fbzh2 Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 Too many ifs, maybes and whoknowsits for my taste. No idea at all if Peterson will be there at 12 nor if we can just wave a wand and move back into the first. In the draft, there is no such thing as a lock. We have 4 picks in the first three rounds (4 out of 92). I see no reason why we can't get 4 quality players as it is without bothering with Turner and the huge contract he is going to want. We have no idea what is going to happen with the first 11 picks. Every year, there are surprises with people being taken much earlier or later than predicted. Certain trades being discussed now for us to get Turner would forfeit our flexibility to take advantage of the surprises that might happen on draft day. Ko Simpson and Youboty are execellent examples of that. Had we traded away those picks before the draft to get some FA thinking we couldn't get quality players with those picks, we would have missed out on nabbing these guys who inexplicably slipped through the early round cracks. I think we are in great shape to continue building this team through the draft and I have no problem playing the cards we already have. We declined to overspend for Clements and he was as good a CB as Turner is a RB with the added bonus that Clements proved his value as a long term starter. I see no reason to overspend and squander first day picks for this guy. Well stated. I couldn’t agree more. There are far too many good player at #12 overall to trade it away so easily. At #12 we are in the driver’s seat…. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 Agreed. I hope the Bills realize that they're in the driver's seat. The Chargers have no use for Turner beyond this year and will not re-sign him anyway. And the market price for starting RB's is a 3rd round pick; the Bills robbed the Ravens by getting two 3rds. Exactly. We don't have to have this guy, they have no use for him. End of story. If the Titans are dumb enough to give up too much for a back up RB who will demand a huge contract, then let them. Lots of good RB's in this draft, even into the 3rd round, and we have plenty of potential on the roster as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 Is there any way to derail this "We must have Turner or we shall die" train? We have 4 picks in the top 100, lets not get greedy and screw that up. This is the kind of "I'm the smartest guy in the room" wheeling and dealing stuff that Donahoe couldn't resist. Buffalo could put this draft on auto-pilot and do just fine. Just set the machine to "get the best LB, RB, CB and TE or G or DT you can find with those 4 picks" and then go out and clean the gutters. Where we will get into trouble is fixating on this or that guy that we somehow get convinced we just have to have and then start squandering picks to get that one guy. This is a team sport and the best "differance maker" is having solid performers across the whole roster. New England, the Sabres, that is the model. I couldn't agree more. There is waaaayyyyy too much Michael Turner around here. He'd be a good addition, but there are some very good alternatives in this draft that should cost no more than a 2nd or even 3rd round pick. The Bills are not so desperate as to *have* to make this trade, especially at the cost of multiple first day picks or the loss of their high 1st round draft position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 Exactly. We don't have to have this guy, they have no use for him. End of story. If the Titans are dumb enough to give up too much for a back up RB who will demand a huge contract, then let them. Lots of good RB's in this draft, even into the 3rd round, and we have plenty of potential on the roster as it is. I think the 'we must have Turner' talk is a lot less stupid than 'running backs are a dime a dozen' or 'we can pick up any RB in the 2nd or 3rd round' or that 'we got A Train' or 'just offer Smith a 3rd rounder and get fukked' posts. Even though I don't think 'we must have Turner'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 How about a swap of 2nds (letting the Bolts move up 20 spots) and the Ravens 3rd round pick in 2008? If Turner could be signed at or below the Travis Henry contract ($22.5 million over 5 years, $12 million guaranteed) with the promise of significant playing time as the lure, it wouldn't handcuff them too much. If he wants a lot more than TH, however, I'd still go for a RB in the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 How about a swap of 2nds (letting the Bolts move up 20 spots) and the Ravens 3rd round pick in 2008? If Turner could be signed at or below the Travis Henry contract ($22.5 million over 5 years, $12 million guaranteed) with the promise of significant playing time as the lure, it wouldn't handcuff them too much. If he wants a lot more than TH, however, I'd still go for a RB in the draft. I don't want swappy seconds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 This is the kind of "I'm the smartest guy in the room" wheeling and dealing stuff that Donahoe couldn't resist. Amen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 My Turner Trade- Bills get Turner and the Chargers 2007 5th - the Bills give up Anthony Thomas 2007 3rd, 2008 2nd and 3rd no thank you enthustiatically. Save our draft picks and lets not mortage our future Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 I don't want swappy seconds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 CHARGERS WILLING TO TAKE LESS THAN A FIRST-ROUNDER FOR TURNER? An industry source tells us that the San Diego Chargers might be willing to accept a trade proposal for running back Michael Turner that includes less than a first-round pick. Though Turner is tendered as a restricted free agent at the highest possible level, which would require compensation in the amount of a first-round pick and a third-round pick, no one is expected to give up that much for a guy who'll be unrestricted in 2008. Per the source, G.M. A.J. Smith could be ready to accept a second-round pick this year and a second-round pick or a third-round pick in 2008 for Turner's rights. The thinking is that Smith wants to end up with three picks in the first two rounds of this year's draft, so that the team can fill needs at receiver, safety, linebacker, and guard with guys who are ready to play right now. Turner has visited the Titans and the Bills this week I would be happier than a pig in his own feces if we got Turner for a 2nd! Then we could draft P.Willie in rd one, and we would be stacked! Actually, I don't think this is news as it's generally been known that they will take less than a #1 (accept for some on the wall who don't understand the whole "tender" thing). And, it's from PFT. But, it is something, and that's a good thing today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 I think the 'we must have Turner' talk is a lot less stupid than 'running backs are a dime a dozen' or 'we can pick up any RB in the 2nd or 3rd round' or that 'we got A Train' or 'just offer Smith a 3rd rounder and get fukked' posts. Even though I don't think 'we must have Turner'. "Dime a dozen" is NOT stupid...and it's trademarked (or at least I might trade mark it someday)...so pay up, bub! I honestly think Turner is a nice step above the "dime-a-dozen" level. That is particularly true if he can catch the ball (at all) and pick up the blitz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 "Dime a dozen" is NOT stupid...and it's trademarked (or at least I might trade mark it someday)...so pay up, bub! I honestly think Turner is a nice step above the "dime-a-dozen" level. That is particularly true if he can catch the ball (at all) and pick up the blitz. Name one thing that is a dime a dozen. Penny candy isn't even a dime a dozen and penny candy hasn't been a penny for 30 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 Name one thing that is a dime a dozen. Penny candy isn't even a dime a dozen and penny candy hasn't been a penny for 30 years. TSW posts. Actually, they are even worth less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 Actually, I don't think this is news as it's generally been known that they will take less than a #1 (accept for some on the wall who don't understand the whole "tender" thing). And, it's from PFT. But, it is something, and that's a good thing today. Not really. The article and information is new, because it references "an industry source" that just reported this, apparently within the last day. What wasn't mentioned in the article is the industry source is actually from the convenience store industry, and not the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generaLee83 Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 I would be happier than a pig in his own feces if we got Turner for a 2nd! Then we could draft P.Willie in rd one, and we would be stacked! Stacked with what? A backup RB and a defense that's made up of 2nd year players and rookies? Give it two years without any more big losses and I'd call this team stacked, for now though they're an unproven bunch with no veteran leadership and don't even mention Crowell as a leader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Indablanc Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 Name one thing that is a dime a dozen. Penny candy isn't even a dime a dozen and penny candy hasn't been a penny for 30 years. Capacitors. My company makes them and some sell for a "dime a dozen" How do we live on that? Easy. Volume. About $500,000.000 dollars worth last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 Capacitors. My company makes them and some sell for a "dime a dozen" How do we live on that? Easy. Volume. About $500,000.000 dollars worth last year. My hero! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 Capacitors. My company makes them and some sell for a "dime a dozen" How do we live on that? Easy. Volume. About $500,000.000 dollars worth last year. Name two. And I truly hope that this September, I don't see number ".000000003" of the Buffalo Bills crawling through toward the line of scrimmage with "A. Capacitor" on the back of his jersey. I would hope we'd have a little more spark than that. That's a RBBC other teams will fear, A-Train and A-Capacitor. Those kind of backfields truly are a dime a dozen. I take that back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 I think the 'we must have Turner' talk is a lot less stupid than 'running backs are a dime a dozen' or 'we can pick up any RB in the 2nd or 3rd round' or that 'we got A Train' or 'just offer Smith a 3rd rounder and get fukked' posts. Even though I don't think 'we must have Turner'. I don't think the Truner trade should be dismissed out of hand but what is so stupid about Pittman, Bush, Irons, Walker and Hunt as alternatives to that? Good backs can definitely be found after the first round. Frank Gore, third round Willie Parker, undrafted Rudi Johnson, fourth round Brian Westbrook, third round Personally, I like Pittman. Though I don't think backs are a dime a dozen, I do think the league, largely based on economics, is moving away from superstars with huge contracts at that position and instead going for the committe approach. Big time backs have had to struggle to get huge contracts lately. James, Alexander and others. The future of the game appears to me to be moving away from the "franchise back" idea. We will still see that approach but in the aggregate, I think the best cap strategies favor a different way to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted April 6, 2007 Share Posted April 6, 2007 Name two. And I truly hope that this September, I don't see number ".000000003" of the Buffalo Bills crawling through toward the line of scrimmage with "A. Capacitor" on the back of his jersey. I would hope we'd have a little more spark than that. That's a RBBC other teams will fear, A-Train and A-Capacitor. Those kind of backfields truly are a dime a dozen. I take that back. We could call him, "Sparky"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts