KurtGodel77 Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 I thibnk the interesting thing about this ranking is that it seems to be fairly consistent i placing Moulds at a low ranking when Moulds performance has varied somewat widely over the 4 years. When he was hurt and hobbled while playing last year his ranking would seem to me have slipped to a low level consistent with his impact on the game. The year before when he took in 100 catches and was clearly the go to guy on our team and also made PP and Reed more ffective players it would seem he would get his highest ranking and it should be demonstrably better than any ranking of last year, The bookend years of the last four should fit somewhere within these two extremes but still vary a lot from the. Yet the rankings outside of the outrider of his 79 ranking are pretty consistent, This measure does not seem to fit reality. 202459[/snapback] Moulds' rankings have been fairly consistent on that site, even though as you point out his numbers have varied. Let's say Moulds catches two passes out of every three thrown his way. When the team's offense as a whole is doing well, as it did in the first half of 2002, drives will be longer, and there will be more pass attempts going to Moulds. He's still only catching 2 out of 3, but because of guys like Price and Centers, there are more first downs, therefore more opportunities for pass plays, and ultimately more yards for Moulds. In 2003 Moulds was hurt, so his numbers went down. He didn't get open as often, putting himself in fewer "situations" where the ball came his way. Those factors led to fewer yards. But presumably he'd still be catching that same 2/3 ratio as before, leading to a similar ranking as in past years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ball'n Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 Todd Pinkson is above Moulds.... Wayne is number 1.... Anyone see anything wrong with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 Todd Pinkson is above Moulds.... Wayne is number 1....Anyone see anything wrong with that. 202491[/snapback] For Pinkston to be rated above any starting NFL WR is more than enough to judge these ratings on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gantrules Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 Football is a wonderful spectator sport. But, to read in to any of the statistics that are kept on the game doesn't usually tell you much about the players. For instance, a key to every team is the offensive line. How would Moulds & Co. do behind the line of KC? How can we gauge that when there really isn't any statistically data to compare it to considering the skill position players have different skill sets in KC. My personal opinion of Eric Moulds is extremely positive. The guy is a great, no fantastic number 1 reciever. You can say all you want about how he was "disappointing" last year. But, considering he was injured for half of the year and his number 2's were Bobby Shaw (gone) and Josh Reed (no higher than 3 on the depth chart this year) says something, doesn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 With Eric never reaching higher than the 45th best player at WR over the past 4 seasons- is Moulds that bad or is the system they use to analyze statistics the bigger question? Maybe the question is how does a service with this faulty a set of formulas for statistical analysis convince anyone to espouse its results? Or has Eric Moulds been vastly overpaid for his services in Buffalo? 202233[/snapback] oh my god - the absolute dumbest statistical ranking known to man arrives. in 2002, moulds is ranked 55th and peerless price is 15th. anyone who watched the games knows that moulds was a) the better player b) the money man and c) the guy who drew the double coverages. that fact alone deligitimizes this ridiculous compendium of loosely related facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 Interestingly, I've heard a rumor that the 49ers have hired the FootballOutsiders guys as consultants... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 Interestingly, I've heard a rumor that the 49ers have hired the FootballOutsiders guys as consultants... 202750[/snapback] Maybe that explains why they're currently on the clock. Stats are made to be twisted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKC Posted January 12, 2005 Author Share Posted January 12, 2005 If he would just get his head out of his a$$ he'd realize that he's actually hit upon a good argument - that quite possibly, Moulds is overpaid relative to his production. 202387[/snapback] While that's one of the minor points it's just too obvious- the far more important goal for discussion is representing a football team as dynamic: studies of individual pieces of that dynamic structure have little value without wide ranging studies of all the components and then, and only then, a comparison can be made about the net value of each piece in the overall equation. This off-season has seen a run on the study of a single piece and there's little, if anything, to be gained from that. I'm happy to see more pieces of the structure being scrutinized, in my mind it helps those of us seeking a greater understanding of the full picture to come closer to achieving just that. You obviously fall into that percentage of us who seek a more analytical study of the team and while the excercises themselves may get childish and mean-spirited at times, it can also result in a benefit to the community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB2004 Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 With Eric never reaching higher than the 45th best player at WR over the past 4 seasons- is Moulds that bad or is the system they use to analyze statistics the bigger question? Maybe the question is how does a service with this faulty a set of formulas for statistical analysis convince anyone to espouse its results? Or has Eric Moulds been vastly overpaid for his services in Buffalo? 202233[/snapback] Moulds is still the best receiver that we have. Who cares what others think about him. He has helped our our team for at least 5 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtGodel77 Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 oh my god - the absolute dumbest statistical ranking known to man arrives. in 2002, moulds is ranked 55th and peerless price is 15th. anyone who watched the games knows that moulds was a) the better player b) the money man and c) the guy who drew the double coverages. that fact alone deligitimizes this ridiculous compendium of loosely related facts. 202694[/snapback] It does seem that some of the 2nd option receivers are rated more highly than they should be when compared to the double-covered go-to guys. Someone pointed out that Pinkston is higher on the list than Moulds, but Pinkston is not the go-to guy. The list is useful for comparing one team's go-to guy with another team's go-to guy, because both players have to deal with the same double coverage, facing the other team's best secondary members, that stuff. Seeing where Moulds stands in comparison with other teams' go-to guys shows he's not that great. So we should either make him take a pay cut down to his market value, or we should cut him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtGodel77 Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 Moulds is still the best receiver that we have. Who cares what others think about him. He has helped our our team for at least 5 years. 203232[/snapback] Eric Moulds has been on the team about ten years, and he's not the player he used to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKC Posted January 12, 2005 Author Share Posted January 12, 2005 Eric Moulds has been on the team about ten years, and he's not the player he used to be. 203237[/snapback] In some ways he is. Watching Lee Evans bring in balls with his great feel for catching with his hands and securing the ball remind me of virtually every season in Moulds career where Eric has proven he simply does not have the natural hands of the great receivers. Much like at the QB position, where teams, fans and the media alike tend to covet the 6-4 240 pounder, we're all also bought to some degree into the bigger receiver as a must have, best possible scenario athlete as a #1 Wideout. For my money there's no better receiver in the league than Marvin Harrison, a guy who has proven to have the type of hands Lee Evans might just be gifted with, not to mention that their otherr physical traits and gifts are in a lot of ways similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtGodel77 Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 In some ways he is. Watching Lee Evans bring in balls with his great feel for catching with his hands and securing the ball remind me of virtually every season in Moulds career where Eric has proven he simply does not have the natural hands of the great receivers. Much like at the QB position, where teams, fans and the media alike tend to covet the 6-4 240 pounder, we're all also bought to some degree into the bigger receiver as a must have, best possible scenario athlete as a #1 Wideout. For my money there's no better receiver in the league than Marvin Harrison, a guy who has proven to have the type of hands Lee Evans might just be gifted with, not to mention that their otherr physical traits and gifts are in a lot of ways similar. 203263[/snapback] So let me get this straight. Moulds was never a deep burner to begin with, and now he's slowing down. His hands aren't that great. He's no longer going over the middle very much. Well, at least he's big . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKC Posted January 13, 2005 Author Share Posted January 13, 2005 So let me get this straight. Moulds was never a deep burner to begin with, and now he's slowing down. His hands aren't that great. He's no longer going over the middle very much. Well, at least he's big . . . 203295[/snapback] I believe most of the arguments pro paying/treating him like a top WR most directly suggest the desirabily of his size/RAC ability as far as the read I get. He clearly in my mind has never overcome his less than great hands/concentration level over his career which, again for me, takes him out of the top ranks. I've done the excercise in the past with him of posting the Wideouts I'd take before him and today that number is probably up around 25-30 in the league. The obvious problem is anyone of those top 25 or 30 changing teams this off-season is certain to cost their new team a bundle, and that's where the value proposition comes into play. I'd fall down on the side, as some have suggested, of letting Evans get another year of development before putting him on top of the depth chart, which leaves the question of whether we can bring in an effective #1 like Eric who draws opponent attention without spending 8.7 mill or keeping Eric without getting trapped into more future cap trauma with with a "restructured" contract that merely extends the pain of the big Moulds deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 Moulds ranked this way in terms of stats, compared with his fellow WR's: 10th in receptions with 88 out of the top 20 in receiving yards 7th in passes thrown to out of the top 20 in receptions per target (catches divided by opportunities) 16th in first downs out of the top 20 in receptions inside the 20 16th in passes dropped Evans figures much better in the above categories except for # of receptions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 This really is starting to become tiresome re: EM, and no direct offense intended as many of these posts have shown careful thought and opinion...Now how difficult is it for any football enthusiast to comprehend that defensive coverage in this league does not lie? There are zero teams in this league that do not fully understand the strengths and weaknesses of the teams they face, week in and week out. There are no wasted steps or false reads that would allow any NFL defensive staff to present double coverage on a player that did not command it. A move such as this presents a defense with such limitations in other areas they might have previously wanted to attack. All of these players are disected on film right down to the expression on their faces when they line up before the snap, and everyone has "the book" on every other significant player across the league. When intentions are revealed on the NFL playing field out of necessity, a moment of pure truth prevails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtGodel77 Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 This really is starting to become tiresome re: EM, and no direct offense intended as many of these posts have shown careful thought and opinion...Now how difficult is it for any football enthusiast to comprehend that defensive coverage in this league does not lie? There are zero teams in this league that do not fully understand the strengths and weaknesses of the teams they face, week in and week out. There are no wasted steps or false reads that would allow any NFL defensive staff to present double coverage on a player that did not command it. A move such as this presents a defense with such limitations in other areas they might have previously wanted to attack. All of these players are disected on film right down to the expression on their faces when they line up before the snap, and everyone has "the book" on every other significant player across the league. When intentions are revealed on the NFL playing field out of necessity, a moment of pure truth prevails. 203512[/snapback] As Astrobot pointed out, Moulds is 7th in the league in passes thrown to. If I was a defensive coordinator, that fact would incline me to double cover him, whether he was that great a receiver or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts