Vrabel: would you have pulled the trigger?

[Direckshun]

Let's put this into consideration...

Let's say the Chiefs and Patriots are engaged in negotiations for Matt Cassel in the spring of 2009.

You must be realistic: You cannot talk Scott Pioli out of Matt Cassel. Pioli wants him, and he will be a Chief. Keep in mind we do not yet know that the Chiefs draft haul that year will be horrible. As far as we know, we are expecting a 2010- or 2011-style draft haul. I am not giving you the luxury of hindsight, so please try not to vote with it. Scott Pioli's Chiefs obviously want Cassel, and Bill Belichek's Patriots obviously want a draft pick (or eight).

So the trade is hypothetically set up as follows: The Patriots give up Matt Cassel. The Chiefs give up: their 3rd rounder in 2009 and their 3rd rounder in 2010 We obviously can't know what the Chiefs' draft position will be in 2010, but combining the average 3rd round draft position with the high-3rd that the Chiefs had in 2009.... that works out to ~500 points on the draft value chart (http://www.draftcountdown.com/features/Value-Chart.php). (For those who follow such things.)

Set up this way, the Chiefs are going to acquire Matt Cassel. No other team will outbid that.

But Scott Pioli doesn't want to give up two draft picks. He wants maximum flexibility in the draft should he feel the need to move around. Typically he would try to do this by trading down, but he's inherited a team with the #3 overall pick, and you simply can't trade down that way.

So Pioli starts searching for ways to noodle with this arrangement.

We can reasonably assume that around 500 points is Cassel's value as of the 2009 offseason, following his successful work with the Patriots (aided and abetted, however, by working with Josh McDaniels and two All Pro WRs). That grades out about twice as much as your average third round pick, but it's also about 60 points shy of the #34 overall that the Chiefs have.

So Pioli proposes: The Patriots give up Matt Cassel and their mid-4th. The Chiefs give up their high-2nd. Belichek doesn't want to give up a draft pick, so he counters: The Patriots give up Matt Cassel and the well-aged former All Pro Mike Vrabel. The Chiefs give up their high-2nd. In this arrangement, Vrabel's value would be equivalent to a mid-4th.

And Pioli, of course, pulls the trigger.

Here's the question, that I'll put in a forthcoming poll:

Would you have traded a 2009 3rd and a 2010 3rd for Matt Cassel, or would you have traded a 2009 2nd for Cassel and Vrabel?

[Titty Meat]

What if Peyton Manning was a free agent?

[Direckshun]

What if Peyton Manning was a free agent?

Oh go read a straw poll. :)

[Titty Meat]

Oh go read a straw poll. :)

We'll win every straw poll!

To answer your question: In 2009 I was pretty happy to get Vrabel he was 2 years removed from a 12.5 sack season. So In 2009 yes I would have done it. Now? No. If we wouldn't have traded for him I think the Patriots cut him.

[Amnorix]

Have you SEEN what the Patriots have been throwing out there at OLB the last couple years? Vrabes isn't going to have been cut.

Bottom line is no one here has 1/100th of an idea how valuable (or not), Vrabes was in helping to change the culture of the locker room and starting to instill a winning mentality and work ethic there. If you can't assess that, you can't assess how valuable he was.

My bet is that he was very valuable in that regard, and therefore worth the two year investment.

[KurtCobain]

No I would've taken the pick. He was a broke dick and we needed to full up on young potetnials.

With that pick, I would've taken Jarett Dillard out of rice. He hasn't done anything in the NFL, so not a hindsight pick, but that's who I would've liked at that spot that year.

[KurtCobain]

Oh crap, yeah 2009, I liked Dillard. But thinking back, I would've taken Nate Davis with a late round 4th. Again, not hindsight. Just who I would've wanted for Cassel Insurance at that time.

[Direckshun]

Have you SEEN what the Patriots have been throwing out there at OLB the last couple years? Vrabes isn't going to have been cut.

Bottom line is no one here has 1/100th of an idea how valuable (or not), Vrabes was in helping to change the culture of the locker room and starting to instill a winning mentality and work ethic there. If you can't assess that, you can't assess how valuable he was.

My bet is that he was very valuable in that regard, and therefore worth the two year investment.

Ah ah ah... you're exercising hindsight.

[Direckshun]

I would've taken Nate Davis with a late round 4th.

Ha.

You can probably get him now for UDFA money.

FWIW I liked the 2009 draft. So shows what I know.

[Direckshun]

No I would've taken the pick.

You're Scott Pioli, though, and Belichek nuked the 4th rounder.

He offered Vrabel instead.

Do you take Cassel for a '09 3rd and a '10 3rd, or do you take Cassel/Vrabel for a '09 2nd?

[Saul Good]

3rd and a 3rd without question. Taking Vrabel was more of a favor to the Patriots.

[SDChiefs]

I would've traded a fifth.

[Bump]

at the time it seemed like the trade of the century for us. But no. Just no.

[Amnorix]

Ah ah ah... you're exercising hindsight.


? No I'm not, not really.

Patriots didn't have any clear replacement at OLB in 2009. Obviously, there's no way to know what 2010 would bring, but if you had asked me if he'd be cut in 2009, I would've said no then too.

Bottom line is I think he was brought in to teach the young players HOW to become winners, and I think that's a valid reason.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Didn't like the trade then, still don't like it now.

A 2nd round pick for a QB that never played a down in college and a guy whose skills fell of a cliff the moment he was traded.

No thanks.

Granted, Pioli would have probably taken another 5-technique with that R2 pick....

HAT TRICK!

[KurtCobain]

3rd and 3rd. No Vrabel. Yeah, we lose Asamoah, but maybe we take him ahead of Arenas.

Definately would've jumped at a chance to not give up that 2nd. It looked like a premium spot that year.

[Just Passin' By]

Getting both was a good deal for the Chiefs.

[Direckshun]

Didn't like the trade then, still don't like it now.

A 2nd round pick for a QB that never played a down in college and a guy whose skills fell of a cliff the moment he was traded.

No thanks.

Granted, Pioli would have probably taken another 5-technique with that R2 pick....

HAT TRICK!

Fail.

[Direckshun]

? No I'm not, not really.

Patriots didn't have any clear replacement at OLB in 2009. Obviously, there's no way to know what 2010 would bring, but if you had asked me if he'd be cut in 2009, I would've said no then too.

Bottom line is I think he was brought in to teach the young players HOW to become winners, and I think that's a valid reason.

That's fair.

[The Bad Guy]

When will this trade be a good trade for the Chiefs? Does Cassel have to win a SB to justify trading a 2nd rounder for him?

[The Bad Guy]

? No I'm not, not really.

Patriots didn't have any clear replacement at OLB in 2009. Obviously, there's no way to know what 2010 would bring, but if you had asked me if he'd be cut in 2009, I would've said no then too.

Bottom line is I think he was brought in to teach the young players HOW to become winners, and I think that's a valid reason.

C'mon some on here are so tuned into the locker room and the impact certain guys have had on others that they know Vrabel did nothing but steal a paycheck the last 2 years.

[KurtCobain]

Pull out the superbowl winning 2nd rounder stats.

Drew Brees won it. Cassel sucks.

[Direckshun]

When will this trade be a good trade for the Chiefs? Does Cassel have to win a SB to justify trading a 2nd rounder for him?

The Cassel/Vrabel trade was an interesting combo package.

Vrabel's acquisition was intended to be the leadership scalpel that the defense (and the organization) needed. It was intended to be a sort of antidote to the fatalism that had consumed this organization over the past decade.

The Cassel trade was with long-term aspirations in mind. Pioli legitimately sees a Super Bowl winner in him, or at least did at the time of the trade.

So with one 2nd rounder, for better or for worse, Pioli made an investment (the team's biggest) in the future for the team, while also picking up someone that would help radically turn around the attitude of the locker room.

[Just Passin' By]

When will this trade be a good trade for the Chiefs? Does Cassel have to win a SB to justify trading a 2nd rounder for him?

By taking the Chiefs to the playoffs, Cassel did more last year than Schaub has done in his Texans career, and he had a much better price tag.

[Rasputin]

I just don't like trading draft picks for rehash players. I would trade older regressing players for draft picks. Draft picks have more potential to get better for long period of time that allows growth & continuity for the team. So no I would not have made the trade.

I would have preferred too

<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-22tna7KHzI&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-22tna7KHzI&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>

the whole thing, than make vrabel cassel deal.

[mcaj22]

Wasn't that our first year going into the 3-4 scheme? Didn't it make sense to acquire Vrabel then? Who the hell was on this roster that had any idea how to play a 3-4 OLBer? They didn't know how well or good Tamba Hali was going to transition at the position they could not see into the future.

You knew Vrabel was going to retire sooner than later. Did you honestly expect or WANT to get 5 years out of the guy? The quicker he retires or leaves the team after we acquire him the better the trade is for us in my opinion. And that brings us to present day.

I understand your argument that's its basically a 2nd rounder for Cassel now that Vrabel is gone after 2 years. But you had to have seen that coming. The only problem is you have to use hindsight here even if you say no.

Is Patrick Chung better than Cassel? Would you rather Chung on the Chiefs? Will Chung be a better long term player and probably help NE win a SB before Cassel helps the Chiefs win one? Is that the determining factor on who wins out in this deal?

Who would the Chiefs had selected at that 2nd round slot in 2009 if they had the pick?

I don't know the answers to these questions and nor do I care, what I do know is that the trade was a part that helped us win 10 games last season and that is the most competitive I've seen my favorite team in years. So whether you like it or not I don't think any guy we would have taken in that 2nd round slot would have been a factor in us winning games like Cassel has been.

[Direckshun]

I just don't like trading draft picks for rehash players. I would trade older regressing players for draft picks. Draft picks have more potential to get better for long period of time that allows growth & continuity for the team. So no I would not have made the trade.

I would have preferred too

<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-22tna7KHzI&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-22tna7KHzI&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>

the whole thing, than make vrabel cassel deal.

Fail.

You're not answering the question.

[ForeverChiefs58]

Some of the very best trades, are the ones never made. :hmmm:

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Here's an idea:

Let's relive the Year of our Shit again!

[SAUTO]

When will this trade be a good trade for the Chiefs? Does Cassel have to win a SB to justify trading a 2nd rounder for him?

for some here? obviously.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Didn't like the trade then, still don't like it now.

A 2nd round pick for a QB that never played a down in college and a guy whose skills fell of a cliff the moment he was traded.

No thanks.

Granted, Pioli would have probably taken another 5-technique with that R2 pick....

HAT TRICK!

More Tight Ends!

[SAUTO]

C'mon some on here are so tuned into the locker room and the impact certain guys have had on others that they know Vrabel did nothing but steal a paycheck the last 2 years.

yep, and they are positive he would have been cut too.

[The Bad Guy]

Here's an idea:

Let's relive the Year of our Shit again!

You seem to love talking about that year in every thread, so why not?

[OnTheWarpath15]

When will this trade be a good trade for the Chiefs? Does Cassel have to win a SB to justify trading a 2nd rounder for him?

IMO, he needs to win multiple playoff games. He was brought here to be the QBOTF - a guy Pioli supposedly felt could win a SB. I don't think a deep playoff run is too much to ask.

C'mon some on here are so tuned into the locker room and the impact certain guys have had on others that they know Vrabel did nothing but steal a paycheck the last 2 years.

In fairness, everyone is guessing regarding the leadership issue.

The guys that say it wasn't much of an issue? They weren't in the room to know if it's true.

The guys that say his leadership was essential? They weren't in the room either.

Both sides of the argument are guilty of believing whatever they want to believe to help their argument.

[RealSNR]

If I have to get Cassel, I'm going to cut my losses and not lose the 2nd draft pick. Do it all with a 2nd rounder and throw Vrabel into the deal.

I like the way this defense looks right now, and Vrabel was at least a small part of that.