Turner is terrible! Look at him he is a backup!

[CircleTheWagons]

Why not. Every team has to live within a budget.

 

Allocating too much to one position, whether it's RB or OL, handcuffs the team. IMO, the best approach is to have a balanced attack--on the field and in the salary structure. No more smoke and mirriors with trading premium picks to catch a whopper (Bledsoe, WM, even JP) or tying the cap in knots over a handful of players (MW, EM).

 

Average teams end up 8-8. Teams need to pay for talent - the best players at their position will be paid the most (outside your "balanced" spending). If you're unwilling to pay premium dollars for a player you will end up with less-than-premium players.

[Lurker]

If you're unwilling to pay premium dollars for a player you will end up with less-than-premium players.

 

It this thread was about Tomlinson, then I'd agree. But since it's about Turner, you've made my point. Thanks.

[colin]

to me the contracts are what they are: no one is coming cheap so you have to pay up.

 

that said, we added two big time run blockers (again look at how the skins ran against dock and how the faiders went going right) to an O that has some

bigtime speed at wideout and a quick QB. all we are left with is a hole at rb, and i think a good rb will play even better than he is on our team with that line, particularly if he has some speed (why imo mcgahee was expendable).

 

so for me it is about what picks we give up. if we can still have 3 day one picks, and land a guy like willis, and get turner then i'd consider that solid. if it costs us a shot at a good LB then i don't think so.

[Dawgg]

Or... you can use the valuable first rounder to add another starter on defense and use a 2nd or 3rd round pick on a running back.

 

Good scouting departments can find RB studs after the first round. We have seen it with Travis Henry, Maurice Jones-Drew and Jerrius Norwood. The Bills once traded the #9 overall pick for Rob Johnson, a backup with loads of potential who had shown promise in limited opportunities...

 

You saw how that turned out. Giving up a first rounder for a largely unproven RB is insane.

 

Marshall Faulk was traded for a 2nd and a 5th -- and he was proven.

Ahman Green was traded with a 5th rounder for Fred Vinson and a 5th

WILLIS MCGAHEE only got 2 3rd rounders!

 

... and people suggest giving up a top 15 pick for Michael Turner???

 

 

 

You're missing the point. If we trade a draft pick for turner, then we are throwing away a draft pick. By NOT trading for turner, we can keep that draft pick and then spend it on a RB.

[Billsjunkie]

Or... you can use the valuable first rounder to add another starter on defense and use a 2nd or 3rd round pick on a running back.

 

Good scouting departments can find RB studs after the first round. We have seen it with Travis Henry, Maurice Jones-Drew and Jerrius Norwood. The Bills once traded the #9 overall pick for Rob Johnson, a backup with loads of potential who had shown promise in limited opportunities...

 

You saw how that turned out. Giving up a first rounder for a largely unproven RB is insane.

 

Marshall Faulk was traded for a 2nd and a 5th -- and he was proven.

Ahman Green was traded with a 5th rounder for Fred Vinson and a 5th

WILLIS MCGAHEE only got 2 3rd rounders!

 

... and people suggest giving up a top 15 pick for Michael Turner???

 

I don't know who has suggested that.

Most people on here do not think that. Most realize that the Chargers will not be taking that #12 pick in a trade for Turner.

 

I still think we can pry him away for a #3

[Rico]

Or... you can use the valuable first rounder to add another starter on defense and use a 2nd or 3rd round pick on a running back.

 

Good scouting departments can find RB studs after the first round. We have seen it with Travis Henry, Maurice Jones-Drew and Jerrius Norwood. The Bills once traded the #9 overall pick for Rob Johnson, a backup with loads of potential who had shown promise in limited opportunities...

 

You saw how that turned out. Giving up a first rounder for a largely unproven RB is insane.

 

Marshall Faulk was traded for a 2nd and a 5th -- and he was proven.

Ahman Green was traded with a 5th rounder for Fred Vinson and a 5th

WILLIS MCGAHEE only got 2 3rd rounders!

 

... and people suggest giving up a top 15 pick for Michael Turner???

I think the Ravens 3rd, the Ravens 7th, and next year's Ravens 3rd for Turner would be fair.

[Ramius]

Or... you can use the valuable first rounder to add another starter on defense and use a 2nd or 3rd round pick on a running back.

 

Good scouting departments can find RB studs after the first round. We have seen it with Travis Henry, Maurice Jones-Drew and Jerrius Norwood. The Bills once traded the #9 overall pick for Rob Johnson, a backup with loads of potential who had shown promise in limited opportunities...

 

You saw how that turned out. Giving up a first rounder for a largely unproven RB is insane.

 

Marshall Faulk was traded for a 2nd and a 5th -- and he was proven.

Ahman Green was traded with a 5th rounder for Fred Vinson and a 5th

WILLIS MCGAHEE only got 2 3rd rounders!

 

... and people suggest giving up a top 15 pick for Michael Turner???

 

yup, because i definitely said we should give up our 1st rounder.

 

A straight second, or more reasonably, swapping firsts, would be appropriate for turner.

[Billsjunkie]

I think the Ravens 3rd, the Ravens 7th, and next year's Ravens 3rd for Turner would be fair.

 

I agree. I could go for a McGahee for Turner trade.

That would make me happy.

[Mickey]

You're missing the point. If we trade a draft pick for turner, then we are throwing away a draft pick. By NOT trading for turner, we can keep that draft pick and then spend it on a RB.

That might be true if we only had to trade one pick to get Turner but that isn't the case, it will take multiple picks. Whatever back we take in the draft will cost one pick, not two or three. Further, a rookie back, even a first rounder, will not cost the cash that Turner is going to cost.

 

You're not an idiot if you would like to see us go for Turner and neither are those who prefer a back from the draft.

[Captain Hindsight]

he also runs behind the same o line as LT

[CircleTheWagons]

It this thread was about Tomlinson, then I'd agree. But since it's about Turner, you've made my point. Thanks.

Hmm. Ok. I thought your point was not to "overspend" at any position, which would prevent us from ever having a Tomlinson on the team. As long as your willing to spend "beyond your means" for superstars, then I guess I made your point. We're in agreement that Turner isn't a superstar at this point, but I'm not worried about Marv paying him like one yet.

[MDH]

... and people suggest giving up a top 15 pick for Michael Turner???

 

 

Who suggested this? I'm all for picking up Turner but there is no way it should cost the Bills their first rounder this year.

[Cornerville]

First of all, all this talk about Turner WILL cost a 1st round pick is speculation...I am sure as we draw closer to the draft...the asking price for Turner will fall...and AJ Smith might be forced to take whatever he can..

 

Hey, Im in agreeance with not sending a 1st for Turner and swap positions...but IMO the Bills...or any other team who wants his services..will not have to...

 

I would gladly take Adrian Peterson at 12 over Turner...but what if the price goes down to a 3rd and 4th? I think it can.

[Dawgg]

Never said you suggested that, simply pointed out that I have seen it suggested on this board a few times.

 

I think even swapping firsts would be a huge mistake. If I'm Tennesse at #19, maybe that makes sense... but going from #12 to #30 is a huge drop off. In 2001, when the Bills traded down from #13 overall to #22, they received an extra 2nd and a 4th. Using that as a gauge, trading down from #12 to #30 is worth maybe a 2nd and a late 3rd -- and Turner simply isn't worth it.

 

Couple that with a draft seemingly deep in RB talent.. this is what we pay our scouts for to travel the country year-round at schools... to unearth talent in the middle rounds. Let's see what that scouting department can do!

 

yup, because i definitely said we should give up our 1st rounder.

 

A straight second, or more reasonably, swapping firsts, would be appropriate for turner.

[Kelly the Dog]

Never said you suggested that, simply pointed out that I have seen it suggested on this board a few times.

 

I think even swapping firsts would be a huge mistake. If I'm Tennesse at #19, maybe that makes sense... but going from #12 to #30 is a huge drop off. In 2001, when the Bills traded down from #13 overall to #22, they received an extra 2nd and a 4th. Using that as a gauge, trading down from #12 to #30 is worth maybe a 2nd and a late 3rd -- and Turner simply isn't worth it.

 

Couple that with a draft seemingly deep in RB talent.. this is what we pay our scouts for to travel the country year-round at schools... to unearth talent in the middle rounds. Let's see what that scouting department can do!

Part of the reason the Bills may do it is to not have to spend the #12 money on a player because they would have to pay Turner something substantial. It's everything that needs to be considered and not necessarily what is the exact worth of a trade according to a chart. Similar to the Skins and the Bears proposed swap; the Bears didnt want the high pick because they didnt want to pay the rookie slotting number for #6. A #12 choice might be preferred to a #6 in that situation.

[makbeer]

The problem I have with Turner is that he isn't shifty. He needs a hole. He's fast and strong, but not necessarily quick.

 

We didn't have a line that he would have worked with last season, and it's yet to be seen if we have t he type of line he can run behind this season.

 

Additionally, he hasn't proven he can handle the load over the course of a full season.

 

He could work out really well, or he could bust as a starter (Lamont Jordan?). Backup RBs that look good in flashes are hard to grade.

 

It's definitely a risk because he's going to be expensive to acquire, and expensive to pay after acquiring him. I'd prefer to wait to see how the first round shapes up before trading for him.

 

That said, if we can't land Adrian Peterson (don't think Lynch and his attitude/demeanor will fly here after mcgahee) somehow, Turner is probably a good option. As a cheaper route, I like a guy like Antonio Pittman.

[Dawgg]

Agreed, but the money is being spent somewhere... be it turner or whoever becomes the #12 pick. Would I rather pay #12 money to a backup RB from SD who has shown flashes of potential or would I rather pay #12 money to a collegiate stud who was determined a fit by the college scouts we employ year-round? I'd rather do the latter.

 

I have seen the former and his name was Rob Johnson.

 

Part of the reason the Bills may do it is to not have to spend the #12 money on a player because they would have to pay Turner something substantial. It's everything that needs to be considered and not necessarily what is the exact worth of a trade according to a chart. Similar to the Skins and the Bears proposed swap; the Bears didnt want the high pick because they didnt want to pay the rookie slotting number for #6. A #12 choice might be preferred to a #6 in that situation.

[Helmet_hair]

That said, if we can't land Adrian Peterson (don't think Lynch and his attitude/demeanor will fly here after mcgahee) somehow, Turner is probably a good option. As a cheaper route, I like a guy like Antonio Pittman.

Ding, ding, ding....I bet this is who Marv takes.

[Ramius]

He could work out really well, or he could bust as a starter (Lamont Jordan?). Backup RBs that look good in flashes are hard to grade.

 

I'd sure hate to have a 1600 total yard, 11 TD back on this roster.

[Ramius]

Agreed, but the money is being spent somewhere... be it turner or whoever becomes the #12 pick. Would I rather pay #12 money to a backup RB from SD who has shown flashes of potential or would I rather pay #12 money to a collegiate stud who was determined a fit by the college scouts we employ year-round? I'd rather do the latter.

 

I have seen the former and his name was Rob Johnson.

 

And the collegiate stud has proven what? roughly 50% of 1st round picks are busts, no matter what any scout thinks. Also, what the hell do we have in the NFL player department? people picking names out of a hat? Last time i checked, the Bills, and every other team, has NFL scouts, watching other teams players.

 

Turner is no more risk than a draft pick. And by swapping 1sts, we'd still have 4 other day 1 picks to adress other needs on the team. Think of it. byu swapping 1sts for turner, we could finish round 1 with both a starting RB and LB, and still have 3 more day 1 picks. Or, we could trade the #30 and a third to move up in round 1 to snag a LB in the low 20's.