JinWPB Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Of course they arent. The NFL is littered with backs averaging over 6.0 YPC. "LETS JUST CROWN HIS ASS ", He must be a hall of fame back. I'm just surprised the other 31 teams aren't fighting over him as much as we are on TBD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Okoye and Turner sound better to me. I dont have a problem with turner I just have a problem with a 2nd rd pick for turner. I really think it's too high of compensation for someone who hasn't shown much versatility in his game. It's cool, and a legitimate opinion. You know your football. And you may be completely right. IMO, I didn't think "there is absolutely no comparison" was a legitimate argument, however. If you make the trade for Turner, however, you can take the best defensive player on the board at #12. Or even trade down and get a top defensive player, plus Michael Turner and temporarily solve your gaping RB problem, and have three more day one picks to go defense. There is no surefire guy, especially RB. But he's far ahead IMO of starting to prove he's a starting back in this league. Frankly, about the only thing I don't want is to just start the season with A Train, Fred Jackson and a #3 draft pick as our backfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sketch Soland Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 "LETS JUST CROWN HIS ASS ", He must be a hall of fame back. I'm just surprised the other 31 teams aren't fighting over him as much as we are on TBD. A very negligable comment. Obviously Ramius isn't putting him in the HOF. And you or I have no idea how much, how little, or how hard NFL teams are interested or fighting for Turner. You and I also have no idea how much A.J. Smith is holding other teams feet to the fire to ring out the best deal possible. Just because a deal has not yet been made does not imply that there is little interest in Turner. It just implies that the right confluence of need and availability has not yet happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePebble19 Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Well almost inarguably the best RB in the entire league runs behind that same line and gets similar if not less results per carry. HOW CAN YOU DISREGARD THIS FACT when you bring up Turner. You put LT in Buffalo and he does not score 30 touchdowns last year. He is a great back, but he is being pushed to elite level by that offensive line, and that is ok, because it is something that all but a handful of great backs have done in their careers. The NFL is littered with backup running backs that look great in the system they are in. Why does Michael Turner look so great right now? Because he is on a top 3 team with a top 3 O-Line. It is easy for Turner to get good runs in that system. If I am running an opposing defense, and you have been getting rolled by LT all day long, and finally he comes out of the game for a few plays for a breather, these are the few plays that I take chances on. These are the plays that I send blitzes designed to get to Rivers and cause a turnover. These are also the plays where I will take the chance of being burned by a backup running back because I know their explosive player is not on the field. Don't get me wrong...He is a good back. He will get paid somewhere, this year or next, and make some team happy...But with all the holes on this team, I would rather take my chances on someone in the draft and keep my picks to make this team better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 You put LT in Buffalo and he does not score 30 touchdowns last year. He is a great back, but he is being pushed to elite level by that offensive line, and that is ok, because it is something that all but a handful of great backs have done in their careers. The NFL is littered with backup running backs that look great in the system they are in. Why does Michael Turner look so great right now? Because he is on a top 3 team with a top 3 O-Line. It is easy for Turner to get good runs in that system. If I am running an opposing defense, and you have been getting rolled by LT all day long, and finally he comes out of the game for a few plays for a breather, these are the few plays that I take chances on. These are the plays that I send blitzes designed to get to Rivers and cause a turnover. These are also the plays where I will take the chance of being burned by a backup running back because I know their explosive player is not on the field. Don't get me wrong...He is a good back. He will get paid somewhere, this year or next, and make some team happy...But with all the holes on this team, I would rather take my chances on someone in the draft and keep my picks to make this team better. One of the reasons I would be in favor of trading a #2 pick for Turner is so we don't have to waste picks on RBs in the draft, particularly the first pick, which I would much rather spend on defense. But there are 75 million reasons why you don't want to spend 75 million dollars upgrading your OL so Anthony Thomas, Fred Jackson and, say, a #3 pick like Lorenzo Booker can run through it. We need a serious back. IMO, we need to draft one in the first two rounds, especially if we don't sign a veteran RB like Chris Brown to be a stopgap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Don't get me wrong...He is a good back. He will get paid somewhere, this year or next, and make some team happy...But with all the holes on this team, I would rather take my chances on someone in the draft and keep my picks to make this team better. The biggest hole on this team is runningback. At least at the other positions people have been pointing at we have Youth with potential. Youboty, McCargo, Williams, Ellison. The first 2 being highly thought of prospects. The other 2 who can continue to improve in their game. I also think getting Ko Simpson and Donte Whitner experience last year, will help to negate the loss of nate clements by being able to protect mcgee, youboty. While not in favor of trading a 2nd for michael turner, this years rb class looks weaker and weaker by the day. Especially with the news about Michael Bush's leg and Marshawn Lynchs back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikie2times Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Well almost inarguably the best RB in the entire league runs behind that same line and gets similar if not less results per carry. HOW CAN YOU DISREGARD THIS FACT when you bring up Turner. With the same variables at work for both RB's you would think the numbers would be an accurate indication of skill difference. The biggest issues I see are sample size, and long runs altering the sample. Turners busted off two runs over 70 yards in 2006 and 2005. Remove those single runs and his 2006 average is down to 5.43, with 2005 down to 4.5. Remove his 30-yard run in 2004 and his average goes from 5.2 to 4.07. Those are still very healthy averages but he's playing against a defense that’s chased LT all game. Past the numbers I've been watching him since N.Illinois and can confidently say he's a very talented runner. IMO more talented then anybody we can get outside of round 1. His dimensions make him difficult to bring down and his straight-line speed is good enough to hit the home run. The only major issue I see is diversity in catching the ball out of the backfield. Fairchild seems to value that type of RB, and that’s one thing Turner is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Tomcat Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 The biggest hole on this team is runningback. While not in favor of trading a 2nd for michael turner, this years rb class looks weaker and weaker by the dayEspecially with the news about Michael Bush's leg and Marshawn Lynchs back. Thats a great point I say give them a 3rd this year and a 4th next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tipster19 Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Kiss Turner good-bye, Atlanta just made a move that puts them in the driver seat. They were one of the four teams interested in Turner and if AJ wants a early 2nd rd pick Atlanta just got Houston's pick at #39, that's the 7th pick in the 2nd rd. We're four picks behind and it wouldn't be in our best interest to get into a bidding war. If using Spikes and/or another pick in the 2008 draft in addition with this year's 2nd rder then we might stand a chance, otherwise we would be better off picking one out of the draft. http://fantasyfootball.usatoday.com/conten...&line=91051 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Kiss Turner good-bye, Atlanta just made a move that puts them in the driver seat. They were one of the four teams interested in Turner and if AJ wants a early 2nd rd pick Atlanta just got Houston's pick at #39, that's the 7th pick in the 2nd rd. We're four picks behind and it wouldn't be in our best interest to get into a bidding war. If using Spikes and/or another pick in the 2008 draft in addition with this year's 2nd rder then we might stand a chance, otherwise we would be better off picking one out of the draft.http://fantasyfootball.usatoday.com/conten...&line=91051 Atlanta already has two good backs that they like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 From Chargers Fansite: L"ooks like the Jets are going to get serious: Scout.com reports "sources familiar with the Chargers" believe the Jets are willing to trade their first-round pick for Michael Turner. Turner, a restricted free agent, isn't even under contract with San Diego, but this appears to be a possibility once he's tendered. The Jets would then explore signing him long term. San Diego is reportedly now looking at running back prospects, possibly Penn State's Tony Hunt." Source: scout.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimBob2232 Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 From Chargers Fansite: L"ooks like the Jets are going to get serious: Scout.com reports "sources familiar with the Chargers" believe the Jets are willing to trade their first-round pick for Michael Turner. Turner, a restricted free agent, isn't even under contract with San Diego, but this appears to be a possibility once he's tendered. The Jets would then explore signing him long term. San Diego is reportedly now looking at running back prospects, possibly Penn State's Tony Hunt." Source: scout.com Umm....they just traded for Thomas Jones.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePebble19 Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 From Chargers Fansite: L"ooks like the Jets are going to get serious: Scout.com reports "sources familiar with the Chargers" believe the Jets are willing to trade their first-round pick for Michael Turner. Turner, a restricted free agent, isn't even under contract with San Diego, but this appears to be a possibility once he's tendered. The Jets would then explore signing him long term. San Diego is reportedly now looking at running back prospects, possibly Penn State's Tony Hunt." Source: scout.com Yeah, this won't happen. No reason to get Michael Turner and bury him on a depth chart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribo Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 I just want 1 question answered. Why would be ok to spend pick #44 on an unproven college RB, but its not ok to spend pick #44 on a semi-proven NFL RB with limited mileage on the tires who we have actually seen in game action? I guess i dont see why trading our 2nd for turner is "sacrificing a pick", while using that same pick on a RB is justified. Bingo! Turner has proved more about his abilities in the NFL than any college RB out there. Plus, I love the possibility of being able to use our 1st on Willis rather than Lynch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 I'm not sure what it proves, if anything. And in no way am I comparing MT to LT as a star, but all three years they played on the same great offense with the great line, Turner gained more than a full yard per carry better than LT. 1.3 yards more the first year (5.2 - 3.9), 1.6 more the second (5.9 - 4.3), and 1.1 more last year (6.3 - 5.2). http://pro-football-reference.com/teams/sdg2004.htm To me it says he's worth a look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koufax Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 I don't worry about Michael Turner not having proven enough to be our 2007 starter way ahead of the second rounders available in the draft or arguably Peterson/Lynch. My issue is has he proven enough to get a big contract extension? You can't trade a second for a one year rental in a building year (not a rebuilding year, but if you think 2007 will be a better team than 2008 I think you are crazy). So if you trade you need to sign him. How much will that take and is he worth it. While that second round pick will be blossoming and making very little in 2010, Turner will be in the third year of a more expensive extension. If I could give up the second to get Turner and an extension at the dollars that the second rounder would be signed for it would be a no brainer. The difference is the dollars to get four years out of turner like we would get out of the second rounder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts