Trade Lynch?....No trade Fred Jackson!

[C.Biscuit97]

True that which is why he still possesses some value. He certainly has more trade value than Marshawn and you and I know already that there's multiple holes that need filling and if Jackson can net a nice return in assets, then you got to pull the trigger on it.

 

At the same time, a lot of team might jsut look at Jackson's age and just assume that he will start fading.

 

I really believe if Lynch has a decent bounceback year and stays out of trouble (that's the key), his trade value will rise a lot. The guy is 2 years removed from a pro bowl and is still only 24 I believe.

[CashHoarder]

At the same time, a lot of team might jsut look at Jackson's age and just assume that he will start fading.

 

I really believe if Lynch has a decent bounceback year and stays out of trouble (that's the key), his trade value will rise a lot. The guy is 2 years removed from a pro bowl and is still only 24 I believe.

 

At least we can both agree that this is a good problem to have...having a lot of talent in a position.

[bowery4]

You miss the point and do so in an obnoxious way you would never do in person. Setting your incivility aside, half of teams have a 1000 rusher. Happier now? It's not impressive to have a 1000 yard rusher.

 

15 teams had 1000 yard rushers in 2009. (Jackson was 15th with 106_.)

 

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=0&statisticCategory=RUSHING&conference=null&season=2009&seasonType=REG&d-447263-s=RUSHING_YARDS&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-n=1

 

16 teams had 1000 rushers in 2008. Lynch was 13th with 1036.

 

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=true&seasonType=REG&d-447263-o=2&conference=null&statisticCategory=RUSHING&d-447263-s=RUSHING_YARDS&experience=null&d-447263-n=1&season=2008&qualified=true&Submit=Go&tabSeq=0&d-447263-p=1

 

17 in 2007. Lynch was 11th with 1115 yards.

 

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=true&seasonType=REG&d-447263-o=2&conference=null&statisticCategory=RUSHING&d-447263-s=RUSHING_YARDS&experience=null&d-447263-n=1&season=2007&qualified=true&Submit=Go&tabSeq=0&d-447263-p=1

 

15 + 16 + 17 / 3*32 = HALF of teams have an RB that rushed for 1000 yards. For most of those teams, Bills included, substitute another guy and you still get 1000 yards.

 

You have a point and so do, I see yours but think that the we are better if we have all three.I think (and so does Buddy at this point) trading either of them for many of the reasons in this thread is just not a good idea. I am finished arguing with you. Sorry I got a bit over the top with the stats.

 

I could prove God statistically. ~ George Gallup

[Bufcomments]

Why would be we trade anyone? Think about how effective Spiller will be when defenses are tired in the third and fourth quarter. Spiller has only had 3 or 4 carries going into the second half. Lynch and Jackson have had 30 carries or so. I just don't see how a tired defense will stop and of our fresh running backs. Especially if that fresh running back is the fastest of the 3.

Exactly my thoughts.

 

I think that is what Gailey is going to do. No way a tired D can catch Spiller after a half of Beast Mode and Fred.

 

You have options with all this talent. Think Gailey is going to use them all.

[1B4IDie]

Lynch, despite his size and obvious strength, has done nothing to prove he can get the 1 on 3rd and 1. I would rather have Jackson take that carry. Jackson finds space and hits holes. Lynch runs into people's backs.

 

As far as trading one vs the other, I don't care. RBs of their caliber are a dime a dozen.

Peace is right on about the value of our so called "1000 yard" or "pro bowl" RBs.

 

Who wants a 30 year old Fred Jackson or a knuckle headed Lynch?

The answer is no one.

When was the last time a RB was traded in the NFL?

In case you haven't been paying attention this is 2010, not 1990.

Teams are not built around a "RB1."

Teams have a whole bunch of 5'9 to 6' 215+ guys that run real fast while holding on to the ball, some can make cuts and catch as well.

 

There is nothing special about Lynch or Jackson that any team would give up any decent talent.

 

It is much more valuable to the Bills to keep the depth at RB then get a a 3rd day pick. Fred Jackson has maybe 2 years left in his career and its not likely the Bills resign Lynch at any type of money Lynch thinks he deserves.

So get what you can out of Lynch and Jackson over the next one-two years instead of gaining a 4th rounder or later, which is all the market for a RB of Lynch or Jackson would garner.

Edited August 31, 2010 by Levitre + Wang = Wood

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

I am a firm believer that every option should be on the table to improve a team. For the right price any player is negotiable. Remember the Dallas cowboys Herschel Walker built ??? My guess is that Fred has less trade market value than he is worth to the team.

 

30 year old RB's in this league, even all pro ones tend to be a very accessible commodity. Westbrook, Willie Parker, Larry Johnson, LT, Chester Taylor just this season and wait until the cut lists come out...

 

Somethign about that number 30

 

 

[ChasBB]

Isn't Lynch one screw-up away from a full year suspension? I don't know if he's worth the risk. I hear the arguments about Lynch's running style being more of a complement to Spiller's running style, but there are other factors to consider with Lynch. He kind of has to re-prove himself after last season. I'm not saying Lynch can't be the guy, but he has to earn it again after last year and after his league suspensions. He is a risk. With Freddy, you KNOW you are getting a dedicated guy who brings it week-in and week-out. If I have to make that decision TODAY, I choose Freddy.