RSS Feed
NOW ON SALE
Click here to buy PDF version
.Click here to buy printed copy.
STILL AVAILABLE
Click here to buy PDF version
.Click here to buy printed copy.
14 Jul 2009
Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
The Kansas City Star is reporting that Matt Cassel's signed a long-term deal with the team. Terms are not yet disclosed.
69 comments, Last at 17 Jul 2009, 8:58am by steelberger
Most Recent FO Features
» 2004 NFL Draft: Six Years Later
The 2004 NFL Draft was supposed to be one of the deepest and best ever. Six years later, how does it look? Sean McCormick breaks down the draft, position by position.
Most Recent Extra Points
Comments
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
The link goes to an unlikely Craig's list ad....
A man's home is his Cassel, I suppose.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
"Ow-ah rental is bettah than yow-ah rental. NO ONE DENIES THIS!"
Oh, here's the Cassel story. http://chiefsblog.kansascity.com/?q=node/855. Link has been fixed.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
Thanks for the story link. It will be interesting to see the deal. No doubt more guaranteed money, but spread out over how many years?
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
This is what I get for apartment hunting and posting XP's at the same time. My bad.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
It depends on the terms of the deal I suppose, but would the Chiefs not have been better advised to have Cassel play out this season before going long-term? If it turns out he's not very good after all, he costs you nothing beyond this year, and it's not like the Chiefs need the cap help. If he is genuinely a good QB, well, tag him again next year and then negotiate. This appears to be premature. That said, if Cassel's legit, I will accept the scorn this post may bring.
Phil Simms is a Cretin.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
To a certain extent, it's a guessing game by both the player and the team. If they sign him to an extension now and he ends up sucking, then the Chiefs have screwed up. But if they keep him on the tag this year and he does well, he has even more bargaining power next year, and his tag number goes from about 15 million to 18 million. In that scenario, Cassell probably would get a deal better than what he's getting now, plus the 15 million he'd pocket this year.
And yeah, it's hard to really analyze much deeper when the terms of the deal aren't known.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
ESPN says 6 years, $63-million. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4327067
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
To me, it initially sounds like too much for a player with Cassell's body of work. But the guaranteed money is "only" $28 million, putting it at less than $5 million per year. I guess the rest is wrapped up in incentives. If that's the case, it looks like a contract that pays him like a star if he plays like one, and pays him like an average starter if he plays like one. If he plays worse than that, he'll be overpaid, but you can say that about most contracts.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
Edit: accidentally posted as my brother - I'm using his computer. This is Mr Shush.
That's not how it works. There is such a thing as money that is neither guarantee nor incentive - non-guaranteed base salary for instance, or roster bonuses. I think it unlikely that a terribly high percentage of the $40.5m he will be paid over the first three years of the contract is in the form of performance based incentives, and virtually certain that the guaranteed money is concentrated in those first three years, with high non-guaranteed base salaries and/or a substantial option/roster bonus in at least two of the last three. This means that he is all but guaranteed to see the majority of that $40.5m, which means that if he plays like an average quarterback for those seasons he will be released after year three, having been paid more than $10m a year, and probably take Haley down with him. This is a serious commitment to the guy as a long term starter. If he plays at a Jake Delhommish level, it's a bad move but not a disaster. Better than that, it's fine. Worse, and it is a big, big problem for the franchise. I don't like this deal at all. If Cassel is a stud, it will save money, but not all that much money, and if he's a stud then his acquisition is a colossal win however much you end up paying him. If he is anything less than a stud, this is a worse deal than you would have got in a year's time.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
Yeah, good point. I was thinking of "incentive" in the sense of anything that's not guaranteed, in that the player can theoretically be released at any time. But as a practical matter, the base salary and roster bonuses are essentially guaranteed for the first 2-3 years, absent an obviously career-ending injury during that time.
So I'll revise back to my first impression -- this seems like too much for a player with Cassell's body of work. But I'm not really sure what better option the Chiefs had. Franchise him this year and next, and you're paying him 33 million for 2 years, which makes 40 million for 3 sound not so bad. Or, if you have him on the franchise deal this year and then do a long-term deal next year, you're still probably not going to save any money, because you would have already invested the 15 million from this year, and because he'd have more negotiating leverage with a higher franchise tag number.
The only reason for the Chiefs to keep him on the franchise deal this year would be to protect themselves in the event that he completely flops. They probably don't think that's likely, or they wouldn't have traded for him. Or more to the point, they must feel like the risk of him flopping is less than the risk of him having them over a barrel if they didn't lock him in.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
This would be a good contract for J.I. Halsell to look at and compare to other starting QBs. Sadly, I suspect that if recent history is any trend, that article would inevitably be only available to ESPN Insiders.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
Sad.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
Incorrect. If ESPN asks FO to write an analysis, it will be Insider only. If ESPN does not ask for it and Halsell writes it on his own, it won't.
Insider content consists 100% of articles that would not be written at all if ESPN wasn't paying for them (except the "4 Downs" series" which became available after a delay).
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
Not sure of the basis for saying that the Insider stuff is entirely material that wouldn't have been written at all.
First, is it actually true that more articles are being written now than before? I have no stats for it but my perception is that during this off-season there has been less free content than there was last year. (I am thinking particularly of the excellent play-diagramming articles that we used to see - although that may reflect my fondness for that kind of article over the pure mind-boggling statistical stuff).
Second, even if ESPN money means more articles are being written, is ESPN getting the additional (i.e. lower-priority) material? My feeling is that Insider is in fact getting at least some of the "juicier" articles (e.g. some of the salary cap stuff) that would previously have been free-to-air, and to the extent that additional articles are being written it is these which are coming onto the free content. For example, I would be more interested in the cap analysis stuff (Insider) than the "wisdom of crowds" material (which at this stage is mostly an exercise in opinion polling).
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
Not sure of the basis for saying that the Insider stuff is entirely material that wouldn't have been written at all.
Because the writers said so and I don't think they are lying.
my perception is that during this off-season there has been less free content than there was last year.
I think you're probably right, but the problem is that FO's writers are not full time and have other responsibilities. The play-diagram articles you mention were written by Mike Tanier, who hasn't written anything this offseason AFAIR.
My feeling is that Insider is in fact getting at least some of the "juicier" articles (e.g. some of the salary cap stuff) that would previously have been free-to-air, and to the extent that additional articles are being written it is these which are coming onto the free content.
That may or may not be true but it's a complex situation. The guy who writes the cap stuff only recently joined FO, and at least 2 of his articles so far were free, while only 1 was Insider (I think. I'm doing this from memory, not looking at archives). If ESPN has "rights" to the juicy articles then that was negotiated in the contract which helps pay Aaron's and Bill's bills (they are full time and don't have other jobs), but I think that's a mistaken impression you have. My understanding is that the reality is as I described above. No Insider = those articles would not have been written.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
We don't know the contract, and I agree that it is unlikely to be as simple as ESPN having "first dibs" on all the best topics. Equally, however, it is a partnership and (whatever the terms of the contract) I can't believe that ESPN would be happy getting only the surplus material as Insider content. I'm not suggesting that anyone is lying, but I am sure that there is a process of consultation/negotiation as to what is and is not Insider. While I'm sure it can be said that more articles are written because of of Insider, it is hard to see how it can be said, categorically, that the Insider articles are definitely the ones which would not have been written otherwise.
There was some reference to Mike Tanier not writing currently for family reasons. However, it does seem to me that if FO wants to avoid the perception among a number of non-Insider readers that they have "sold out" their best content to ESPN, they would have been wise to arrange some sort of temporary replacement.
As it is (even if in reality it is pure coincidence) producing fewer good free articles in the immediate aftermath of the ESPN deal inevitably fuels that perception.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
Aaron posted a comment a week or two ago addressing why there has been less X's and O's and details of the game content on FO this offseason. I can't remember exactly where, and I don't remember the exact details, but he said it is primarily for two reasons. The X's and O's and details of the game content was written primarily by Michael David Smith and Mike Tanier. But MDS has left FO's staff and no longer writes for them (a great shame, because he was one of my favorite FO writers). And Tanier (another one of my favorites) apparently has had some personal reasons for being less available for writing articles.
Also, although he didn't mention this, I seem to recall Aaron himself writing some excellent "content" articles himself about the game and the players back when FO was still young. However, he does a lot less of that now, probably because of all the work he does writing the book(s) and improving DVOA and researching new statistics, and when Aaron does write things they tend to live totally on the statistic side of the house.
Aaron, if you are still reading the contents, know that this reader misses you as a writer! I know you're more "editor in chief" and the main statistical researcher, but I'd love to see you write non-statistical articles on occasion!
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
Heartily agree.
I fully understand that FO's "unique selling point" is the advanced stats, but I think to a lot of readers it goes beyond that - the selling point is good writing and thoughtful discussion about football issues. For example, if you look at most of the discussion threads (this one is a good example) there is relatively little citation to the advanced stats stuff.
I think it would be a mistake to place too much emphasis on KUBIAK, DVOA etc and not enough on the narrative articles. Whether that is Mr Schatz, or whether they need to get someone else in to do that, I don't know.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
Is MDS writing somewhere else or did he walk away from it all together?
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
He's at AOL Fanhouse now. I'm sorry he left FO but I wish him well.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
Thanks.
Pessimism
I was afraid this would happen. It's almost the same as if they'd drafted a QB in the first instead of the trade. Cassel has to deliver or they lose big. The best thing about that trade was that it wasn't much of a risk. Now it's the huge, potentially disastrous question mark it appeared to be when I first saw the words "Cassel to Chiefs."
Re: Pessimism
A couple reasons for optimism --
1) They spent a 2nd on him, not a 1st. The way they used that 1st has been questioned, but at least they had it to use.
2) At least there's a year of history on Cassel to say that it's possible he can be a good NFL QB. I still think this deal is a little rich, but it makes more sense for Cassel to get it than Matt Stafford.
Re: Optimism
True. I'd rather have Cassel than any of the rookie QBs, and I'd rather see the Chiefs take risks than stick with what they have. Hope this one works.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
This is the most irresponible spending of large sums of money since the stimulus bill. KC is going to regret this move for years.
I heard on ESPN radio yesterday that Cassel was (statistically) the worst red zone QB in the league last season. And that was with Welker and Randy Frickin Moss.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
what is a more questionable deal.. considering "body of work".. track record, etc.
this one or the deal the jets gave sanchez .. ?
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
Sanchez, undoubtedly. Stafford's is even worse.
By the way, I love your catalogs.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
I am amazed at how opinionated people are about Cassel considering how uninformed they are of his play.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
I don't think it's all that amazing. We've seen Matt Cassel for 16 NFL games. That's fewer games, but better data than we would have for a highly ranked QB in the draft. There are no questions like "how would his play translate to the pro game?" as we already know the answer. Like a newly drafted QB, there are still questions about how he will develop. But we know enough for most people to have opinions.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
I am not saying that we DON'T have enough info, I am saying that most who think KC screwed the pooch didn't watch a single minute of his play last season. The guy was one of the best in the league down the stretch, even according to DVOA.
And it isn't as if Pioli is just throwing darts here. He has been tracking Cassel for years now. Frankly, I view this contract as a no brainer.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
So the info is out there, but anyone who came to a different conclusion than you must not have seen it? It's good to know you're monitoring all our football viewing habits.
A $63 million contract is never a no-brainer, or at least it shouldn't be. Yes, he was good down the stretch, but a lot of players have put together a dynamite half season before, only to revert to mediocrity thereafter. For someone to merit a $63 million contract, I expect them to prove that they can do it from one season to the next, and that they can handle the pressure of being "the guy". So far, I've seen maybe half a season of solid play from him.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
"It's good to know you're monitoring all our football viewing habits."
The majority of people questioning this move have already stated on previous threads that they did not watch every game - or even many games.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
Prior to this post, I've seen exactly two people in this thread openly criticize this deal, and I was one of them. So I'm not sure where this "majority" argument is coming from.
FWIW, I watched probably 5 or 6 Patriots games last season, and yes, it was clear that Cassel got better as the season went on. My point is that I don't consider that sufficiently convincing to justify this contract. There have been a lot of Derek Andersons and Scott Mitchells who put it together for 1 year.
I'm not saying he can't be good, or even an all-star. I'm not even saying that he won't end up justifying this contract. (I don't think he will, but I'll admit it's possible.) I'm saying that right now, he hasn't earned a $63 million contract.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
There are a whole host of reasons why Anderson isn't comparable in the least. First off, Anderson benefited from vastly superior OL play, with comparable "skill" position talent around him. Despite this, Anderson's comp% was significantly lower than Cassel's and his INT rate significatly higher.
Again, I think it is being overlooked that this isn't some desperate GM talking themselves into a promising unknown. This is a GM with a great deal of cache who is secure in his position for at least a couple years signing a QB who he drafted and monitored for the past 4 season.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
Braylon "questionable hands" Edwards is equal to Randy Moss now? Where is Cleveland's Welker?
Plus Jamal Lewis is worse than the committee of running backs New England had.
I think you really underestimate Cassel's supporting cast.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
In the handful of games I caught, Edwards didn't have the hands issues that plagued his last season. And Moss wasn't anywhere near as good in 2008 as he was in 2007. Considering NE was without at least 2 of their top 3 backs for more than half the season and all three for much of it, I think Lewis was more than comparable. I will grant you that Cleveland didn't have a Welker-type slot guy.
I think NE was better overall, but comparable doesn't mean identical.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
"And Moss wasn't anywhere near as good in 2008 as he was in 2007."
I don't think that's an argument in favor of Cassel. It's an argument in favor of Tom Brady.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
Oddly enough, I agree somewhat, but not for the same reasons. Brady and Moss had a special connection that Cassel and Moss couldn't quite forge.
That said, the mistakes I lump on Randy had nothing to do with poor plays by Cassel. Moss dropped two huge passes against Pitt, one that eventually cost a definitive 7 points and another that negated what would have been at least a 35 yard gain and put NE into FG position. 7 definite and another 3-7 possible points lost. These are plays he made in 2007 and it wasn't Matt's fault he didn't last year.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
We'll just have to agree to disagree on the quality of the 2007 Browns supporting cast as compared to the 2008 Patriots.
I think I disagree on how much security Pioli has in his new position though. My take on it has always been that if Pioli flops on his own, people will assume he was being carried by Belichick (see Crennel and Weis). I think Pioli's security is very much tied to Cassel. If Cassel flops and the team doesn't improve in 2-3 years, Pioli might be on the way out.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
I agree that Pioli is only guaranteed a spot for 2-3 years. Really, in todays NFL not many have much longer than that. My point was that Pioli doesn't have to make this bet. This isn't a case of a beleaguered GM needing to make a big spalsh to justify his position (or rescue for that matter). This is a new GM running a team not much is expected of for the next couple seasons. Yet Pioli chose to lock into Cassel even though Pioli already had him for at least one season and had time to find another alternative. Usually when a relative unknown is given a mega-contract it is a panic move, but that isn't so in this case.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
IMHO the Chiefs are one of the more loyal franchises, and will give Pioli longer than 2-3 years. That might change given that Lamar Hunt passed on a few years backs.
But every other pont you make I agree with. Pioli knows Cassel, what he is capable of, how he trains and what his attitudes are. It's ideal that he can get a Patriots QB in, if the franchise is to take a step towards the sort of dominance and success that the Pats have enjoyed. If he has the right coach in place, and Cassel can work with him; they'll improve significantly.
The other thing to consider is that the usual alternative for finding a franchise QB is the draft. Given the choice of spending the money on a veteran who's been around a class organisation, learned from the best and successfully played one season; or a top college prospect I know which I'd put my money on. Neither route is guaranteed, but I reckon the former has better odds; especially when you're the guy in charge and can shape the future.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
If by "down the stretch" you mean after the Steelers game (where nobody can argue that he looked like one of the best in the league)then the Pats played Seattle (4-12, 28th ranked D), Oakland (5-12, 27th ranked D), Arizona (9-7, 19th ranked D), and Buffalo (7-9, 14th ranked D). Hardly a murderers row of opponents.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
First off, Matt was excellent in the first 40 minutes or so of that game and NE would likely have gone into halftime up at least 17-10 if not for Moss' terrible play.
Even that aside, Matt's run started well before Pitt.
Even all THAT aside, DVOA takes opponent into account and Matt was still one of the best "down the stretch".
Matt will earn every penny of this contract.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
I understand that you support Cassel, but dont rewrite history. Cassel was 12/23 for 122 yards in the first 3 quarters before the fumble/interception-fest began.
Barely 50% completions and no TD's. 5.3 yards per attempt and a passer rating of 67.6. That is hardly "excellent".
After that he was a turnover machine.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
I am not rewriting history. I watched that first half. Matt played quite well and was victimized by Moss' poor play. Just add Moss' two drops back in and viola!
14/23 - 61%
160 yards
6.96 ypa
1 TD
96.3 rating
Now of course your rebuttal is "all QBs are victims of dropped passes" and you are correct. Over the course of a season it (usually) all evens out. But you are talking about a single half. With a sample size that small Moss's drops made a dramatic difference. It certainly wasn't Matt's fault Moss dropped two balls that hit him in the hands.
Exagerated for effect: If every pass Matt threw was picture perfect, but still dropped and/or bobbled into an interception would you say "How could he have played well? He was 0/20 with 3 interceptions?"
It is possible for a QB to play well and not have the numbers bear it out when you are dealing with samples sizes that small.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
If you are going to count drops by Moss you also have to count the 2-3 dropped INTs by Steeler DBs in that game.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
And of course the subsequent plays that did get included in the stats wouldn't count ...
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
WOW. You say you are not rewriting history, then you start using imaginary stats. You are now no longer worth the effort.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
I've gone on record saying Cassel won't be good, so obviously I think this is a terrible move. I know he was much better in the second half than the first half of last season, but does that necessarily mean that the "true" Cassel is the second half guy? (What proof is there that second half performance is more predictive than first half performance?) We only have 16 games on him and people want to throw half of them out? David Lewin created a system for evaluating QBs which strongly implies that more games leads to better evaluation, but throw that out the window. And how do we account for the Pats' blowout win against Arizona in the snow when the Cards clearly did not come to play (which is one of the precious few second half games we're allowed to consider)? How many people are ignoring the fact that Cassel's conventional stats were inflated by his deceptively easy schedule? How many people are ignoring that both his conventional and advanced stats were inflated by a strong o-line and excellent receivers?
This post came out a little more vitriolic than I intended, but I do believe there are serious questions about Cassel's ability to perform. I didn't like the trade, and I hate the contract (which doesn't really save the Chiefs any money over keeping him on the franchise tag this year and extending him later unless he becomes a near-elite QB, which I obviously don't expect to happen).
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
"And how do we account for the Pats' blowout win against Arizona in the snow when the Cards clearly did not come to play (which is one of the precious few second half games we're allowed to consider)?"
Clearly didn't come to play, or clearly got outplayed?
"How many people are ignoring the fact that Cassel's conventional stats were inflated by his deceptively easy schedule? "
DVOA is supposed to account for that, and he was a top 5 QB for the last 8 weeks of the season according to DVOA.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
I'm not really trying to take you head on there, Rich; you're a sharp guy and I usually respect your input, so don't take this too personally. But I can't believe how many people think playing for the Patriots means canonization!
This is a bit outrageous, but *Joey Harrington* would probably have won 11 games with NE last year. I mean, this is a guy who took a team that lost its starting qb to the long arm of the law late in the preseason, around whom the entire offense was based, to a 5-11 record with a team that wasn't just coming off the greatest offensive performance of all time (in fact, Atlanta flat out sucked the year before). I'm sorry, against the schedule Cassel played, the fact that it's even *plausible* that Harrington could have done, record-wise, the same as Cassel gives us exactly this much information: Cassel's probably as good as Harrington. But we're not even sure of that since before last September he hadn't played since 1924 or whenever he was in junior high school or whatever.
Yes, Cassel was somewhat learning on the job during the 1st half of the year, but that's not the same thing as saying those games can just be ignored when measuring Cassel's performance. Yes, he played well, according to dvoa during the last 8 games, against 5 horrendous teams, Buffalo in million-mph winds, an Arizona team in the midst of a literally famous stretch of futility, and one half of a Steeler's game. But aren't you, Rich, the one who always says dvoa is close to useless when used to measure an individual's performance? You sometimes qualify that with, well, qb maybe a little, but it's always a hedge, not a strong claim in itself (IIRC).
I'm not really arguing that Cassel won't be good. But I strenuously object to anyone who thinks just because Belichick had him and Pioli got him, he must be some kind of wonderful "leader of men" that will definitely be great. The fact is, the difference between what we know of Cassel and nothing is pretty close to … nothing. Sure, BB & Pioli have more information than we have, but we don't have it, so we can't claim it's really there in any way outside of the trust-the-experts fallacy.
Fair's fair, Rich. The "leader of men" and Patriot canonization thing are definitely not you: you've consistently claimed that Cassel got better (he did), did well at the end of the season in measurements that take into account strength of opponent (he did), and that he might just be good (he might). That's all fair, but anyone who claims more than an iota more than that is pulling sh!t out of their a$$.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
I am Cassel's biggest supporter on this site and I'm not canonizing him in the slightest. I am just going by what I saw in his performance last year. I have used the "Pioli signed him" not meaning he must be good, but rather as a "he isn't the hopeful unknown" that people like to offer as similar examples.
And I don't think anyone is saying the first half is irrelevent, just that there are reaons that explain a clear upward trend quite well.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
I'm going to call BS on this one. You could not have dropped Joey Harrington into NE's offense last year and won 11 games. The Patriots run an offense that is very complex and calls for very quick decision making, emphasizing QB wits over raw physical talent (in the form of arm strength or scrambling ability). Their offensive line is overrated because of Brady's shiftiness...I would put them as middle of the pack in pass protection and below average in run blocking. Their WR's are very good and make a QB look better, and their coaching and playcalling is excellent, and all these things helped Cassel. And yes they tailored their playcalling a bit for the guy under center, but to a great extent, I would think the playbook is what it is. I can think of only a couple of "non-elite" (i.e. not Peyton Manning-ish) QB's you could drop onto the Patriots offense who would have won 11 games last year, and Joey Harrington is not one of them. The fact that Cassel was able to succeed in that environment at least indicates that he is smart, a quick learner, and careful with the ball, which makes him a far more attractive candidate than many QB's out there. Granted, there's no way to tell if he is elite or even worth $10M per year, but he certainly might be.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
While I don't necessarily disagree with any of your points, combined they feel to me to be about as accurate as "Pennington's arm is too weak to lead a team downfield." What I mean is, we're none of us experts, so we hear something a football-knowledgeable person says and latch onto it.
Maybe Brady made the offensive like look good (I actually think that's true), but none of us have ever sat with a stopwatch to measure that, so we're really just repeating what we've heard somebody say who (maybe) has measured it.
And the other points support Harrington as plausible: extremely talented wide receivers, an offense suited to wiles (ie, veteran) over skills (ie, youth/speed), excellent coaching and playcalling.
More, Harrington had to do all that with a less-gifted coaching staff (wasn't that the Petrino year?), surrounded by *way* less talented players, and took a team with significant weaknesses everywhere to a non-Raiders-like record. (I do feel that I'm overvaluing record here, but this is a conversation about Cassel, who only has one 11-5 record.) He showed he can do what Cassel did, in worse circumstances, with less support.
Again, my claim is that it is plausible that Harrington could have done it, and I think plausible is quite the understatement. You may disagree - no problem - but neither of us has the expertise to really judge it.
And let me refer again to anyone saying "BB & Pioli & McDaniels believe it so it's true" - that is called the expert fallacy, and really has no bearing here. When I heard KC traded for Cassel, my first thought wasn't "Pioli must know what he's doing," though that was always my impression before the trade, it was "why is Pioli giving such a gift to NE when he isn't there anymore!" Then he took Vrabel too! That's 2 players NE was known to have not wanted (one's old, one's overpaid for a backup), and remember when that happened in Den with Cutler & Marshall everybody said that just decreases value. This dog plain don't hunt. (It's actually exactly this that I call the canonization of Patriots - everything they touch turns to gold, just like St Whoever, and I believe it!)
Thread's old, you probably won't even see this. That's too bad.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
On the Pats' O-line: I've never sat down with a stopwatch, and I'm certainly not a coach or a scout, but my impression from watching the Pats O-line and comparing the blocking I see to other O-lines is that the Pats O-line is nowhere near as good as, say, Denver's or Indy's. Some teams you just see an impregnable iron picket form around the QB, or holes get ripped open for RB's to squeeze through. You see that occasionally from the Pats, but more frequently you see a defender or two invade the pocket and force Brady to dart around him, and it never looks easy for the Pats running backs, especially on runs behind the tackles.
I'll agree that I know too little about Harrington to say if he specifically would fail in New England, but isn't he the one with great measurables and questionable intangibles, that never was able to put a productive offense together despite having weapons? Or am I mixing him up with Boller? I do think that there are relatively few non-elite QB's that could succeed in New England's system, but I'll concede that I don't know if Harrington is one of them. (The one's I was specifically thinking of who I don't think are elite but that I thought could succeed with the Patriots were Pennington and Edwards). But now it sounds like you think Harrington is a viable option as a starter, when before the implication was that Harrington was being touted as an example of how a non-viable option could have succeeded?
I'm familiar with expert fallacy. However, I'm not saying that "BB and Pioli and McDaniels believe it so it's true". I'm saying that "people with more pertinent data that I have act in a way that implies something, so I think that the probability that something is true is greater than I would have thought given the data that I alone have". I'm not convinced Cassel is great, and I'm certainly not convinced that BB and co are infallible. However, I do think that the fact that both Pioli and McDaniels know a great deal about Cassel, and while in possession of this knowledge are willing to risk their careers on Cassel not flopping implies that the probably of him flopping is lower than the probability of some random player about whom we have not data flopping is. It's the same principal behind the Lewin projection system...Lewin is saying that when scouts have a lot of data (i.e. college starts) about a candidate and still rank that candidate worthy of a first or second round grade, there is a higher probability of that candidate succeeding than a candidate about which they have less data (i.e. with fewer college starts). That is believed to be the reason between the correlation between starts and NFL success in the projection system.
McDaniels and Pioli have even more information on Cassel than scouts do on a college QB with a lot of starts. And McDaniels was allegedly willing to trade a former 1st round and highly touted QB for Cassel (and maybe some additional compensation), while Pioli has shown that he was willing to trade a 2nd round pick and give a first-round-pick level of money to Cassel.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
MJK, good points all. I'm not sure Harrington would be a viable starter right now, but at the beginning of last year he was just coming off his year in Atlanta, so I think it valid for discussing 2008.
I don't know if Boller or Harrington is who you're talking about, probably both. Really, I picked Harrington because p-f-r found him to be the worst starter ever given how many starts he got. I think that's probably better than replacement level, but more or less worse than anything else. Basically, I'm saying that if the worst good qb ever could do it, then all we know is Cassel is about on par with the worst good qb ever, which tells us more or less nothing, let alone that he's actually any good. You mention Pennington and Edwards, so if I'd been less outrageous to start, we might have just agreed loudly.
Finally, I didn't even remember you using the BB+Pioli+McDaniels argument, so I wasn't aiming that directly at you. There's something to be said in comparing using their stated opinions to how Lewin makes use of scouting information. Something about it still stinks to me, but the odor's faint and there'll be more interesting things to talk about on other threads.
Thanks!
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
When the guy is starting for the first time in nearly a decade, I think it is safe to say the performance after getting reacclimated is far more predictive than initial performance.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
We'll find out if that's worth a bet of $10M/year.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
When the guy is starting for the first time in nearly a decade, I think it is safe to say the performance after getting reacclimated is far more predictive than initial performance.
It's possible that that's the case, but it's definitely not safe to say. Safe would mean you had numerous examples of players who sat for many years, then played poorly at first, got better later and continued to maintain the high level of performance, with no counterexamples. But you don't have that, you have educated guesswork at best. It's not necessarily wrong, but it's not safe either, and as another commenter noted the contract represents a serious gamble on your view being right.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
As I recall, Cassel got most of the snaps in training camp last year. Obviously playing full-speed is different but it wasn't as if he just came off the bench unprepared.
IIRC I read that the Patriots adjusted their offense in the 2nd half of the season. Fewer dropbacks, more out of the shotgun; thereby allowing Cassel more time to read the field and not have to worry about the footwork getting into position. That's smart coaching and I suspect the sort of thing Pioli will expect and instruct his headcoach to do.
Let's also remember that while he might get acclimated as the season goes on, opponents also have more gamefilm of him to look at. They can begin to look for tendencies and weaknesses to exploit.
I'm not drawing any conclusions from those points, just highlighting as things to consider in any discussion.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
BGA, you are one of my favorite posters on this site, but I think you are overthinking this one a bit. Clearly there isn't a sample size large enough to make scientific conclusions, but that doesn't change what the evidence indicates.
You have a QB who, by all reports was an excellent college prospect who got stuck behind two Heisman winners. His coach even admits that it was a very tight race between him and Leinart. So, this QB doesn't start in college and then continues to play little minutes in the pros outside of the preseason.
So, this QB is then thrust into the starting position and quite clearly has issues feeling pressure in the pocket. He will hold onto the ball a bit too long, get happy feet, even roll into oncoming pressure because he can't quite feel what he doesn't see. To make matter worse the OL plays quite terribly during this time of acclimation. Even in blowouts like against Denver, the QB is harrassed on nearly every dropback and ends up being sacked 6 times. Some of this is his fault, much of it was just poor portection.
As the OL returns to health and things settle down a bit, the QB gradually becomes more comfortable. Accordingly, the team's comfort grows and the playbook is opened fully. From this point on, the QB and the offense as a whole are at or near the top of the entire league, despite other teams' game film to break down growing with each passing week. The QB faces each division opponent twice and improves his play against all three - in two cases dramatically (the third was in windswept conditions).
In fairness, the QB was on a team with a fabulous rushing attack. However, when the QB really started to take off, the team was down to its 4th string halfback.
Almost the possible explanations for this, I can't see how anyone could say that the QB genuinely improving his play isn't far and away the most likely explanation.
Here is a link to some more information on Cassel. A KC writer is going back through game tape and breaking down his play, both good and bad. It is an informative read.
http://kan.scout.com/2/876996.html
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
It's probably a good thing that there is all of this dialog about Cassell...
because I really don't think we will ever hear from him ever again.
Now he is a Cleveland Brown . . .
never to be heard from again .. .. ..
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
There will probably be another story about it if he becomes a Cleveland Brown. That would be something of a surprise.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
A couple of points.
1). I'm as big a Cassel fan as anyone, but even for me, when I saw news of Cassel's contract, my thought was "wow, good deal for him. That's probably too much money for the Chiefs to throw at him".
2). But then I started considering the circumstances. Cassel was already going to get at least 15 M guaranteed or something like that under the franchise tag. Plus, under the franchise tag, he would get to be a FA after one year, which would turn into ridiculous amounts of money if he plays well, or get another 18 M guaranteed if he was franchised again. And most players, for good or ill, tend to think they will play well and succeed and generally gamble on riskier propositions than lower amounts of safe money--that's why players don't negotiate for fully guaranteed contracts in the NFL. So KC would have to offer Cassel a deal with significantly more guaranteed than the $15M he was already guaranteed. Probably a good bit over $20 M, for him to even consider signing it.
If you're going to offer that much guaranteed, you have to make it a fairly long contract, in order to amortize the guaranteed money for cap reasons. But if it's a long contract, the player is sure to demand even more guaranteed over the short term part, and a big ballooning salary over the end part to give him negotiating leverage.
I think the deal is a little on the high side, considering I expect Cassel's career to end up more like Kerry Collins' or Jeff Garcia's than Tom Brady's, but not horrible for the Chiefs.
And then you consider a couple of other factors. Pioli is not known for throwing money around rashly. The Patriots almost never did with him as personnell guru. Maybe that was partly Belichick, but Pioli's got to be reasonably careful. Cassel is a player that Pioli scouted, and now has FIVE YEARS of personal experience with, including one year with him as a starter. Pioli has way way way more data on Cassel than any of us, or even any person in the league excepting perhaps Bill Belichick and possibly Josh McDaniels. He has much more information than teams have for evaluating draft prospects, and he just made the decision to give this guy what is essential an upper-half of the first round draft pick contract (but not quite a first pick overall contract). These factors more than any others imply to me that Cassel will likely not flop, because several smart people with a lot of experience with Cassel (Pioli in KC and McDaniels in Denver) seem to be under the impression that he's a solid enough to risk a lot on.
All that being said, I do believe in the "sophomore curse" for QB's, so I expect him to struggle a bit this year.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
Once you equalize for total overall cap, Cassel was paid quite a bit less than Jake Delhomme got back in 2004, despite being younger, more athletic and coming off a better season than Delhomme did. And Delhomme only had one season starting as well.
I don't remember people being all that surprised when he was shown the money.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
For the record, I watched every Patriots game last year. Here's my thoughts on Cassel's Play:
KC-NE: Brady goes down, Cassel comes in and plays conservatively but a little sloppily, and the Pats barely win
NE-NYJ: Again conservative playcalling and mediocre play from Cassel, but again Pats win narrowly
MIA-NE: The Ronnie Brown Wildcat show. Patriots, including Cassel, are embarrassed. This is mainly on the Pats D, but Cassel didn't look great.
NE-SF: I was actually at this game. Cassel played really well, but the Pats D had a hard time containing JTO (and that about sums up the Pats D in 2008). Essentially Cassel won a shootout, showing flashes of what he would later show down the road, but with a propensity for taking sacks and pulling the ball down too early.
Through the first quarter, Cassel has shown himself to be faster than Brady, but too eager to pull the ball down and run. Yet he is very careful with the ball, protecting it well and taking sacks rather than throwing INT's. The playcalling is extremely conservative, and they're making Cassel play from under center a lot.
NE-SD: Early on, the game hinges on four big plays. Both teams attempt to test the other deep. Randy Moss drops (or has broken up) two deep balls that he normally catches, both of which would have been TD's. Some of this might be on Cassel, but Moss doesn't look himself. Meanwhile, the Chargers complete two deep balls at the expense of Deltha O'Neal, and jump out to a 17-3 halftime lead. Cassel tries to bring the Pats back in the 2nd half, but fails to score on 4 tries from the 1-yard line, and the Pats get crushed. This loss is definitely at least partly on Cassel, but had any of those early deep plays gone differently, it could have had a very different result.
DEN-NE: Cassel plays reasonably well, and the Patriots cream the Broncos.
STL-NE: Cassel's first really bad game. Still rushing too much, can't convert in the red zone, two interceptions, sloppy play, the Pats win only because they're playing the Rams. This win is definitely on schedule. Cassel did put together a nice 4th quarter drive to take the lead late, though.
NE-IND: Cassel plays reasonably well and loses a heartbreaker to the Colts. The one int was a desparation 4th down pass at the very end of regulation and doesn't really count.
In the second quarter, Cassel has shown some improvement, but still takes too many sacks. Red zone troubles plague the Patriots, both in the passing and the running game.
BUF-NE: Good play from Cassel, including a TD run, solid win, but it was really due to the Pats running attack.
NYJ-NE: The game that ultimately would cost the Pats a playoff birth but that could have given Cassel a real legacy. Cassel brings the Pats back from a 24-6 deficit with an amazing second half effort, throwing for 400 yards and 3 TD's, including a 2-point conversion and a TD drive in the final minute with no timeouts left that culminates in one of the greatest TD's passes ever to Randy Moss on 4th down with 1 second left. The Jets then win the toss, the Pats defense can't prevent them from converting a 3rd and 15 deep in their own end, and the Jets win on a FG with Cassel never seeing the ball in OT. But the training wheels have come off, and Pats fans start to be won over to Cassel.
NE-MIA: Revenge on the Wildcat. Cassel plays exceptionally well and New England stomps on a fairly good Miami team.
PIT-NE: The game usually cited against Cassel. Both teams are playing conservatively through the first half, and neither offense does much of anything. Pittsburgh has played slightly better but the score is tied. Then, random chance intervenes. After muffing a punt but retaining possession, Pittsburg is held out of the end zone, but the Pats muff a punt and Pitt recovers and scores. Then Cassel gets strip sacked on the next play and Pitt recovers. Three disastrous plays, only one of which is Cassel's fault, change the character of the game. Now Cassel, playing from behind against the best defense in the league, feels the heat and melts down.
In the third quarter, Cassel has three good or amazing games, and one horrible one, against the best defense in the league when forced to play from behind due to luck, defense, and special teams.
NE-SEA: Good game by Cassel, and a narrow NE win.
NE-OAK: Amazing game by Cassel, admittedly against a bad defense, and Pats stomp on Raiders.
ARI-NE: Another fantastic game by NE. I would say against a very bad team, but Arizona went on to play well later. So maybe just against a good team having a bad day. But it should be pointed out that Cassel threw for 345 yards and 3 TD's in a snowstorm against a decent defense.
NE-BUF: You had to watch this game to understand why it made us like Cassel so much. It was essentially played in a hurricane and passing was ALMOST impossible. But when Cassel did throw, it was almost always complete (6/8, and one of the incompletes was a drop). On the critical TD drive, he converted two 4th downs, one on foot and one through the air, and had a pretty good punt. It was an example of smart football in difficult conditions.
Four really good games by Cassel at the end. And if the Pats D could have covered the TE on a 3rd and 15 on overtime, then they would have made the playoffs and all New England fans would know it was mainly due to Cassel's play in the second half.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
57% of Cassel's passing yards last season were the result of YAC. This was by far the most in the league for starting QBs. From what I understand, YAC for QBs does not correlate from year-to-year. Apparently, YAC is receiver skill rather than a QB skill. So, a large proportion of Cassel's value last year should be attributed to Welker, Moss, Faulk, etc.
For comparison, Brady's YAC from 2007 was 42%.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
I'd be willing to bet that most QB's starting for the first time have an above average YAC percentage. Offenisve coordinators tend to try to protect their young QB's by calling a lot of swing passes, flat passes, and quick outs, and other easy-to-complete passes that call for YAC. We know that for at least half of the season McDaniels and BB were calling primarily short passes for Cassel--"leaving the training wheels on" so to speak--and only later in the season did they let him start to play like an actual QB.
I'd be curious to know how his YAC percentage breaks down in the first half of the seaons versus the second.
Re: Chiefs Lock Up Cassel
You'd probably lose that bet, at least based on 2007-2008 numbers. YAC% for first year starters in 2008 (2007 is similar):
Matt Ryan: 41%
Aaron Rodgers: 41%
Dan Orlovsky: 40%
Tyler Thigpen:42%
Shaun Hill:44%
Joe Flacco: 48%
Ryan Fitzpatrick:45% (the only player on this list with lower "air" yards than Cassel)
JT O'Sullivan - 53%
Most of the guys at the bottom of the list near Cassel are veterans who aren't very good anymore or who were never any good: Favre, Bulger, Campbell, Losman, Palmer (who still may be good), Orton, Collins, Jackson.
I'd be worried about Cassel's accuracy if I were a Cheif fan. Anyone who throws that many short passes really should have a higher completion percentage. I think McDaniel's play calling and the Patriot's quality at WR may have hid many of Cassel's defeciencies as a QB. I guess we'll find out in a couple of months.
Post new comment