grammer_police Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 Look, here's the deal. Here are the options for a rookie: 1. bust(sort-of common) 2. average back(very common) 3. star(pretty rare) Here are the options for Turner: 1. bust(he has already proven that he has something) 2. average back(possible outcome) 3. star(very possible outcome) Drafting a rookie in the 1st round(lynch or if we are lucky youKnowWho) could be our savior, but isnt there a better chance that Turner could be something special, than some rookie who has never played a down in the NFL. Marv, spend your first on Turner if that's what it takes. We have taken enough chances, it's time now to start filling our holes.
Ball'n Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 Look, here's the deal.Here are the options for a rookie: 1. bust(sort-of common) 2. average back(very common) 3. star(pretty rare) Here are the options for Turner: 1. bust(he has already proven that he has something) 2. average back(possible outcome) 3. star(very possible outcome) Drafting a rookie in the 1st round(lynch or if we are lucky youKnowWho) could be our savior, but isnt there a better chance that Turner could be something special, than some rookie who has never played a down in the NFL. Marv, spend your first on Turner if that's what it takes. We have taken enough chances, it's time now to start filling our holes. This is more like it. Here are the options for a rookie: 1. bust(sort-of common) 2. average back(very common) 3. star(pretty rare) Here are the options for Turner: 1. bust(unlikey) 2. average back(very possible) 3. star (possible) Still Turner is more proven than anyone we could draft, and I hope we get him. HOWEVER, his contract will be more than a rookie, and if he only plays average, some may consider him a little bit of a bust because of the money he is receiving.
Buffaloed in Pa Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 Yatta,yatta, yatta. Behind that line a average back look like a star.
JAMIEBUF12 Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 i bet adrian peterson out rushes michael turner next season.
Buffaloed in Pa Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 i bet adrian peterson out rushes michael turner next season. Now you did it. Watch-out.
The Dean Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 i bet adrian peterson out rushes michael turner next season. That may well be true and that may well mean squat. Should Turner be picked up by a team that makes him the FEATURE back, then you might have a point. Should he be picked up by a team that uses several backs, the comparison is useless. Certainly AP will be picked up by a team that plans to use him as a feature back. But, even if Turner ends up being a feature back, there is MUCH more to consider than total rushing yards. YPC is one measure, but that's not what I'm talking about. The question should be, which back contributes more to the team's success. In this measure, you MUST consider, receiving yards, blitz pick ups, lead blocks, playing every down HARD (whether the ball carrier or the decoy), third-down conversions, success on 3rd or 4th and short, etc...as well as rushing yardage. Which of these two is more capable of being the total package (or at least the package more valuable to the BILLS at this time)? I don't fuc#ing know, and neither do you. All I'm asking is THINK before you post such nonsense.
JAMIEBUF12 Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 That may well be true and that may well mean squat. Should Turner be picked up by a team that makes him the FEATURE back, then you might have a point. Should he be picked up by a team that uses several backs, the comparison is useless. Certainly AP will be picked up by a team that plans to use him as a feature back. But, even if Turner ends up being a feature back, there is MUCH more to consider than total rushing yards. YPC is one measure, but that's not what I'm talking about. The question should be, which back contributes more to the team's success. In this measure, you MUST consider, receiving yards, blitz pick ups, lead blocks, playing every down HARD (whether the ball carrier or the decoy), third-down conversions, success on 3rd or 4th and short, etc...as well as rushing yardage. Which of these two is more capable of being the total package (or at least the package more valuable to the BILLS at this time)? I don't fuc#ing know, and neither do you. All I'm asking is THINK before you post such nonsense. well i have THOUGHT ABOUT IT and i stand pat....i think adrian peterson will out rush michael turner next season.adrian will be the first runningback chosen in this years draft and rightfully so.michael turner has talent but there had to be a reason he was chosen in the fifth round.and even if i end up wrong it is just my opinion.it means nothing.that is what we all do on this board.post our opinions about what we think will happen or what players we like or dislike.go bills in"07
The Dean Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 well i have THOUGHT ABOUT IT and i stand pat....i think adrian peterson will out rush michael turner next season.adrian will be the first runningback chosen in this years draft and rightfully so.michael turner has talent but there had to be a reason he was chosen in the fifth round.and even if i end up wrong it is just my opinion.it means nothing.that is what we all do on this board.post our opinions about what we think will happen or what players we like or dislike.go bills in"07 That's it? That the limit of your ability to think about RBs and there contribution to the team? Total rushing yards? You think no further. Thanks for the heads-up.
Dibs Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 Look, here's the deal.Here are the options for a rookie: 1. bust(sort-of common) 2. average back(very common) 3. star(pretty rare) Here are the options for Turner: 1. bust(he has already proven that he has something) 2. average back(possible outcome) 3. star(very possible outcome) Drafting a rookie in the 1st round(lynch or if we are lucky youKnowWho) could be our savior, but isnt there a better chance that Turner could be something special, than some rookie who has never played a down in the NFL. Marv, spend your first on Turner if that's what it takes. We have taken enough chances, it's time now to start filling our holes. Here is the thing though.......EVERY single NFL team & analyst is looking at AP being selected within the top 5(certainly top 10).........Lynch is generally considered worthy of using a 1st round pick on.........Turner looks like he should command around a second round pick. What does that tell us? It tells us that Turner is not as valuable a commodity as Peterson or Lynch........that a vast majority of experts believe that Peterson & Lynch would have more chance of becoming a top NFL RB than Turner. This is not saying he won't/can't be good.......but it does contradict the premise of this thread.
JAMIEBUF12 Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 That's it? That the limit of your ability to think about RBs and there contribution to the team? Total rushing yards? You think no further. Thanks for the heads-up. actually dean what you posted was very true .you do have to look at more than just "rushing yards"to evaulate a runningback.every thing you posted was true about picking up blitzes etc...i just think adrian can be the real deal.i also have nothing against turner.i just would rather draft our own runningback at#12 then give multiple picks for another runningback.go bills in"07
The Dean Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 actually dean what you posted was very true .you do have to look at more than just "rushing yards"to evaulate a runningback.every thing you posted was true about picking up blitzes etc...i just think adrian can be the real deal.i also have nothing against turner.i just would rather draft our own runningback at#12 then give multiple picks for another runningback.go bills in"07 Cool, I understand your point , now. Thanks I have no strong opinion on who we should get. I just think there is no way we get AP at #12. In order to get AP we probably WILL spend multiple picks as we will (most likely) have to trade up to get him. AP is totally unproven...but has HUGE potential. Turner is proven, to a degree, and has HUGE potential. I trust Marv and Co. to figure out the right course of action here...I REALLY do.
Koufax Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 Here is the thing though.......EVERY single NFL team & analyst is looking at AP being selected within the top 5(certainly top 10).........Lynch is generally considered worthy of using a 1st round pick on.........Turner looks like he should command around a second round pick. What does that tell us? It tells us that Turner is not as valuable a commodity as Peterson or Lynch........that a vast majority of experts believe that Peterson & Lynch would have more chance of becoming a top NFL RB than Turner. This is not saying he won't/can't be good.......but it does contradict the premise of this thread. I think Turner will be better than Lynch. But he also will be more expensive, and in a salary cap league, that means he diverts resources from another area on the team. His biggest issue is his contract, which is also the most unknown situation. I think Marv and DJ will do something smart. Talent wise I'd be elated to have Turner, but as to what picks and dollars make it seem like a good deal, it is hard to tell. The man is going to get paid, whether before or after the 2007 season, and while he will probably be worth what he gets to somebody, I don't know that AJ's draft pick asking price and Turner's dollar asking price adds up to a good value for the Bills. But if we could somehow come out of the draft with Willis and Turner I would be very very happy (as I would with Peterson and Poz). But I think we are all playing April Dreamers, and we will probably end up with something much less glamorous and exciting, but hopefully that helps us win football games just the same.
daquix Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 Yatta,yatta, yatta. Behind that line a average back look like a star. I wish we had that average running back Tomlinson.
The Jokeman Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 Look, here's the deal.Here are the options for a rookie: 1. bust(sort-of common) 2. average back(very common) 3. star(pretty rare) Here are the options for Turner: 1. bust(he has already proven that he has something) 2. average back(possible outcome) 3. star(very possible outcome) Drafting a rookie in the 1st round(lynch or if we are lucky youKnowWho) could be our savior, but isnt there a better chance that Turner could be something special, than some rookie who has never played a down in the NFL. Marv, spend your first on Turner if that's what it takes. We have taken enough chances, it's time now to start filling our holes. Let's assume Turner gets a contract similar to what Lamont Jordan got when he signed with the Raiders after being a career back up with the Jets which was five years for $27.5 million including a $7 million dollar signing bonus. In comparison Haolti Ngata, last year's 12th overall pick, got a 5 year contract worth $14 million. Now the question will be what form on draft pick compensation Turner would require. Even if it's a 2nd this year and possibly a 3rd next year. The truth is not only in terms of draft pick compensation (as many feel it's it's going to cost car more to acquire Turner than any draft pick would which is the ultimate reason I'm against Turner. Not only that but many are citing that part of the reason they're against choosing a RB in the draft because of the poor sucess rates of finding a quality RB after Roud 1 of the draft. Let's not forget taht Turner was originally a 5th Round pick. Yes inpart because of poor competition in college but one could argue that Walter Peyton also came from a a small school out of college but it didn't stop him from being a 1st Round pick? Why? because talent is talent. To me Turner is way over hyped and the only way I'd trade for him is if it means ging up only one day 1 pick of the draft and is signed to a heavily performanced based contract as until he proves otherwise he is an NFL back up which might be more then a rookie might turn into but likely cost the Bills a lot more in terms of salary cap and draft pick compensation.
The Dean Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 I wish we had that average running back Tomlinson. Not for a #1 pick though. Don't want anyone else's rejects. Gotta build through the draft, it's the ONLY way. Simple minds...
obie_wan Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 That may well be true and that may well mean squat. Should Turner be picked up by a team that makes him the FEATURE back, then you might have a point. Should he be picked up by a team that uses several backs, the comparison is useless. Certainly AP will be picked up by a team that plans to use him as a feature back. But, even if Turner ends up being a feature back, there is MUCH more to consider than total rushing yards. YPC is one measure, but that's not what I'm talking about. The question should be, which back contributes more to the team's success. In this measure, you MUST consider, receiving yards, blitz pick ups, lead blocks, playing every down HARD (whether the ball carrier or the decoy), third-down conversions, success on 3rd or 4th and short, etc...as well as rushing yardage. Which of these two is more capable of being the total package (or at least the package more valuable to the BILLS at this time)? I don't fuc#ing know, and neither do you. All I'm asking is THINK before you post such nonsense. Turner may actually be more of a risk than a rookie in regard to the above items. IT seems that if he had mastered the little things noted above after 3 years in the league, and he is as good a runner as hyped, then why didn't SD get creative to get him on the field more. They could have used him in teh backfield and spit LT out wide- you wouldn;t be ebenching any premier talent at WR. My guess is they feared Brees/Rivers would have gotten killed due to inferior blocking and blitz pickup skills. Turner is worth a 3rd and no more. My guess is the contract he wants will be prohibitive as well.
The Dean Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 Turner may actually be more of a risk than a rookie in regard to the above items. IT seems that if he had mastered the little things noted above after 3 years in the league, and he is as good a runner as hyped, then why didn't SD get creative to get him on the field more. They could have used him in teh backfield and spit LT out wide- you wouldn;t be ebenching any premier talent at WR. My guess is they feared Brees/Rivers would have gotten killed due to inferior blocking and blitz pickup skills. Turner is worth a 3rd and no more. My guess is the contract he wants will be prohibitive as well. Let's see: They had LT, for Christ's sake, and the LEAST creative head coach in the league. I don't know if he is the complete package, nor do I know if AP (or Lynch or Leonard, etc) can do those items at a pro level (and neither do you). But there certainly is film and there are scouting reports of Turner's ability in these area. If they are positive, I have no problem with a trade involving draft picks.
Pyrite Gal Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 This is more like it. Here are the options for a rookie: 1. bust(sort-of common) 2. average back(very common) 3. star(pretty rare) Here are the options for Turner: 1. bust(unlikey) 2. average back(very possible) 3. star (possible) Still Turner is more proven than anyone we could draft, and I hope we get him. HOWEVER, his contract will be more than a rookie, and if he only plays average, some may consider him a little bit of a bust because of the money he is receiving. From a game theory perspective I like the format for consideration of a player and I agree with the way you have decided to fill out this format regarding Turner. Hoq do you fill it out regarding Lynch? My sense is 1. bust unlikely but certainly possible 2. average back quite possible 3. star unlikely but possible
obie_wan Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 Let's see: They had LT, for Christ's sake, and the LEAST creative head coach in the league. I don't know if he is the complete package, nor do I know if AP (or Lynch or Leonard, etc) can do those items at a pro level (and neither do you). But there certainly is film and there are scouting reports of Turner's ability in these area. If they are positive, I have no problem with a trade involving draft picks. The Bills had Thurman Thomas, a bona fide Hall of Famer, and he shared times with the likes of Robb Riddick and Kenny Davis, among others. I'm just saying - if Turner was so good - he would have forced himself on to the field. My guess is that he's lacking in some critcal skills to be a feature back.
ganesh Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 What does that tell us?It tells us that Turner is not as valuable a commodity as Peterson or Lynch........that a vast majority of experts believe that Peterson & Lynch would have more chance of becoming a top NFL RB than Turner. Dibs, I think one of the reasons for that is that Peterson and Lynch will be in the 21-22 years old category...Turner is 25 and will have a shelf life of 5 years considering up to 30 being a good age for RBs. Plus, there is a reason why a Turner went in the 5th round in the draft, he was not a valuable commodity at that time.
Recommended Posts