Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

mikezcim asked in SportsFootball (American) · 1 decade ago

Matt Cassel trade: fair or not?

The trade was Matt Cassel and Mike Vrabel from the Pats for the 34th pick(2nd round) from the Chiefs.

I think this trade was totally fair. I doubt the Pats got a better offer, and a high 2nd-rounder is more preferable (for cap space, risk/reward ratio) than a high 1st rounder.

What do you guys think?

17 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    I think it was fair. As far as the Vrabel part, I think Belichick told Pioli that if you want Cassel you have to take Vrabel off our hands. Lets be honest here. Cassel had one good season with a good o-line and great receivers and Vrabel's career is pretty much over. I think the 34th pick is plenty fair, especially since KC is helping NE further by giving them an extra $17 mil in cap space. If the Pats had gotten a better offer you know that they would have taken it. They aren't going to be doing anyone any favors just because they used to be part of the Pats organization.

    I think what people are missing here is that since Cassel was franchised, he basically had final say on where he went. There may have been a better deal offered, but if Cassel was going to shoot it down it obviously wouldn't matter because the deal wouldn't go through anyways. A 2nd round pick was the best offer from a team Cassel would want to go to and could offer him a new contract with the terms he's looking for.

  • 5 years ago

    It depends on whether Cassel has the weapons on the team he may play for or not. The thing is, Cassel is a bit overrated based on his performance. He only played one mostly full season and he is already dubbed the savior of that franchise. I think many fans and the media should look at things in the proper perspective. One season does not define greatness. You have to be consistent each year to earn that title. If he were to play next year the same way he did which was good, then yes he deserves to be named as a good QB. But back to the question. Cassel wouldn't be traded especially at this point. There have been many reports of how Brady's rehab has taken a few steps backward. It would do the Patriots damage to trade him off, especially if he did so well with that offense. Lets just say Brady does come back and he's fine. What if Brady gets hit again, and the Patriots traded Cassel to another team? The Patriots would have to rely on their 3rd stringer to get things going and we don't know about how well he may do. So I believe he stays, and if he were to go him doing well would depend on the weapons he has.

  • 1 decade ago

    Let's think about this for a second. Bill Belichick is one of the most intelligent coaches in the History of the NFL. I seriously doubt that this man would go through with this trade if he thought that his team would get the short end of the stick. Getting rid of Mike Vrabel, a Pro Bowl veteran on the downhill of his career, and Matt Cassel, who has not totally proven himself opened up alot of cap space for New England. They know can pursue big name free agents like Ray Lewis, who would be a great addition to the Patriots Defense.

  • ntg
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    I don't know if it has been proven that the Patriots had better offers. Then it would be wrong for them to have dealt to KC. But consider some things here. First, this is a deep draft. Not all drafts are the same. They are getting first round talent for second round money. Sounds like a good deal there. The Patriots have long said they think picking at the end of the first round is a better deal, still great talent, much less money and pressure on the player. So this is up their ally.

    We also don't know if those other teams were ready to make their trade now. That's important, because it's free agent time, and they just freed up a lot of money at an important time. Waiting may have cost them some free agents they wanted.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    I think Cassel for a 2nd rounder straight up wold have been fair. Throwing Vrabel into the trade skews it slightly in favor of the Chiefs. But considering the cap space it clears for the Pats, I think it is close to a fair trade for both sides.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    well, that guy from USC should go in the first round with one year's experience in the PAC-10. Cassel and Vrabel are only costing you a 2nd rounder and Cassel has dominated in his one year trial. Personally, I would think they would be worth a 1st round pick but....

    my man Randy Moss was only worth a 4th rounder when he ;left Oaktown, so, maybe that's fair. Personally though, I would have thought it should be a mid-late 1st round

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Vrabel is old and Cassel is Unproven, they got the 34th pick in the draft for them, and got rid of $19mil, in salary, it was a fair trade.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Fair

    the Chiefs got a good QB for a second and the Pats made a 7th round pick into a 2nd

  • 1 decade ago

    the pats had an offer in a 3 team deal with the broncos that probably would have netted them a first round pick... but for whatever reason they chose to send cassel to KC.

    So it wasn't the best deal they could have gotten, but the Pats tend to know what they are doing, so I would not question it. And a second does not seem unfair to me.

    Source(s): ESPN
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    it was fair but i think the chiefs will benefit a lot more from this on the field at least. the chiefs got a better deal unless the pats get a great player that will mean a lot to the team.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.