Tipster19 Posted March 25, 2006 Posted March 25, 2006 The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports Green Bay is making a push to sign WR Marc Boerigter, the towering Kansas City free agent. With wide receivers in demand because the draft class is so poor and more than 20 already off the board, Boerigter's market value has been pushed up. The Packers appear to be competing with Tampa Bay and New England for his services. We own the rights to Moulds and have the cap room. He's 32 soon to be 33. He can throw all the temper tantrums that he wants to but if he doesn't find a trade partner or threatens to hold out, then who really loses? Him, that's who. He won't be on the roster come opening day but Buffalo WILL be compensated and rather nicely I might add. Here's my prediction on where Moulds will go. 1. Philly- This makes the most sense for both teams. They need Moulds, he's a poor man's TO. The WRs that they have there now couldn't catch a bus. 2. Seattle/Minnesota- The loser of the Burleson sweepstakes. 3. Green Bay- They can say all that they want that they are not interested but don't believe it. Driver is up there in age, Walker may not be right physically and he feels like Moulds about his team, if not more. Oh, I almost forgot Ferguson. Can you say injury prone? 4. KC- Not too many coaches have seen more of Moulds than Herm and they NEED WRs. 5. San Diego- They need another WR. They tried the Boston experiment, now it's time to go with a solid, proven player. 6. Denver- Shanahan is capable of anything when it comes to trading. 7. Houston- They need to compliment Andre Johnson. They signed an awful lot of O-Linemen, now it's time to make this Carr go. It would serve us best to trade him to the NFC but if that can't happen then I do believe that most of the AFC West teams could stand to use a WR of Moulds' caliber.
bbfan54 Posted March 25, 2006 Posted March 25, 2006 There is interest in EM but the way the NFL operates teams rarely get fair value for trades anymore. This is even more true when it is known the team wants to get rid of a player. The bills will probably get no better than a fourth rounder. Some of the teams showing interest may not offer anything in the hope that EM will be cut. By contacting EM's agent now they can work out the preliminary terms to a contract before he may get cut.
Tipster19 Posted March 25, 2006 Author Posted March 25, 2006 That's just it. We don't want to get rid of EM. He's not happy, not us. EM will find his value, he just might not like it.
MadBuffaloDisease Posted March 26, 2006 Posted March 26, 2006 There is interest in EM but the way the NFL operates teams rarely get fair value for trades anymore. This is even more true when it is known the team wants to get rid of a player. The bills will probably get no better than a fourth rounder. Some of the teams showing interest may not offer anything in the hope that EM will be cut. By contacting EM's agent now they can work out the preliminary terms to a contract before he may get cut. Well if the draft is as poor as they say for WR's, then using even a 2nd rounder to trade for Moulds would be a smart idea, if a team needs a WR. Why take a chance on an unproven, less-talented rookie when you could have Moulds? And you've GOT to be kidding me if Boerigter is a hot WR prospect. The guy failed miserably on an offense that was great and had some average WR's.
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted March 26, 2006 Posted March 26, 2006 Marc Boerigter a hot commodity.... I think E. Moulds trade value is higher then most around here think. The Bills dont have to dump moulds, sure they dont want him at his current salary, but they don't have to get rid of him. I'd look for teams like philly,den, ne or a team on the cusp to offer up something like a 3rd rounder as we get closer to the draft. Of course I could be wrong and maybe no one wants to trade for a 32 year old wr, but if the choice is a draft pick for eric moulds or Marc Boerigter
MadBuffaloDisease Posted March 26, 2006 Posted March 26, 2006 The Bills need to let teams know in NO uncertain terms that they fully intend to keep Eric for the 2006 season, whether that's true or not (and again at worst, if he doesn't get traded, they pull a Milloy on him and release him just before his 2006 contract gets guaranteed). If teams know that he's NOT going to be free, they'll start giving up the picks.
Tortured Soul Posted March 26, 2006 Posted March 26, 2006 We've said we're not going to keep him at this salary. You see that? That's the leverage going out the window.
MadBuffaloDisease Posted March 26, 2006 Posted March 26, 2006 Not exactly. A team doesn't want to wait until just before the season starts to add him.
Arkady Renko Posted March 26, 2006 Posted March 26, 2006 What does the other team need to pay if they take on Moulds via trade? 5 million?That's not bad in today's inflated FA market. Giving up a pick or a similarly disgruntled player is a small price to pay to guarantee that you retain his services if you are desperate for a receiver.
Pyrite Gal Posted March 26, 2006 Posted March 26, 2006 There is interest in EM but the way the NFL operates teams rarely get fair value for trades anymore. This is even more true when it is known the team wants to get rid of a player. The bills will probably get no better than a fourth rounder. Some of the teams showing interest may not offer anything in the hope that EM will be cut. By contacting EM's agent now they can work out the preliminary terms to a contract before he may get cut. 642272[/snapback] Teams rarely get fair value for trades because teams much more rarely make trades in todays world than in the past. Whi;e there are examples of teams getting hosed in a fire sale, there are also examples like the one mentioned above of TH for a third and Peerless for a 1st where the team got far more value for the player than he ultimately turned out to be worth. The difference is that trade value is determined for the most part by supply and demand rather than a simplistic calculation of how much a player contributes on the field. In this particular case (which is a far better way of analysing a particular case than attempting to shoe horn it into some general rule for which there are huge exceptions to the "rule" you state) the thing to do is look at the particulars. The situation with Travis Henry bears much in common with the Eric Moulds case. In both cases you have: 1. A player who announced clearly he will not play again for the Bills (though the EM case is slightly less strident because his agent spoke for him allowing a little wriggle room) while Henry spoke for himself that he was pissed. 2. Both players seemed headed for a cut but were still under contract and Bills property. 3. The Bills have publicly consistently stated they want and value the player, but in both cases authorized them to seek a trade (a great move as the player does the GMs work and the Bills do not come hat in hand trying to attract trade interest. There are some real differences the biggest negatuve for us is the extraordinary cap hit Moulds 2006 contract has for us if we were to honot it. However, the interest for Moulds seems to be far higher than the interest in Henry as Moulds is a more worthwhile player and the best WR of the alternatives available. The Bills and Marv will have to hang tough on this one and be willing to take this beyond the draft and near Jumne if necessary, but this particular situation is set up for the Bills to trade EM for some very good value (perhaps a 2007 1st) if they hang tough.
KOKBILLS Posted March 26, 2006 Posted March 26, 2006 1. Philly- This makes the most sense for both teams. They need Moulds, he's a poor man's TO. The WRs that they have there now couldn't catch a bus. 642250[/snapback] I doubt many here are a bigger EM Fan than I am... But... All TO bashing aside, Moulds is no where near the WR TO is...Poor man or not...Moulds is not even in TO's Zip Code as a Play Maker any longer...Not even close... That being said, I do think Philly is a nice match for EM in a Trade. They need all the Vet WR help they can get...
Tipster19 Posted March 26, 2006 Author Posted March 26, 2006 Here's a trade that I would do. Trade Moulds and our later 3rd rd. pick (#73) or our 4th rder, if we can get away with it, to San Fran for their RG Justin Smiley. With the signing of Larry Allen they are shifting Smiley over to the right side to compete with OGs David Baas and Eric Heitman. They can stand to use a veteran WR and we can sure use a good OG, especially one who has some game experience. The cap savings would be nice too. Check out the link. http://www.49ers.com/team/playerinfo.asp?TeamRosterID=308
krazykat Posted March 26, 2006 Posted March 26, 2006 I doubt many here are a bigger EM Fan than I am... But... All TO bashing aside, Moulds is no where near the WR TO is...Poor man or not...Moulds is not even in TO's Zip Code as a Play Maker any longer...Not even close... That being said, I do think Philly is a nice match for EM in a Trade. They need all the Vet WR help they can get... 642467[/snapback] Even more, Moulds is a solid #2 now, little else. Over the last three seasons, very consistently, he's averaged 77 catches for 880 yards and 3 touchdowns. Anyone thinking that that will improve as he enters his mid thirties is being naive.
CoachChuckDickerson Posted March 26, 2006 Posted March 26, 2006 If Travis Henry got us a 3rd.... 642350[/snapback] Henry was/is in his prime years for a running back and had a tiny salary. Moulds is in the golden years of his career for a receiver and has a huge contract.
Tipster19 Posted March 26, 2006 Author Posted March 26, 2006 I think that it's apparent that Moulds does have value, it's just a matter of how much. He won't be just a salary cap casualty and this we should all rejoice in. The compensation that we will recieve for him WILL improve our team. When you hear purported rumors involving the likes of a Javon Walker this early on then there should be a level of value. There is still plenty of time to work out a trade that will benefit us. Look how long it dragged out with Travis Henry. Donahoe stuck to his guns and got a fair market value for him. Marv, and us, needs to keep the same mentality.
dave mcbride Posted March 26, 2006 Posted March 26, 2006 everyone needs to hold onto their hats with regard to moulds' age. there are a lot of guys in recent times who have stayed very productive into their mid-30s -- mccardell, jimmy smith, and even joey galloway, who had a career year last year at age 34. http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1286 the point is, moulds' age isn't nearly as big a deal as many are claiming. by the end of the year last year, he was hands down the best player on the bills by any measure. the guy can still bring it.
#1TN Bills Fan Posted March 26, 2006 Posted March 26, 2006 I agree that EM is by FAR the best WR available in FA, but the question still remains, what will we get for him? I don't see us getting anything better than a Third Round pick, unless there is a bidding war among 2 or more teams. I think that the Vikings are the most likely candidate for his services because they still have a ton of cap space.
Recommended Posts