The Patriots won't get an opportunity to "trade" Cassel

[PatsChamp88]

2 1st rounders love it, I wouldn't mind seeing him go to the vikings then I could at least see him play twice a year vs lions .

 

[Taxed in Maine]

Not only that, but of those 10 teams, only 3 have any real likelihood of being interested in a QB (Seattle, St. Louis, Carolina), and they'd all get under if they just cut their current starting quarterbacks ($6 million saved for Delhomme, $14 milllion for Hasselbeck and $6.5 million for Bulger).

I'm not saying that other things, like the dead money created by such cuts, wouldn't prevent those teams from signing Cassel. I'm just pointing out an easy way for them to come up with enough money to make the deal even at full "franchise" value for Cassel.

I do not believe you would have to have $14.6M available to make the trade, as a long term contract would be part of the deal.
You would only need to have enough to cover the terms of the new deal.

 

[Spiral]

The team that trades for Cassel won't have to have $14M in cap space. No team is going to trade for him unless he's already signed to a long-term agreement.

The most likely scenario involving a trade is where the "buyer" approaches the Patriots and negotiates compensation, in the form of players/draft picks. The compensation has to be less than two #1s, otherwise the team wouldn't bother to trade with the Patriots. Once this is agreed, the buyer will get permission from the Patriots to negotiate a contract with Cassel and his agent. The contract will be signed by the Patriots and Cassel, and assigned to the team that trades for him, like any other trade. The upfront compensation will not be payable until after the trade takes place, probably in the form of a roster bonus due shortly after the start of the league year, say March 10. That way there are no cap consequences for the Patriots. Therefore, the team that trades for Cassel will have to have enough 2010 cap space to take on first-year cap charge of the contract, which will likely be less than $14M. The Patriots will free up the $14M in cap space allotted for the franchise tender as soon as the trade is approved. Of course, the sooner that happens the better, which probably means that Floyd Reese will be doing nothing but working this deal for the next month or so.

 

[Deus Irae]

I do not believe you would have to have $14.6M available to make the trade, as a long term contract would be part of the deal.
You would only need to have enough to cover the terms of the new deal.

I was just pointing out that every team that would need/want that quarterback could do it, even at full cost.

 

[Fencer]

If the Vikings give up two firsts for Cassell one will have to wonder if they're channeling the ghost of George Allen. Still, it would make sense for them. Perhaps this year's and one in 2011 rather than 2010.

They're hardball negotiators, but so are our guys.

 

[Fencer]

Ya know -- navigating this deal might be a big part of why Reese was hired in the first place. He could have the time and relationships to work it properly.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I do think that if Detroit wanted to do this it would mean both 1st rounders this year.

Per the CBA: "Draft Choice Compensation of two first round draft selections shall be made . . ."

My understanding is it would be DET's first in 2009 and 2010, since I see no chance that they would do it if they had to give up #1 and #20.

I do not believe you would have to have $14.6M available to make the trade, as a long term contract would be part of the deal.
You would only need to have enough to cover the terms of the new deal.

The reason I think they do need to have the full salary cap available is because the team has to accept Cassel at his old contract before they can rip it up and sign him to a new one. The same thing happened with Moss--Brady had to restructure his contract so the Pats would have the $9M required by Moss' contract before he re-negotiated.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

But Cassel has to agree to a deal in principle with his new team before a trade happens regardless. Nobody's going to fork over significant draft picks to have Cassel play under the one-year franchise contract. And he's free to negotiate, or not, with any team he wants.

Think of it this way. There are two options based upon whether or not Cassel signs the tender.

Option A is Cassel doesn't sign tender and his agent is free and clear to negotiate with any team which has an interest in his client and has two 1st's to surrender should the Pats not match any deal that is tabled in front of them.

Option B is Cassel signs his tender, and is under contract to the Pats and thus requires the Pats co-operation in getting any deal done.

From the perspective of Cassels agent ..... option A can't happen if option B is exercised. OTOH, option B can be exercised even if option A is chosen.

Thus option A is in the best interest of Cassel.

So suppose Cassel is tagged, thus free to negotiate with any team, and he comes to terms with the team of his choice. Why on Earth would that team decide to fork over 2 firsts instead of approaching the Patriots to negotiate a lower level of compensation?

..... because they may lose Cassel to another team that is willing to sign Cassel and relinquish two 1st's for him before trade negotiations with the Pats even takes place.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

I still find that two #1s is a lot to give up... even though there are examples this year of high picks moving (Dallas WR).

But here's a question I don't have an answer to : who was the last player to BE picked up in this manner (just signing the player and giving away two #1s) ? I can't recall any in recent memory. Teams have traded away tagged players, but... Anyone remember recent moves of the like ?

It's unprecedented that a franchise caliber QB becomes available in this manner so frankly all comparable are kinda worthless.

