ThePebble19 Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 MICHAEL TURNER RUNS BEHIND A TOP 3 O-LINE IN THE NFL. For the life of me, I will never understand how people forget this FACT when they bring up Turner. For a third rounder, yes. For a low 2nd, take a hike.
JinWPB Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Does he want a HUGE deal? doubtful, hes probobly looking for something of market value, which is what Ahman Green got. 5 years, 20-25 mil. Turner is better than Ahman, likely better than Willis. If I have to choose turner or antonio pittman or kenny irons or even Tony hunt, ill take turner in the 2nd round.Are you actually going to call that contract cap friendly? Why? becuase he signed it last year. I believe it made him the highest paid safety in history. Something in the range of 34 million dollars. Archuleta is about the 18th best SS in the league. The contract might be cap friendly if the player whose signature it bore was named Ed Reed. I meant cap friendly for the Bears as the Skin are on the hook for the bonus money,the base pay is actually cheap for a s/db this year ala Nate. LINK http://www.hogshaven.com/story/2007/3/9/115441/1599
obie_wan Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 IMO, you can't really compare someone like Kenneth Davis to Turner because Davis was given a chance to start for three straight years in Green Bay, and couldn't distinguish himself from Brent Fullwood, Jessie Clark, Gerry Ellis, Gary Ellerson, Larry Mason, Keith Woodside and the mighty, highly feared PaulOtt Caruth. Kenny Davis was dumb as a post. If he had to do anything moe than run straight ahead, he was in trouble. Any RB the Bills draft needs to have some smarts to pick up blitzes and run the proper patterns.
Kelly the Dog Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 MICHAEL TURNER RUNS BEHIND A TOP 3 O-LINE IN THE NFL. For the life of me, I will never understand how people forget this FACT when they bring up Turner. For a third rounder, yes. For a low 2nd, take a hike. 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.
daquix Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 MICHAEL TURNER RUNS BEHIND A TOP 3 O-LINE IN THE NFL. For the life of me, I will never understand how people forget this FACT when they bring up Turner. For a third rounder, yes. For a low 2nd, take a hike. So does Ladanian Tomlinson. He also must be a product of his offensive line then?
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted March 21, 2007 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. On about 76% more carries then turner has ever gotten. Absolutely no basis for comparison.
Brandon Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 IMO, you can't really compare someone like Kenneth Davis to Turner because Davis was given a chance to start for three straight years in Green Bay, and couldn't distinguish himself from Brent Fullwood, Jessie Clark, Gerry Ellis, Gary Ellerson, Larry Mason, Keith Woodside and the mighty, highly feared PaulOtt Caruth. No disagreement. I'm just pointing out that Turner's statistics really are not that impressive or unusual.
Captain Hindsight Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 considering we dont have a running back right now a second rounder would be fair but i wouldnt be that surprised if we drafted someon in say the 4th rounder, i get the feeling marv is very high on fred jackson, plau there is a lot of talent int his years draft. that being said a 3rd rounder would be a steal imo
Ramius Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 No disagreement. I'm just pointing out that Turner's statistics really are not that impressive or unusual. Of course they arent. The NFL is littered with backs averaging over 6.0 YPC.
Mile High Posted March 21, 2007 Author Posted March 21, 2007 No offense to the Fred Jackson crowd. But, why all the hype? What has this guy ever done? And by coming into camp more ripped and in shape people think that this is going to make a difference? Doubt it. The fact of the matter is this guy probably won't make the team and will end up on someone's practice squad. Trust me, I love the under dog but I just don't see it with Jackson.
MDH Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Absolutely no basis for comparison. They only play on the same team, on the same offense, at the same position and run behind the same OL. You're right, there is absolutely no basis for a comparison.
Kelly the Dog Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 On about 76% more carries then turner has ever gotten. Absolutely no basis for comparison. If it were 50 carries, or one year there would be little basis for comparison. But it's three years and 157 carries. So surely there is basis for comparison. It's 157 individual tryouts. And he's played pretty well most every time. In that span, LT had 1000 carries. But 15-16% is a decent sampling and I don't see how that is "absolutely no basis for comparison". It's surely not enough to say he can be a workhorse. But it surely is enough to say he's done well with the same line in front of him. We're basically basing Losman's success and future on one half of one full season with the new line. We're basing Jason Peters success and future with one half of one full season at Left Tackle. Turner has carried the equivalent of one half of one full season. Again, I am in no way comparing Turner to LT as a player or sure thing or franchise back. But when people say "It's SD's line, it's the SD offense!", there is a legitimate argument to make that MT has played in front of that same line and produced similar results with a significant amount of carries.
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 They only play on the same team, on the same offense, at the same position and run behind the same OL. You're right, there is absolutely no basis for a comparison. yeah comparing someone who averaged 341 carries a year to some guy who averages 52. Yeah that seems fair
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Getting someone elses backup rb who's going to want a new contract while handing over premium draft picks to a in confrence superbowl contender isn't worth it. Especialy because it's a terrible draft year for rb's. The last thing Id like to see is panic and handing over a draft for an unproven commodity. If I wanted to see my team do that I'd go root for the giants.
MDH Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 yeah comparing someone who averaged 341 carries a year to some guy who averages 52. Yeah that seems fair So what do you want, some absolute assurance that he can do the job on a full time basis? You're not going to get that from any player until he gets the chance to prove himself. Any RB out of college is going to have those questions over his head as well. Turner has proven more as a pro than any of them.
Kelly the Dog Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Getting someone elses backup rb who's going to want a new contract while handing over premium draft picks to a in confrence superbowl contender isn't worth it. Especialy because it's a terrible draft year for rb's. The last thing Id like to see is panic and handing over a draft for an unproven commodity. If I wanted to see my team do that I'd go root for the giants. Which sounds better to you, Okoye/Willis/or Branch and Michael Turner, or Marshawn Lynch and David Harris (or any other second round LB or DT). Frankly, I would take the first scenario easily. It's seems to me to be more talent and more potential stardom and greater impact on the team.
Brandon Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Of course they arent. The NFL is littered with backs averaging over 6.0 YPC. Do you think he can do that if given 250 carries per season?
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted March 21, 2007 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.
Sketch Soland Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Lots of interesting arguments in this thread. Marv is many things and one of them is straight forward. If he is targeting a RB in the 2nd-3rd round, he will take a look at his draft options and his possible trade options and analyze them on the same playing field, so to speak. In other words: how does a Michael Bush, Antonio Pittman, Irons, etc. stack up against Turner (or other trade option) and then how does each player's specific qualities relate to and fit within the system that we are trying to run offensively? Who we take, or trade for, will be the guy we want because 1) he has the individual athletic, mental, and character qualities necessary, and 2) Because of one, he seems the best fit for the offense we are trying to run. Marv is not swayed by sexiness and flash, imo. He's just assessing the situation and going with what he deems the best fit (which it seems like he does after a wealth of input from his staff and coaches). If Turner is this guy, and they believe that, then they will pull the trigger for a 2nd or 3rd and bypass the rookies. It is that simple. Having said that, my hunch is that we do not trade for Turner. Somehow, I'm beginning to think we do not even draft a RB in the first two rounds, as we have a sense of a player that we feel is the best fit who will drop lower than the 1st 2. As many have said, RB, especially this year, is a position where value can be had in lower rounds, whereas LB this year, for example, shows a much larger dropoff between the top talent and the rest.
Ramius Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 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.
Recommended Posts