Matt Cassel Traded To KC

[cmh6476 1,023]

Um, if you decided to trade picks, which one is gonna yield the bigger and better return: the #3 pick or the #34 pick?

 

Basically, KC was never gonna trade that #3 pick, yet some folks are under the assumption that it was on the table.

I can see the Chiefs trying to trade down if they find a suitor. Sometimes tough trying to trade out of that high of a pick, unless someone falls in love with one of the QBs out there or something.

[Joey Gladstone 33]

Can't wait to hear what Whitlock thinks

[surferskin 30]

Pats fans are so cute. Yeah, I'm sure they turned down the #3 overall in favor drafting 31 spots higher because that's the "patriot way".

[three out of four 0]

You really have to explain this one.

 

Considering the money that is coming off the books thanks to getting rid of Cassel, one would think that cap space would be used for that third overall pick, wouldn't you think?

 

Besides, having the third overall pick would offer you a great opportunity to trade it to someone else for multiple picks, for both this year and next year.

 

I think this is a good deal for New England, and would not be surprised at all if they brought back Damon Huard to back up Brady this year.

 

It's not that easy to trade a top five pick because the money you have to pay those guys is ridiculous for someone who has never played in the NFL. That's why those picks don't get traded much anymore. A lot of GMs think the best place to be is in the bottom half of the first round because you can still get a stud but don't have to pay him nearly as much. If you miss and the guy flames out it's not that big of a deal salary-cap wise but if you miss on a top five pick then it can handcuff a team for years. The Pats now have a 1st rounder and 3 2nd rounders and they will be able to move around and get whoever they want on draft day. They also have all their picks from rounds 3-7 and are expected to get a conditional 3rd rounder for losing Samuel and a few other FAs.

[surferskin 30]

A lot of GMs think the best place to be is in the bottom half of the first round because you can still get a stud but don't have to pay him nearly as much.

Since A LOT of GM's think this, I bet you'll have no trouble finding me a link. I'd specifically like to hear why the end of the first round is better than the #3 overall.

[WhiteWonder 2,723]

Since A LOT of GM's think this, I bet you'll have no trouble finding me a link. I'd specifically like to hear why the end of the first round is better than the #3 overall.

 

its not set in stone but its very easy to understand that way of thinking.... how many top 5 even top 10 picks bust? How much worse does it look for a franchise to have one of those picks bust than say.... the 25th overall selection? Those top few picks also get paid substantially more... Having one bust hurts your wallet ALOT more.

 

no need for a link on that one, its just common sense.

 

Unless your team is in need of a franchise QB where even though the risk of a bust is high, you need a top 3 pick to take that risk..... id rather trade down.

 

Do you think Tennessee feels it really needed that top 3 pick to take Vince Young at that kind of money? Hell as good as Reggie Bush is, he certainly hasn't produced like a top 3 pick.

[Melissa Stark 1]

Wonder what LJ's thinking now.

[Joey Gladstone 33]

Wonder what LJ's thinking now.

 

That his lady better shut the fock up or she'll be wearing sunglasses the next two weeks.

[surferskin 30]

its not set in stone but its very easy to understand that way of thinking.... how many top 5 even top 10 picks bust? How much worse does it look for a franchise to have one of those picks bust than say.... the 25th overall selection? Those top few picks also get paid substantially more... Having one bust hurts your wallet ALOT more.

 

no need for a link on that one, its just common sense.

 

Unless your team is in need of a franchise QB where even though the risk of a bust is high, you need a top 3 pick to take that risk..... id rather trade down.

 

Do you think Tennessee feels it really needed that top 3 pick to take Vince Young at that kind of money? Hell as good as Reggie Bush is, he certainly hasn't produced like a top 3 pick.

No, despite what you consider "common sense" I'd still prefer to see a quote from an actual GM.

[DamageIncVacc 6]

Think anyone makes a play for thigpen. He proved he can play . would be a good fit for maybe the lions or jets ?? as long as the price is right.

[redtodd 7]

You really have to explain this one.

 

Considering the money that is coming off the books thanks to getting rid of Cassel, one would think that cap space would be used for that third overall pick, wouldn't you think?

 

Besides, having the third overall pick would offer you a great opportunity to trade it to someone else for multiple picks, for both this year and next year.

 

I think this is a good deal for New England, and would not be surprised at all if they brought back Damon Huard to back up Brady this year.

 

I may have over simplified it. The point is probably moot as it was never on the table and if it was offered, the Pats would have probably grabbed it (but who knows). My point behind it was that the #3 pick is not near as attractive as it once was. It requires a team to pay an undrafted player an insane amount of money. The new player will most likely be one of (if not THE) highest paid player on the team. If he is anything less than an impact player right off of the bat, it is a waste of money.

 

Talent-wise, the #3 pick is much safer than later ones, but when you take into account the money required to sign a guy at the #3 spot, it is not as appealing. This is why you are not seeing teams trade out of the top picks much anymore, the other teams do not want to move up.

 

Again, none of this really matters since the Chiefs were not offering up the #3 pick.

[TD Ryan2 316]

well, just a 2nd seems a little light (maybe).

many of us Pats fans thought (hoped) we'd see Cassell yield a 1st rounder (or a Julius Peppers).

 

But overall, they took Cassel, a late round nobody, and turned him into a very high 2nd rounder (34th overall). If you had told NE fans back before the '08 season that Matt Cassel would get us a 2nd rounder, we'd have been thrilled.

 

The Vrable "throw in" in interesting. See, Vrabel has lost a step; he just isn't the player he once was. But he still has locker room value and Pioli is trying to put his mark on that KC team. A guy like Vrabel is exactly what he needs in that locker room.

So, while I don't think losing Vrabel is a huge loss for NE at this point, I do think it's a great addition to KC for locker room reasons.

 

so now NE is $20mil under the cap and they have 6 picks in the top 100 (I think) of this year's draft?

It ain't over yet for NE; they've still got lost of bullets to fire this off season.

[BMoney 0]

well, just a 2nd seems a little light (maybe).

many of us Pats fans thought (hoped) we'd see Cassell yield a 1st rounder (or a Julius Peppers).

 

But overall, they took Cassel, a late round nobody, and turned him into a very high 2nd rounder (34th overall). If you had told NE fans back before the '08 season that Matt Cassel would get us a 2nd rounder, we'd have been thrilled.

 

The Vrable "throw in" in interesting. See, Vrabel has lost a step; he just isn't the player he once was. But he still has locker room value and Pioli is trying to put his mark on that KC team. A guy like Vrabel is exactly what he needs in that locker room.

So, while I don't think losing Vrabel is a huge loss for NE at this point, I do think it's a great addition for KC for locker room reasons.

 

so now NE is $20mil under the cap and they have 6 picks in the top 100 (I think) of this year's draft?

It ain't over yet for NE; they've still got lost of bullets to fire this off season.

 

 

THAT they do..but if brady goes down again.....you can cue up on the price is right music when you lose....a starting qb and a guy who can help change an attitude in the lockerroom for a 2nd?....

 

im surprised no one is complaining about how lopsided this is.....

[Mad Brad 0]

"With the 3rd pick of the 2009 NFL draft the Kansas City Chiefs select.... M. Crabtree !!!!!!

[TD Ryan2 316]

.but if brady goes down again....

 

 

if Manning goes down.

if Roethlisburger goes down.

 

 

you really think NE is that great that they can have an All Pro at the BACKUP spots too?

[redtodd 7]

im surprised no one is complaining about how lopsided this is.....

 

I definitely would have liked them to have gotten more than they did, but let's be honest were they going to get more for Cassel? I am not sure. I would rather them get the 2nd rounder than be stuck with $30M at the QB position. It also stinks that they did not get more for Vrabel, but he may have been a cap casualty anyways. When I heard about the Vrabel deal before the Cassel deal, I thought it would be for a 5th.

 

In the end, they got a high 2nd rounder for two guys they probably did not want on the team anymore and they freed up $20million in cap space.

[redtodd 7]

"With the 3rd pick of the 2009 NFL draft the Kansas City Chiefs select.... M. Crabtree !!!!!!

 

That would be interesting, but I think they will draft someone for the line. You need to protect your new investment. Plus LJ has proven he cannot run effecively unless he has a great line.

[BMoney 0]

if Manning goes down.

if Roethlisburger goes down.

you really think NE is that great that they can have an All Pro at the BACKUP spots too?

 

 

 

i know what you are saying..injuries can crush a playoff team...(see seattle)..

 

bradys coming off major knee issues....its a risky time to do it.....but they must know hes back to form....

 

and the pats will always make moves that keep them ahead....in the 90s..players near the end (dotson, robinson, rison) all wanted to come to gb...now, its ne... guys like dillon and moss..who scared everyone else away..and fred taylor..which is a steal...

 

its a bit risky..but you need to take risks at times...

[pittnthat 0]

The Pats just couldn't be stuck with the Cassel cap hit. Sage going to Minnesota and Collins going back to Tenn. only left how many trading partners?(Det?,Tampa?)

The real value of the trade is the cap savings. Now the Pats can get the speed they need on D and package deals on draft day.

[MTSkiBum 1,620]

if Manning goes down.

if Roethlisburger goes down.

you really think NE is that great that they can have an All Pro at the BACKUP spots too?

 

Not too big of deal, when the backups have had a pretty good record the last couple years. In fact 2 years ago we would of made the playoffs had we stuck with batch a little longer rather than rushed Ben back.

 

We have this guy named di.ck Lebeau and he makes sure that we are a contender. Just like the patriots have belicheat. The colts would be focked on the other hand.

[pittnthat 0]

Not too big of deal, when the backups have had a pretty good record the last couple years. In fact 2 years ago we would of made the playoffs had we stuck with batch a little longer rather than rushed Ben back.

 

We have this guy named di.ck Lebeau and he makes sure that we are a contender. Just like the patriots have belicheat. The colts would be focked on the other hand.

SB43...1st and 20 deep in your own territory and you think Leftwitch would have won the game?

Did the Cards throw for 375 on us during SB43 with Lebeau as the D.C.?

I think Pittsburgh has the best d in the league but it's a Q.B. driven league.

[MTSkiBum 1,620]

SB43...1st and 20 deep in your own territory and you think Leftwitch would have won the game?

Did the Cards throw for 375 on us during SB43 with Lebeau as the D.C.?

I think Pittsburgh has the best d in the league but it's a Q.B. driven league.

 

All hail the mighty trent dilfer! What a stud Dilfer is

 

Lets not forget Brad Johnson, he is the second coming of Johnny Unitas

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ben is better than both those guys, but my point is that it is a team game, it is not a QB game. Same goes with Cassel, he took over a team that was 16-0 the year before, with a great coach that played to the backup QB's strength.

[three out of four 0]

Since A LOT of GM's think this, I bet you'll have no trouble finding me a link. I'd specifically like to hear why the end of the first round is better than the #3 overall.

 

Here you go:

 

"Based on the economics of the first pick, and the first few picks, I don't know [if the old chart] represents the accurate value, with the highest value being the highest pick," Dolphins vice president Bill Parcells said. "I'm of the opinion that the cost is a deterrent. We've put a lesser value on that."

 

Although Tampa Bay Buccaneers general manager Bruce Allen noted that his club does not utilize a point chart, he echoed Parcells's thoughts.

 

"If people are relying on that [chart], they're probably going to have a tough time [trading]," he said.

 

They are words spoken in many NFL cities, and explain, in part, why there have been no trades in the draft's top 10 since 2004.

 

Few teams, it seems, are putting a high value on those top picks, with more clubs placing the top value of the first round from Nos. 11-32. More teams also are discovering it is better business to accumulate more draft choices in the second or middle rounds, because the economic risk is limited and it's still possible to land a quality player (i.e. Asante Samuel, fourth round).

 

Indianapolis Colts general manager Bill Polian has been one of the most vocal critics of the system, saying the draft's true purpose - to help teams that need it most - is no longer being served. Especially at No. 1.

 

"If you fail with that pick, your franchise is saddled with an albatross that you can't get rid of for who knows how long," he said. "It's completely changed because of the cost of those picks and in my view, that's wrong."

 

"The contracts the first five, six, seven guys get, they could very well be the worst deal in football," said former Tennessee Titans general manager Floyd Reese, now an analyst for ESPN. "People say, 'What about teams which overpay in free agency?' But the difference to me is that at least you're paying a guy who you've seen play in the NFL vs. a guy you're hoping can play in the NFL."

 

Carl Peterson, one of the NFL's longest-tenured general managers, said that is one reason he doesn't expect much interest from other clubs in the Chiefs' No. 5 pick.

 

"People shy away from those picks because those players are so expensive. You do all the research you can and do all your homework and spend a lot of time and a lot of money looking into these players, but mistakes are still made," he said earlier this month.

 

"I'm not holding my breath. We certainly will, as we do each year, contact the teams behind us to let them know we may be interested in moving back. But it's not that easy to get another team to agree to that. It's easier to do that in the middle to late part of the first round, but not early in the first round."

 

Here's the link for the whole article:

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/arti...a_numbers_game/

 

 

 

 

Here's a link explaining that the NY Giants have had more success with second round picks than first round picks. The study went back to 1979 and didn't even factor in the fact that first round picks are paid a lot more than second round picks.

 

http://ultimatenyg.blogspot.com/2008/02/be...raft-picks.html

 

 

 

This is from a Chiefs website:

 

2000

 

49ers get: Two 1sts (#12 and #24)

 

Redskins get: 1st (#3 - Chris Samuels)

 

Perfect. This is exactly what I want the Chiefs to do. Only problem is that the top few picks in the draft have been becoming less and less valuable due to the financial demands that come with it. But I would be ecstatic if Pioli and Co. could strike a deal like this.

 

http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2009/2/4/748...alue-on-the-chi

[GhostofMeanMachine99 1]

I may have over simplified it. The point is probably moot as it was never on the table and if it was offered, the Pats would have probably grabbed it (but who knows). My point behind it was that the #3 pick is not near as attractive as it once was. It requires a team to pay an undrafted player an insane amount of money. The new player will most likely be one of (if not THE) highest paid player on the team. If he is anything less than an impact player right off of the bat, it is a waste of money.

 

Talent-wise, the #3 pick is much safer than later ones, but when you take into account the money required to sign a guy at the #3 spot, it is not as appealing. This is why you are not seeing teams trade out of the top picks much anymore, the other teams do not want to move up.

 

Again, none of this really matters since the Chiefs were not offering up the #3 pick.

 

I know what you meant. Just wanted some clarity, that's all.

 

If they were indeed offered the #3 pick, you take it in a heartbeat. No one says you have to keep it. You can always trade out of it or trade down.

 

Someone will make them an offer and I can guarantee you it's better than the 34th overall pick.

 

For a team like the Eagles, who have two number 1's this year, you can offer it to them in exchange for both picks and a few others.

 

2 first round picks and a few others looks a little better than the 34th overall pick, doesn't it?

[RLLD 4,197]

Cassell stepped into the QB role for the Pat's last year and won 11 games, they went and franchised the guy rather than lose him......and then they dispatch him AND a LB to the Chiefs for a round 2 pick? And nothing else?

 

I think this deal is huge for the Chiefs, and I think they come away from the deal wining HUGE.....which makes me wonder.....if this isn't "hush-payment" to Scott Pioli.....

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Cassell stepped into the QB role for the Pat's last year and won 11 games, they went and franchised the guy rather than lose him......and then they dispatch him AND a LB to the Chiefs for a round 2 pick? And nothing else?

 

I think this deal is huge for the Chiefs, and I think they come away from the deal wining HUGE.....which makes me wonder.....if this isn't "hush-payment" to Scott Pioli.....

 

Until you look at it from a different perspective. This is from Ron Borges who does not like Belichick at all.

 

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/footbal...&position=0

 

Scott Pioli soon may learn there is no such thing as friends in the NFL, especially when they used to employ you as their gofer.

 

Pioli yesterday closed out what he believes was a blockbuster deal with the Patriots [team stats] that landed him his franchise quarterback (literally, in this case), Matt Cassel, and Mike Vrabel, a linebacker who can settle Kansas City’s troubled defense.

 

And perhaps he did. But if the many in these parts who believe Bill Belichick is Einstein in a hoodie are correct, what Pioli may have gotten instead is Scott Mitchell the sequel and an expensive linebacker on the wrong end of the football timeline.

 

For the Patriots, this was a best-case scenario. It freed up $17.85 million on their cap and allowed them to get rid of a 12-year veteran whose game had begun to slip as well as a guy Belichick clearly believes was destined to become the most expensive backup in NFL history had he stayed.

 

Belichick may be proven wrong on the latter point, but it was clearly part of his thinking, because there’s no way he would have left his team exposed at quarterback, the game’s most critical position.

 

What the Patriots learned during the past few weeks is the market for Cassel was neither deep nor strong. Even two teams thought to be interested, Detroit and Tampa, are now said to have been seeking Cassel only to deal him to Denver to acquire the more highly regarded Jay Cutler

[Ras66not99 0]

like chad jackson, lawrence maroney?

yeah thats who I was talking about.... ya fockin tard

 

HOW BOUT THEIR ENTIRE OFFENSIVE LINE OVER THE YEARS ????????? Where do you think these guys came from ???? Mankins, Lyght, Kaczur, Koppen How bout all their unheralded role players that have been a huge part to their success ? guys like Branch, Faulk, Hobbs, Samuel, Wilson...

 

The Pats have great personnel evaluators.... they love sliding back and making the most of their picks every year and they do a great job of it...

[WhiteWonder 2,723]

Here you go:

 

"Based on the economics of the first pick, and the first few picks, I don't know [if the old chart] represents the accurate value, with the highest value being the highest pick," Dolphins vice president Bill Parcells said. "I'm of the opinion that the cost is a deterrent. We've put a lesser value on that."

 

Although Tampa Bay Buccaneers general manager Bruce Allen noted that his club does not utilize a point chart, he echoed Parcells's thoughts.

 

"If people are relying on that [chart], they're probably going to have a tough time [trading]," he said.

 

They are words spoken in many NFL cities, and explain, in part, why there have been no trades in the draft's top 10 since 2004.

 

Few teams, it seems, are putting a high value on those top picks, with more clubs placing the top value of the first round from Nos. 11-32. More teams also are discovering it is better business to accumulate more draft choices in the second or middle rounds, because the economic risk is limited and it's still possible to land a quality player (i.e. Asante Samuel, fourth round).

 

Indianapolis Colts general manager Bill Polian has been one of the most vocal critics of the system, saying the draft's true purpose - to help teams that need it most - is no longer being served. Especially at No. 1.

 

"If you fail with that pick, your franchise is saddled with an albatross that you can't get rid of for who knows how long," he said. "It's completely changed because of the cost of those picks and in my view, that's wrong."

 

"The contracts the first five, six, seven guys get, they could very well be the worst deal in football," said former Tennessee Titans general manager Floyd Reese, now an analyst for ESPN. "People say, 'What about teams which overpay in free agency?' But the difference to me is that at least you're paying a guy who you've seen play in the NFL vs. a guy you're hoping can play in the NFL."

 

Carl Peterson, one of the NFL's longest-tenured general managers, said that is one reason he doesn't expect much interest from other clubs in the Chiefs' No. 5 pick.

 

"People shy away from those picks because those players are so expensive. You do all the research you can and do all your homework and spend a lot of time and a lot of money looking into these players, but mistakes are still made," he said earlier this month.

 

"I'm not holding my breath. We certainly will, as we do each year, contact the teams behind us to let them know we may be interested in moving back. But it's not that easy to get another team to agree to that. It's easier to do that in the middle to late part of the first round, but not early in the first round."

 

Here's the link for the whole article:

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/arti...a_numbers_game/

Here's a link explaining that the NY Giants have had more success with second round picks than first round picks. The study went back to 1979 and didn't even factor in the fact that first round picks are paid a lot more than second round picks.

 

http://ultimatenyg.blogspot.com/2008/02/be...raft-picks.html

This is from a Chiefs website:

 

2000

 

49ers get: Two 1sts (#12 and #24)

 

Redskins get: 1st (#3 - Chris Samuels)

 

Perfect. This is exactly what I want the Chiefs to do. Only problem is that the top few picks in the draft have been becoming less and less valuable due to the financial demands that come with it. But I would be ecstatic if Pioli and Co. could strike a deal like this.

 

http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2009/2/4/748...alue-on-the-chi

 

[TD Ryan2 316]

again, it's a simple as this:

 

- once, there was no chance that Cassel would ever amount to anything

- then, we had dreams of 1st rounders dancing in our heads over him

- now, we got a second rounder

 

not too bad really.

 

In Belichick we Trust.

[WhiteWonder 2,723]

its ok to be happy with a 2nd rounder as a Pats fan.... but I don't think you can say anything other than the Chiefs got a complete steal.

 

For a team that wasn't totally comfortable with what it had at QB, they now get a guy who played pretty darn well last year along with a great veteran defender who should provide some valuable leadership on the defense (and can still play a little himself) all for a 2nd round draft pick?

 

even if Cassel isn't markedly better than Thigpen, he is another option and free's up what you can do with that 1st round pick....

[TD Ryan2 316]

its ok to be happy with a 2nd rounder as a Pats fan.... but I don't think you can say anything other than the Chiefs got a complete steal.

if Cassel plays like he did in the second half of last year, KC got a steal.

if Cassel isn't much of a QB outside of NE's system, KC didn't make a very good deal.

EDIT: nah, there's no way this isn't a "good deal" for KC. If Cassel flops, they still had to take the chance on him, they still had to trade away a second and take the risk... and the risk on Cassel is considerably less than that on some rookie who's never played a down in the NFL.

 

it all comes down to how good is Cassel really?

some analysts believe he's somewhere between the 5th and 10th best QB in the NFL. If they're right, it's a great trade for KC.

some analysts believe he's the next Scott Mitchell. If they're right, NE just fleeced Pioli.

 

Personally, I think Casssel will be one of the better QBs in the NFL... somewhere above the 50% mark for starting QBs, top 15, maybe top 10.

 

what is clear is that NE wasn't negotiating from a position of power here. Everybody knew they had 2 QBs taking up about $30mil of the cap. It's tough to negotiate when the opposition knows you have no choice but to unload the guy. With that in mind, I'll accept the 2nd rounder. NE gambled with the Franchise tag on Cassel. They knew they didn't want him to walk away for nothing and a second is all they could get; it's still better than nothing.

[ROCKET 0]

I don't know as if we'll ever really know what went down with this deal. On the surface it looks like the Pats got less than fair compensation after seeing an injury ridden TE who's also a headcase cost Tampa a 2nd and 5th. I think the deciding factor that few people have pointed out is that BB wanted to control where Cassell would end up and Cassell had a short list of places he wanted to go. BB obviously didn't want him to end up in Denver for whatever reason and took less compensation to ensure he'd end up in KC. I think this whole deal was ironed out before Pioli signed on the bottom line as KC's GM barring a scenario where Cassell and BB would be content. It didn't happen. Cassell was ok with the move to KC and it's one place where BB had no issue with him ending up.

 

I don't think Tampa wanted Cassell and I don't think Cassell wanted to end up in Detroit. That left the KC deal the only other workable option for all 3 sides involved. The Pats didn't have the time or cap room to drag this out and took the best immediate deal. I wish the scenario had played out where we got more compensation but it is what it is. I'm still almost as happy about getting the #34 as a late first rounder, I just wish we'd of gotten another first day pick back as well. All in all I can live with what we got considering the scenario that unfolded, what we invested in Cassell to begin with and what he did as a Patriot for basically peanuts.

[WhiteWonder 2,723]

if Cassel plays like he did in the second half of last year, KC got a steal.

if Cassel isn't much of a QB outside of NE's system, KC didn't make a very good deal.

EDIT: nah, there's no way this isn't a "good deal" for KC. If Cassel flops, they still had to take the chance on him, they still had to trade away a second and take the risk... and the risk on Cassel is considerably less than that on some rookie who's never played a down in the NFL.

 

it all comes down to how good is Cassel really?

some analysts believe he's somewhere between the 5th and 10th best QB in the NFL. If they're right, it's a great trade for KC.

some analysts believe he's the next Scott Mitchell. If they're right, NE just fleeced Pioli.

 

even if he is the next Scott Mitchell, they pais a 2nd rounder for someone to come in an compete with Thigpen, instead of using a 1st rounder on a Mark Sanchez....

 

and they also got Vrabel. I think thats big for their defense especially switching to a 3-4

[JT 137]

QUOTE(Melissa Stark @ Feb 28 2009, 02:33 PM)

Wonder what LJ's thinking now.

 

That his lady better shut the fock up or she'll be wearing sunglasses the next two weeks.

 

Winner

 

Funniest comment on these boreds in a long time.

[BirdBradyBobbyOrr 0]

OK I've thought about it for a few days now and I believe 1 of 2 things happened.

 

1) The Pats misjudged the interest in Cassel. COMPLETELY! They were stuck with him at $14.9 million, tying up $30 million to QB's and severely handicapping anything we wanted to do this year. If they didn't move him they were screwed, and they knew it. Pioli also knew it and he told Coach Belichik, sure I'll take Cassel but I want Vrabel as well. Pioli helped out but he didn't do it for nothing.

 

The haters will all say this is what happened but I can't imagine the Patriots didn't consider this scenario and if they did why wouldn't they have just felt around and then cut him instead of franchising him?

 

2) The Pats didn't cut him outright because they wanted to control where Cassel went. They couldn't cut him because if he became an FA the Jets, Bills, and others like the Broncos would all have a shot at him. Sending him to KC does send him to an AFC rival but a clearly lesser team and out of our division. Furthermore it puts him against the Chargers and Broncos two times a year making the AFC West road to the playoffs that much tougher.

 

I still believe that the Vrabel part of the trade happened because the Pats misjudged the interest in Cassel and Pioli made them include Vrabel in the trade.

 

 

There is no way it made sense to trade franchise Cassel if the results were a 2nd rounder and the loss of Vrabel. They had to want control of his landing spot.

 

Mort is reporting Denver offered the 12th pick and we passed so this supports the idea that they didn't want Cassel to go to Denver.

 

Thoughts?

[The Hood 9]

if Cassel plays like he did in the second half of last year, KC got a steal.

if Cassel isn't much of a QB outside of NE's system, KC didn't make a very good deal.

EDIT: nah, there's no way this isn't a "good deal" for KC. If Cassel flops, they still had to take the chance on him, they still had to trade away a second and take the risk... and the risk on Cassel is considerably less than that on some rookie who's never played a down in the NFL.

 

I think K.C.'s offensive system is now going to be very similar to NE's with Haley coming in as coach. He learned under Parcells and Charlie Weis and NE is still running their offense off that same base system. I saw Michael Smith on ESPN claiming it was the exact same terms, ect. Think this is going to be much less of an adjustment for Cassel than ending up somewhere else and should help him continue to be productive.

[three out of four 0]

OK I've thought about it for a few days now and I believe 1 of 2 things happened.

 

1) The Pats misjudged the interest in Cassel. COMPLETELY! They were stuck with him at $14.9 million, tying up $30 million to QB's and severely handicapping anything we wanted to do this year. If they didn't move him they were screwed, and they knew it. Pioli also knew it and he told Coach Belichik, sure I'll take Cassel but I want Vrabel as well. Pioli helped out but he didn't do it for nothing.

 

The haters will all say this is what happened but I can't imagine the Patriots didn't consider this scenario and if they did why wouldn't they have just felt around and then cut him instead of franchising him?

 

2) The Pats didn't cut him outright because they wanted to control where Cassel went. They couldn't cut him because if he became an FA the Jets, Bills, and others like the Broncos would all have a shot at him. Sending him to KC does send him to an AFC rival but a clearly lesser team and out of our division. Furthermore it puts him against the Chargers and Broncos two times a year making the AFC West road to the playoffs that much tougher.

 

I still believe that the Vrabel part of the trade happened because the Pats misjudged the interest in Cassel and Pioli made them include Vrabel in the trade.

There is no way it made sense to trade franchise Cassel if the results were a 2nd rounder and the loss of Vrabel. They had to want control of his landing spot.

 

Mort is reporting Denver offered the 12th pick and we passed so this supports the idea that they didn't want Cassel to go to Denver.

 

Thoughts?

 

I think controlling where Cassell went played a part of it but Belichick always talks about doing whatever is in the best interests of the team. I think Vrabel might have been asked to take a pay cut and if not he would have been cut just like Lawyer Milloy.

 

I think the biggest factor was that the Pats had to make a deal quickly to free up some cap space before all the FAs they targeted were gone. They couldn't afford to wait for the best possible deal.

 

The Pats ended up with a high 2nd round pick by franchising him instead of a compensatory pick which would have been at the end of rd 3, at best, by letting him walk. I think a lot of us were expecting more but the Pats now have a ton of flexibility with the extra cap room and all the picks they have. I'm hoping they make a deal for Peppers who will give them the pass rush they lacked last year.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

I think controlling where Cassell went played a part of it but Belichick always talks about doing whatever is in the best interests of the team. I think Vrabel might have been asked to take a pay cut and if not he would have been cut just like Lawyer Milloy.

 

I think the biggest factor was that the Pats had to make a deal quickly to free up some cap space before all the FAs they targeted were gone. They couldn't afford to wait for the best possible deal.

 

The Pats ended up with a high 2nd round pick by franchising him instead of a compensatory pick which would have been at the end of rd 3, at best, by letting him walk. I think a lot of us were expecting more but the Pats now have a ton of flexibility with the extra cap room and all the picks they have. I'm hoping they make a deal for Peppers who will give them the pass rush they lacked last year.

 

I think that this is correct. The Patriots were hoping that they could trade Cassel right away and many teams probably wanted to wait until the draft. The Patriots were going to miss out on a lot of mid-tier FA's because they had NO room under the cap. By making this trade, they now have about $15-16m available to sign players. They immediately re-signed S James Sanders and there is probably a veteran CB to be signed soon.

 

Add in 4 picks in the top 2 rounds and you have a better situation than you did a week ago. I think that they could have played hardball and tried to get more for Cassel, but they might not have liked where he ended up.

 

It was also interesting that there were reports that the Pats could have pulled their trade with KC to get more from DET or Tampa, but Belichick did not want to pull a bush-league move on Pioli.

[FantasyBowl33 0]

OK I've thought about it for a few days now and I believe 1 of 2 things happened.

 

1) The Pats misjudged the interest in Cassel. COMPLETELY! They were stuck with him at $14.9 million, tying up $30 million to QB's and severely handicapping anything we wanted to do this year. If they didn't move him they were screwed, and they knew it. Pioli also knew it and he told Coach Belichik, sure I'll take Cassel but I want Vrabel as well. Pioli helped out but he didn't do it for nothing.

 

The haters will all say this is what happened but I can't imagine the Patriots didn't consider this scenario and if they did why wouldn't they have just felt around and then cut him instead of franchising him?

 

I still believe that the Vrabel part of the trade happened because the Pats misjudged the interest in Cassel and Pioli made them include Vrabel in the trade.

There is no way it made sense to trade franchise Cassel if the results were a 2nd rounder and the loss of Vrabel. They had to want control of his landing spot.

 

Thoughts?

The Pats actually had a chance to get the Lions 2nd round pick just for Cassel but declined because they wouldn't take Vrabel off their hands. Was Vrabel's contract guaranteed? makes sense if so.

 

From Boston.com:

 

The Saturday trade that shipped Cassel and Vrabel to Kansas City for a second-round pick (No. 34 overall) allowed the Patriots to clear Cassel's $14.65 million franchise tag fee off the books and $3.3 million of Vrabel's scheduled $4.3 million cap hit in 2009.

 

Lending further credence to the idea that the trade was done in part with an eye toward clearing cap space is the fact that the Lions offered the first pick of the second round (No. 33 overall) straight up for Cassel, according to an NFL source.

 

Kansas City's willingness to take on Vrabel's contract allowed the Patriots to gain more room under the cap.

[cmh6476 1,023]

again, it's a simple as this:

 

- once, there was no chance that Cassel would ever amount to anything

- then, we had dreams of 1st rounders dancing in our heads over him

- now, we got a second rounder

 

not too bad really.

 

In Belichick we Trust.

it probably could end up being a good deal for both teams. I kind of think neither party would have partaken, if they didn't feel like the move benefited them somehow. The Chiefs went out and got what is probably the best option at QB available to them. Would signing Jeff Garcia or Kurt Warner have been any better than getting Cassel? And on the flip side, is drafting Sanchez or Stafford any better than investing in Cassel? Plus, it only took your 2nd as oppossed to your 3rd overall. And NE got his contract off the books,a nd got a decent pick for him.

 

As for Vrabel, he may have very well ended up a cap casualty for the Pats. Instead, they throw him in a package with cassel, and send him to a team that has the cap space to pay him this year at what he is making (which also probably helps sell tickets this year in KC), and provides leadership and the mentality this team so desperately needs into the locker room.

 

This very well could be a win-win for both organizations.