Let's talk Matt Cassel: Will he be any good (1 Viewer)

[safariplanet]

Let's look at the evidence:

Shoo-in Hall of Fame receiver
Super-Bowl winning linemen anchoring the trench
Arguably some of the league's best coaching in recent historyI ask because there have been a lot of rumors flying around the KC tabloids that the Chiefs would trade for him (especially with Pioli having a tie-in). What do you think?

 

[Tecmo]

He will fail without Randy Moss. How hard is it to read a defense with Moss on one side? You absolutely know where that safety is going. And Welker to killing it underneath, he's always open. He's no match for any third CB. I don't see enough teams putting their second best coverage to cover an underneath target like Welker... too worried about big gains than first downs. And the NE line is very underrated, these guys will get a running game going and give you time.

I don't think he's worthy of a 1st day pick little alone a 1st round pick

 

[PatsWillWin]

He will fail without Randy Moss. How hard is it to read a defense with Moss on one side? You absolutely know where that safety is going. And Welker to killing it underneath, he's always open. He's no match for any third CB. I don't see enough teams putting their second best coverage to cover an underneath target like Welker... too worried about big gains than first downs. And the NE line is very underrated, these guys will get a running game going and give you time. I don't think he's worthy of a 1st day pick little alone a 1st round pick

Excellent analysis. Really not idiotic at all.

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

HOTT NEW THREAD

 

[rabidfireweasel]

And Welker to killing it underneath, he's always open. He's no match for any third CB. I don't see enough teams putting their second best coverage to cover an underneath target like Welker... too worried about big gains than first downs.

You should watch more closely. Welker is often double teamed. On Randy Moss's Superbowl catch, Welker was double teamed at the goalline. Also, you are oversimplifying. If you simply assign a specific corner to Welker, then when Welker goes in motion, you are telegraphing man coverage on that side of the field.

 

[Boston]

The only real arguement I see against Cassel is the generic "he was playing with good players" which I find somewhat lazy. Sure he had the benefit of playing with Welker and Moss and those guys are legit studs who would help any QB in the history of the game. Yet, after those two are Gaffney and Watson heading to the Hall-of-Fame? Can someone name another Wr on the Pats roster after Moss, Welker and Gaffney? Does Cassel have an All Pro in his backfield? I really think the surrounding players arguement is an incredible slight on what Cassel accomplished as a first year QB who had not seen live action since High School.

As for Cassel he's a big-time athlete with great size (6'4", 230) who can move very well for his size. He's very intelligent as he was able to handle a growing playbook as the season went on on a team that changes their offensive gameplan on a weekly basis. He's a well-respected leader who his teammates really like and he was able to handle the media in a very tough market and IMO these areas are becoming more and more important as far as the QB position is concerned. He performed well in good weather, snow, wind and rain conditions (i.e. he has now seen all the elements). In the last seven games he had 14 TD passes to 4 ints (with one rushing Td). In those seven games he threw 35+ passes in five games and 30 in six (the one he didn't was the Buffalo wind debacle) which means he wasn't being treated as a game manager by the coaching staff. Overall Cassel had difficulty with accuracy on the long ball and pocket presence early on but both those areas saw dramatic improvement as the season went on. As he gained more experience every facet of his game improved and he really did not have a weakness (I'm not saying there aren't areas he can't improve on because he's still early in dhs development).

Overall I think many judge a guy like Cassel by whether he's a Brady or a Manning or a guy like Andrew Walter or David Carr (i.e. it's all or nothing). IMO he has all the makings of being a very good QB in the NFL. I think he can have a career on par with a Matt Hasselbeck or Trent Green. He's not going to be a Hall-of-Famer but I think the team that acquires him can expect real good QB play and leadership for the next 6-8 years.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

The only real arguement I see against Cassel is the generic "he was playing with good players" which I find somewhat lazy. Sure he had the benefit of playing with Welker and Moss and those guys are legit studs who would help any QB in the history of the game. Yet, after those two are Gaffney and Watson heading to the Hall-of-Fame? Can someone name another Wr on the Pats roster after Moss, Welker and Gaffney? Does Cassel have an All Pro in his backfield? I really think the surrounding players arguement is an incredible slight on what Cassel accomplished as a first year QB who had not seen live action since High School.

As for Cassel he's a big-time athlete with great size (6'4", 230) who can move very well for his size. He's very intelligent as he was able to handle a growing playbook as the season went on on a team that changes their offensive gameplan on a weekly basis. He's a well-respected leader who his teammates really like and he was able to handle the media in a very tough market and IMO these areas are becoming more and more important as far as the QB position is concerned. He performed well in good weather, snow, wind and rain conditions (i.e. he has now seen all the elements). In the last seven games he had 14 TD passes to 4 ints (with one rushing Td). In those seven games he threw 35+ passes in five games and 30 in six (the one he didn't was the Buffalo wind debacle) which means he wasn't being treated as a game manager by the coaching staff. Overall Cassel had difficulty with accuracy on the long ball and pocket presence early on but both those areas saw dramatic improvement as the season went on. As he gained more experience every facet of his game improved and he really did not have a weakness (I'm not saying there aren't areas he can't improve on because he's still early in dis development).

Overall I think many judge a guy like Cassel by whether he's a Brady or a Manning or a guy like Andrew Walter or David Carr (i.e. it's all or nothing). IMO he has all the makings od being a very good QB in the NFL. I think he can have a career on par with a Matt Hasselbeck or Trent Green. He's not going to be a Hall-of-Famer but I think the team that acquires him can expect real good QB play and leadership for the next 6-8 years.

Agree in general but would not call long ball accuracy improvement "dramatic". I might not even call it acceptable.To the OP, here's another "homer" attempt at the case against Cassel:

1. He "fell into" the starting job due to Brady injury, Gutierrez not ready with the playbook, and OConnell not ready, despite looking like dung in preseason.

2. In the first half of the year, he looked like Bledsoe minus accuracy.

3. Despite second half success, he did not develop reliable long ball accuracy (even throwing to Moss(!)).

4. The whithering pressure he felt at the hands of the Steelers is a possible reliable indicator of how he will do against lesser defenses long term.

5. I, for one, have not been overly impressed by his mobility which is often praised. It's better than Brady's, but that's not saying much.

Now to flip it back to the homer perspective, watch his late game TD throw to Moss versus the Jets. GMs and owners will value that throw and convince themselves that his long ball accuracy will improve over time, citing Brady among others as evidence.

IF Cassel develops into a very good NFL QB in the future, he will do it by becoming a master of the playbook, something he wasn't afforded the opportunity to do in New England (as the starting QB). There's no substitute for starting experience to establish reliable evidence. Looked at it from this perspective, Cassel's Year 1 starting performance would have to be rated a solid B+/A-.

With this kind or rating, Cassel's value is something like (threw McNabb and Garcia in the list as potential acquisition candidates):

McNabb > Garcia > Cassel ~ Thigpen, Sanchez > other "top 5" draft QBs > Orton, Grossman, T Jackson, V Young, Clemmens, Edwards, Hill, Orlofsky, etc.

Cassel is basically the next best thing to the possible availability of McNabb (first) and Garcia (second).

Will he be any good? I don't know, but he's near the top of potential candidates....

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

I always flash back to Moss on an island with Ahmad Carroll, headed for the end zone and Cassel couldn't hit him.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

It's not just the receivers, it's the line & system he played in. I would not bite.

 

[PatsWillWin]

Do any of the people who think Cassel is a bust have anything to offer from, you know, watching him play?

So far all we're seeing over and over is really insightful variations of "HE HAD RANDY MOSS HES NOT WORTH A FIRST DAY PICK."

Holes in his game? Problems you think he'll have adjusting? Anything?

 

[Banger]

He had everything in his favor...probably the easiest schedule against the pass in the NFL last year, best coaching staff, good line, great wr's and he had a nice year. Could he have similar success going to a pretty solid situation like Minn? Possibly. I think he'd struggle going to a lesser team like KC where he doesn't have the solid surroundings.

I'm not sold on him. I know I've brought up the analogy a number of times but I can't get Derek Anderson out of my head. He was the next great QB, made the pro bowl in his 1st season as a starter, rumored to be traded for a 1st round picks, yadda, yadda and how's he doing now?

 

[PatsWillWin]

He had everything in his favor...probably the easiest schedule against the pass in the NFL last year, best coaching staff, good line, great wr's and he had a nice year. Could he have similar success going to a pretty solid situation like Minn? Possibly. I think he'd struggle going to a lesser team like KC where he doesn't have the solid surroundings.

I'm not sold on him. I know I've brought up the analogy a number of times but I can't get Derek Anderson out of my head. He was the next great QB, made the pro bowl in his 1st season as a starter, yadda, yadda and how's he doing now?

Seriously - anything specific about Cassel at all? Did you watch him play? If so, why do you think he = Derek Anderson? What about his game don't you like?The problem with all of this "system" stuff is that it if he were the next Dan Marino, people would have no inkling on it because they are dismissing him because "hey, he had Randy Moss" and "hey, how's DEREK ANDERSON looking now?"

So really, anyone have anything about Matt Cassel's game that makes them think he will fail with another team?

 

[David Yudkin]

Do any of the people who think Cassel is a bust have anything to offer from, you know, watching him play?

So far all we're seeing over and over is really insightful variations of "HE HAD RANDY MOSS HES NOT WORTH A FIRST DAY PICK."

Holes in his game? Problems you think he'll have adjusting? Anything?

I don't think Cassel will bomb on another team next year, but I don't see him being the type of QB that will turn into an elite guy either.IMO, he still hasn't mastered his pocket presence and took a ton of sacks, and that's playing behind one of the better OLs in the league. He also did not fare anywhere near as well on intermediate and long range routes. By the end of the year, he did do well in running very short routes and releasing the ball a lot quicker (which minimized the sack issue to a certain extent). But those were normally plays within 10 yards from the LOS. I still don't think he did that great a job reading defenses, coverages, and the blitz and to that extent the combined talent level of NE helped him out quite a bit. He played mostly out of the shotgun, and that may not fit with other offenses around the league.

On the plus side, I believe the Pats play book is fairly sophisticated so he did a decent job grasping it by the end of the year (but bear in mind he had a favorable schedule). He did have 4 years to learn and had Brady to guide him (something which won't happen elsewhere).

I think Cassel fit well with what the Patriots had in their tool box (the players, the OC, BB, the system, the formations, etc.) but that may not translate as well someplace else. While we can't pin it all on Cassel, NE did score 179 fewer points this year compared to last year. I think with fewer resources, Cassel will put up more pedestrian numbers.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Do any of the people who think Cassel is a bust have anything to offer from, you know, watching him play?

So far all we're seeing over and over is really insightful variations of "HE HAD RANDY MOSS HES NOT WORTH A FIRST DAY PICK."

Holes in his game? Problems you think he'll have adjusting? Anything?

He led the NFL in sacks last year.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

Do any of the people who think Cassel is a bust have anything to offer from, you know, watching him play?

So far all we're seeing over and over is really insightful variations of "HE HAD RANDY MOSS HES NOT WORTH A FIRST DAY PICK."

Holes in his game? Problems you think he'll have adjusting? Anything?

The closest I've seen anyone coming to an argument against Cassel's value being directly related to the draft position of Sanchez, Stafford, etc. is that teams would have to spend 14MM on Cassel in year 1 AND give up pick(s).The fallacy of that is that a late round 1 QB will fetch similar dollars over the long haul UNLESS that unproven commodity fails, in which case the ultimate cost is much higher.

If anyone drafts a lesser rookie QB rather than trade for Cassel, I feel bad for them.

 

[Banger]

Do any of the people who think Cassel is a bust have anything to offer from, you know, watching him play?

So far all we're seeing over and over is really insightful variations of "HE HAD RANDY MOSS HES NOT WORTH A FIRST DAY PICK."

Holes in his game? Problems you think he'll have adjusting? Anything?

I don't think Cassel will bomb on another team next year, but I don't see him being the type of QB that will turn into an elite guy either.IMO, he still hasn't mastered his pocket presence and took a ton of sacks, and that's playing behind one of the better OLs in the league. He also did not fare anywhere near as well on intermediate and long range routes. By the end of the year, he did do well in running very short routes and releasing the ball a lot quicker (which minimized the sack issue to a certain extent). But those were normally plays within 10 yards from the LOS. I still don't think he did that great a job reading defenses, coverages, and the blitz and to that extent the combined talent level of NE helped him out quite a bit. He played mostly out of the shotgun, and that may not fit with other offenses around the league.

On the plus side, I believe the Pats play book is fairly sophisticated so he did a decent job grasping it by the end of the year (but bear in mind he had a favorable schedule). He did have 4 years to learn and had Brady to guide him (something which won't happen elsewhere).

I think Cassel fit well with what the Patriots had in their tool box (the players, the OC, BB, the system, the formations, etc.) but that may not translate as well someplace else.

:( couldn't have said it better. The big thing is the deep ball which largely took the Moss factor out of the offense and turned an all time great offense into a slightly above average passing offense. He also had 48 sacks which was the 5th most in the league and only 7 behind Mad Mike Martz's offense. That's a tremendous amount of sacks behind that line.

He did fine last year but in the games that I watched I never came away thinking "wow, that guy is something".

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Well since this is now (at least the third Cassell thread, I'll repost what I said in another one that addresses the issue. Since it seem the Pats homers are the ones that defend him most vigourously, perhaps the perspectove from a non-Pats homer (in fact an anti-Pats homer) will help.

I agree that Cassell was greatly aided by playing with Moss and Welker in a great system, but lets not act like he's a total schlub. He was recruited to play for USC - the premier college football program in the country right now. Sure he didn't start but it wasn't like he sat behind scrubs. Carson Palmer and Matt Leinart were legit Heisman canidates/winners. So the pedigree is there. I think he's a very good young QB with a bright future. As a Jets fan and with the Pats on National TV often I watched him play quite a bit (once in person). My two biggest criticisms of him in the early season was that he was a terrible deep ball passer (not that he didn't have the arm, but had no accuracy downfield) and that he tended to watch the pass rush rather than keep his eyes downfield which led him to run more than he should. Let's not forget he was quite inexperienced early in the season. He really grew though and started hitting Moss deep (once again admittedly its pretty easy to throw to a guy like Moss). He developed into a very smart and accurate QB though and limited his runs to times he had to rather than just taking off.I don't think he'll be an elite QB but I do think he could be a very effective starter elsewhere and hope he gets the chance. Even as a Pats hater you gotta love his story.

 

[twitch]

Ive heard Derek Anderson mentioned in comparison to Cassel a few times. And what they have in common is obviously their limited playing experience. But Cassel is yet to lay a complete egg like Anderson did last year. That guy barely completed 50% of his passes. He was benched because he was horrible. So, a Braylon Edwards drop here or there caused it to be a little lower than the 53 of 54% it would have been. That's just awful by today's QB standards. He completely sucks on short throws and reads. He made a living that one good year he had throwing the ball downfield to KW2 and Edwards and letting those 2 guys, 2 of the best in the game downfield btw, make spectacular plays for him. Far more spectacular I might add, then what Moss or Welker ever did for Cassel last season. Moss played more like a 30 year old receiver who just signed a big contract last year than he did the record breaking WR from the previous season. Welker of course competed at an all-World level that we've now come to expect from him. Cassel was impressive running that entire offense. Anderson is a one-trick pony, imo. If he's not able to make the big play down the field, his game falls apart. With Cassel, especially with more reps and game experience, I think you'll get a balanced QB solid in all areas. New England doesnt run a classic WCO, but imo Cassel would be right at home in a WCO because of his short to intermediate passing efficiency. jmho.

 

[PatsWillWin]

I should clarify - I don't think Cassel is a lock to be a stud or whatever. I'm just getting sick of all these Cassel threads where people come and talk about Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Derek Anderson or Matt Shaub and don't actually talk about Cassel...I think that's lazy, and doesn't help the SP. NFL analsysts, and, as I believe we'll discover shortly, GM's as well, know he had Randy Moss and Wes Welker, and they're not dismissing Cassel because of it, so I certainly don't think we should either.

He did take too many sacks last year. He was also up there in the # of times he dropped back, but his attempts per sack is still in the bottom 10 of the league. That is certainly a valid criticism. His sacks did go down in the second half of the season, I think he was sacked 19 times in the final 8 games as opposed to 28 times in the first 8, but that would still put him among the most sacked QB's in the league with an above average offensive line. His pocket presence isn't as refined as a veteran, but I think that's to be expected...yet he's also a great scrambler.

I'm also uncertain about his ability to stretch the field. But I think this did improve as the season went one, and he was this close on a lot of deep balls.

Other than that, I really don't see a lot of holes in his game. I think it was really impressive what he was able to do last season, especially with his lack of experience.

No, you don't know if he can repeat the same success on another team, but it's not really arguable that he can make most of the necessary throws, that he's smart, coachable, and tough...that's more than I can say for a pretty good chunk of NFL QB's, and certainly more than you can safely say about any rookie QB coming out this season.

 

[Banger]

Ive heard Derek Anderson mentioned in comparison to Cassel a few times. And what they have in common is obviously their limited playing experience. But Cassel is yet to lay a complete egg like Anderson did last year. That guy barely completed 50% of his passes. He was benched because he was horrible. So, a Braylon Edwards drop here or there caused it to be a little lower than the 53 of 54% it would have been. That's just awful by today's QB standards. He completely sucks on short throws and reads. He made a living that one good year he had throwing the ball downfield to KW2 and Edwards and letting those 2 guys, 2 of the best in the game downfield btw, make spectacular plays for him. Far more spectacular I might add, then what Moss or Welker ever did for Cassel last season. Moss played more like a 30 year old receiver who just signed a big contract last year than he did the record breaking WR from the previous season. Welker of course competed at an all-World level that we've now come to expect from him. Cassel was impressive running that entire offense. Anderson is a one-trick pony, imo. If he's not able to make the big play down the field, his game falls apart. With Cassel, especially with more reps and game experience, I think you'll get a balanced QB solid in all areas. New England doesnt run a classic WCO, but imo Cassel would be right at home in a WCO because of his short to intermediate passing efficiency. jmho.

It's easy to say that now about Anderson but go back almost a year to the day and you can essentially substitute Cassel's name with Anderson's. There were a tremendous amount of people pulling out the stats and how Anderson ranked all time in terms of 1st year starters with 29 Td's, etc. Yes, they are different QB's that have different problems but both are one year wonders with incredible hype. Sometimes you just need to take a step back.It's very difficult to make an honest evaluation of how Cassel would fare on another team because like I said, he had nearly everything in his favor this year and while he did ok, he wasn't great. Look how Flacco did as a true 1st year starter where his best WR was a nearly extinct Mason, and Ryan with a nice WR in R. White (who pales in comparison to Moss/Welker). Neither had nearly the surrounding talent, the coaching staff, lines, etc. Could Cassel be the 25th best QB in the league and start somewhere? I'm sure he could but there's nothing in his game that would indicate to me that he can take a team to another level. He can fill a gap, nothing more. He's a Chad Pennington.

 

[PatsWillWin]

Ive heard Derek Anderson mentioned in comparison to Cassel a few times. And what they have in common is obviously their limited playing experience. But Cassel is yet to lay a complete egg like Anderson did last year. That guy barely completed 50% of his passes. He was benched because he was horrible. So, a Braylon Edwards drop here or there caused it to be a little lower than the 53 of 54% it would have been. That's just awful by today's QB standards. He completely sucks on short throws and reads. He made a living that one good year he had throwing the ball downfield to KW2 and Edwards and letting those 2 guys, 2 of the best in the game downfield btw, make spectacular plays for him. Far more spectacular I might add, then what Moss or Welker ever did for Cassel last season. Moss played more like a 30 year old receiver who just signed a big contract last year than he did the record breaking WR from the previous season. Welker of course competed at an all-World level that we've now come to expect from him. Cassel was impressive running that entire offense. Anderson is a one-trick pony, imo. If he's not able to make the big play down the field, his game falls apart. With Cassel, especially with more reps and game experience, I think you'll get a balanced QB solid in all areas. New England doesnt run a classic WCO, but imo Cassel would be right at home in a WCO because of his short to intermediate passing efficiency. jmho.

It's easy to say that now about Anderson but go back almost a year to the day and you can essentially substitute Cassel's name with Anderson's. There were a tremendous amount of people pulling out the stats and how Anderson ranked all time in terms of 1st year starters with 29 Td's, etc. Yes, they are different QB's that have different problems but both are one year wonders with incredible hype. It's very difficult to make an honest evaluation of how Cassel would fare on another team because like I said, he had nearly everything in his favor this year and while he did ok, he wasn't great. Look how Flacco did as a true 1st year starter where his best WR was a nearly extinct Mason, and Ryan with a nice WR in R. White (who pales in comparison to Moss/Welker). Could Cassel be the 25th best QB in the league and start somewhere? I'm sure he could but there's nothing in his game that would indicate to me that he can take a team to another level. He can fill a gap, nothing more. He's a Chad Pennington.

Summary:1. Look at Derek Anderson. Yeah, look at him.2. It's very hard to evaluate Cassel.3. Having said that, he's a Chad Pennington.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Cassell ranked barely above the league average in adjusted net yards per attempt. Considering his great supporting cast, that is not impressive. I'm also not impressed by two things:

1) Calling him a first year starter, when he'd been in the league for a long time

2) Looking at his great last seven games, when there's no more indicative of his future than his first slate of games.

 

[PatsWillWin]

Been meaning to ask this -> what is adjusted net yards/attempt and where do you get it?

 

[Boston]

The other aspect of the anti-Cassel arguement is that Cassel will not improve given more playing time and that the only coach who can bring out his talent is BB. When looking at his development (and I strongly disagree with the analysis of a few posts here) you need to keep in mind that he had not played in app. eight years. With that in mind is it not too much of a stretch to say that he's just scratching the surface of his talent? To say this kid has maxed out after playing 16 games with this layoff says either he has very limited real talent or BB is infact the greatest coach in NFL history and can truly turn water into wine.

 

[PatsWillWin]

Cassell ranked barely above the league average in adjusted net yards per attempt. Considering his great supporting cast, that is not impressive. I'm also not impressed by two things:1) Calling him a first year starter, when he'd been in the league for a long time2) Looking at his great last seven games, when there's no more indicative of his future than his first slate of games.

First year starting = first year starter. Nobody is equating him with a rookie.Generally speaking, I think it's encouraging when a first year starter gets better over the course of a season. You might have a bunch of spreadsheets telling me that that I shouldn't find that encouraging, but oh well.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I'm sure he could but there's nothing in his game that would indicate to me that he can take a team to another level. He can fill a gap, nothing more. He's a Chad Pennington.

Would that be the Chad Pennington that has lead his team to the playoffs in almost every season that he's been healthy?

 

[Boston]

1) Calling him a first year starter, when he'd been in the league for a long time2) Looking at his great last seven games, when there's no more indicative of his future than his first slate of games.

That's just foolish:1) The kid had not seen live action in close to eight years. If you think running the scout team in shorts for three years equals playing a divisional game with the playoffs on the line in December than we see things totally different.2) So you don't think playing far better in the second half of the year after gaining experience shows anything? Please explain because that makes zero sense to me. Once the kid got his feet wet he played far better. This just seems like commonsense and it's not something that simply applies to Cassel but to any player. A better understanding of the game is undoubtedly gained by experience. To think you're not going to improve with more experience and a better understanding of what your job requires based on real action is simply not realistic.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Cassell ranked barely above the league average in adjusted net yards per attempt. Considering his great supporting cast, that is not impressive. I'm also not impressed by two things:1) Calling him a first year starter, when he'd been in the league for a long time2) Looking at his great last seven games, when there's no more indicative of his future than his first slate of games.

1) What would you call a guy that never started and then starts? He was in the league for 3 years as a backup, sure. But didn't everyone call Philip Rivers and Chad Pennington first years starters after they finally got their chance after sitting behind vets.2) While it may not be indicative of future success, doesn't it show improvement? He looked better, he didn't just put up better stats.

 

[Boston]

I'm sure he could but there's nothing in his game that would indicate to me that he can take a team to another level. He can fill a gap, nothing more. He's a Chad Pennington.

Would that be the Chad Pennington that has lead his team to the playoffs in almost every season that he's been healthy?

I think calling him a Chad Pennington (with more durability hopefully) is a compliment and a good comparasion as well. For some reason people think if you're not the next John Elway than you're run of the mill.

 

[twitch]

Ive heard Derek Anderson mentioned in comparison to Cassel a few times. And what they have in common is obviously their limited playing experience. But Cassel is yet to lay a complete egg like Anderson did last year. That guy barely completed 50% of his passes. He was benched because he was horrible. So, a Braylon Edwards drop here or there caused it to be a little lower than the 53 of 54% it would have been. That's just awful by today's QB standards. He completely sucks on short throws and reads. He made a living that one good year he had throwing the ball downfield to KW2 and Edwards and letting those 2 guys, 2 of the best in the game downfield btw, make spectacular plays for him. Far more spectacular I might add, then what Moss or Welker ever did for Cassel last season. Moss played more like a 30 year old receiver who just signed a big contract last year than he did the record breaking WR from the previous season. Welker of course competed at an all-World level that we've now come to expect from him. Cassel was impressive running that entire offense. Anderson is a one-trick pony, imo. If he's not able to make the big play down the field, his game falls apart. With Cassel, especially with more reps and game experience, I think you'll get a balanced QB solid in all areas. New England doesnt run a classic WCO, but imo Cassel would be right at home in a WCO because of his short to intermediate passing efficiency. jmho.

It's easy to say that now about Anderson but go back almost a year to the day and you can essentially substitute Cassel's name with Anderson's. There were a tremendous amount of people pulling out the stats and how Anderson ranked all time in terms of 1st year starters with 29 Td's, etc. Yes, they are different QB's that have different problems but both are one year wonders with incredible hype. Sometimes you just need to take a step back.It's very difficult to make an honest evaluation of how Cassel would fare on another team because like I said, he had nearly everything in his favor this year and while he did ok, he wasn't great. Look how Flacco did as a true 1st year starter where his best WR was a nearly extinct Mason, and Ryan with a nice WR in R. White (who pales in comparison to Moss/Welker). Neither had nearly the surrounding talent, the coaching staff, lines, etc.

Could Cassel be the 25th best QB in the league and start somewhere? I'm sure he could but there's nothing in his game that would indicate to me that he can take a team to another level. He can fill a gap, nothing more. He's a Chad Pennington.

And I appreciate that. But simply looking at the #s, or simply calling both 'one year wonders', doesnt depict just how different their actual games are. Their success was achieved largely in 2 completely different fashions. One threw the ball down field religiously, and with great success. The other sparingly. One is terrible with the 5 yard pass. The other excelled in that area. One has limited mobility and gained little yardage on the ground. The other excelled in that area, and the #s reflect that. And to be frank, one strikes me as somewhat 'slow' mentally (by NFL QB standards), the other as fairly bright. I wont specify either/or in this instance, but would let each person decide which is which. Completely different QBs, imo. And not to suggest that Anderson wont bounce back, continue to improve and not make his mark on the league. He may very well. But right now, I simply wouldnt compare the little Ive seen of his game to Matt Cassel's. And in regards to the sacks, Id compare Cassel to another Q that was sacked a ton last year - Ben Roethlisberger. Both were sacked nearly 50 times. And Id make a case that Ben probably had a few more sacks where he was scrambling around to make a play. I think we'd all agree he has a tendency to hold the ball longer than just about any other Q in the game. But given that Cassel was sacked 47 times, he only fumbled the ball 7 times (lost 4), for a loss of yardage of 219 yards. Roethlisberger on the other hand was sacked 46 times, fumbled the ball 14 times (lost 7), for a loss of 284 yards. And that's with 47 less pass attempts. So, high sack totals for Cassel, yes. But despite that, he was able to protect the football fairly well and limit the cost to a degree. And as was pointed out, he was only sacked 19 times in the 2nd half of the season, 5 times vs. the Steelers, so he definitely improved in that area down the stretch.

The kid obviously has a limited resume to draw from. And its really easy to make random comparisons to one QB or another by virtue of circumstance, age, experience, etc. But Id make a case that his experience with New England is somewhat unique. He replaced a 'legend'. He was coached by a highly demanding perfectionist, and dealt with immense pressure and scrutiny all season. Not every one-year wonder QB out there can say the same.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Been meaning to ask this -> what is adjusted net yards/attempt and where do you get it?

(PYD - INT*45 + PTD*20 - SkYdLost)/(Att+Sk)

 

[Chase Stuart]

Cassell ranked barely above the league average in adjusted net yards per attempt. Considering his great supporting cast, that is not impressive. I'm also not impressed by two things:

1) Calling him a first year starter, when he'd been in the league for a long time

2) Looking at his great last seven games, when there's no more indicative of his future than his first slate of games.

First year starting = first year starter. Nobody is equating him with a rookie.Generally speaking, I think it's encouraging when a first year starter gets better over the course of a season. You might have a bunch of spreadsheets telling me that that I shouldn't find that encouraging, but oh well.

Lots of people are saying he played so well considering it was his first year starting. That's a red herring, when he's been in the league for five years. If I have a bunch of data telling you otherwise, why would you generally think the opposite ?

 

[Banger]

I'm sure he could but there's nothing in his game that would indicate to me that he can take a team to another level. He can fill a gap, nothing more. He's a Chad Pennington.

Would that be the Chad Pennington that has lead his team to the playoffs in almost every season that he's been healthy?

Pennington would probably be his upside. I was just trying to think of a potentially comparable type QB in terms of skillset... efficient, smart QB, that relies on the short game, doesn't throw a good deep ball but is not a game changer. He's not going to lose you games but he's not going to put you on his shoulders and win them.

 

[Chase Stuart]

1) Calling him a first year starter, when he'd been in the league for a long time2) Looking at his great last seven games, when there's no more indicative of his future than his first slate of games.

That's just foolish:1) The kid had not seen live action in close to eight years. If you think running the scout team in shorts for three years equals playing a divisional game with the playoffs on the line in December than we see things totally different.2) So you don't think playing far better in the second half of the year after gaining experience shows anything? Please explain because that makes zero sense to me. Once the kid got his feet wet he played far better. This just seems like commonsense and it's not something that simply applies to Cassel but to any player. A better understanding of the game is undoubtedly gained by experience. To think you're not going to improve with more experience and a better understanding of what your job requires based on real action is simply not realistic.

1) He's not a kid. He was 26 years old in '08. My point is it is far from uncommon -- and perhaps expected -- for QBs that sit for awhile to play well when they first play. Culpepper. Brees. Pennington. Even Warner. Your point is that he's going to get much better with experience; that's far from obvious. You want to give Cassell bonus points for being a first year starter; I think he deserves slight bonus points over other guys with four or five years of NFL experience. There aren't too many examples of guys just flat out being on the bench and not in another league for several years, but Rivers and Pennington are two guys who sat for multiple seasons and then were great out of the gate. Spin it another way -- how many guys sat for multiple years and then stunk?2) I think a seven game sample size is far less valuable than the 16 game sample size. There have been many studies to indicate that season splits are close to irrelevant when predicting future performance. Even for young players.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I'm sure he could but there's nothing in his game that would indicate to me that he can take a team to another level. He can fill a gap, nothing more. He's a Chad Pennington.

Would that be the Chad Pennington that has lead his team to the playoffs in almost every season that he's been healthy?

I think calling him a Chad Pennington (with more durability hopefully) is a compliment and a good comparasion as well. For some reason people think if you're not the next John Elway than you're run of the mill.

I think that's all that anyone arguing on his behalf is saying. He's not necessarily an elite talent, but he is talent. If you watched him play its hard to argue otherwise - every argument against him is irrelavant and lazy. Like you said I'm sure most teams would love for him to be a Chad Pennington (without the injury history). Chad is smart, accurate, a leader and a winner - he really has been in the playoffs in nearly every season where he's stayed healthy. If some one just throws out the name Derek Anderson, what does that mean? So a player came out of nowhere and quickly fell into obscurity? Wow. So should I throw out tha names, Kurt Warner. Tom Brady, Tony Romo, Jeff Garcia, Trent Green....?

 

[twitch]

Cassell ranked barely above the league average in adjusted net yards per attempt. Considering his great supporting cast, that is not impressive. I'm also not impressed by two things:

1) Calling him a first year starter, when he'd been in the league for a long time

2) Looking at his great last seven games, when there's no more indicative of his future than his first slate of games.

First year starting = first year starter. Nobody is equating him with a rookie.Generally speaking, I think it's encouraging when a first year starter gets better over the course of a season. You might have a bunch of spreadsheets telling me that that I shouldn't find that encouraging, but oh well.

Lots of people are saying he played so well considering it was his first year starting. That's a red herring, when he's been in the league for five years. If I have a bunch of data telling you otherwise, why would you generally think the opposite ?

A red herring is identifying a 4th year player as having been in the league for five years. Specifically, a first-year starter.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I'm sure he could but there's nothing in his game that would indicate to me that he can take a team to another level. He can fill a gap, nothing more. He's a Chad Pennington.

Would that be the Chad Pennington that has lead his team to the playoffs in almost every season that he's been healthy?

Pennington would probably be his upside. I was just trying to think of a potentially comparable type QB in terms of skillset... efficient, smart QB, that relies on the short game, doesn't throw a good deep ball but is not a game changer. He's not going to lose you games but he's not going to put you on his shoulders and win them.

Who really said otherwise? Most says he'll be a good, but not elite QB. What's wrong with that? By definiation there are very few elite QBs. If Pennington did not suffer so many injuries he would have had a very good career. That's what I expect from Cassell. Pennington was a first round pick (No. 14) and few would argue that he was a wasted pick. so even by your cpmaprison, Cassell would be worth a mid-first round pick.

 

[Boston]

I'm sure he could but there's nothing in his game that would indicate to me that he can take a team to another level. He can fill a gap, nothing more. He's a Chad Pennington.

Would that be the Chad Pennington that has lead his team to the playoffs in almost every season that he's been healthy?

I think calling him a Chad Pennington (with more durability hopefully) is a compliment and a good comparasion as well. For some reason people think if you're not the next John Elway than you're run of the mill.

I think that's all that anyone arguing on his behalf is saying. He's not necessarily an elite talent, but he is talent. If you watched him play its hard to argue otherwise - every argument against him is irrelavant and lazy. Like you said I'm sure most teams would love for him to be a Chad Pennington (without the injury history). Chad is smart, accurate, a leader and a winner - he really has been in the playoffs in nearly every season where he's stayed healthy. If some one just throws out the name Derek Anderson, what does that mean? So a player came out of nowhere and quickly fell into obscurity? Wow. So should I throw out tha names, Kurt Warner. Tom Brady, Tony Romo, Jeff Garcia, Trent Green....?

A Patriot and Jet fan on the exact same page...there is hope for world peace.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Cassell ranked barely above the league average in adjusted net yards per attempt. Considering his great supporting cast, that is not impressive. I'm also not impressed by two things:

1) Calling him a first year starter, when he'd been in the league for a long time

2) Looking at his great last seven games, when there's no more indicative of his future than his first slate of games.

First year starting = first year starter. Nobody is equating him with a rookie.Generally speaking, I think it's encouraging when a first year starter gets better over the course of a season. You might have a bunch of spreadsheets telling me that that I shouldn't find that encouraging, but oh well.

Lots of people are saying he played so well considering it was his first year starting. That's a red herring, when he's been in the league for five years. If I have a bunch of data telling you otherwise, why would you generally think the opposite ?

A red herring is identifying a 4th year player as having been in the league for five years. Specifically, a first-year starter.

 

[Banger]

Ive heard Derek Anderson mentioned in comparison to Cassel a few times. And what they have in common is obviously their limited playing experience. But Cassel is yet to lay a complete egg like Anderson did last year. That guy barely completed 50% of his passes. He was benched because he was horrible. So, a Braylon Edwards drop here or there caused it to be a little lower than the 53 of 54% it would have been. That's just awful by today's QB standards. He completely sucks on short throws and reads. He made a living that one good year he had throwing the ball downfield to KW2 and Edwards and letting those 2 guys, 2 of the best in the game downfield btw, make spectacular plays for him. Far more spectacular I might add, then what Moss or Welker ever did for Cassel last season. Moss played more like a 30 year old receiver who just signed a big contract last year than he did the record breaking WR from the previous season. Welker of course competed at an all-World level that we've now come to expect from him. Cassel was impressive running that entire offense. Anderson is a one-trick pony, imo. If he's not able to make the big play down the field, his game falls apart. With Cassel, especially with more reps and game experience, I think you'll get a balanced QB solid in all areas. New England doesnt run a classic WCO, but imo Cassel would be right at home in a WCO because of his short to intermediate passing efficiency. jmho.

It's easy to say that now about Anderson but go back almost a year to the day and you can essentially substitute Cassel's name with Anderson's. There were a tremendous amount of people pulling out the stats and how Anderson ranked all time in terms of 1st year starters with 29 Td's, etc. Yes, they are different QB's that have different problems but both are one year wonders with incredible hype. Sometimes you just need to take a step back.It's very difficult to make an honest evaluation of how Cassel would fare on another team because like I said, he had nearly everything in his favor this year and while he did ok, he wasn't great. Look how Flacco did as a true 1st year starter where his best WR was a nearly extinct Mason, and Ryan with a nice WR in R. White (who pales in comparison to Moss/Welker). Neither had nearly the surrounding talent, the coaching staff, lines, etc.

Could Cassel be the 25th best QB in the league and start somewhere? I'm sure he could but there's nothing in his game that would indicate to me that he can take a team to another level. He can fill a gap, nothing more. He's a Chad Pennington.

And I appreciate that. But simply looking at the #s, or simply calling both 'one year wonders', doesnt depict just how different their actual games are. Their success was achieved largely in 2 completely different fashions. One threw the ball down field religiously, and with great success. The other sparingly. One is terrible with the 5 yard pass. The other excelled in that area. One has limited mobility and gained little yardage on the ground. The other excelled in that area, and the #s reflect that. And to be frank, one strikes me as somewhat 'slow' mentally (by NFL QB standards), the other as fairly bright. I wont specify either/or in this instance, but would let each person decide which is which. Completely different QBs, imo. And not to suggest that Anderson wont bounce back, continue to improve and not make his mark on the league. He may very well. But right now, I simply wouldnt compare the little Ive seen of his game to Matt Cassel's. And in regards to the sacks, Id compare Cassel to another Q that was sacked a ton last year - Ben Roethlisberger. Both were sacked nearly 50 times. And Id make a case that Ben probably had a few more sacks where he was scrambling around to make a play. I think we'd all agree he has a tendency to hold the ball longer than just about any other Q in the game. But given that Cassel was sacked 47 times, he only fumbled the ball 7 times (lost 4), for a loss of yardage of 219 yards. Roethlisberger on the other hand was sacked 46 times, fumbled the ball 14 times (lost 7), for a loss of 284 yards. And that's with 47 less pass attempts. So, high sack totals for Cassel, yes. But despite that, he was able to protect the football fairly well and limit the cost to a degree. And as was pointed out, he was only sacked 19 times in the 2nd half of the season, 5 times vs. the Steelers, so he definitely improved in that area down the stretch.

The kid obviously has a limited resume to draw from. And its really easy to make random comparisons to one QB or another by virtue of circumstance, age, experience, etc. But Id make a case that his experience with New England is somewhat unique. He replaced a 'legend'. He was coached by a highly demanding perfectionist, and dealt with immense pressure and scrutiny all season. Not every one-year wonder QB out there can say the same.

I agree on the assessement of DA's and Cassel's games and that was one of the biggest reasons I was not a DA believer last year despite the hype. Similarly, Cassel's strength is the short passing game and he happens to have most likely the best short yardage wr in the game in Welker. That's another factor when I said that he had nearly everything in his favor... his strength was complimented/enhanced by the likely best short yardage wr in the game. If he goes to KC can he have the same success with Bowe/Gonzo who are more down field threats? Rice/Berrian, who are downfield threats? Can he be a successful mid/deep ball thrower? He had THE BEST downfield threat in the game and couldn't consistently use him effectively last year.NE's line>>Steelers line and Ben game is scrambling around to make time for his wr's to get downfield for a deep ball. The Steelers also had a much tougher schedule. That comparison is apples/oranges IMO.

 

[Boston]

Cassell ranked barely above the league average in adjusted net yards per attempt. Considering his great supporting cast, that is not impressive. I'm also not impressed by two things:

1) Calling him a first year starter, when he'd been in the league for a long time

2) Looking at his great last seven games, when there's no more indicative of his future than his first slate of games.

First year starting = first year starter. Nobody is equating him with a rookie.Generally speaking, I think it's encouraging when a first year starter gets better over the course of a season. You might have a bunch of spreadsheets telling me that that I shouldn't find that encouraging, but oh well.

Lots of people are saying he played so well considering it was his first year starting. That's a red herring, when he's been in the league for five years. If I have a bunch of data telling you otherwise, why would you generally think the opposite ?

A red herring is identifying a 4th year player as having been in the league for five years. Specifically, a first-year starter.

I believe "Red Herring" actually mean playing behind two Heisman Trophy winners as well as one of the NFL's all time great players.

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

I don't think anyone can rationally deny that there are real arguments against him, tho. Including some highly cogent ones in this thread.

 

[Banger]

I'm sure he could but there's nothing in his game that would indicate to me that he can take a team to another level. He can fill a gap, nothing more. He's a Chad Pennington.

Would that be the Chad Pennington that has lead his team to the playoffs in almost every season that he's been healthy?

Pennington would probably be his upside. I was just trying to think of a potentially comparable type QB in terms of skillset... efficient, smart QB, that relies on the short game, doesn't throw a good deep ball but is not a game changer. He's not going to lose you games but he's not going to put you on his shoulders and win them.

Who really said otherwise? Most says he'll be a good, but not elite QB. What's wrong with that? By definiation there are very few elite QBs. If Pennington did not suffer so many injuries he would have had a very good career. That's what I expect from Cassell. Pennington was a first round pick (No. 14) and few would argue that he was a wasted pick. so even by your cpmaprison, Cassell would be worth a mid-first round pick.

I guess it's what you're looking for out of your QB position. If you're looking for a guy who's upside is an average QB he might be your guy. If I'm running an organization I would likely take a risk on a guy that can have a higher ceiling. I would take a gamble on the Cutler/Ryan/etc. They may bust but if they hit they can carry a franchise. That's just my opinion. You shoot for elite, you don't shoot for average.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Similarly, Cassel's strength is the short passing game and he happens to have most likely the best short yardage wr in the game in Welker. That's another factor when I said that he had nearly everything in his favor... his strength was complimented/enhanced by the likely best short yardage wr in the game. If he goes to KC can he have the same success with Bowe/Gonzo who are more down field threats?

Was Wes Welker considered the best short yardage WR in the game when he was in Miami? I am not selling Welker short (no pun intended), but I think people make him out to be more than he is. I think he's great at getting open and quick as hell after the catch, - he's a player any team would want - but alot of his success was also Brady and then Cassell finding him and getting the ball where it needed to be. At the same time of course he helped Cassell - he is clutch and tough.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I don't think anyone can rationally deny that there are real arguments against him, tho. Including some highly cogent ones in this thread.

I don't think he's a sure thing by any means and I admit some of the concerns are legit. I just think people that haven't really watched him play use those concerns as a crutch to downplay him, instead of analyzing his game.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I'm sure he could but there's nothing in his game that would indicate to me that he can take a team to another level. He can fill a gap, nothing more. He's a Chad Pennington.

Would that be the Chad Pennington that has lead his team to the playoffs in almost every season that he's been healthy?

Pennington would probably be his upside. I was just trying to think of a potentially comparable type QB in terms of skillset... efficient, smart QB, that relies on the short game, doesn't throw a good deep ball but is not a game changer. He's not going to lose you games but he's not going to put you on his shoulders and win them.

Who really said otherwise? Most says he'll be a good, but not elite QB. What's wrong with that? By definiation there are very few elite QBs. If Pennington did not suffer so many injuries he would have had a very good career. That's what I expect from Cassell. Pennington was a first round pick (No. 14) and few would argue that he was a wasted pick. so even by your cpmaprison, Cassell would be worth a mid-first round pick.

I guess it's what you're looking for out of your QB position. If you're looking for a guy who's upside is an average QB he might be your guy. If I'm running an organization I would likely take a risk on a guy that can have a higher ceiling. I would take a gamble on the Cutler/Ryan/etc. They may bust but if they hit they can carry a franchise. That's just my opinion. You shoot for elite, you don't shoot for average.

I guess it depends on how you define "average". Are playoff QBs average or above average? Is a guy who finished top 3 in the MVP voting average? Chad Pennington is under-rated in the Fantasy Football world, but I guarantee you he is not in the NFL world. Bill Parcells was quick to snatch him up when he was avialble, and he has a pretty sharp football mind.I also think Cassell has a little more upside than you give him credit for. I think people forget that he was recruited to play at USC which means at one time he was considered one of the best high school QBs in the nation. I think it will be interesting to see what happens.

 

[Banger]

Similarly, Cassel's strength is the short passing game and he happens to have most likely the best short yardage wr in the game in Welker. That's another factor when I said that he had nearly everything in his favor... his strength was complimented/enhanced by the likely best short yardage wr in the game. If he goes to KC can he have the same success with Bowe/Gonzo who are more down field threats?

Was Wes Welker considered the bestr short yardage WR in the game when he was in Miami? I am not seeling Welker short (no pun intended), but I think people make him out to be more than he is. I think he's great at getting open and quick as hell after the catch, but alot of his success was also Brady and then Cassell finding him and getting the ball where it needs to be.

He was certainly emerging on Miami which led to NE trading for him. He averaged 10.3 per catch and 10.5 in his two years on NE. He led the Fins in receptions with 67 catches on 100 targets and receptions/target with the all star trio of Harrington, Culpepper and Cleo Lemon throwing to him.

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

There are some other things I'm curious about, like the % of plays NE ran from shotgun vs. what he would run with other offenses, especially one like Minn. where I assume (but may be wrong) that he would be under center much more for handoffs and play action. Maybe the shotgun % isn't so different but I dunno where to find that.

 

[Banger]

I'm sure he could but there's nothing in his game that would indicate to me that he can take a team to another level. He can fill a gap, nothing more. He's a Chad Pennington.

Would that be the Chad Pennington that has lead his team to the playoffs in almost every season that he's been healthy?

Pennington would probably be his upside. I was just trying to think of a potentially comparable type QB in terms of skillset... efficient, smart QB, that relies on the short game, doesn't throw a good deep ball but is not a game changer. He's not going to lose you games but he's not going to put you on his shoulders and win them.

Who really said otherwise? Most says he'll be a good, but not elite QB. What's wrong with that? By definiation there are very few elite QBs. If Pennington did not suffer so many injuries he would have had a very good career. That's what I expect from Cassell. Pennington was a first round pick (No. 14) and few would argue that he was a wasted pick. so even by your cpmaprison, Cassell would be worth a mid-first round pick.

I guess it's what you're looking for out of your QB position. If you're looking for a guy who's upside is an average QB he might be your guy. If I'm running an organization I would likely take a risk on a guy that can have a higher ceiling. I would take a gamble on the Cutler/Ryan/etc. They may bust but if they hit they can carry a franchise. That's just my opinion. You shoot for elite, you don't shoot for average.

I guess it depends on how you define "average". Are playoff QBs average or above average? Is a guy who finished top 3 in the MVP voting average? Chad Pennington is under-rated in the Fantasy Football world, but I guarantee you he is not in the NFL world. Bill Parcells was quick to snatch him up when he was avialble, and he has a pretty sharp football mind.I also think Cassell has a little more upside than you give him credit for. I think people forget that he was recruited to play at USC which means at one time he was considered one of the best high school QBs in the nation. I think it will be interesting to see what happens.

Playoff QB's can be above or below average. Playoff's or no playoffs aren't a reflection of the QB alone. The Jets had that playoff QB for years yet they let him go for nothing. Why? Because, he's limited and while he's efficient he can't bring a team to the next level.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Similarly, Cassel's strength is the short passing game and he happens to have most likely the best short yardage wr in the game in Welker. That's another factor when I said that he had nearly everything in his favor... his strength was complimented/enhanced by the likely best short yardage wr in the game. If he goes to KC can he have the same success with Bowe/Gonzo who are more down field threats?

Was Wes Welker considered the bestr short yardage WR in the game when he was in Miami? I am not seeling Welker short (no pun intended), but I think people make him out to be more than he is. I think he's great at getting open and quick as hell after the catch, but alot of his success was also Brady and then Cassell finding him and getting the ball where it needs to be.

He was certainly emerging on Miami which led to NE trading for him. He averaged 10.3 per catch and 10.5 in his two years on NE. He led the Fins in receptions with 67 catches on 100 targets and receptions/target with the all star trio of Harrington, Culpepper and Cleo Lemon throwing to him.

Fair enough. I did edit my post a little to reflect that Welker did help of course. In no way was I trying to downplay him, but just pointing out that his QBs helped him, as much as he helped them which you indriectly imply by saying how much the Miami guys hurt him.