BUFFALOTONE Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 I wouldn't give up the second for him considering Bush should be available in the second and I think I'd take him over Turner. Even though I still feel that neither is the answer right now. Yeah lets take a back that is 245-250 lbs. depending on what he ate at breakfast and is coming off a major injury. Why the love affair with Bush, he played in 2 weak ass conferences and had an offense taylor made for him. He had the pleasure of playing with a very good QB in a very good system. As for Turner why blow your load on a backup RB who spells the best player in the league? Turner will want a huge deal and I for one would not want to pay him based on what he has done so far.
BUFFALOTONE Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Congratulations, you've been found guilty of buying into the hype. A 2nd for turner woudl be a fair deal, a third would be a great deal for us. Each of those 3 backs you mentioned is COMPLETELY unproven at the NFL level. Turner has proven what he can do in limited duty. Hes about 6' tall and listed at 237. That would give him tony hunt size, but hes got irons' skills. Plus, its better that hes a backup. THe idea is to pick up a RB with minimal mileage on him. Turner certainly hasnt been overworked. Will he respond well to being, 'the guy'? Cant say for sure, could be the next LaMont Jordan, but I think its doubtfull. Since he is a RFA Id bet he wouldnt want anything more than the standard feature back price of about 23 mill for 5 years that ahman green got. I think hes worth it, hes definately better than green at this juncture. Positives: Proven commodity without sacrificing a first round pick. Negatives: Allows us less mobility in the draft. That being said, a draft day trade would be the preferable way to pull this off. He is a backup, he is not proven, he runs behind LT and an unbelievable OL. He is the furthest thing from a proven commodity. Sometimes I wonder if some of you watch football or just parrot ESPN.
Mike formerly from Florida Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 You don't average over 4 yards in the NFL without being a good back. I wish we could get him for a 3rd, that would be perfect. He's worth more than a 3rd and that won't get him. He's a proven commodity and you can't call anyone a back-up who plays behind LT because everyone in the league would be a bck-up to LT including the KC starter. I give up the 2nd and 6th if necessary. Draft Willis in the first and get your DT and CB depth in the third and you've had a gem of a draft which includes a great back.
JinWPB Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 I really think the Bills should play the waiting game. The dust of free agency is starting to settle,,there are quite a few good backs in the draft, and not that many teams looking for one. The value of running backs (unless your LT or Shawn) has been falling. Turner would want a huge contract if we traded a 2nd. Look at the recent trade of S Adam Archuletta , six years left on a cap friendly contract( by present standards) for a 6th rnd. pick. SD wants a 2nd for their backup? First day picks are almost guaranteed starters,lets keep them.
tombstone56 Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 it was my understanding that the bills had offered a 2nd but AJ countered they wanted roscoe too,,marv said no ,, all that said, i m a huge fan of brian leonard the kids works hard for every inch every down.. in one sweep play he actualy "drop kicked" the guy trying to tackle him. the last person i saw do that was a high school kid from east brady pa. you might of heard of him,,JIM KELLY.. .leonard has moved in a 2nd rd projection,, tony hunt should be there in the 3rd too..
MattyT Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 1st and 3rd? - no effing way 2nd? - worthwhile gamble 3rd? - get-r-done! 2nd day pick? - wake up you're clearly dreaming
Kelly the Dog Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 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
Pyrite Gal Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Plenty of backup rbs do such as but not limited to and currently excluding turner Kevan Barlow- (split carries with garrison hearst looked like he had very good potential average a real good 5.1ypc in 2003 and went on to average 3.4, 3.3, and 2.8 the following 3 seasons Troy Hambrick- After averaging 4.7, 5.1,4.0 backing up the aging emmitt smith finaly got his chance to prove himself and flunked out hasn't played a down since 2004 Lamont Jordan- Receiving limited but more opportunities then everyones current favorite backup Michael turner. Backing up curtis martin Lamont Jordan had the look of a starting back and some production for a team to warrant the chance. Showed potential as a legit receiving threat and having the speed and power to make a starting caliber back. Has been a bit of a dissapointment with the raiders. I dont watch much raider games but I know he had ball security issues in the past. I really dont see him as anything special. My whole thing about turner is yeah he has some nice speed and runs with good power, however he's also backing up the best rb currently in the game. When LT comes out of games teams aren't focusing on Michael Turner. He also doesn't have the production that warrants giving a high 2nd rd pick to a afc superbowl contender. For a 4th rd pick sure. Anything more then that and I'll pass. We saw the same thing here with what I used to call the AVP effect. The other team would either physically knock out starting QB out of the game or the starter would be so bad he would get pulled and then AVP would come in and throw a TD pass or even lea a furious comeback and cries would rise on the TSW board or among Bills partisans to bring in AVP as a starter. AVP was a good player and actually a very good back-up who could deliver a team a win if his job was to help protect a lead or lead us to a single score for the win, but Ds even if he was successful against him in relief of the starter would wake up and stiffen. Once the Bills actually had to go with AVP as a starter and opponents got a good look at some tape and figured out the team's tendencies with him and the particular weakenesses of his game then AVP's production as a Bill went way down. The main reason Turner makes any sense for us would be if we went with a decision to go with an RB by committee approach as even though Turner is not a proven or credible starter at RB, right now we do not have a credible starting threat at RB on this roster. Thomas proved he could start way back when (in NFL lifetimes) but the last time he carried the rock for a 1000 yards in a season was 2003 and he was actually only able to answer the starting gun in the line-up 13 times which is the most starts in a season he ever had. Even if you believe in Thomas and prayer as your starter you still need a big time back-up for him. Turner makes a little sense with him being backed up by Thomas or Thomas being backed up Turner, but even this configuration call for one of these men to step up which cannot be counted upon in either individual case. A second as their "opening" likely means they settle for one of our thirds and if we have a third plan for a starting RB AND can sign him to an incentive laden deal i would pull the trigger.
dollars 2 donuts Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 That being said, a draft day trade would be the preferable way to pull this off. A draft day trade for an unproven back-up that everyone seems to love. hmmmmm, where have I heard this before? No matter what, though, i want a RB either in the first or second round, or by a trade like this for Turner.
jri111 Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Yeah lets take a back that is 245-250 lbs. depending on what he ate at breakfast and is coming off a major injury. Why the love affair with Bush, he played in 2 weak ass conferences and had an offense taylor made for him. He had the pleasure of playing with a very good QB in a very good system. exactly, I really don't see the love affair with Bush. He had one good seaon. He's 250 pounds and not a power runner. He can't break tackles. Yes he's elusive for his size, but you're not going to get very far in the NFL if you get knocked down on the first hit. He's also coming off a leg injury, which usually heals at 100%, but he hasn't worked out in 6 months, Frankly out of all the seond-tier RB's I'd take him last.
Ramius Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 I'd take turner for a 2nd rounder. He's proven more in the NFL than any of the backs that will be available in the 2nd/3rd round. I've seen a little of turner, and hes got the explosiveness. I'm not keen on the fact that he seems to catch very few passes, but perhaps that was the offense. LT and Gates were catching everything. As for playing time, my old neighbor (still a bills fan) lives in SD and sees the chargers all the time. Says he'd love it if the bills snagged him. SAys turner is the real deal, and can carry the load. One point he brought up which i didnt know, was that turner spells LT in the middle of drives too, not just at the end of the games. Says when turner came in for a set of downs to give LT a blow, the offense didnt miss a beat. Also said lots of times it was tough to tell when LT had subbed out, because there was no difference is the quality of the ground game, and turner was just as good.
NewEra Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 I wouldn't give up the second for him considering Bush should be available in the second and I think I'd take him over Turner. Even though I still feel that neither is the answer right now. If you would rather have bush that turner, you really need to watch more football. Turner is twice the back bush is
daquix Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Kenneth Davis had over 600 yards rushing for the Bills in 1991 and 1992. Darrick Holmes had nearly 700 yards and was closing in on 1000 yards rushing and receiving combined as a rookie in 1995. The point is that it helps when an excellent starting RB and a good OL have already beaten the crap out of the opposing defense before you come into the game. Turner could be a quality starter who just needs a chance, but he could also be like any number of backups who are largely the beneficiaries of someone else's success. Kenneth Davis and Darrick Holmes had nearly double the carries that Turner has had, and Holmes has half the avg/ yards per carry.
ROCCEO Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Yeah lets take a back that is 245-250 lbs. depending on what he ate at breakfast and is coming off a major injury. Why the love affair with Bush, he played in 2 weak ass conferences and had an offense taylor made for him. He had the pleasure of playing with a very good QB in a very good system. As for Turner why blow your load on a backup RB who spells the best player in the league? Turner will want a huge deal and I for one would not want to pay him based on what he has done so far. 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. I really think the Bills should play the waiting game. The dust of free agency is starting to settle,,there are quite a few good backs in the draft, and not that many teams looking for one. The value of running backs (unless your LT or Shawn) has been falling. Turner would want a huge contract if we traded a 2nd. Look at the recent trade of S Adam Archuletta , six years left on a cap friendly contract( by present standards) for a 6th rnd. pick. SD wants a 2nd for their backup? First day picks are almost guaranteed starters,lets keep them. 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.
Ramius 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. Check your facts on the archuleta deal. With the way the deadskins structured the deal, and with the amount of money arch got last year, chicago has him for the next 3 years at a bit over 8 mil total.
Kelly the Dog Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Kenneth Davis had over 600 yards rushing for the Bills in 1991 and 1992. Darrick Holmes had nearly 700 yards and was closing in on 1000 yards rushing and receiving combined as a rookie in 1995. The point is that it helps when an excellent starting RB and a good OL have already beaten the crap out of the opposing defense before you come into the game. Turner could be a quality starter who just needs a chance, but he could also be like any number of backups who are largely the beneficiaries of someone else's success. 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.
Fan in San Diego Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 I wouldn't give up the second for him considering Bush should be available in the second and I think I'd take him over Turner. Even though I still feel that neither is the answer right now. Bush had surgery today, so I think he's of the list.
The Jokeman 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. Let's not forget the year before leaving the Jets Lamont Jordan rushed for 479 yards on 93 carries, good for a 5.2 avg and 2 TDs but only showed be an average starting RB with the Raiders the next year two seasons. Personally I'd rather take a chance on someone in Round 2 or 3 inpart because they likely won't command a new contract like Turner would likely command as a starter (see lower cap figuere) and also rookies would have less treads on their tires.
Kelly the Dog Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Let's not forget the year before leaving the Jets Lamont Jordan rushed for 479 yards, 5.2 avg and 2 TDs but only showed be an average starting RB with the Raiders the next year. Personally I'd rather take a chance on someone in Round 2 or 3 inpart because they likely won't command a new contract like Turner would likely command as a starter (see lower cap figuere) and also rookies would have less treads on their tires. Jordan rushed for 1000 yards, caught 70 passes for almost 600 more and scored 11 TDs on a pitiful team that year.
Koufax Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 If we could get Turner for our 2nd, I think it is a great 2007 move, and a better 2007 move than anybody we can draft at #44. The issue is the contract to keep him around longer than that. How much money will it take and when to get him to stick around as long as that #44 RB would? I think he is definitely more of a proven commodity and more talented than our alternatives in the second round, but he is only under contract through 2007, and those other guys would be locked up through 2010 or 2011. So it is all about 1) will AJ let him go for #44 (I think so) and 2) can we get a reasonable extension that isn't too much money for a player yet to carry the load? Interesting thread in SD: http://forums.chargers.com/showthread.php?t=40851
Recommended Posts