Peppers cap hit "killing" Panthers

[MassPats38]

You know, I'm not sure I even understand this thread.

Cassel was tagged. Cassel was immediately traded for a draft pick, releasing his cap space. The Pats proceeded to sign other free agents. This is all exactly what most people (on this board and elsewhere) expected to happen.

But because another player in a very different situation is engaged in a costly standoff with his team, that "proves" that the Pats took on a huge risk and that the people who expected the above scenario to unfold smoothly were wrong?

In the end, all the fuss about the actual signing of the tender is kind of missing the point, IMO. In fact, of those who were most worried about the risks of applying the tag, half thought the big risk was that he would sign it, half that he wouldn't! The main thing is that it was a flexible, amiable situation where both sides wanted everything done quickly, and so it was.

I read the OP's posting the article as a response to those who claimed (and still claim) the Pats got jobbed by not holding Cassel and waiting for higher compensation (in short the cost of playing chicken with other teams), not as an "in your face" to those saying Cassel should be franchised and dealt. Peppers' franchise figure cannot reasonably be interpreted as not limiting transactions (reasonably teams with $22 million have a little more flexibility to make personnel decisions than those with $5), thus the article's import is not earth-shattering.

The Cassel situation would not be different from the Peppers situation if he fought a trade and injected delay into the process (if a player was prior to Cassel was traded under a one-year contract at the franchise amount, I cannot recall it so the issue of a player refusing trades would not appear to be a non-factor). As Cassel had not previously been in this situation, it wasn't a given as to how he would proceed notwithstanding the opinions of the amateur Freud's out there.

 

[Deus Irae]

I read the OP's posting the article as a response to those who claimed (and still claim) the Pats got jobbed by not holding Cassel and waiting for higher compensation (in short the cost of playing chicken with other teams), not as an "in your face" to those saying Cassel should be franchised and dealt. Peppers' franchise figure cannot reasonably be interpreted as not limiting transactions (reasonably teams with $22 million have a little more flexibility to make personnel decisions than those with $5), thus the article's import is not earth-shattering.

The Cassel situation would not be different from the Peppers situation if he fought a trade and injected delay into the process (if a player was prior to Cassel was traded under a one-year contract at the franchise amount, I cannot recall it so the issue of a player refusing trades would not appear to be a non-factor). As Cassel had not previously been in this situation, it wasn't a given as to how he would proceed notwithstanding the opinions of the amateur Freud's out there.

Are there really a lot of people that think the team got jobbed, though?

 

[MassPats38]

I can only point to the responses here after the trade (please, do not ask me to find and link to them as they made my head hurt at the time), certainly in light of the Cutler debacle, who saw the three way trade as a very real possibility and thought Belichick was literally taking a hit to help out his trusted lieutenant Pioli (the lieutenant reference I believe was Peter King, but he was not alone in the media speculating on that theory).

I am not sure how recent developments would quell the conspiracy theorists positing a lopsided trade to help out an old friend.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Are there really a lot of people that think the team got jobbed, though?

There are some who are questioning why Belichick acted so quickly to move on an offer on the table, rather than playing one team off of another to get more than a 2nd round pick.

The piece to that puzzle that we don't have an answer to is how many teams were willing to take on Cassel's nearly $15 million one year price tag, without a long term contract.

None of us have the answer to that, though the reports suggest it might not have been more than one.

We also have seen reports that Cassel didn't seem to realize that by signing the tender, the only way he could block a trade is by refusing to negotiate a long term deal. While that might have been a big issue for certain teams, it clearly wasn't an obstacle for the Chiefs... though again, if Belichick decides to get "cute" and try to leverage more out of Pioli, he runs the risk of seeing the offer from the Chiefs come off the table too.

So I think its safe to assume that Belichick moved as quickly as he did because he understood the risks involved - and how having Cassel still on the books today would have limited his free agency moves.

... and had Cassel NOT signed the tender as some thought he might, the question is how long it might have taken HIM to find a trading partner willing to give him the long-term deal he likely still wants today from the Chiefs.

 

[Deus Irae]

I can only point to the responses here after the trade (please, do not ask me to find and link to them as they made my head hurt at the time), certainly in light of the Cutler debacle, who saw the three way trade as a very real possibility and thought Belichick was literally taking a hit to help out his trusted lieutenant Pioli (the lieutenant reference I believe was Peter King, but he was not alone in the media speculating on that theory).

I am not sure how recent developments would quell the conspiracy theorists positing a lopsided trade to help out an old friend.

Ok... I asked because I think he was doing Pioli a solid, but I didn't have a problem with the trade and I didn't think they got jobbed, even though I thought (and still think) that they could have gotten more if they'd waited a day or two. I'm not sure where you would say that puts me on your list, but at least I've got a bit more clarity, so your answer is appreciated. Enjoy the rest of the day!

 

[Deus Irae]

There are some who are questioning why Belichick acted so quickly to move on an offer on the table, rather than playing one team off of another to get more than a 2nd round pick.

The piece to that puzzle that we don't have an answer to is how many teams were willing to take on Cassel's nearly $15 million one year price tag, without a long term contract.

None of us have the answer to that, though the reports suggest it might not have been more than one.

We also have seen reports that Cassel didn't seem to realize that by signing the tender, the only way he could block a trade is by refusing to negotiate a long term deal. While that might have been a big issue for certain teams, it clearly wasn't an obstacle for the Chiefs... though again, if Belichick decides to get "cute" and try to leverage more out of Pioli, he runs the risk of seeing the offer from the Chiefs come off the table too.

So I think its safe to assume that Belichick moved as quickly as he did because he understood the risks involved - and how having Cassel still on the books today would have limited his free agency moves.

... and had Cassel NOT signed the tender as some thought he might, the question is how long it might have taken HIM to find a trading partner willing to give him the long-term deal he likely still wants today from the Chiefs.

Thank you for your take. I don't want to re-hash the entire thing as much as I wanted MassPats38's take on his own post, but I appreciate the thoughtfulness of your effort.

Have a great day and may the Good Lord smile upon you and yours.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

How does this thread go from Peppers killing their cap to arguing over Matt Cassel? Too many threads on this board go off topic. Stick to Peppers and what Carolina could/should do.

 

[Deus Irae]

How does this thread go from Peppers killing their cap to arguing over Matt Cassel? Too many threads on this board go off topic. Stick to Peppers and what Carolina could/should do.

"Cap hit".....


hope that helps.



P.S. The Cassel comparison was made in the O.P. to start with, so it's not off topic.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

"Cap hit".....


hope that helps.



P.S. The Cassel comparison was made in the O.P. to start with, so it's not off topic.

True, but this was a side note of why maybe the Pats traded him so quickly for a second round pick. The main subject was Peppers which went immediately focused on Cassel instead. I'm surprised nobody thinks that Peppers has a excellent chance of being traded now. The Pats have a very good chance of landing Peppers, if they want him. The Panthers have very limited options and Peppers controls were he lands assuming he lowers his contract demands.

 

[MassPats38]

Ok... I asked because I think he was doing Pioli a solid, but I didn't have a problem with the trade and I didn't think they got jobbed, even though I thought (and still think) that they could have gotten more if they'd waited a day or two. I'm not sure where you would say that puts me on your list, but at least I've got a bit more clarity, so your answer is appreciated. Enjoy the rest of the day!

You are folding your tinfoil hat but not yet donning it.

In all seriousness, I take no exception to the statement Belichick may have taken some pleasure helping Pioli and Cassel out (Cassel could have ended up with a team like the Lions, so he may well have been helped out by the KC trade) with the deal struck. I do find it utterly implausible that Belichick would slash the Pats' throat and refuse substantially more benefit to the Pats to help a friend. The first scenario reflects an incidental benefit or secondary motivation, the latter scenario reflects a primary motivation.

 

[MassPats38]

How does this thread go from Peppers killing their cap to arguing over Matt Cassel? Too many threads on this board go off topic. Stick to Peppers and what Carolina could/should do.

The opening post is an article on the Peppers situation and the comments below the article in the opening post are how that relates to the Cassel situation, specifically "I'm not saying the Panthers and Patriots situations were the same, but for all those who were so cavalier about tagging Cassel in the first place, and then cavalier - even critical - of Belichick's decision to quickly move to take an offer on the table, they might want to reconsider and at least acknowledge that there was some risk that the Patriots were taking when they tagged Cassel at nearly $15 million." The first post is about Cassel, so discussing Cassel really is not off topic.

 

[slash83]

Dont matter anymore if Peppers is killing there cap at this point not much really left in free agency unless they wanna re up some of there own. At this point I think the Panthers are content with paying him 16mil for one more season.

 

[supafly]

What the Peppers story does not say is that as of March 18th that the Panthers were 5.11 million under the cap.

Cap room for all 32 teams - KFFL Community

This is another reason I believe that John Fox MAYBE alright with keeping him, it all comes down to whether or not he's bluffing when he says he is ok with the cap hit. They are somewhat under the cap, (including JP's hit obviously) and are in the process of freeing up some more money via Delhomme restructure/extension. They solidified their OL by resigning Gross, already have one of the league's best rushing attacks, and have Smith and Mohammed as their primary receivers. The defense is certainly not bad, they may have a hole here or there, but already have one of the league's best pass rushers via Peppers. He counted as almost 14 million last yr, so the extra 3 million may actually be alright with Fox. The Panthers ended up with the #2 seed, so Fox may really be ok with picking up where they left off.

If Fox is bluffing, (and he may be bluffing, I know the consensus here is that he is)--he is doing a decent job of it. I believe that there's a chance he'll leave sure, but it's also possible that he stays. A lot of us are assuming that Fox is just so torn up and limited in free agency, etc--but that may not be the case at all.

He had a pretty decent team last yr, and may simply add another piece or 2 to the main piece he already has, which of course is Julius Peppers. Certainly a player who you could build and add a franchise around. It may be more beneficial for Fox to just pick up where they left off--which was a major, unlikely upset to the Cardinals.

Just something to consider, that's all.

 

[Deus Irae]

You are folding your tinfoil hat but not yet donning it.

In all seriousness, I take no exception to the statement Belichick may have taken some pleasure helping Pioli and Cassel out (Cassel could have ended up with a team like the Lions, so he may well have been helped out by the KC trade) with the deal struck. I do find it utterly implausible that Belichick would slash the Pats' throat and refuse substantially more benefit to the Pats to help a friend. The first scenario reflects an incidental benefit or secondary motivation, the latter scenario reflects a primary motivation.

Well, now you're pretty much into interpretation. Holding onto Cassel for 2 more days might (argument's sake, not to get into it for real!) have resulted in the team getting Tampa's first, for example. Then the argument you're worried about becomes whether or not people think that's "substantially more benefit...". Personally, as I've said before, sometimes you don't need to get 100% of what you CAN get for a deal to be a good one. Future goodwill and ease of dealing can be a very good part of any move.

Hell, if American businesses would get back to that sort of common sense approach instead of trying to squeeze every microliter of blood out of every stone, we might all be better off.