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

[mgteich]

1) Is there a restriction with regard to what years the picks must come. Is it restricted to 2009 and 2010?

2) The open question is the value of Cassel. I don't see any team forking over two firsts, although I guess it depends on the contract that Cassel is willing to sign. The teams that need him most have very high draft choices.

3) A poster again indicated that Kraft has all the cards. I don't see it that way.

A) First any team willing to pay two firsts and can negotiate a deal with Cassel holds the cards.

B) If no team is willing to come up with two firsts, then Cassel can wait until just before the deadline at which time he can sign the tag and play 2009 for the patriots for a guaranteed salary of $14M. The patriots are then free to trade him to whoever wants him for 1 year for $14M. The patriots will have the power but will not likely get much if Cassel doesn't want to sign a contract with the new team. They can have him for $14M and $17M next year if they want to tag him. If you all think this is patriot power, so be it.

C) The third alternative is for the patriots (at some point) to give Cassel permission to discuss terms with other teams, before or after the tag is placed. The patriots can then not put the tag on or remove it subject to agreed-upon compensation from some team. This is useless to that team UNLESS A DEAL HAS ALREADY BEEN STRUCK WITH CASSEL. This is a win-win and maximizes both Cassel's opportunity to find a situation he wants, and for the patriots to get solid compensation. Of course, the longer the patriots wait to allow discussions and to approve a deal the longer they carry the albatross of $14M of cap money that has much better uses.

D) The fourth alternative is for the patriots to wait and see with regard to Brady's health, intending to trade Cassel if Brady is OK. Cassel would simply sign the tag in late April and collect $14M guaranteed from whoever the patriots sucker-punched into compensation for a one year deal with Cassel, or if Brady isn't ready, Cassel will play a few games for $14M.

BOTTOM LINE
D) There is no question that the patriots will get much less without Cassel's cooperation that with it.
E) I expect Cassel to have a press conference with another team in the first week in March.
F) Cassel will be very rich. The patriots can help decide how rich. In some sense the best for Cassel is for him to collect bonus money twice or three times. $14M for one year is a fine place to start.
G) And just BTW, don't plan on any Super Bowls in 2009 or 2010 if the team plans to spend $29M on the quarterback position in 2009. The team has 2009 and 2010 needs.

 

[Rob0729]

Here's why. IMHO of course.

The recent positive media stories on Cassel's play last year (Pro Football Weekly ranking him 32nd best player, not QB, in the NFL) and his offseason value (TSN ranking Cassel as 3rd best FA player, not QB, in the NFL this offseason) seem to be suggesting (confirming?) that Cassel is a franchise caliber QB, one of obvious high demand, this offseason.

So, allow me to work with this axiom.

Given the abundance of teams desperate to find even a decent starting QB, and coupled with a dearth of quality QB's being available, I believe we will see at least one team (likely more) jump at the opportunity to acquire Cassel this offseason via the "two firsts compensation for franchise tagged players" rule afforded them by the CBA.

For a team staring at hiring a re-tread FA like Garcia or Favre or ? and who are drafting outside the top 10, and without any hope to land either Stafford or Sanchez, I would think that they will be ecstatic to be in position to land Cassel, who I would imagine the vast majority, if not all, teams would have ranked as higher value, and certainly far less of a risk, than either Stafford or Sanchez ..... for the mere cost of a couple of mid to late round 1st's.

The key here is that the team needs to pounce on Cassel PRIOR to him signing his tag tender BEFORE he becomes a contracted player to and thus, under control of, the Pats. Cassel's agent would almost certainly advise his client to refrain from signing the tender until after such time as they have explored a market with the least amount of restrictions possible. Keeping the Pats out of it ensures as open a market as possible for his client so that he can attempt to secure the best deal possible for his client. Assuming suitable interest, Cassel's agent comes up with a contract that they want and they bring that offer back to the Pats in order to match. At this point the Pats either match (highly unlikely) or take the picks as per the CBA allotment.

Failing this action I believe Cassel's agent would then instruct his client to sign the franchise tender, take the money, and then worry about finding a suitable dancing partner afterwards.

Thought's or criticism's?

I don't buy this. First, Cassel is saying things publically that indicate he is not going to force the Patriots' hand. It could change, but it doesn't look like he will sign the tender.

Second, Cassel doesn't want to risk having to be a back up for $14.6 million guaranteed and hope the there is no uncapped year making him a RFA in 2010 (he would only have 5 years of NFL experience at the end of the 2009 season and the RFA period increases to 6 years with no cap). Then he could end up being a Patriots back up in 2010 for only a couple of million. Then at 28 and potentially being Brady's back up again for two years, he would enter the free agent market again and hope there is a market for him. He can get upwards to $30 million in guarantees alone in a trade this offseason. It is in his best interest to get traded.

I think this is the most underplayed issue facing Cassel. He could lose millions if he stays with the Pats on an one year tender and there is no cap in 2010. Going from an UFA even with the franchise tag to being a RFA next year if the league has no cap could cost him over $10 million in guarantee money alone. Cassel no matter what he says needs a long term deal this year. I think he will play the game and get franchised and get traded.

Third, being franchised and traded is not a negative anymore. In recent years, players who are franchised and traded are still getting top dollar. Cassel could end up on a playoff contender (Tampa, Vikings) and get paid more than Brady is getting paid.

 

[mgteich]

OK, I'm missing something.

First, I don't think that the players will player next year without a new CBA agreement. Many of their top players would lose UFA status. But let's accept that Cassel would be an RFA and the patriots would tender him at the top amount of $3.3M, requiring a 1st and a 3rd. That is simply a minimum amount, not the amount that Cassel would be forced to play for.

This time Cassel is totally free to deal. Are you saying that no team would offer Cassel a very large deal, with a large bonus, and give a 1st and a 3rd? Cassel would have gotten $14M in 2009 plus another large guaranteed bonus in 2010, PLUS an acceptable contract.

Cassel doesn't have to "force the patriots hand" for two months, and he won't. He just needs to go on a vacation and make sure that the team has his agent's number. There is no reason for him to force anything until a week before the deadline for other teams to come up with the two firsts, at which time he can then force the team's hand by signing the tender. But it won't get to that. The patriots don't want to be without $14M of cap money for the first two months of free agency.

I don't buy this. First, Cassel is saying things publically that indicate he is not going to force the Patriots' hand. It could change, but it doesn't look like he will sign the tender.

Second, Cassel doesn't want to risk having to be a back up for $14.6 million guaranteed and hope the there is no uncapped year making him a RFA in 2010 (he would only have 5 years of NFL experience at the end of the 2009 season and the RFA period increases to 6 years with no cap). Then he could end up being a Patriots back up in 2010 for only a couple of million. Then at 28 and potentially being Brady's back up again for two years, he would enter the free agent market again and hope there is a market for him. He can get upwards to $30 million in guarantees alone in a trade this offseason. It is in his best interest to get traded.

I think this is the most underplayed issue facing Cassel. He could lose millions if he stays with the Pats on an one year tender and there is no cap in 2010. Going from an UFA even with the franchise tag to being a RFA next year if the league has no cap could cost him over $10 million in guarantee money alone. Cassel no matter what he says needs a long term deal this year. I think he will play the game and get franchised and get traded.

Third, being franchised and traded is not a negative anymore. In recent years, players who are franchised and traded are still getting top dollar. Cassel could end up on a playoff contender (Tampa, Vikings) and get paid more than Brady is getting paid.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

1) Is there a restriction with regard to what years the picks must come. Is it restricted to 2009 and 2010?

My understanding is that there is, but it is not spelled out in the CBA (since it really has no direct effect on the team-player relationship).

B) If no team is willing to come up with two firsts, then Cassel can wait until just before the deadline at which time he can sign the tag and play 2009 for the patriots for a guaranteed salary of $14M. The patriots are then free to trade him to whoever wants him for 1 year for $14M. The patriots will have the power but will not likely get much if Cassel doesn't want to sign a contract with the new team. They can have him for $14M and $17M next year if they want to tag him. If you all think this is patriot power, so be it.

I believe the no-renegotiation clause only counts if a player remains with his old team for the season. If the Patriots were to trade Cassel, I think he would still be free to renegotiate with a new team (the wording of the CBA--Article XX, Section 2, paragraph k--is not entirely clear on this point).

C) The third alternative is for the patriots (at some point) to give Cassel permission to discuss terms with other teams, before or after the tag is placed. The patriots can then not put the tag on or remove it subject to agreed-upon compensation from some team. This is useless to that team UNLESS A DEAL HAS ALREADY BEEN STRUCK WITH CASSEL. This is a win-win and maximizes both Cassel's opportunity to find a situation he wants, and for the patriots to get solid compensation. Of course, the longer the patriots wait to allow discussions and to approve a deal the longer they carry the albatross of $14M of cap money that has much better uses.

Extending the tender automatically grants the player the right to discuss contracts with all other teams until and unless the player signs.

 

[jmt57]

Do we have any CBA experts around to clarify?

I'd be willing to bet it is this year's and next. Not unlike how the Pats were not forced to lose the pick from SF in as part of the spygate penalty.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

First, I don't think that the players will player next year without a new CBA agreement. Many of their top players would lose UFA status. But let's accept that Cassel would be an RFA and the patriots would tender him at the top amount of $3.3M, requiring a 1st and a 3rd. That is simply a minimum amount, not the amount that Cassel would be forced to play for.

As Miguel astutely noted, the RFA number for Cassel in 2010 would be a minimum of 110% of his 2009 salary. So if he plays under the franchise tag, his RFA tender would be about $16M.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

So, we should expect the Jets to come out of nowhere and seduce him like they tried to seduce Branch and Troy Brown?

If Lord Favre returns, as wacky Woody wants, the Jets would have nearly 30 mill tied up in two QB's when they are already 7 mill over the cap for next year. Sure, they could restructure some contracts, but they can't make a move until Brett says yea or nay.

 

[Fencer]

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.

That's not realistic. The value next year, if there's no subsequent trade value, of a Brady clone at backup QB would be $5 million or less. Cassell is not a Brady clone. And it's only that high because Brady is rehabbing an injury.

Franchising and keeping Cassell means

A. Overpaying him by $10+ million, relative to his actual value to the team, knowing that

B. His trade value isn't as high as was hoped.

It's not a good deal for the Pats.

And signing Cassell long-term at a competitive salary is even less good of a deal.

 

[Patjew]

Quick question.......

With the possible exception of the Jets, would anyone care what team Cassel signed with if it brought back 2 first round picks?

I wouldn't care even if it was the Jets.

Edit: this is a fun thread.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

If Lord Favre returns, as wacky Woody wants, the Jets would have nearly 30 mill tied up in two QB's when they are already 7 mill over the cap for next year. Sure, they could restructure some contracts, but they can't make a move until Brett says yea or nay.

Welcome to step 2 of the Brett Favre 2-step:

B-R-E-T BRET BRET BRET!!!

I left off the last T for "Thank God it wasn't us."

PFnV

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

I don't buy this. First, Cassel is saying things publically that indicate he is not going to force the Patriots' hand. It could change, but it doesn't look like he will sign the tender.

Second, Cassel doesn't want to risk having to be a back up for $14.6 million guaranteed and hope the there is no uncapped year making him a RFA in 2010 (he would only have 5 years of NFL experience at the end of the 2009 season and the RFA period increases to 6 years with no cap). Then he could end up being a Patriots back up in 2010 for only a couple of million. Then at 28 and potentially being Brady's back up again for two years, he would enter the free agent market again and hope there is a market for him. He can get upwards to $30 million in guarantees alone in a trade this offseason. It is in his best interest to get traded.

I think this is the most underplayed issue facing Cassel. He could lose millions if he stays with the Pats on an one year tender and there is no cap in 2010. Going from an UFA even with the franchise tag to being a RFA next year if the league has no cap could cost him over $10 million in guarantee money alone. Cassel no matter what he says needs a long term deal this year. I think he will play the game and get franchised and get traded.

Third, being franchised and traded is not a negative anymore. In recent years, players who are franchised and traded are still getting top dollar. Cassel could end up on a playoff contender (Tampa, Vikings) and get paid more than Brady is getting paid.

Hi, Rob.

I'm not sure what it is you are disagreeing with me on.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

That's not realistic. The value next year, if there's no subsequent trade value, of a Brady clone at backup QB would be $5 million or less. Cassell is not a Brady clone. And it's only that high because Brady is rehabbing an injury.

Franchising and keeping Cassell means

A. Overpaying him by $10+ million, relative to his actual value to the team, knowing that

B. His trade value isn't as high as was hoped.

It's not a good deal for the Pats.

And signing Cassell long-term at a competitive salary is even less good of a deal.

Fencer, it is the fact that Brady is rehabbing a serious injury that makes it viable that the Pats hand might be forced when it comes to keeping Cassel at the tagged amount thus forcing any team looking to acquire Cassel to consider the Pats as the primary competition for Cassel. Competition as in the Pats will match any competing offer that comes in for the tagged Cassel. Poison pilled contracts not withstanding.

 

[VJCPatriot]

What are the tampering rules?

It's not tampering if the Pats tag Cassel with the nonexclusive free agent tag, which is likely what they are going to do. I'm not sure a team will be willing to give up two 1st round picks for Cassel. But if they do, more power to them! the Pats will definitely like that, and so should we.

 

[Halifax_Pats_Fan]

2 first rounders? Pfffft... At that point I wouldn't even care if it was the Jests.

I agree. I would definately send Matt to the Jets for 2 first rounders. We got some holes to fill...

 

[tanked_as_usual]

there are teams that are well positioned for the next couple of years to give up 2 first rounders (titans, vikings, panthers come to mind) whose picks will likely be at the bottom of the first round for those years and who are arguably a QB away from it all........so it is very possible


the jets aren't really in the hunt for cassel....not just money-wise......somebody on that staff probably realizes that the jets don't have the pass-catching targets the pats had to make cassel effective the way he was this past season and that they will likely be looking for a mid-level vet to add (assuming favre is gone) and maybe drafting yet another QB prospect and using the $$ they would have used on cassel to try to upgrade their WR's (if I was ryan, the first thing I would request is to dump coles......he's a PITA when you're trying to build something)

what I think is going to happen is that both sides will work (pats and cassel) to keep their options open which likely means a tag, but no signing of the tender until at least other markets for his services has been defined.....nobody needs to rush off and pull the trigger hastily.......there is also a likely desire for cassel to move to slightly familiar territories (the chiefs, for example .... or to less extent, the broncos) where familiarity would enhance effectiveness (it is not beyond the realm of possibility for the broncos to move cutler and add cassel.....cutler is still in his rookie deal and is very tradeable for good picks......carolina would come knocking as he is a great replacement for the kind of game that delhomme plays.....and cutler is NOT the kind of QB that executes the mcdaniel type of offense)....so when the time comes, the opportunities will be defined, and a deal will be struck......I seriously doubt that the pats will wind up with 2 1st rounders for him ......... a 1st and a 2nd or a 1st and a 3rd is what I thinki

 

[Miguel]

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 agree with him. If a team had to give both 1st 2009 picks, they would be at a disadvantage over a team that just had to give up a 1st round pick in 2009 and a 1st round pick in 2010 since a 1st round pick in 2009 is worth more in 2009 than a 1st round pick in 2010.

 

[Miguel]

1) Is there a restriction with regard to what years the picks must come. Is it restricted to 2009 and 2010?

No, a team can make an tender offer to a franchised player AFTER the 2009 draft.

 

[sieglo]

I agree. I would definately send Matt to the Jets for 2 first rounders. We got some holes to fill...

Not only would we gain two first round picks, the Jests would lose two first round picks.

I could live with that.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

No, a team can make an tender offer to a franchised player AFTER the 2009 draft.

Miguel--I think the point he was trying to make is that it would have to be for "the next two" firsts--i.e., a team couldn't have signed a franchise player before the 2008 draft but offer their firsts in 2009 and 2010.

 

[SunnyDenmark]

Here's some food for thought regarding giving up two 1st rounders to 'swoop' in and close the deal before a bidding war erupts....

I like the idea of a decent team giving up a low 1st rounder this year (Vikes at # 22) and next year their pick could be likely a lower 1st rounder as well - mainly due to their weak division. That has already been discussed.

What about another opposite scenario. You own one of the top 5 picks (and those are hard to trade down) AND you don't want to pay the huge $$$ to a rookie unproven NFL player. So you get Matt Cassell for 2 firsts (via the CBA agreement). If it wasnt for Pioli running the show - I could see KC doing it at #3. And next year I could even see KC's pick be only in the teens - maybe even high teens as I see a weak division (Raiders, Denver with atrocious defense, SD with LT on the decline).

Cassell could mature along with the other sophmore talent they picked up from last years draft haul. And they still have cap space and other picks in the later rounds. With Tony G., and if Larry Johnson got the winning fever back again (and with Herm now gone) - they could actually be a playoff sleeper pick this year (with Cassell).

Also by 'giving away' the # 3 pick via this CBA agreement (Pats could not decline ?) it would avoid the possibility of a long holdout - as is common with the top first round picks in the draft - and the re-building Chiefs could actually challenge in the weak AFC West.

Probably a 'daft' idea but this is one way to get rid of one of the top 1st round picks (#1-5) that supposidly is hard to trade down and avoid pay crazy money to rookies. Granted - you will lose your first rounders for next 2 years.