bud8andbills Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 a second round pick. While he is still first round talent, a second round pick should be adequate. If no trades can be worked out, let him sit. Early next season him sitting will up the anty for some team to give us a first or second for the draft after the up and coming season. The only question is how tight will the cap be if he stays on. We will need to sign some good draft picks i'm sure.
Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 a second round pick. While he is still first round talent, a second round pick should be adequate. If no trades can be worked out, let him sit. Early next season him sitting will up the anty for some team to give us a first or second for the draft after the up and coming season. The only question is how tight will the cap be if he stays on. We will need to sign some good draft picks i'm sure. 640799[/snapback] Why keep him on the team if no trade can be done. Moulds made it clear he wants out of Buffalo. And besides even if we don't get a trade or release him, he'll probably become a holdout. By the way when does FA end anyway?
The Jokeman Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 a second round pick. While he is still first round talent, a second round pick should be adequate. If no trades can be worked out, let him sit. Early next season him sitting will up the anty for some team to give us a first or second for the draft after the up and coming season. The only question is how tight will the cap be if he stays on. We will need to sign some good draft picks i'm sure. 640799[/snapback] The Bucs were able to get a 3rd and 6th for Keenan McCardell a few years back. I would hope we could get as much for Moulds but with his high cap number we might have to settle for just the 3rd.
bud8andbills Posted March 24, 2006 Author Posted March 24, 2006 Yeah, we do need to trade him. Doesn't Mike Williams have us sitting with 5 million in dead cap money? If we release Eric, wouldn't that be another 5 million in dead cap money? If so, it would be 10 million. OUCH!
jahbonas Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 The Bucs were able to get a 3rd and 6th for Keenan McCardell a few years back. I would hope we could get as much for Moulds but with his high cap number we might have to settle for just the 3rd. 640807[/snapback] For the 1 millionth time...any team trading for Moulds will rip up the existing contract and work a new 3 year deal....Moulds existing contract will have NO BEARING on the trade value
bud8andbills Posted March 24, 2006 Author Posted March 24, 2006 Yes, if we trade him, it voids our contract with him. All ties are cut. But if we release him, won't it stick us with another 5 million in dead cap money?
The Jokeman Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 For the 1 millionth time...any team trading for Moulds will rip up the existing contract and work a new 3 year deal....Moulds existing contract will have NO BEARING on the trade value 640811[/snapback] Most likely that's true but the team you're trading with you isn't going to focus on that. They're going to focus on the current contract and give up as little as they can to get Moulds. Yes, if we trade him, it voids our contract with him. All ties are cut. But if we release him, won't it stick us with another 5 million in dead cap money? 640812[/snapback] When you trade a player any of his prorated signing bonus and possibly other bonuses escalate and count against your cap that year. That's why you don't see many that many trades in the NFL.
BillnutinHouston Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 IMO Moulds' trade value is less than most people think. If I'm a GM interested in Moulds, I know going in that the Bills need to offload him or cut him. I'd offer the Bills a low pick (4th?) so they at least get something instead of just cutting him. This is a waiting game and the question will be how long Marv wants to wait and see what the market will bear before pulling the trigger.
Bill from NYC Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 IMO Moulds' trade value is less than most people think. If I'm a GM interested in Moulds, I know going in that the Bills need to offload him or cut him. I'd offer the Bills a low pick (4th?) so they at least get something instead of just cutting him. This is a waiting game and the question will be how long Marv wants to wait and see what the market will bear before pulling the trigger. 640859[/snapback] I fully agree, but I have been known to underestimate trade value. That said, If I was Marv, I would jump all over a 4th for a washed up, old, sulking, whining Eric Moulds.
Dibs Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 I fully agree, but I have been known to underestimate trade value. That said, If I was Marv, I would jump all over a 4th for a washed up, old, sulking, whining Eric Moulds. 640861[/snapback] That's rough True but rough
kasper13 Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 If someone (even NE) threw a 3rd round pick on the table, I'd take it. With all the supposed interest in Moulds, a 3rd round pick is not out of line. I'd guess Marv would take a 4th. Anyone trading for Moulds helps the Bills out in cap space so that is a consideration as well.
eball Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 by Moulds with Moulds from Moulds in regard to Moulds ...Oh wait. You said propositions. My bad.
ans4e64 Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 there is no way we are getting a second, or maybe even a third, for a 10 year vet. other teams know we are going to have to cut him, we will not sit with him the year, we cant, he counts 10 mil on the cap, if we cant get a trade he WILL be cut. i say 5th round for moulds, if a really good offer comes and there is a bidding war or anything, bump it to a 4th, thats it, its reality everyone, please see it.