That's the unique variable in all of this. Franchise caliber QB becomes truly available to plenty of QB needy teams, in a season where no franchise QB's are around for the taking.

That's why this has the potential to explode in the Pats favor.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

So they can insure retaining his services and circumvent the entire 'negotiation' or bidding war they believe could happen.

Having read this entire thread I think people are forgetting what the OP was trying to get at. As well as the differences between signing and trading for a franchised player.

(for example)
If the Vikes just have to have Cassell and he has been franchised
- they simply offer him a contract that is acceptable to him, Cassel signs the offer
- the Pats have a given period to match
-if the pats do not match the Vikes offer, per the CBA, the Pats recieve the next two Vikes 1st rounders. (this years and next years).
I do think that if Detroit wanted to do this it would mean both 1st rounders this year.


Trading for him will mean coming up with a contract offer for Cassell AND a package of picks (or players) worth less than the two 1st round picks.

The entire package will have to be acceptable to the Pats and Cassell. This is where the bidding war among teams (hopefully) could take place.

Thanks for recapping.

The thing to also remember is that one team that is also in the running for Cassel is ..... the Patriots. Whether they truly are or not is immaterial as they have (strategically) issued their desire to "keep" Cassel. So, any team interested in acquiring Cassel will have to consider the very real possibility that the Pats will simply match any offer Cassel's agent brings in should no team go the two 1st route.

If a team wants Cassel badly enough they will not call the Pats bluff and take that chance. They'll just give up the two 1st's and be assured of getting their guy. IMHO.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

Per the CBA: "Draft Choice Compensation of two first round draft selections shall be made . . ."

My understanding is it would be DET's first in 2009 and 2010, since I see no chance that they would do it if they had to give up #1 and #20.

Do we have any CBA experts around to clarify?

 

[maverick4]

Question maybe not related but for curiosity's sake, why didn't the Chargers try to get something for Brees instead of letting him go for nothing?

 

[Spiral]

Thanks for recapping.

The thing to also remember is that one team that is also in the running for Cassel is ..... the Patriots. Whether they truly are or not is immaterial as they have (strategically) issued their desire to "keep" Cassel. So, any team interested in acquiring Cassel will have to consider the very real possibility that the Pats will simply match any offer Cassel's agent brings in should no team go the two 1st route.

If a team wants Cassel badly enough they will not call the Pats bluff and take that chance. They'll just give up the two 1st's and be assured of getting their guy. IMHO.

I disagree for two reasons. First, the Patriots are very disciplined about how they value each position on the roster in terms of cap space. Long-term contracts for both Brady and Cassel would tie up too much of that cap space for one position. Basically they'd be giving up some combination of Mankins, Wilfork, and/or Seymour in order to keep two quarterbacks. Second, if some team thought the Patriots would be likely to match their offer, they'd stick in some poison pill provision, much like teams do for restricted free agents.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

I disagree for two reasons. First, the Patriots are very disciplined about how they value each position on the roster in terms of cap space. Long-term contracts for both Brady and Cassel would tie up too much of that cap space for one position. Basically they'd be giving up some combination of Mankins, Wilfork, and/or Seymour in order to keep two quarterbacks. Second, if some team thought the Patriots would be likely to match their offer, they'd stick in some poison pill provision, much like teams do for restricted free agents.

I'm not endorsing the idea of keeping both Brady and Cassel. I'm merely suggesting that the threat of keeping the two is the trump card that the Pats hold in ther hand. And this trump card is the right bower!

 

[mcgraw_wv]

Do we have any CBA experts around to clarify?

It wouldn't be any picks they got via trade or anything else, it would have to be their original picks via schedule.

 

[Brettlax3434]

two first sounds perfact!

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

It wouldn't be any picks they got via trade or anything else, it would have to be their original picks via schedule.

Do you mean that in order to use a 1st round pick that pick has to be the teams original pick positioned to them via schedule results?

What if a team were to trade down out of their original, scheduled, draft slot. Could they not use that pick?

 

[maverick4]

Out of the top 20 teams with the most cap room, the most likely buyers, due to their QB situations, look like:
Tampa
KC
Tennessee
Detroit
SF
Minnesota
Chicago

7 teams.

I think it's more likely that the really horrible teams won't give up multiple high picks for 1 player, so that probably means KC, Detroit, SF are out, leaving 4.

I have wondered for years why the Bears don't go after a QB, they could become instant contenders. They'll soon be like the Ravens, a dominant D with a horrible QB situation for years while their defense ages.

Ask The Commish.com - Projected 2008 Salary Cap Figures

 

[Fencer]

Do you mean that in order to use a 1st round pick that pick has to be the teams original pick positioned to them via schedule results?

What if a team were to trade down out of their original, scheduled, draft slot. Could they not use that pick?

It's their own picks, or else higher ones.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

It's their own picks, or else higher ones.

Thanks, fencer.