firstngoal Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 For those of you that think the Bills will be dropping the ball if they release Moulds think again. He did come on near the end of the season but overall he didn't have a good year. His play has declined over the years as has his yards per catch which is a good indicator for determining whether a receiver is on the decline. Moulds would be worth about 1.5 million a year, tops at this stage not 5 or 10 million per season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 Guess what, Nate Clements didn't have a great year either and we still are going to pay him like a top 5 CB. Heck, The entire bills team had a bad year last year. Is moulds the same player now as he was when he first became a starter, not exactly, but he still is a receiver that makes the catches and demands double coverage. Other teams plan for him being on the field and how they are going to defend him. He is still productive and still one of the top receivers in the league. If we give JP slack for not having a good o-line infront of him, why should we not look at moulds the same way? He had a QB who was in his first full year leading an offense that couldn't keep the opponents Defense away from him. Hows he supposed to get the ball? You know what, let him go, atleast we won't have to hear any more about this until next season when he lights it up against us and our receivers look like a bunch of high school guys. it will be the same thing as letting Pat go last year. We won't miss hm til we see what he really meant to the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webster Guy Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 Guess what, Nate Clements didn't have a great year either and we still are going to pay him like a top 5 CB. Heck, The entire bills team had a bad year last year. Is moulds the same player now as he was when he first became a starter, not exactly, but he still is a receiver that makes the catches and demands double coverage. Other teams plan for him being on the field and how they are going to defend him. He is still productive and still one of the top receivers in the league. If we give JP slack for not having a good o-line infront of him, why should we not look at moulds the same way? He had a QB who was in his first full year leading an offense that couldn't keep the opponents Defense away from him. Hows he supposed to get the ball? You know what, let him go, atleast we won't have to hear any more about this until next season when he lights it up against us and our receivers look like a bunch of high school guys. it will be the same thing as letting Pat go last year. We won't miss hm til we see what he really meant to the team. 614266[/snapback] So are you suggesting for the Bills to keep him at his current salary? He said he would take no pay cut. Assuming that to be true, what would you do? I agree that at that salary that it is a no-brainer- let him go. But I agree with your points that he could still be productive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimBob2232 Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 Moulds would be worth about 1.5 million a year, tops at this stage not 5 or 10 million per season. Okay, ill bite. Would you rather have moulds or Brandon Lloyd? Moulds is going to cost 6 mil against the cap this year REGARDLESS of whether he is on the roster or not. You bring in Lloyd (using him as an example here, because we WILL need another WR), and you pay him 3 mil/year (and thats probably low..) So for a 1M savings, you severely downgraded at WR, created even more inconsistency for JP, run a fan favorite out of town, and created very little free cap room to solve our real issues (OL/DL/DB). Doesnt sound too smart. I think it is a moot point, sadly. I think we need to eat the 10mil cap hit this year. Keep moulds, and let him go prior to the start of next season. The only other option IMO, is to extend his deal one year, give him some up front money now. But if we do that, we have to rely on keeping him 2-3 more years, and im not so sure that is a smart move either. Suck it up. Keep EM this year. Move on. Address it next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 it will be the same thing as letting Pat go last year. We won't miss hm til we see what he really meant to the team. 614266[/snapback] Completely different scenarios......Last year we were on the cusp of the playoffs and we let go Pat Williams hoping that Tim Anderson will step in without a beat.....It did not happen....Of course compounding the DT loss was the loss of Takeo Spikes and horrible play by the rest of the defense.... This team is clearly rebuilding/reloading....what ever you want to call.... Having a Moulds or not having him will not alter the course of this teaml.. If the team is looking for the long haul, they have to let go of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 Okay, ill bite. Would you rather have moulds or Brandon Lloyd? Moulds is going to cost 6 mil against the cap this year REGARDLESS of whether he is on the roster or not. You bring in Lloyd (using him as an example here, because we WILL need another WR), and you pay him 3 mil/year (and thats probably low..) So for a 1M savings, you severely downgraded at WR, created even more inconsistency for JP, run a fan favorite out of town, and created very little free cap room to solve our real issues (OL/DL/DB). Doesnt sound too smart. 614286[/snapback] Moulds as he wont cost us a 1st and 3rd rd pick. Not that it matters since this is it for the cba, and we wont be able to compete with higher revenue teams, but yeah Lloyd would cost us a 1st and 3rd as he was tendered with such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 Completely different scenarios......Last year we were on the cusp of theplayoffs and we let go Pat Williams hoping that Tim Anderson will step in without a beat.....It did not happen....Of course compounding the DT loss was the loss of Takeo Spikes and horrible play by the rest of the defense.... This team is clearly rebuilding/reloading....what ever you want to call.... Having a Moulds or not having him will not alter the course of this teaml.. If the team is looking for the long haul, they have to let go of him. 614311[/snapback] Its not a different scenario. We are letting go of Moulds cause he is going to cost the team too much and we feel we have a cheaper replacement in Evans. We let go of Pat Williams cause he would cost the team too much and we thought we had a cheaper replacement in Tim Anderson You think if TKO didn't get hurt our Defense would have still been good? I don't see this team as being in a rebuilding stage cause that would mean they are not looking at being competitive for a couple of years. Ralph wants to win before he dies so he is looking at winning now so they need a mixture of younger guys and veterans. Losing Moulds will hurt the bills cause it means we need to find another top tier WR. You can have the greatest line in the league, but without a couple of passing threats, your not gonna win the big game. Evans is good but not ready to be considered a threat by himself (proof - Miami game after moulds was gone), Parrish hasn't proved anything yet cause of limited playing time, Aiken not bad for a 5th receiver, and Reed is a FA whom the Bills are pretty much letting go cause he can't seem to catch the ball. I think the Bills will take to much of a hit letting him go and taking the dead cap space, then just keeping him this year and letting him go. If he was costing the bills 11 mil. and cutting him would save 9 mil, I would say for the good of the team he needs to go. But to only save 4-5 mil? all your doing is taking out a good WR and replacing him with a cheaper receiver with less talent and saving maby 1-2 mil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimBob2232 Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 Moulds as he wont cost us a 1st and 3rd rd pick. Not that it matters since this is it for the cba, and we wont be able to compete with higher revenue teams, but yeah Lloyd would cost us a 1st and 3rd as he was tendered with such. 614314[/snapback] Okay...not the point at all. Lloyd was just a name I chose off the list of free agents. In actuality there is nobody even close to moulds calibur on the FA list...so the drop off is even more severe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 A couple of things to consider..... - While I love Moulds play...I am not sure that keeping him is the right thing to do at ANY salary. Like it or not JPL IS the future of this team at QB....and you cant have a older, once dominate but not anymore, get upset if he isn't getting the ball on every play, expensive WR talking crap about him in the locker room. Simple as that. - In a year where teams are going to have to lop good players off (considering how labor talks are going) like limbs with a samuri sword we might just be able to land a comparable receiver to go opposite Evans.....just maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firstngoal Posted March 1, 2006 Author Share Posted March 1, 2006 A couple of things to consider..... - While I love Moulds play...I am not sure that keeping him is the right thing to do at ANY salary. Like it or not JPL IS the future of this team at QB....and you cant have a older, once dominate but not anymore, get upset if he isn't getting the ball on every play, expensive WR talking crap about him in the locker room. Simple as that. 614352[/snapback] Exactly!!!! Plus at his age and decline in production, he's no longer a #1 receiver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts