Cassel traded to Buffalo

[Pondering Her Percy]

There was no stability in KC. They were going through coaches every single year. I don't think Cassel has has the same OC in consecutive years since he was in NE.

And Detroit wasn't going through coaches year after year?? Nobody was more unstable than Detroit. Bottom line is, there isn't much of a difference between Cassel and Hill and it was a smart trade by Spielman. We didn't lose anything special in Cassel

[Demi]

Bottom line is, there isn't much of a difference between Cassel and Hill

Cassel is a bottom of the league starter, top of the league backup.
Hill is a middle to bottom of the league backup.

If your starter is injured, Cassel can win games. Hill won't. He's an extra coach on the sideline and emergency fill in that shouldn't lose you the game.

Multiple teams have signed/traded for Cassel and he's ended up starting for two of them. And likely will for a third. Teams sign Hill as a cheap veteran mentor for younger QBs. No team has ever signed Shaun Hill and let him compete for a starting job as anything but lip service.

Was it a good deal in the end? Depends how you feel about the backup position. But if you think it matters and teams should have quality backups, I'm not sure how a person could say the Vikings ended up gaining anything. They downgraded their backup QB position and got a mid round pick and a little cap relief.

Not much difference between Cassel and Hill? Tell that to the Pats who franchised him, the Chiefs who traded for him and gave him a nice contract, the Vikings who signed him and started him just last year before his injury...and the Bills that just traded for him. If there wasn't much difference these teams would have signed Hill and brought him in to compete for a starting job at some point in his career.

[Pondering Her Percy]

Cassel is a bottom of the league starter, top of the league backup.
Hill is a middle to bottom of the league backup.

If your starter is injured, Cassel can win games. Hill won't. He's an extra coach on the sideline and emergency fill in that shouldn't lose you the game.

Multiple teams have signed/traded for Cassel and he's ended up starting for two of them. And likely will for a third. Teams sign Hill as a cheap veteran mentor for younger QBs. No team has ever signed Shaun Hill and let him compete for a starting job as anything but lip service.

Was it a good deal in the end? Depends how you feel about the backup position. But if you think it matters and teams should have quality backups, I'm not sure how a person could say the Vikings ended up gaining anything. They downgraded their backup QB position and got a mid round pick and a little cap relief.

Not much difference between Cassel and Hill? Tell that to the Pats who franchised him, the Chiefs who traded for him and gave him a nice contract, the Vikings who signed him and started him just last year before his injury...and the Bills that just traded for him. If there wasn't much difference these teams would have signed Hill and brought him in to compete for a starting job at some point in his career.

My point is, after New England, he has done close to nothing. Not much more than Shaun Hill has done. Since NE, his record is 23-33. Hill is 16-18. All I'm saying is, when you look at numbers and records, we didn't really downgrade as much as people think. If much at all

[Mothman]

My point is, after New England, he has done close to nothing. Not much more than Shaun Hill has done. Since NE, his record is 23-33. Hill is 16-18. All I'm saying is, when you look at numbers and records, we didn't really downgrade as much as people think. If much at all

Hill, who "won't" win games, is 3-4 in last 7 starts (all last season). Cassel, who "can win" games, is 3-4 in his last 7 starts. What a difference!

One of Cassel's last 7 starts was the game @ New Orleans in which he was injured and didn't finish. However, if we throw that one out, he'd still be 3-4 in his last 7 starts (wins against STL, DET and PHI, losses against NE, CIN, BAL and CAR).

[Pondering Her Percy]

Hill, who "won't" win games, is 3-4 in last 7 starts (all last season). Cassel, who "can win" games, is 3-4 in his last 7 starts. What a difference!

One of Cassel's last 7 starts was the game @ New Orleans in which he was injured and didn't finish. However, if we throw that one out, he'd still be 3-4 in his last 7 starts (wins against STL, DET and PHI, losses against NE, CIN, BAL and CAR).

Exactly my point!! So to save some money and gain a 5th and 7th is a pretty solid deal for the QBs being very similar

[vatusay]

Lets sign Matt Flynn. He had a couple good games.

[PacificNorseWest]

Ya'll splittin' hairs with this Cassel/Hill debate.

[DK Sweets]

I don't give a rat's pooper what other teams value Cassell at. At one point, Percy Harvin was highly valued. It doesn't make him better than any receiver who has actually produced for the past two years who didn't get the same compensation.

In case you missed it, that doesn't make Cassell better than Hill. It's all about actual production, not perceived value.

[Demi]

Exactly my point!! So to save some money and gain a 5th and 7th is a pretty solid deal for the QBs being very similar

In Hill's wins, the opposing team scored 7 combined points.
In Cassel's they scored 49.

During that stretch, Cassel also had to come in against the Bears, went 20/33 and the team won by 3. Despite 33 attempts he doesn't get the "start". Hill also won against two of the worst teams in the league this year. And the Broncos when the defense shut them down.

Cassel is better than Hill, enough the Bills just traded for Cassel instead of just signing Hill. Hopefully Hill doesn't get a snap and we won't have to see first hand how much of a difference it is.....

[Mothman]

It's hair-splitting... neither one of them is very good.

[frosted]

In Hill's wins, the opposing team scored 7 combined points.
In Cassel's they scored 49.

During that stretch, Cassel also had to come in against the Bears, went 20/33 and the team won by 3. Despite 33 attempts he doesn't get the "start". Hill also won against two of the worst teams in the league this year. And the Broncos when the defense shut them down.

Cassel is better than Hill, enough the Bills just traded for Cassel instead of just signing Hill. Hopefully Hill doesn't get a snap and we won't have to see first hand how much of a difference it is.....

Why are we comparing QBs by team wins again, anyways? It's just asinine. Teams win games.

[Mothman]

Why are we comparing QBs by team wins again, anyways? It's just asinine. Teams win games.

Quite true!

[Demi]

Why are we comparing QBs by team wins again, anyways? It's just asinine. Teams win games.

Because QBs have a larger impact than any other individual position in the game on those team wins?

And you're right, neither are very good. But one is obviously better than the other....

[Pondering Her Percy]

In Hill's wins, the opposing team scored 7 combined points.
In Cassel's they scored 49.

During that stretch, Cassel also had to come in against the Bears, went 20/33 and the team won by 3. Despite 33 attempts he doesn't get the "start". Hill also won against two of the worst teams in the league this year. And the Broncos when the defense shut them down.

Cassel is better than Hill, enough the Bills just traded for Cassel instead of just signing Hill. Hopefully Hill doesn't get a snap and we won't have to see first hand how much of a difference it is.....

Well obviously I disagree. I'm not saying Hill is better but I am saying that there isn't much of a difference between the two.

[frosted]

Because QBs have a larger impact than any other individual position in the game on those team wins?

And you're right, neither are very good. But one is obviously better than the other....

I don't get why you're so confused about this, your last post regarding the number of points scored against Hill and Cassel's teams is exactly the reason why comparing QBs by wins is the height of jack-####-edness.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk