Anything more than a swap of number 1 draft choices for Turner..

[genomich]

I would be appalled if the Bills offer anything more for this guy. It will work out similarly to the Rob Johnson deal. He is always playing against second stringers and is the product of a successful running system....he will be the next Lamont Jordan.

[Sketch Soland]

I would be appalled if the Bills offer anything more for this guy. It will work out similarly to the Rob Johnson deal. He is always playing against second stringers and is the product of a successful running system....he will be the next Lamont Jordan.

 

That's good to know. Thanks for the heads up.

[IDBillzFan]

That's good to know. Thanks for the heads up.

The thing I love the most about this board is how even experienced GMs bring their all-knowing wisdom here.

 

All this time I thought Turner could be a good back, but apparently all of us are wrong.

[In space no one can hear]

I would be appalled if the Bills offer anything more for this guy. It will work out similarly to the Rob Johnson deal. He is always playing against second stringers and is the product of a successful running system....he will be the next Lamont Jordan.

 

 

Have you seen Turner play? He doesn't play ONLY against second stringers.

There were actually games this year when LT2 was having difficulty running the ball effectively and SD would put Turner in and he would energize the Chargers and punish the other team with his power AND speed.

[billybob]

Totally agree - I don't understand why you'd give up alot for RB who's not much different from the one we just traded away- now here's a trade I'd think about - Peerless Price and our 1st for Micheal Turner and Vincent Jackson

[5 Wide]

I remember seeing Turner drop the hammer on London Fletcher for an extra 3 yards one game. Of course that happened to London at times. I saw that and said to myself, wow this guy is bigger, faster version of Travis Henry. I would love that kind of back.

[Sketch Soland]

Totally agree - I don't understand why you'd give up alot for RB who's not much different from the one we just traded away- now here's a trade I'd think about - Peerless Price and our 1st for Micheal Turner and Vincent Jackson

 

Now why would a team trade a young WR with potential for Peerless Price?

 

What would the Chargers gain from that?

[2003Contenders]

The other funny thing is all of these references to the Raiders' acquisition of Lamont Jordan being so awful. Well, in 2005, the year that the trade was made, Jordan was arguably a top 5 running back: he accounted for over 1000 yards rushing (close to 1600 rushing/receiving) and 11 TDs. I realize that he had a horrible season in 2006, but he was injured -- and the Raiders as a team were putrid.

[ACor58]

We traded away a starting RB for two 3rd round picks. It is hard to justify trading anything higher than that for a backup.

[Sketch Soland]

The other funny thing is all of these references to the Raiders' acquisition of Lamont Jordan being so awful. Well, in 2005, the year that the trade was made, Jordan was arguably a top 5 running back: he accounted for over 1000 yards rushing (close to 1600 rushing/receiving) and 11 TDs. I realize that he had a horrible season in 2006, but he was injured -- and the Raiders as a team were putrid.

 

Yes, good point

[ddaryl]

If Turner runs for 2000 yds next year, they can have our first. Otherwise, take two thirds and kiss my ass AJ Smith.

 

 

I agree completely

 

 

There is absolulty no reason to offer up a 1st rd pick for Turner. A pair of 3rd or a 2nd rd tops would be more then enough.

 

Hell Mcgahee a proven starting NFL RB with multiple 1000 yd seasons netted us 2 3rd picks. Don't see how Turner, a career NFL backup, running behind a all pro OL, an Offense that usually has D's on their heals, and has LT as a starting RB softening up D's for him could be worth more.

 

 

Show some patience. This deal will get done for much less then a 1st rd pick. Let alone a pick this year and a 1st in 2008.

[Sketch Soland]

I agree completely

There is absolulty no reason to offer up a 1st rd pick for Turner. A pair of 3rd or a 2nd rd tops would be more then enough.

 

Hell Mcgahee a proven starting NFL RB with multiple 1000 yd seasons netted us 2 3rd picks. Don't see how Turner, a career NFL backup, running behind a all pro OL, an Offense that usually has D's on their heals, and has LT as a starting RB softening up D's for him could be worth more.

Show some patience. This deal will get done for much less then a 1st rd pick. Let alone a pick this year and a 1st in 2008.

 

I'm not familiar with this word. Definition?

[Kelly the Dog]

It really doesn't matter all that much what we give up for him if we want him, unless it's totally outrageous like two number ones. If we trade for him, we're making Michael Turner our feature back for a few years barring injury. If he's great, it's a great trade. If he's pretty good, it's a pretty good trade. If he's terrible, it's a terrible trade. And anything in between.

 

Regardless of the fact that relatively no one makes trades for #1 picks, Turner is young, and ready, and has proven himself a lot more than any rookie. he would be the second or third RB taken in this draft if he were eligible as is, somewhere around the 12-16 just above or below Lynch. That's a #1 pick in my book.

 

He had exactly one game last year where he played against scraps and piled up some yards. More than 2/3 of his yards were in the middle of the game or the 4th quarter with the game on the line. In college he was a workhorse and carried the ball full time the whole year 310-330 carries a season and was one of the best runners in NCAA history.

 

He also runs hard, breaks tackles, doesn't fumble and has breakaway speed.

[billybob]

Now why would a team trade a young WR with potential for Peerless Price?

 

What would the Chargers gain from that?

I don't want the Chargers to gain I want us to gain- my way of saying I don't think Turner is worth as much as they want for him- he has decent speed and size but he has run behind a very good Oline and against teams that have to prepare for LT- I can't see trading away McGahee and then trading a 1st+ for a back who like McGahee is not special- but I'd be willing to trade our first and Price or Reed for Turner and a better #2 receiver like Vincent Jackson

[Sketch Soland]

It really doesn't matter all that much what we give up for him if we want him, unless it's totally outrageous like two number ones. If we trade for him, we're making Michael Turner our feature back for a few years barring injury. If he's great, it's a great trade. If he's pretty good, it's a pretty good trade. If he's terrible, it's a terrible trade. And anything in between.

 

Regardless of the fact that relatively no one makes trades for #1 picks, Turner is young, and ready, and has proven himself a lot more than any rookie. he would be the second or third RB taken in this draft if he were eligible as is, somewhere around the 12-16 just above or below Lynch. That's a #1 pick in my book.

 

He had exactly one game last year where he played against scraps and piled up some yards. More than 2/3 of his yards were in the middle of the game or the 4th quarter with the game on the line. In college he was a workhorse and carried the ball full time the whole year 330 carries a season and was one of the best runners in NCAA history.

 

He also runs hard, breaks tackles, doesn't fumble and has breakaway speed.

 

Well said

[ddaryl]

I'm not familiar with this word. Definition?

 

 

Patience = "In Marv We Trust" or let the man do his job and negotiate fair compensation for a career backup RB with potential.

 

 

We just don't need to trade away our 1st rd pick for Turner IMO, and I'm confident that Marv has no intention of doing so.

[DrDawkinstein]

i wouldnt swap 1sts... that means we go from picking 2nd in our division to picking last...

 

id be willing to give them our 2nd. but no way would i move from that #12 spot.

[Sketch Soland]

I don't want the Chargers to gain I want us to gain- my way of saying I don't think Turner is worth as much as they want for him- he has decent speed and size but he has run behind a very good Oline and against teams that have to prepare for LT- I can't see trading away McGahee and then trading a 1st+ for a back who like McGahee is not special- but I'd be willing to trade our first for and Price or Reed for Turner and a better #2 receiver like Vincent Jackson

 

Yes, but the Chargers would never trade Jackson for Price. My point was that it takes two to tango and when you propose a trade you have to think about whether the other team would be willing to trade such and such player, not just whether something benefits us.

 

It makes zero sense that the Chargers would just throw in Jackson for Price. Turner is valuable enough to be a tradeable commodity all by himself, so the Chargers would have no need or reason to throw in another player to sweeten the post unless they felt they were getting value in return. Jackson for Price is not value for the Chargers.

[billybob]

Yes, but the Chargers would never trade Jackson for Price. My point was that it takes two to tango and when you propose a trade you have to think about whether the other team would be willing to trade such and such player, not just whether something benefits us.

 

It makes zero sense that the Chargers would just throw in Jackson for Price. Turner is valuable enough to be a tradeable commodity all by himself, so the Chargers would have no need or reason to throw in another player to sweeten the post unless they felt they were getting value in return. Jackson for Price is not value for the Chargers.

yes Turner is a tradeable commodity- but not worth the 12th overall pick IMHO- maybe the Chargers think Rice or Jarrett will be avail where they pick and is better than Jackson- and maybe there is a player who they think will be there at 12- like Branch- sending them a wr back is just letting AJ save face.

[tennesseeboy]

We traded away a starting RB for two 3rd round picks. It is hard to justify trading anything higher than that for a backup.

We had a lot less leverage. Everyone in the world knew we didn't want WM here, and others had passed up the opportunity to get here. Turner they've put a tag on, and have indicatated they like him as insurance if LT goes down. Part of the question in the negotiation is not so much how much we need him (pretty bad...about a 75 on a 100 scale.) and how willing they are to lose him (not very...abpit 30 on a 100 scale.) Hence the ante is considerably upped. Couple that with the fact that a couple of other teams are interested...if we get him for a switch of firsts and a third-take the deal.