Buftex Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 there is no way we are getting a second, or maybe even a third, for a 10 year vet. other teams know we are going to have to cut him, we will not sit with him the year, we cant, he counts 10 mil on the cap, if we cant get a trade he WILL be cut. i say 5th round for moulds, if a really good offer comes and there is a bidding war or anything, bump it to a 4th, thats it, its reality everyone, please see it. 640922[/snapback] I agree...I will be very surprised if we get more than a 5th rounder for him. Even then, I think we would get the pick from a team that does not want him to hit the open market, and have to get in a recruiting/bidding war for him...and yeah, if they trade for him, it will be under the condition that he takes a very big paycut...Buffalo would likely be his best option. If he wants to leave that badly though, good luck to him, the Bills need to move on, and start the rebuilding process for real...it really is a shame to see the Bills and Moulds, who have had a nice relationship for a decade, end their association so acrimoniously.
Pyrite Gal Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 there is no way we are getting a second, or maybe even a third, for a 10 year vet. other teams know we are going to have to cut him, we will not sit with him the year, we cant, he counts 10 mil on the cap, if we cant get a trade he WILL be cut. i say 5th round for moulds, if a really good offer comes and there is a bidding war or anything, bump it to a 4th, thats it, its reality everyone, please see it. 640922[/snapback] Not so fast and cockure about this! While it certainly is not likely that we will get a 2nd for Moulds, it clearly is a real possibility (though again it is not a likelihood). This is because the amount a team receives in return for a traded player is governed most by supply and demand. On the supply side, om the Scouts Inc, ranking of available WRs all the UFAs except for David Boston through the top 15 WRs are gone and if the Bills were to cut Moulds he would easily be the #1 WR available. On the demand side, Moulds having been allowed to work out a deal says multiple teams have expressed interest. Based on the assessment of folks on TSW he probably is not simply blowing smoke here as several teams such as Philly or the Broncos either have a huge position need at WR or this one player might make the difference for them in obtaining an SB berth. If supply of a WR of Moulds rep and recent production are low and the demand is high enough to create competition this can lead to idiotic maneuvers we have benefitted from such as AT giving up a 1st for PP, TN giving up a 3rd for TH amd hurt us when we were forced to overpay for Milloy when safeties Cota and Battle signed and reneged on us and unless we overpaid when he surprisingly hit the market the Bears might have got him. It is a steely-eyed waiting game right now because if two of these teams feel he can make the difference for them reaching the SB or putting enough butts in their seats they would be silly not to part with even a 1st for Moulds if that is what the supply and demand of the market dictate. The quality of a player's work, his age, and his contract are quite relevant factors to consider. However, Moulds is still the best offensive player on this team due to his experience and athleticism (Evans, McGee and maybe McGahee are closing fast) and his quality makes a high draft pick for him meet the laugh test. He is well into the backside of his career, but if a team is looking to get value from him for only 1 year (to make the difference in an 06 SB run or to pretend to be a good team in 06) then trading for him makes sense. His salary hit is high but it has become standard operating procedure to rip up inherited contracts and negotiate new deals which provide the advantage to the player that he receives a ton of cash upfront he would not have even gotten from his old contract, but his new team gets to prorate that hit over the life of the contract and have a very manageable 06 cap hit. Is it likely that Moulds would command a 2nd or 3rd in a trade? I would not say this is a probability or even likely. Howerver, is it possible that the Bills might even be able to pry a first out of a team so that they are assured of getting Moulds when it is unlikely they would get him as an FA since bad teams get first shot. Yes this is certainly and easily possible. My bet is on the Broncs as the best potential trade partner, Moulds could team with the quality WR they already have to create a force similar to the one Moulds teamed with PP to form in 2002. If Moulds went into FA it is doubtful he would be there when the Broncs turn came around so if they want him they have to trade for him. Finally, the Broncs have two first round picks in 06 but neither are high enough to get them an guaranteed impact player(not that the first picks of any draft provide much in the way of surefire immediate help- see Mike Wiiliams and Harrington if you doubt this). If Marv is as tough a customer as TD was (his reading of the market and not even panicking when their was no draft day deal for TH as 3 of the top picks that day were for RBs) then he will resist the wails of fans who want something to happen yesterday and maybe we get a surpirsing pick for Moulds.
ans4e64 Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 Not so fast and cockure about this! While it certainly is not likely that we will get a 2nd for Moulds, it clearly is a real possibility (though again it is not a likelihood). This is because the amount a team receives in return for a traded player is governed most by supply and demand. On the supply side, om the Scouts Inc, ranking of available WRs all the UFAs except for David Boston through the top 15 WRs are gone and if the Bills were to cut Moulds he would easily be the #1 WR available. On the demand side, Moulds having been allowed to work out a deal says multiple teams have expressed interest. Based on the assessment of folks on TSW he probably is not simply blowing smoke here as several teams such as Philly or the Broncos either have a huge position need at WR or this one player might make the difference for them in obtaining an SB berth. If supply of a WR of Moulds rep and recent production are low and the demand is high enough to create competition this can lead to idiotic maneuvers we have benefitted from such as AT giving up a 1st for PP, TN giving up a 3rd for TH amd hurt us when we were forced to overpay for Milloy when safeties Cota and Battle signed and reneged on us and unless we overpaid when he surprisingly hit the market the Bears might have got him. It is a steely-eyed waiting game right now because if two of these teams feel he can make the difference for them reaching the SB or putting enough butts in their seats they would be silly not to part with even a 1st for Moulds if that is what the supply and demand of the market dictate. The quality of a player's work, his age, and his contract are quite relevant factors to consider. However, Moulds is still the best offensive player on this team due to his experience and athleticism (Evans, McGee and maybe McGahee are closing fast) and his quality makes a high draft pick for him meet the laugh test. He is well into the backside of his career, but if a team is looking to get value from him for only 1 year (to make the difference in an 06 SB run or to pretend to be a good team in 06) then trading for him makes sense. His salary hit is high but it has become standard operating procedure to rip up inherited contracts and negotiate new deals which provide the advantage to the player that he receives a ton of cash upfront he would not have even gotten from his old contract, but his new team gets to prorate that hit over the life of the contract and have a very manageable 06 cap hit. Is it likely that Moulds would command a 2nd or 3rd in a trade? I would not say this is a probability or even likely. Howerver, is it possible that the Bills might even be able to pry a first out of a team so that they are assured of getting Moulds when it is unlikely they would get him as an FA since bad teams get first shot. Yes this is certainly and easily possible. My bet is on the Broncs as the best potential trade partner, Moulds could team with the quality WR they already have to create a force similar to the one Moulds teamed with PP to form in 2002. If Moulds went into FA it is doubtful he would be there when the Broncs turn came around so if they want him they have to trade for him. Finally, the Broncs have two first round picks in 06 but neither are high enough to get them an guaranteed impact player(not that the first picks of any draft provide much in the way of surefire immediate help- see Mike Wiiliams and Harrington if you doubt this). If Marv is as tough a customer as TD was (his reading of the market and not even panicking when their was no draft day deal for TH as 3 of the top picks that day were for RBs) then he will resist the wails of fans who want something to happen yesterday and maybe we get a surpirsing pick for Moulds. 640931[/snapback] honestly, your posts are always waaaaaay tooooooo long and that is why i never read them. i said that if teams get into a competition then bump up the pick
Nanker Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 there is no way we are getting a second, or maybe even a third, for a 10 year vet. other teams know we are going to have to cut him, we will not sit with him the year, we cant, he counts 10 mil on the cap, if we cant get a trade he WILL be cut. i say 5th round for moulds, if a really good offer comes and there is a bidding war or anything, bump it to a 4th, thats it, its reality everyone, please see it. 640922[/snapback] Not to be Mr. NegativeMotherF, but two years ago, Keenan McCardell was a 13 year vet and San Diego paid TamponBay a Third and a 6th for the disgruntled washed-up former star. "The Bucs get multiple draft picks from SandieGo for disgruntled holdout receiver Keenan McCardell." "Keenan McCardell will get his wish to play for a new team, but he still doesn't have a new contract. The Bucs' disgruntled receiver was traded to San Diego in exchange for the Chargers' third- and sixth-round picks in the 2005 draft. Tampa Bay also could receive an additional fifth-rounder if McCardell makes the Pro Bowl this year or in 2005. The deal was struck less than an hour before the NFL's trading deadline of 4 p.m. Tuesday. It ends an 82-day holdout by McCardell, who had two years remaining on his contract with the Bucs that would have paid him $2.5-million this season and $2.75-million in 2005. However, McCardell, 34, will not have his contract restructured by the Chargers." Their statistics are eerily similar - an up year followed by a down year followed by an up year followed by a... Keenan's done this in 15 years Eric did this in 11 years The thing is, we don't HAVE to cut Eric - just like the Bucs didn't have to cut McCardell. But to get those kind of picks for EM, we're probably talking the 2007 Draft. It depends if Marv wants to get something for him this year or not. If he does, it's likely he'll have to take less than he could if he hangs EM out to dry a little more. Hey, The Bills will have to pay him, but if he doesn't show up for the games once the season starts - The Bills will fine him his weekly paycheck for as long as he holds out. If I were Marv (and I'm not) I'd take a long term approach to Mr. Moulds' situation.
frogger Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 question, when does the dead money return to our cap numbers, will it clear next year? and If so how come we can't use that to our advantage, sign a player to a 2 year deal, making moving the better portion into the 2nd year when we get the other side of that 5 million dead cap space (from mike williams). I love Moulds, he has been one of my favorites since he came to life in 98, Right now, my only concern is that what if he goes to a team we have to see play, because like Reed, thomas and Smith it was hard to see them in another uniform. Oh bother
shibuya Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 Yes, if we trade him, it voids our contract with him. All ties are cut. But if we release him, won't it stick us with another 5 million in dead cap money? 640812[/snapback] trade or release the outcome is the same financially. We will have about 5 million in dead cap space and we wil save 5 mil by trading him or releasing him. only a complete fool would just release Moulds. he's our asset and he can hold out if he wants to. EM either plays for us or we trade him. We won't just release him, especially since we do not need the cash. There are no prime FA left to spend it on.
Recommended Posts