare away the "hire and fire" crowd.
  24. patsfaninpittsburgh

    patsfaninpittsburgh Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,055
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Cassel and Anderson are almost the anti-comparible

    Anderson throws a great deep ball but struggles with touch and sucks on short routs. Also, his ability to read defenses deteriorated as time has gone along.

    Cassel has improved in these areas and is weakest on the deep ball.
  25. BradyManny

    BradyManny Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    9,679
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    This defense, until Adalius Thomas got hurt, was only giving up 1 more point a game than last year. Even after the horrible weeks of defense that followed Thomas injury, the team settled in only allowing 2 more points a game. So, essentially, despite all the bytching and moaning, the 2008 defense was nearly as effective as the 2007 defense. Field position isn't just dictated by the defense, its as much dictated by the offense - a team that scores TDs nearly every possession and never has to punt (a la the 2007 Patriots) will have better field position.

    So take that out of the equation.

    As for weighted DVOA, LOL at weighting it to weigh the end of the season more than the beginning. That's very selective considering how opponents at the end of the year were a joke, including one team that hardly even showed up (Arizona). Even then, the DVOA went from 42.6 to 15, thats a huge drop off, you yourself said it would've been at least 35% with Brady.

    Really, the Keep Cassel crowd annoys me not just b/c they want to get rid of Brady, but b/c they don't see they'd be drastically overpaying for Matt Cassel. There are two options for who quarterbacks our team in both the near and distance future, and they are Tom Brady and Kevin O'Connell. Matt Cassel is about to get a bloated contract and it isn't going to be from the New England Patriots.
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2009
  26. Miguel

    Miguel Patriots Salary Cap Guru PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    3,980
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0


    In order for the Pats to be able to trade Cassel after July 15th Cassel would have had to sign the tender before then.
  27. BradyManny

    BradyManny Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    9,679
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    Interesting.

    Would the Pats have the chance at that point to revoke the tag if he doesn't sign it? Not that I think it would get that far. Cassel should sign the tender the minute its offered.
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2009
  28. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    19,975
    Likes Received:
    24
    Ratings:
    +28 / 1 / -0

    1) We cannot afford $14M of cap money for Cassel for more than a couple of weeks. We need to re-sign free agents or replace them (e.g. Hochstein, Wright, Sanders, Sanders, Evans, Paxton, Hanson, Harrison, Williams). Even jags cost cap money, although veteran jags don't cost much. We also need to pay for rookies and have monies left for IR, the Practice Squad and replacement players during the season.

    2) I expect Cassel to be on someone else's roster by mid March. We will get what we can. If Cassel doesn't cooperate, we can threaten, but unless we want to wait until the draft, we can end up with nothing (if he doesn't sign). I expect Cassel to work with the team and have a deal done before one week of free agency is over.

    3) I support the signing of a free agent QB before Training Camp, as I did last year. Brady IS INJURED. Even if he is 100% for Game One, we still need a real backup. The cap cost could be between $2M and $6M; in any case, a vast savings from $14M. It is just possible that Belichick believes that O'Connell or Gutierrez can handle the situation if it arises. If so, In Bill We Trust.

    4) I do NOT expect any major free agent signings or trades. However, we should have the cap monies available in case an opporunity is there. Also, we need cap money even if we want even a mid-level free agent or two.

    5) We do have a critical need to extend who we can. This may take cap money. The potential list is large: Seymour, Wilfork, Green, DE Smith, Vrabel, Mankins, Hobbs, Kaczur, Neal, Mankins, Faulk, Watson, and TE Thomas. All are in their contract years. Also, we could be considering extensions for Light and/or Brady.

    Draft needs will be greatly affected by extensions or the lack of extensions. Perhaps we can expect to draft guards and expect them to start. That is not the case for defensive linemen. I could see us drafting two defensive linemen on the first day of the draft if there are no extensions, and none if all of our line is extended and re-signed.
  29. TheGodInAGreyHoodie

    TheGodInAGreyHoodie Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    Messages:
    6,631
    Likes Received:
    25
    Ratings:
    +25 / 0 / -0

    Lets assume for a moment the real possibility that Brady will not be ready to start the season.

    Let also recognized Brady is only signed 2010 not 2014 as one poster seems to think.

    That means we need to worry about both 2009 and 2011.

    One solution is to sign Matt Cassel long term and sever ties with Brady.

    Another would be to extend and restructure Brady's contract to save the Patriots cap space in 2009 so they can afford a one year deal with Cassel.

    But getting rid of Cassel and keeping Brady while we have question marks at QB for both 2009 and 2011 while it may appeal to many fans hearts makes no sense.
  30. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    40,772
    Likes Received:
    58
    Ratings:
    +81 / 3 / -1

    Disable Jersey

    The day Cassel is traded is going to be a great day, just because these ridiculous @!$%$% threads will finally cease. It's getting to the point where I'm about to beg Belichick to just cut the kid now, so people will stop with this nonsense.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page