If we getTurner, it'll be because Schott understands its worth giving up whatever we have to give to get someone of his caliber. Maybe Schott believes Turner will be the next Walter Payton.
do not try to convince some JETS fans of TURNER's worth. They are very much opposed to the man and not very open minded!
I'm not against Turner I just wouldn't give up anything more then a third round pick for him. No one ever trades a 1st round pick for a running back and if your gonna give up a 2nd round pick you better get back Marshall Faulk or Shaun Alexander. So maybe Turner is worth a third. Not saying he's a bad player just hasn't proven his worth yet.
What are you talking about, I am not opposed to the man, I just don't think the money and picks he will demand is a good value for the state the team is in right now. If you disagree, fine, but this has nothing to do with me being close minded. By the way, Dreesen mentioned some backs, what about the Bettis trade. Bettis was the 10th overall pick, was OROY, had two seasons over a 1000 yards and was traded after his third season. The trade consisted of Bettis and a third round pick being swapped for a 2nd and a 4th round pick....
I think people are just wary of the situation because they saw the potential that Jordan showed while he was here and then saw that potential unrealized in Oakland. It's a huge gamble, and no matter what the fans think, the FO will act on their research and scouting of Turner to make the decision. I would not be very happy to see us give up a 1st round pick for him, but if he lives up to that billing then I can brush off my wariness and enjoy his production on the field.
And Bettis was a MUCH better prospect at that point than Turner is now. It's 50/50 in 3 years none of us can remember Michael Turner's name. For me it's 50/50 that's tomorrow, but then again names are just not my thing.
Hmm another question: Why is the fact that Turner was drafted in the 5th still being used? Not only was that years ago but um...it's never held back careers of guys with obvious talent who got their chance.
Yes, you can ask for me. I ask that he be had with the 32nd pick of the 7th round, gets a 4 dollar contract, goes back in time and becomes a first rounder (cause all 5th rounders are talentless and suck), and he starts ahead of the games best player. Otherwise he's not worth it. He's just not that good. It's all done by science, it's literally impossible for a FIFTH ROUND BACKUP to be anywhere near good. Just kididng. Great post. One thing I'm realizing is the root of the problem: The Jets had a similarly talent backup RB who went and signed a big contract with another team. Ignoring that that team was the Raiders, they had no offensive line to speak of, they barely had a QB, and STILL this back put up 1500+ yards in his first full season...they say this back is/was a complete bust. Therefore, all talented backups who look like this former Jets backup are bound to busts and one must have a weary eye for the next to fool people into thinking he's good.
Where was it said that all 5th rounders suck? IMO I don't care if Turner was a 5th, 6th, 7th, or 2nd round pick. The fact is that he hasn't proven jack and I don't want to see a 1st rounder given up for him. Since you brought up Jordan, I do think it's a fair comparison and IMO Jordan thus far hasn't performed to the monster contract he received. Now this can and has been a whole separate debate altogether, but again IMO he hasn't and that's why I compare the two. Does that mean all backups won't be any better than LJ? Of course not, but I haven't seen anything from Turner that would justify giving up a 1st. Lets look at the LJ and Raiders situation some more. If the Raiders liked LJ so much and viewed him in the same light as the Turner fan club around here (obviously the Raiders did) why didn't they give up a second rounder for him when they approached the Jets for a trade. The Turner lovers here will part with a 1st and the Raiders wouldn't give up a second!!! Why is that? Well, tell me the last time a team gave up a 1st rounder for an unproven backup RB? It just doesn't happen. The Raiders did the smart thing and took their chances to see if they could get him as a UFA the next year. This is what the Jets can do as well. Also, if Turner is so great and can bowl people over and break long runs at any given moment, why isn't he used as a receiving threat out of the back field? You would think SD would use him as a weapon on third downs at the very least. He is rarely thrown to, and this fact can be used when detrmining his worth. You mentioned LJ with 1500 yards and a fair amount of that was receiving yards. LJ was a decent receiving back on the Jets and I would venture a guess (without looking up the stats) that in a single season LJ had a lot more receptions than Turner has had in his career.
