Question

If I’ve become convinced that the scholarly approach is correct, and that there really are very, very many later edits in the Talmud from the period of the Amoraim, does that have any halakhic significance in light of the fact that Maimonides did not see himself as bound by the “Saboraic rabbis” or by anything that came after them?
Or should we say that if we understand the Talmud differently from Maimonides and think he was mistaken in assuming that the vast majority of it was an Amoraic work, then his view about being bound only by the Amoraim is simply irrelevant?
 
*And rabbis too hold similar views. For example, Rabbi Zini of Haifa argues that almost all of the anonymous layer of the Talmud is Saboraic (he says this specifically in order to reject academic scholarship, but that isn’t relevant here).