Mack Hollins is a National Treasure!!

[BillsFanForever19]

19 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

It's a deceiving contract.  It's basically a one year contract that counts about $4m against the cap for one season.  Then only $750k in dead money if you cut him after this season.  He can get an extra $1m in incentives based on how many catches he makes.  I don't think the Bills would agree to those same incentives kind of pointing to my belief that he thinks he'd have more playing time with the Pats then here.

 

I'd have at least matched that contract if I was Beane instead of paying E. Moore $2.5m.  I know we're always tight against the cap but it's at most only $1.5m more expensive to have signed Hollins.  Then just eating $750k next year in dead cap if you wanted to move on from him.

 

Like you said though, it's ultimately the playing time. He really overachieved for us last season. Which was great for him. But at the end of the day, I don't think the Bills really wanted him playing as big of a role as he did for us. It was more of a necessity due to injuries and Coleman not lighting it up right out of the gate. 

 

That's why they signed Palmer. And with him, Shakir, Coleman, Samuel, and Kincaid he'd be taking a step back from the role he had last year - unless there were injuries again.

 

And for that 5th spot, I think they wanted someone who could stretch the field situationally for us. Mack doesn't provide that. I believe they thought they were going to Draft a speed guy by Round 5 - but the board just kept falling Defense in Rounds 2-4 and there wasn't really anything of value left by Round 5. So they pivoted and signed Moore. 1 yr, 2.5m guaranteed was probably their ceiling.

 

I don't think Mack wanted the role he'd have, I don't think they wanted Mack for that role bc of his lack of speed, or to pay 3.5m guaranteed, up to 8.4m on a 2 yr deal for that role. Palmer really spelled the end for Hollins.

Edited 18 hours ago by BillsFanForever19

[Ethan in Cleveland]

4 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

Like you said though, it's ultimately the playing time. He really overachieved for us last season. Which was great for him. But at the end of the day, I don't think the Bills really wanted him playing as big of a role as he did for us. It was more of a necessity due to injuries and Coleman not lighting it up right out of the gate. 

 

That's why they signed Palmer. And with him, Shakir, Coleman, Samuel, and Kincaid he'd be taking a step back from the role he had last year - unless there were injuries again.

 

And for that 5th spot, I think they wanted someone who could stretch the field situationally for us. Mack doesn't provide that. I believe they thought they were going to Draft a speed guy by Round 5 - but the board just kept falling Defense in Rounds 2-4 and there wasn't really anything of value left by Round 5. So they pivoted and signed Moore. 1 yr, 2.5m guaranteed was probably their ceiling.

 

I don't think Mack wanted the role he'd have, I don't think they wanted Mack for that role bc of his lack of speed, or to pay 3.5m guaranteed, up to 8.4m on a 2 yr deal for that role. Palmer really spelled the end for Hollins.

Makes sense to some degree. I’d say Palmer took Cooper’s role and with Samuel playing better at the end of the year, his targets would go down. Obviously the Bills want Coleman to get more targets too. All that said, he probably has better stats as 4/5th WR with Allen than whatever he ends up at with the Patriots. Last year with Allen was more productive than he has been in almost all other years with lesser QBs.

[NewEra]

14 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

I'd want to play at a place where I wasn't standing on the sideline as much.  I know they get paid either way but when I used to play sports I hated riding the pine.

Standing on the sideline as much?  He led our WRs in snaps

[NewEra]

13 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

Again, it comes down to money and role. A 31 year old journeyman WR who overachieved the year before is going to want to cash in. We paid him 2.6m last year. Having someone sign you for multiple years for up to 8.4m is a big jump.

 

Good team or bad team, no 31 year old WR is going to pass up more money and a bigger role for less money and a smaller role. This could be Mack's last contract.

As i stated previously 

[NewEra]

13 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

Elijah Moore isn't his replacement. They're different kind of players. Josh Palmer was brought in to be a more talented version of what Mack was and with a bigger role than Mack had. He moves Keon to the Z, with Shakir in the Slot and Samuel (who I'd expect they plan on having a bigger role this year) moved all around.

 

Ultimately, between Shakir, Palmer, Coleman, Samuel, and Kincaid (also out of the Slot) - I don't think whomever is WR5 is going to have much of a role.

 

And honestly, I don't think they expected to use Hollins as much as they did. Between Samuel's Turf Toe to start the year, Coleman not being gangbusters out of the gate (and then being injured), and then Cooper getting injured almost immediately - he was pushed into having a bigger role than they anticipated.

 

Bc of that, New England offered him a 2 year, 8.4m deal and a bigger role than he'd have here. I don't think they wanted to pay that for the small role of WR5, I don't think he wanted the smaller role he'd have here after we signed Palmer, and I think they wanted a speed element in the WR game (which Mack doesn't provide).

 

He was a great locker room guy and a fun presence on the team. But they wanted an upgrade in talent on the Outside, as well as some speed as well. It really didn't make sense for either side for him to return. He'll have a bigger role and be paid better in New England.

Yes- I know all of this.  My point is that IT’s MY OPINION, that we’re going to miss what he brings to the table and he should’ve paid him-  because we paid a malcontent that can’t block (or likely play ST) 1M less gtd.  
 

I’m happy that we added some speed with Moore.  I think Hollins is better for our team.  
 

 

[folz]

18 minutes ago, NewEra said:

Standing on the sideline as much?  He led our WRs in snaps

 

First off, I loved Mack too, he was a big part of last season, and I also wish he were still on the team. But, I think we will all miss Hollins' personality and on-field attitude more than his production. And it's tough to quantify how important a guy is in the locker room, as a teammate, etc. And I'm not discounting his blocking or special teams play either.

 

But, I don't think he would be leading in snaps again this year. As BillsFanForever pointed out, I don't think that was the plan for Mack last year even. But with the injuries (to Samuel, Coleman, and Cooper), he was pressed into heavier service. And now with the additions of Palmer and Moore, Keon going into year two (he'll get more playing time than last year), and Samuel (hopefully healthy)---plus the amount that we throw to our RBs and TEs, there just wouldn't be much playing time or balls for Mack this upcoming season---at least on offense (42% of our passing plays last year went to RBs and TEs, not to mention that our run/pass split is already 49 run/51 pass). So, we are already a team that doesn't use their WRs as much as other teams.

 

And you figure we'll mostly be starting Palmer, Coleman, and Shakir. Plus, we run a lot of two TEs and Jumbo packages. Then Samuel would come in as #4. So, Mack would be fighting with Moore, Shenault, Shavers, Prather, Virgil, and Hamler for WR5 snaps. How much do you want to pay for that role (even if special teams is included). Better to go with younger and cheaper. We are paying $2.5 million for Moore (we paid $2.6 million for Mack last year), and Moore brings something Mack doesn't in that role (whatever you think of his overall play). Mack got $8.4 million from NE ($3.5 million of which is guaranteed). So, even if he doesn't hit any incentives, he's still $1 million more than Moore. If he does hit incentives, he could cost 4 times as much as Moore.

 

I won't compare him to Palmer, because Palmer is obviously the more athletically gifted...definitely an upgrade from Mack, imo. Palmer 2,287 yards and 11 TDs in 4 years; Mack 2,069 yards and 15 TDs in 8 years. And as far as Moore: 2,162 yards and 10 TDs in 4 years.

 

Last year, fyi: Hollins had 378 yards and 5 TDs; Palmer had 584 yards and 1 TD; Moore had 538 yards and 1 TD.

 

At his age, this could be Mack's last contract. Yes, winning a Super Bowl would be nice for any player. But, I think many older players (who haven't had huge contracts in their careers) would trade standing on the sidelines for a Super Bowl for a bigger contract that will bring his family financial security after retirement. I've seen $8.4 million everywhere, but the D&C (not sure if they are correct) said it could go up to $10.4 million max, if he hits all incentives. Mack's career earnings are $11.7 million in 8 years. He could almost double his career earnings if he plays well. Hard to turn that down, especially if the Bills were looking at WR5 money (maybe just giving him a slight boost). I mean the Bills might have been willing to go to $3.5 million for Mack, but they probably wouldn't have given him as many incentives as New England and/or he wouldn't have had as much opportunity in Buffalo to reach those incentives. So, imo, it made sense for both the player and the team to move on.

 

But, no doubt we will all miss Mack and it's going to suck seeing him on the other side in the Pats games.

[NewEra]

55 minutes ago, folz said:

 

First off, I loved Mack too, he was a big part of last season, and I also wish he were still on the team. But, I think we will all miss Hollins' personality and on-field attitude more than his production. And it's tough to quantify how important a guy is in the locker room, as a teammate, etc. And I'm not discounting his blocking or special teams play either.

 

But, I don't think he would be leading in snaps again this year. As BillsFanForever pointed out, I don't think that was the plan for Mack last year even. But with the injuries (to Samuel, Coleman, and Cooper), he was pressed into heavier service. And now with the additions of Palmer and Moore, Keon going into year two (he'll get more playing time than last year), and Samuel (hopefully healthy)---plus the amount that we throw to our RBs and TEs, there just wouldn't be much playing time or balls for Mack this upcoming season---at least on offense (42% of our passing plays last year went to RBs and TEs, not to mention that our run/pass split is already 49 run/51 pass). So, we are already a team that doesn't use their WRs as much as other teams.