1. Turner hasn't gotten a "monster contract," and no one here has any idea what kind of contract he'd ask for. 2. I get the feeling that any RB who put up 1500+ all purpose yards in their first season as a feature back behind Oakland's line should be getting alot more praise than Lamont is getting. You're ignoring draft position. The Raiders giving up a second meant a pretty high pick in the second round. After that you ignore that the Jets have two seconds, one being very high in a very deep draft. What? So it's a knock that a RB with that skillset hasn't had many passes thrown to him? I don't see get the argument. That's like say...so Randy Moss is so great because he can catch everything and he's really fast...but why hasn't he been used at QB? It's a plus if a RB can be a good reciever in the backfield, duh. I've never considered it a huge thing, and there is little evidence on whether Turner is or isn't a decent enough reciever in the backfield. Yes, so whats the significance? Seems a little nitpicky, plus a very large assumption that because they don't use him he can't. Think about it this way: Phil Simms said that many in SD consider Turner the better inside runner, and from watching him Turner is a hard runner period. Turner is not a starter. Turner plays RB. Turner comes into the game. Hm, powerful inside runner coming in after great counter/pass catching RB...wouldn't the best move be to RUN Turner? Circumstancial evidence is all there is for either side, but seems to me it's assumed that because Turner doesn't have receptions...he can't catch. Seems a tad bit presumptuious for a guy without many touches per game anyway.
And when he gets his chance and puts up fulltime numbers that support him being a star back then the 5th round thing will become a historical footnote just like it has for many other backs in NFL history. My counter-question would be: why do Turner's supporters not admit that he is unproven and that nothing that he has done so far deserves mention in the same breath as a first-round pick?
The Raiders team that signed Lamont Jordan was coming off a season in which two high draft choices (Robert Gallery and Jake Grove) had joined the offensive line potentially setting it up to be very good for the long-term. Sounds a lot like the Jets. They talked themselves into thinking that they had finished the main rebuild and just needed to add a back to the equation to make the offense hum. They picked Jordan because he was big, fast, had some very good part-time stats, had the skills to do all the roles (run, receive, block) required of an NFL mainstay and most importantly he was available as a UFA, meaning he was just going to cost them cash and cap. Offensively the Jets are in a very similar place to where the Raiders were after 2004. The main difference in the situation is that Turner is nowhere near as good a prospect as Jordan was then, and he's going to cost them a pick, cash and cap, so he's a lot more expensive than Jordan was. Oh yeah, and the Raiders have sucked wind bigtime since they made the mistake of thinking they had the fundamentals down and took a flyer on a potential franchise back. There's nothing the Jets could do that is more likely to cause them to step back next year than to spend the 25 pick unwisely. They still need help on the offensive line, the defensive line and at linebacker. That's where the pick should be spent.
