Chiefs Matt Cassell -- My Assessment - Page 10

Amnorix · 02-28-2009, 04:15 PM

I've posted at some length about Cassell before in some no doubt long forgotten threads. Given the latest developments, however, I'll try to repeat my thoughts.

I think Matt Cassell has a better than average opportunity to succeed as a starting QB in the NFL. I think, therefore, he represents a much lower risk than nearly any pick that is taken in the draft.

Cassell's season with the Patriots last year showed much about him. It was really a tale of two seasons -- the early part, when he more or less stunk, and the latter part when he came into his own, the coaches and team played to his strengths and stayed away from his weaknesses, and the game clearly slowed down for him and he became more confident and capable in his position and play.

The GOOD:

1. Cassell CLEARLY has all the physical skills. He is big, tall, strong and tough. He takes a wallop and gets right back up. He has the arm strength to throw all the passes -- the deep out or the deep ball. He is reasonably shifty in the pocket (but note pocket presence/timing below) and has good speed in running out of the pocket. There is no physical limitation in his game.

2. Cassell appears to have good leadership skills. Everything I saw/read about Cassell suggests a mature and intelligent individual to whom the team responded. A veteran team, the Patriots players could have folded their tent on him, but he appeared to get the team to buy into him -- both coaches and other players.

3. He isn't a rookie. You may not appreciate this much, but rookies, whether QBs or any other NFL position players, take a hell of a lot of time to understand what the NFL is all about. It's relatively rare for players to have tremendous impact in their first years for precisely this reason. He not only isn't a rookie, but he has been well coached and has seen the best in the game conduct his business.

4. Patience/coachability. He clearly is very coachable. His tremendous improvement as 2008 went along is evidence of that, as well as all the statements made by the Patriots coaches and other players. He also took a beating early in the season, which was partly his fault and partly the fault of the OLine, but continued to progress and elevate his game.

The BAD:

1. He had no touch on the long ball. None. Whenever he went deep to Moss or anyone else, whether they were open or not, they were completely incapable of hooking up. I imagine that was a timing thing as much as anything, and it may be that having a full training camp/preseason to work on this will help tremendously, but I can't tell you how aggravating it was to see Moss 5 yards behind the entire defense running free and to have the ball overthrown, or whatever. It happened time and time again.

2. Timing/pocket presence. Although it got better as the year went along, Cassell took far too many sacks, held the ball too long, and didn't seem to have a good feel for the pocket. Note that this DID get better as teh year went along, and my main source of comparison was Tom Brady, who has about the best pocket presence since Dan Marino, so I may be a bit unreasonable here.

3. Needs the shotgun. As a result of item 2, above, the Patriots starting putting Cassell into the shotgun. ALOT. A whole lot. That definitely helped him quite a bit in terms of seeing/processing the field of play, making quicker decisions, avoiding sacks, etc., but the shotgun also limits the offensive playcalling a fair bit.

In summary, I think he has a better than average chance to be a high quality NFL starting QB. His ceiling is not yet determined, but I think it is quite high.

Hammock Parties · 03-01-2009, 02:41 AM

I really hate people who rip Trent.

He played a perfect playoff game.

Really, he did. Find fault with one thing Trent did in that game. I dare you.

If we had EVER fixed the defense he would have delivered a Super Bowl. No doubt in my mind.

Ultra Peanut · 03-01-2009, 02:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTG#10

So basically he is Tyler Thigpen.

Thiggy++, but yeah.

**Tribal Warfare** · 03-01-2009, 03:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTG#10

Thats a lousy attitude?

Sounds like a young man showing confidence in his skills to me...

At QB specifically, even if he has a sense of entitlement, he shoudn't have ever leaked this sentiment to press. The QB position like the HC should conduct themselves with the utmost professionalism, instead Thigpen comes off as whining child.

Ultra Peanut · 03-01-2009, 03:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claythan

I really hate people who rip Trent.

He played a perfect playoff game.

Really, he did. Find fault with one thing Trent did in that game. I dare you.

If we had EVER fixed the defense he would have delivered a Super Bowl. No doubt in my mind.

We had to punt once.

Hammock Parties · 03-01-2009, 03:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ultra Peanut

We had to punt once.

No, we didn't.

There were no ****ing punts in that game.

milkman · 03-01-2009, 03:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claythan

No, we didn't.

There were no ****ing punts in that game.

Bascically, two crappy defenses didn't make any stops.

tk13 · 03-01-2009, 03:25 AM

I think in 2006 Trent could've played better, but in 2003, I don't know how on earth you expect anything else. When the defense doesn't force one single punt, what are you supposed to do? Trent didn't miss a 30 yard FG or fumble inside the red zone. Short of having mystical powers to reverse time, I don't know what else you could do.

If you were working at your job, and somebody else had a completely different job, and they didn't do it, to the point where they didn't even try, and then you got blamed when the project failed, you would shoot that other person in the face with a potato gun.

Hammock Parties · 03-01-2009, 03:29 AM

In 2006 no quarterback would have played well.

The pass protection was shit, the running game was shit, the receivers dropped passes like they were throwing the game.

Joe ****ing Montana would have lost his shit in that game.

tk13 · 03-01-2009, 03:34 AM

I'd agree with that, Trent wasn't 100% but I think we got all out of whack with drops in the 1st half too. The Colts defense was crazy in that playoffs. That was probably the best example of a Cover 2 in recent memory. Relentless pass rush and guys swarming downfield so you had to take the underneath stuff.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 03-01-2009, 03:52 AM

I do love the revisionist history that believes that if we would have beaten the Colts, or forced them to punt, that we wouldn't have just gotten our asses stomped the next round.

Hell, the best team Vermeil ever put on the field here was the 2005 Chiefs, and even with that mediocre defense (16th in points) we didn't do shit.

Ultra Peanut · 03-01-2009, 03:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claythan

No, we didn't.

There were no ****ing punts in that game.

Wait, seriously? I totally scrubbed my memory of that game.

**** that defense so much.

Hammock Parties · 03-01-2009, 03:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

I do love the revisionist history that believes that if we would have beaten the Colts, or forced them to punt, that we wouldn't have just gotten our asses stomped the next round.

No one is saying that.

Only that if Trent had had a defense, at some point, that team would have won a Super Bowl.

Maybe not that year, but no one was beating New England that year.

Crush · 03-01-2009, 04:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Thigpen just became angrier.

You won't like him when he is angry.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 03-01-2009, 04:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claythan

No one is saying that.

Only that if Trent had had a defense, at some point, that team would have won a Super Bowl.

Maybe not that year, but no one was beating New England that year.

We had a defense in 2005 that was passable, and we had an offense that was more than SB caliber. We didn't have an easy schedule, and we missed the playoffs.

You of all people should remember how much of a ****ing badass Larry Johnson was in 2005. It's not like losing Johnnie Morton or John Tait caused our O to crumble.

Hammock Parties · 03-01-2009, 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

We had a defense in 2005 that was passable, and we had an offense that was more than SB caliber. We didn't have an easy schedule, and we missed the playoffs.

Do you remember when we played the Cowboys in Dallas? That was essentially a playoff game.

Our defense pissed down it's leg. Shat itself. All over.

Trent was magnificent.

In fact, he was so magnificent, he would have forced overtime if the ****ing kicker hadn't missed.

That defense wasn't passable. They were shit against most of the good teams. They were passable against teams like the Texans.

02-28-2009, 04:15 PM
Amnorix In BB I trust Join Date: May 2003 Location: Boston, Mass. Casino cash: $10029808	Matt Cassell -- My Assessment I've posted at some length about Cassell before in some no doubt long forgotten threads. Given the latest developments, however, I'll try to repeat my thoughts. I think Matt Cassell has a better than average opportunity to succeed as a starting QB in the NFL. I think, therefore, he represents a much lower risk than nearly any pick that is taken in the draft. Cassell's season with the Patriots last year showed much about him. It was really a tale of two seasons -- the early part, when he more or less stunk, and the latter part when he came into his own, the coaches and team played to his strengths and stayed away from his weaknesses, and the game clearly slowed down for him and he became more confident and capable in his position and play. The GOOD: 1. Cassell CLEARLY has all the physical skills. He is big, tall, strong and tough. He takes a wallop and gets right back up. He has the arm strength to throw all the passes -- the deep out or the deep ball. He is reasonably shifty in the pocket (but note pocket presence/timing below) and has good speed in running out of the pocket. There is no physical limitation in his game. 2. Cassell appears to have good leadership skills. Everything I saw/read about Cassell suggests a mature and intelligent individual to whom the team responded. A veteran team, the Patriots players could have folded their tent on him, but he appeared to get the team to buy into him -- both coaches and other players. 3. He isn't a rookie. You may not appreciate this much, but rookies, whether QBs or any other NFL position players, take a hell of a lot of time to understand what the NFL is all about. It's relatively rare for players to have tremendous impact in their first years for precisely this reason. He not only isn't a rookie, but he has been well coached and has seen the best in the game conduct his business. 4. Patience/coachability. He clearly is very coachable. His tremendous improvement as 2008 went along is evidence of that, as well as all the statements made by the Patriots coaches and other players. He also took a beating early in the season, which was partly his fault and partly the fault of the OLine, but continued to progress and elevate his game. The BAD: 1. He had no touch on the long ball. None. Whenever he went deep to Moss or anyone else, whether they were open or not, they were completely incapable of hooking up. I imagine that was a timing thing as much as anything, and it may be that having a full training camp/preseason to work on this will help tremendously, but I can't tell you how aggravating it was to see Moss 5 yards behind the entire defense running free and to have the ball overthrown, or whatever. It happened time and time again. 2. Timing/pocket presence. Although it got better as the year went along, Cassell took far too many sacks, held the ball too long, and didn't seem to have a good feel for the pocket. Note that this DID get better as teh year went along, and my main source of comparison was Tom Brady, who has about the best pocket presence since Dan Marino, so I may be a bit unreasonable here. 3. Needs the shotgun. As a result of item 2, above, the Patriots starting putting Cassell into the shotgun. ALOT. A whole lot. That definitely helped him quite a bit in terms of seeing/processing the field of play, making quicker decisions, avoiding sacks, etc., but the shotgun also limits the offensive playcalling a fair bit. In summary, I think he has a better than average chance to be a high quality NFL starting QB. His ceiling is not yet determined, but I think it is quite high.
Posts: 43,125

03-01-2009, 02:41 AM	#136
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $4700478	I really hate people who rip Trent. He played a perfect playoff game. Really, he did. Find fault with one thing Trent did in that game. I dare you. If we had EVER fixed the defense he would have delivered a Super Bowl. No doubt in my mind. __________________ Chiefs game films
Posts: 277,954

03-01-2009, 03:25 AM	#142
tk13 ... Join Date: Nov 2001 Casino cash: $1972500	I think in 2006 Trent could've played better, but in 2003, I don't know how on earth you expect anything else. When the defense doesn't force one single punt, what are you supposed to do? Trent didn't miss a 30 yard FG or fumble inside the red zone. Short of having mystical powers to reverse time, I don't know what else you could do. If you were working at your job, and somebody else had a completely different job, and they didn't do it, to the point where they didn't even try, and then you got blamed when the project failed, you would shoot that other person in the face with a potato gun.
Posts: 54,948

03-01-2009, 03:29 AM	#143
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $4700478	In 2006 no quarterback would have played well. The pass protection was shit, the running game was shit, the receivers dropped passes like they were throwing the game. Joe ****ing Montana would have lost his shit in that game. __________________ Chiefs game films
Posts: 277,954

03-01-2009, 03:34 AM	#144
tk13 ... Join Date: Nov 2001 Casino cash: $1972500	I'd agree with that, Trent wasn't 100% but I think we got all out of whack with drops in the 1st half too. The Colts defense was crazy in that playoffs. That was probably the best example of a Cover 2 in recent memory. Relentless pass rush and guys swarming downfield so you had to take the underneath stuff.
Posts: 54,948

03-01-2009, 03:52 AM	#145
'Hamas' Jenkins Now you've pissed me off! Join Date: Jan 2006 Casino cash: $8009572	I do love the revisionist history that believes that if we would have beaten the Colts, or forced them to punt, that we wouldn't have just gotten our asses stomped the next round. Hell, the best team Vermeil ever put on the field here was the 2005 Chiefs, and even with that mediocre defense (16th in points) we didn't do shit. __________________ "When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read 'all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics.' When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty – to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.”--Abraham Lincoln
Posts: 74,826