I can still see a scenario in which Cassel signs the tender when offered - which would I assume prevent him from being viable trade option - as fewer teams will be interested in giving up a high pick to sign a guy who is only on a one year deal (I believe if he signs it they need to wait a year to sign him to a new deal)
If he signs it and is relegated to riding the bench at $14.5 million, what's the downside for him? He bears little risk of injury - and would not harm his value (as opposed to playing badly) so he'd still be able to get the same type of longterm deal with a big signing bonus in 2010.
Schefter thinks Cassel will command $25 million in signing bonus money this year. Next year, with the prospect of no salary cap - it could be even higher. But even if its the same, over the 2 year period Cassel would collect $40 million instead of $25 by signing a long term deal this year.
Fans often make the mistake of looking at the long term contract he potentially would sign this year as, say 6 years $60 million and ask why he would accept $14.5 million this year and give up $60 million - but of course most know that the salary is not guaranteed. Only the signing bonus money is "real" - everything else is fictional until he makes it to that year to collect that salary. It doesn't matter if someone signs him to a $200 million contract - unless its guaranteed it might as well be Monopoly money.
Only the guaranteed money counts - and he could get every bit as much in guaranteed money NEXT year by sitting on the bench this year - PLUS an extra $14.5 million.
So over a 2 year period by signing the tender he'd be looking at $40 million guranteed plus a long term contract of as much, or more value than any he'd sign this year...
As opposed to signing a long term contract this year and collecting $25 million in guaranteed money. That extra $14.5 million is nothing to sneeze at.
I actually don't think this will happen for one important reason - Cassell's not greedy, and after several years on the bench, he wants to PLAY. But from a fiscal standpoint, signing the tender would make a lot of sense.