<<1. Turner hasn't gotten a "monster contract," and no one here has any idea what kind of contract he'd ask for. 2. I get the feeling that any RB who put up 1500+ all purpose yards in their first season as a feature back behind Oakland's line should be getting alot more praise than Lamont is getting.>> I never mentioned anything about Turners contract in this statement- I was stating that IMO Jordan hasn't lived up to his contract as of yet. As I stated, there has been much debate about whether or not LJ has done well in Oakland and I'm not going to rehash that here. There's been good points on both sides of the fence, but IMO he hasn't lived up to his contract as of yet. <<You're ignoring draft position. The Raiders giving up a second meant a pretty high pick in the second round. After that you ignore that the Jets have two seconds, one being very high in a very deep draft.>> No I'm not. I stated that the Raiders wouldn't give up a second while the Turner fan club (herein referred to as TFC) is willing to give up a 1st. That's a fact- period. Even if you try to equate the 2 picks (which I don't agree with) it's still a fact that the Raiders wouldn't give up for Jordan what the TFC will give up for Turner. I don't care if the Jets have 8 second round picks - they would still be overpaying for unproven talent by giving up a 1st and the contract that goes with it. Now if you said to trade down our second pick into the 3rd and get additional pick(s) and use the 3rd on Turner I may bite. It's all about the value. <<What? So it's a knock that a RB with that skillset hasn't had many passes thrown to him? I don't see get the argument. That's like say...so Randy Moss is so great because he can catch everything and he's really fast...but why hasn't he been used at QB?>> Receiving skills has everything to do with it when you're considering giving up a 1st rounder and a big contract on an unproven backup to make him your featured back. Good featured backs in this league are at least decent receivers, and can pick up the blitz in addition to be being great runners. If we were acquiring Turner as a backup, then I'd agree that receiving skills would not be considered. Even you can admit that Turner isn't going to get 6 yards a carry as a full time back. So then you need to evaluate what else he brings to the table when determining fair value. The Moss statement makes absolutely no sense - receiving and blocking are a part of a RB's game. <<It's a plus if a RB can be a good reciever in the backfield, duh. I've never considered it a huge thing, and there is little evidence on whether Turner is or isn't a decent enough reciever in the backfield.>> A smart GM would take this into account when considering what compensation to give up. The SD coaching staff should know whether or not Turner is a good enough of a receiver, and would use him accordingly. At the very least you'd have to say he's unproven, just like he's unproven as a full time back. All of this unproven skill and contract he's going to demand needs to be looked at. <<Yes, so whats the significance? Seems a little nitpicky, plus a very large assumption that because they don't use him he can't. Think about it this way: Phil Simms said that many in SD consider Turner the better inside runner, and from watching him Turner is a hard runner period. Turner is not a starter. Turner plays RB. Turner comes into the game. Hm, powerful inside runner coming in after great counter/pass catching RB...wouldn't the best move be to RUN Turner? Circumstancial evidence is all there is for either side, but seems to me it's assumed that because Turner doesn't have receptions...he can't catch. Seems a tad bit presumptuious for a guy without many touches per game anyway.>> See above in regards to the receiving skills. As far as the rest, don't you think the Turner banter is mainly coming from the S.D. FO to drive up his price? I think that the TFC takes too lightly what we will be giving up for a player that is so unproven.
Why is this fact? Just curiousity, I don't necessarily disagree. 1. If we had 8 second round picks, we'd be stupid not to trade a low first round pick for a very talented, young player. 2. I can't say I disagree with the rest of your post. My thinking has and will sit in the camp that if we give up a first, it's because our coaching staff thinks its worth the risk. Considering our draft position in the first and second, and the large amount of significant talent available available after, I don't get why not. It's a draft pick on a player that might be good, same as giving it up for a 24 year old if you ask me. Except that this 24 year old happens to have NFL experience... 3. I guess I disagreed with some of your post. You're bringing up the contract again. Why would he get a big contract? What indication is there that he'd get one? And recieving skills in a RB are much less important to me than RB skills. Considering that theres little evidence on the topic of Turner's hands, it's barely a topic. Why couldn't I admit Turner wouldn't gain 6 a carry if he became a full time back? It'd be stupid to expect that. Just like I think it's a little quick to assume/imply he can't recieve or block when he doesn't even get 10 (hell, 5) touches a game. Turner to me is a late first round draft pick. A late first round draft pick is young obviously (he's 24), has NFL skills (we've all seen that), will get a decent but not killer contract (like I'm guessing he will), plus Turner adds the bonus of actually playing in the NFL before this year. To me its the same as drafting a RB, except this guy is young, fresh, has an amazing college track record, and has been working out/training/learning in the NFL for 2 years already. Someone said that he would cost a pick, plus cash, plus a cap hit. Um...so would any guy we draft...and besides the two guys we have no shot of drafting, what RB has as much talent as Turner in this draft?
When you quote someone please leave their name in. 1.) It is easier to follow who and what you are arguing. 2.) It shows some respect to the other posters. Thanks. Man I guess this will not die. This line can not run block for shit and the solution to some is to bring in a different RB. A RB that if he has proven anything at all, it is he is a decent backup. That just does not make sense. Fix the run blocking and than see if what we have now will or will not work. Then the following year when the Jets have a run blocking line of some note the FO will know for sure what it has to work with. Turner will be a free agent with no more appreciable wear and tear on him and the FO can get him then. Super Bowl winning teams are not built putting the cart before the horse. I can not see any RB coming in behind this offensive line and ripping it up. Plain and simple you win in the trenches. If that was not painfully obvious this Sunday then I do not know when it will be. This FO needs to bring in road graders at guard and to fix the right side of the line in addition to getting Brick into the weight room with protein shakes in both hands. They do not need to trade first round picks away for unproven RB's. That is not the way to win in the NFL.
You're really grasping here. You've never seen Tony Hunt play, if you think he's slow. He runs with a low pad level, and has a similar style to Steven Jackson. He's proven his ability to block, and be fairly decent at catching balls out of the backfield, something Turner hasn't. How can you call him reliable? He's been a backup, in a role that Jesse Chatman (now a and a better physical speciman then Turner), dominated even moreso then Turner. Turner doesn't lower his head until he's in the open field. I don't trust him at all, squeezing through a tight hole or creating his own, because of his little stutterstep moves that don't work.
Sorry about that - was having some troubles with the computer. Couldn't agree with you more on these points.
Hunt IS slow. I don't have to study this guys college career in order to see how slow he is. Even Mike Mayock pointed it out about 500 times how slow this guy is. He will not outrun ANYONE. And i don't care how well Turner can block or catch. He's got good hands by the way. Do you think Jamal Lewis can catch or block? No! Who cares? That's what they had Chester Taylor for. We have Leon Washington who's an exceptional pass blocker and receiver. What the hell do we need another great blocker and receiver for? Maybe we should just switch Brad Smith to RB, he can catch.
Quote: Offensively the Jets are in a very similar place to where the Raiders were after 2004. The main difference in the situation is that Turner is nowhere near as good a prospect as Jordan was then, and he's going to cost them a pick, cash and cap, so he's a lot more expensive than Jordan was. It's a fact because Jordan was considered to be a good prospect as an NFL runningback coming out of college. Good enough that nobody criticized the Jet's selection of him on the 49 pick of the 2001 NFL draft. You get taken in the top 50 players in a draft on merit and there's no question you are a good prospect. Turner languished until pick 154 of the 2004 draft for reasons that will be covered below, and was not considered a great NFL prospect - just an average one. It's a fact because Lamont Jordan, filling in in much the same way that Turner has for LT, demonstrated early on that he had all the tools needed to play runningback in the NFL. He rushed well, he caught passes well and he blocked well. The Jets thought highly enough of his skills that they lamentably even allowed him to throw an option pass now and then. Turner has been treated like a one-dimensional asset, albeit a strong one-dimensional asset, by the Chargers who have repeatedly declined to use his receiving skills (liabilities) in game situations. Don't get me wrong about Turner. I think he has a chance to be a good back. He has little or no chance to be a good all-around back but he could well turn into a 4.5 yards per carry 270 carry type back. He also could turn out to be unable to handle the job and/or blowout to injuries as soon as he has a bunch of people on him for 20 carries a game. There's just no way to tell. For a 1st round pick I want a young proven guy, like Curtis Martin in 1998, or a blue-chip prospect who has the tools to do the whole job. The only guy likely to be available this year who fits either of those bills is Clinton Portis. Even he is probably over-priced at the 25 though. The 37 would be a fairer price.
