Matt Cassell will NOT be a San Francisco 49er in 2009
by David Fucillo on Feb 6, 2009 8:00 AM PST
in San Francisco 49ers News
Email
PrintThe latest news out of New England is that the Patriots have franchised QB Matt Cassel. It's not exactly a shocking move as the Patriots find themselves in a bit of a sticky situation. If Tom Brady is not 100% come late summer, the Patriots will require the services of Cassel. If you're the New England Patriots, things could be a lot worse. The best case scenario is that Brady is good to go by the start of the season. They either trade Cassel for some picks, or he signs somewhere as a free agent...and the Patriots get some picks.
The worst case scenario could be one of two depending on how you view things: 1) Brady is hurt and the Patriots have to use Cassel or 2) Brady is healthy and they can't unload Cassel. The second option is not so bad given that Cassel would be under a 1-year contract.
I chose the specific headline for this article because of some comments I've seen elsewhere. I've noticed emails to various media types from 49ers fans inquiring about the chance of the team landing Cassel. The one that tipped the scales for me was an email someone sent to Sando suggesting the 49ers sign Cassel for 6 years at 65-70 million and apparently a 20-25 million dollar signing bonus.
Now I realize this is just one person throwing out a suggestion, but I'm sorry, it's not going to happen. Of course now, thanks to the power of the Internet, if the 49ers do go after Cassel this post will make me look foolish (so feel free to bookmark it!). However, I just want to go on record as saying it just won't happen.
My reasons are pretty simple. Cassel was the starting QB in New England this past season and had one heck of a season. He threw for 3,693 yards with a 63.4% completion percentage, 21 TDs, 11 INTs and a QB rating of 89.4. Nonetheless, it's his only starting experience since high school. Color me a little skeptical.
There has been some discussion about the system in New England and that makes me just a little bit more nervous. Even if a deal could be arranged that just involved second round picks, is it worth it knowing you'll also be forking over a big, fat contract?
One other quick point I wanted to make will likely ruffle the feathers of some folks here. While I'm a fan of Shaun Hill being the short term answer at QB, I realize some people disagree. However, I wanted to throw some info out there just for comparison's sake.
Cassel: 327/516, 3,693 yards, 63.4%, 7.16 YPA, 21 TDs, 11 INTs, 89.4 QB rating
Hill: 181/288, 2,046 yards, 62.8%, 7.10 YPA, 13 TDs, 8 INTs, 87.5 QB rating
Now I realize statistics don't project out perfectly and to do so can be some serious cherry-picking. But it's the middle of February and I want to do it anyways. The numbers project rather well. The area where Hill projects much worse is interceptions. However, he projects for pretty similar yards and more touchdowns. Not exactly the science of Florida Danny, but arguably a little more remedial.
However, the point I'm making is in the value of what the team would have. The talk surrounding Matt Cassel has been about an Aaron Rodgers-type of contract (6 years, $65M). And we can't forget the draft pick(s) involved. On the other hand we've got Shaun Hill. Hill signed a 3-year deal for $6 million prior to this past season. It included a $2 million signing bonus and playing time incentives that could max out the package at $11.5 million.
The draft pick comparison would be the "QB of the future" taken in the middle rounds. I suppose one could argue Matt Cassel is more of a sure thing, but even that's questionable. So conceivably (and I do stress the conceivably), you could be comparing 6 years, $65M and a 2nd round pick or worst case a pair of first rounders for a potential 1-year wonder, with Hill's contract, a rookie's contract (we won't consider Alex Smith in this equation for now) and the 3rd-5th round pick you used on that rookie.
Now that's all just something I'm throwing out there off the top of my head. If you don't like Shaun Hill for the short term, maybe you've got some other ideas. Whatever those ideas are (minus those who would name JTO the starting QB again), I think they're better than breaking the bank for Matt Cassel. Consider me on record with that.
30 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Cassel vs. Hill
I’m with you, Fooch, in that I think Hill is probably the better short-term solution, where Cassel may be neither the short-term or long-term solution. If it were Cassel’s second year at the helm, then it may seem like a more worth it gamble.
Perhaps I’m just being safe. Perhaps I’m a little delusional to think that the 49ers can do better than Cassel with a pair of second round picks over two years. In any case, I’d go with HIll over forking over the draft picks AND contract.
Comparisons...
Stats were similar. Cassel SHOULD have better stats, considering the superior offense of the Pats. In fact, they should have been markedly better than Hill’s, if I were considering throwing out that kind of coin to Cassel.
Cassel’s a lot like Mark Sanchez…1 year at the helm, did well, looks promising, batteries not included. Do you gamble on the future with either (I still think Cassel’s not yet a proven quantity to command that price, so in essence, you’re getting the 1st Rd QB roll of the dice like a Sanchez)?
I think the 9ers are fine for now with Hill while they establish a new identity and find some other pieces that will make a bigger impact on the team NOW rather than taking up so much cap space with another gamble at the QB like Cassel, or any 1st Rd QB being considered this year. Let’s develop the WR’s and find the game-breaker. Make sure the O Line can finally protect ANY QB before throwing a high-priced filet mignon to the dogs. Get a D in place that makes more sacks than the O gives up.
Boldin’s talking again like he wants to go…Pick any Ravens LB and it would be an upgrade over all but PW…At least 1 of the 1st and 2nd rounders should make an immediate impact…Leave the QB position alone for now, let Sing work his magic and make the team into a strong defensive force that runs the ball and passes to their game-breaker.
2nd Round Pick
Josh Freeman, QB, Kansas St.
I’m just going to start throwing that name around as much as possible not for any other reason than I feel like it.
by methodrampage on Feb 6, 2009 1:39 PM PST up reply actions
I like to call it...
… the Michael Bush effect.
I've noticed...
… that depending on where the mock-drafter places Sanchez in their mock, Freeman may not make it to the 49ers second pick.
Anyone else think
some team is going to be in for a huge surprise when they give up the draft picks and a huge contract for a guy that’s not going to perform anywhere near as good when he’s surrounded with lesser talent?
I’m also wondering what this will do to the team morale. I mean the Pats, under Belichick, have not overpaid for players. What happens if every team says “no thanks?” Or if Brady doesn’t recover and Cassel needs to stay. How will al those players that take pay cuts feel when this guy is making a (site decorum)load more than them? Could be fun to watch the Pats implode… though I guess that is the most extreme of worst case scenarios.
Pats players...
… have taken pay cuts? I think the primary reason for the lower salaries of some of their players is because the Pats work hard to find the “diamonds in the rough” that fit into their system. If Cassel gets paid because the team needs him, then he gets paid because they need him. It’s not the first time the team has franchised a QB because their “franchise QB” may be in question.
With the franchise tag, I’m pretty sure every team will say “no thanks” until they see Cassel for another year or it gets to the point where no draft picks are involved. If Brady heals, then the team looking at Cassel next offseason may get a dramatic discount (compared to if they were to acquire him this offseason).
+1
New England isn’t taking money out of the pockets of their players to pay Cassel so what he is going to make is pretty irrelevant. The Patriots had to franchise Cassel because they can’t really sign him long term so they pay him top dollar for one season as insurance Brady. It’s a typical CYA move by the Patriots and I seriously doubt anybody is going to make a big play for Cassel with his limited playing experience.
by methodrampage on Feb 6, 2009 1:44 PM PST up reply actions
You know...
Shaun Hill would have better stats if he were throwing to Wes Welker and a motivated Randy Moss. I find it hard to believe that Cassel could have put up his NE numbers if he was the QB for this year’s SF offense. Maybe better per game than Hill, but 65 million better? Nah.
Maybe Hill isn’t the long term answer. Though I have to say I don’t see too much difference between Hill and say….Jake Delhomme who has been to a Superbowl. Hill has only had a handful of starts himself….you would think he could get better. I’mreally hoping that they don’t go with a first round QB. I’m not the only one right?
by save10 on Feb 6, 2009 1:15 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
For sure
Cassel was surrounded by better players and played in an offensive system that’s pretty much been in place for years.
If Cassel had started for the Niners last year and Hill had played for the Patriots I would expect the stats, which are similar now, to remain similar. I might chart out Cassel as marginally better, but really, in the offense that the Niners want and the players that the Niners have, unless the next QB on the roster has a big “S” on his chest I don’t think there’s going to be all that much reason to get an immediate upgrade at the position. I’d hope for a future starter in the draft, someone who can sit around for a few years and learn.
by Bob In Beaverton on Feb 6, 2009 1:48 PM PST up reply actions
First round QB.
You’re not the only one. With so many other pressing needs that have incapable players, taking a first round QB just shouldn’t be an option unless the guy who is slated to go #1(Stafford) falls to #10. Needless to say, that’s a VERY unlikely scenario.
Shaun Hill..
Was the Qb that beat the Bills and The Jets both in the AFC east, and Shaun was not the QB when we lost to the Patriots.
Think about that
by Josh G and the Shaun Hill band wagon on Feb 7, 2009 10:36 AM PST up reply actions
Think about this:
AFCE-
Fins: 11-5
Pats: 11-5
Jets: 9-7
Bills: 7-9
NFCW-
Cards: 9-7
49ers: 7-9
Hawks: 4-12
Rams: 2-14
You can go back to thinking Hill is Tom Brady, because he throws to Moss too.
Well, we're waiting....
No
In fact.. I actually believe shaun is the Long term answer, if you mean more than 2 years..
by Josh G and the Shaun Hill band wagon on Feb 7, 2009 10:39 AM PST up reply actions
besides..
A 1st round pick, should be spent on the best available player, l;ike someone else, said before.. unless Stafford falls to 10, this simply won’t happen, and even if he does, after the A. Smith Debacle, even then I doubt, Mike Singletary, would ever draft a QB in the First round. Expect them to get an O- or (even more likely a D-lineman). The later rounds are for addressing team needs, and depth.. boy did we get lucky in the sixth last year (Morgan) and I don’t think Singletary, is that worried about the QB spot. He feels very good about Shaun, and A. Smith is somewhat familar with Raye’s system as well, so unless A. smith finds more money somewhere else (San Diego?) I would not expect the 49ers to draft a qb before the 4th round.
by Josh G and the Shaun Hill band wagon on Feb 7, 2009 10:49 AM PST up reply actions
When you say...
bq.A 1st round pick,should be spent on the best available player.
I am slightly uncomfortable with this. Do you mean the best available player period, regardless of their position? Or do you mean the best available player according to the most pressing needs of the team?
I, for one, prefer the latter. What happens if the best available come the #10 spot is a player that plays in the P Willis position and we draft him according to that policy. Isn’t that rather stupid as we have more pressing needs elsewhere – at RT,NT,FS etc. Or, am I just showing my ignorance here with a lack of understanding of how college players can be drafted – regardless of position – and coached to play elsewhere!!
My own opinion is – even if Stafford falls to #10 and he is at that point by far the best available player, I would not draft him as our highest need is a pass-rushing DE/OLB so I would draft the best available player at one of those positions to fill that hole.
With regards the QB position, the way I see it is Hill to be the #1 QB next season, rework A Smith’s contract and keep him as the #2 QB – just cos he was a #1 overall draft pick doesnt make him some sort of superman,he still needs to learn the game like everyone else and he has not had the most settling of support to his career thus far(this is not an accusation to you-its just a general point I wish to make) – and then draft a QB in the 3rd or 4th rnds for the future.
by Ninerfromacrossthepond on Feb 8, 2009 3:53 AM PST up reply actions
interesting discussion point
I think the “best available” argument is something to throw up as a front page post in the coming days…..
by David Fucillo on Feb 8, 2009 8:03 PM PST up reply actions
I think...
In the specific example of the 2009 49ers, the only player/position excluded from the BPA mantra should be Willis (aka the weak-side ILB). Otherwise, every other position stands to be improved.
Didn't everybody REALLY want Derek Anderson before last year, too?
"I’m Joey Devine, I’m what Joba Chamberlain would be if he was good and nobody had ever heard of him."
No.
Not me, anyway.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Feb 6, 2009 2:31 PM PST up reply actions
Good, I was tired of hearing Cassel to the 49ers. It’s not going to happen. This is the team who set the trend shipping overrated backup QBs to other teams for a premium price. Did any of those guys perform better without Rice and this system?
by bignerd on Feb 6, 2009 2:48 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
QBs
Elvis Grbac was ok but not great after leaving. Steve Bono had his moments too. But certainly not what they would have done here.
by David Fucillo on Feb 6, 2009 3:56 PM PST up reply actions
Did anyone think he would be?
Seriously, I don’t see how this is worthy of a front page post. Who out there really thought it would happen? Or what’s more, who out there even wanted it to happen?
Cassel
I had just seen the occasional mailbag question of people asking about it. It was just something I wanted to address.
by David Fucillo on Feb 6, 2009 6:59 PM PST up reply actions
I saw this on a video on NFL.com
It raised some interesting questions-
If no team shows interest cos of the 1yr wonder thing and the Pats keep him, it would mean that he’ll be earning more than Brady as a backup QB.How would this go down with Brady?Would the Pats be forced to rework his contract?Isn’t this against the Pats’ policy of having such high-earners,even for their stars?I mean Brady is the best QB in the NFL!!
If the Pats do trade him and get 2high picks and then Brady’s knee does not hold up where does this leave the Pats?In order to get the most out of any poss trade do they have to trade asap thus leaving them in an awkward position over Brady?The longer they leave it, the more his value goes down?
by Ninerfromacrossthepond on Feb 6, 2009 7:15 PM PST reply actions
As I mentioned...
… above, franchise contracts (and salaries) really shouldn’t be used as a gauge to how much a player on the team gets paid. I’m sure Brady will understand that Cassel’s contract is a one-year insurance policy on his knees.
As I also pointed out, just because Cassel will make top 5 money next season, it does not mean he’ll be making that for the rest of his life. If Brady shows up at the end of summer and is ready to go, Cassel may not even see the field next season. Because of that, teams will still be a little wary about throwing gobs of money at him, and definitely not top 5 money. His next contract, assuming he doesn’t touch the field next season, will probably be pretty similar to Matt Schaub’s contract from a couple years ago, with maybe a little more headroom.
GOOD
Shaun Hill woulda done hella good in New England too
If you had a lineup of 9 Jack Custs who hit(Cust career average) .239 AVG, .382 OBP, and .475 SLG, then your team would score 6.12 runs per game-totalling to 991runs a season.The 08 rangers lead the majors in runs score with 901.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