 

And you figure we'll mostly be starting Palmer, Coleman, and Shakir. Plus, we run a lot of two TEs and Jumbo packages. Then Samuel would come in as #4. So, Mack would be fighting with Moore, Shenault, Shavers, Prather, Virgil, and Hamler for WR5 snaps. How much do you want to pay for that role (even if special teams is included). Better to go with younger and cheaper. We are paying $2.5 million for Moore (we paid $2.6 million for Mack last year), and Moore brings something Mack doesn't in that role (whatever you think of his overall play). Mack got $8.4 million from NE ($3.5 million of which is guaranteed). So, even if he doesn't hit any incentives, he's still $1 million more than Moore. If he does hit incentives, he could cost 4 times as much as Moore.

 

I won't compare him to Palmer, because Palmer is obviously the more athletically gifted...definitely an upgrade from Mack, imo. Palmer 2,287 yards and 11 TDs in 4 years; Mack 2,069 yards and 15 TDs in 8 years. And as far as Moore: 2,162 yards and 10 TDs in 4 years.

 

Last year, fyi: Hollins had 378 yards and 5 TDs; Palmer had 584 yards and 1 TD; Moore had 538 yards and 1 TD.

 

At his age, this could be Mack's last contract. Yes, winning a Super Bowl would be nice for any player. But, I think many older players (who haven't had huge contracts in their careers) would trade standing on the sidelines for a Super Bowl for a bigger contract that will bring his family financial security after retirement. I've seen $8.4 million everywhere, but the D&C (not sure if they are correct) said it could go up to $10.4 million max, if he hits all incentives. Mack's career earnings are $11.7 million in 8 years. He could almost double his career earnings if he plays well. Hard to turn that down, especially if the Bills were looking at WR5 money (maybe just giving him a slight boost). I mean the Bills might have been willing to go to $3.5 million for Mack, but they probably wouldn't have given him as many incentives as New England and/or he wouldn't have had as much opportunity in Buffalo to reach those incentives. So, imo, it made sense for both the player and the team to move on.

 

But, no doubt we will all miss Mack and it's going to suck seeing him on the other side in the Pats games.

I get all of that.  My point still stands.  If it was all about money, I think Beane should’ve paid him.  If it’s all about usage, there’s nothing he could’ve done to keep him.  
 

If Moore proves to be a key contributor, I’ll be proven wrong.  
 

I haven’t seen 11.6M either, so if that is the case - end discussion.   

[BillsFanForever19]

4 hours ago, NewEra said:

Standing on the sideline as much?  He led our WRs in snaps

 

Yes, but that was only bc of the injuries to Samuel that then went on to nag when he returned, Coleman being eased in and then hurt when he started getting hot, and Cooper being eased in and then getting hurt. He was never supposed to have as big of a role as he did. 

 

He wouldn't get the same amount of snaps here as he did last season unless we had multiple injuries again. 

 

1 hour ago, NewEra said:

I get all of that.  My point still stands.  If it was all about money, I think Beane should’ve paid him.  If it’s all about usage, there’s nothing he could’ve done to keep him.  

 

It's money and usage. I have no doubt of that. 

 

If you look at the depth chart for the Patriots at WR and their stats last year, it's possible Hollins might start on the Outside opposite Diggs. They spent a 2nd and a 4th on Polk and Baker last year. Polk had 12 catches for 87 yards all season and Baker didn't record a single catch all season. Their leading pass catcher was TE Hunter Henry and their leading Wide Receiver accounted for 621 yards.

 

Listening to Mack's Presser with the Patriots, he was saying he pretty much left it up to his agent to find the best situation for him. And that's more than just money. The WR5 on our team is no greater than Option 6 or 7 (if Knox has a good year). 

Edited 2 hours ago by BillsFanForever19

[BillsShredder83]

19 hours ago, NewEra said:

As a 31 year old WR on a 2 year contract…. You’d rather join a team with zero percent chance to win the SB over those 2 years and join a bunch of guys you’ve never played with before. 🤷🏻‍♂️

 

maybe he just loves McDaniel and would rather play with him.  If that’s the case, no fault on Beane.  

Whoever it may be-  Mack made big plays catching passes and blocking for long gains

Dudes a nomad. Something about bouncing around makes him happy like Fitz did. Guarantee Mack is beloved in every city he played in.

 

The gimmicky stuff is a nothing, but he's like a Barnaby with big play upside. Enforcer. Bring swag to the rest of the players. Get under other teams skin. One of my favorite one year guys I can remember. 

[JerseyBills]

5 hours ago, NewEra said:

Standing on the sideline as much?  He led our WRs in snaps

Ya he was huge in the run game