Preston Howley III Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 I don't understand this statement at all. How does drafting the best available player equate to trading picks and drafting based on perceived need? Makes no sense to me. In fact, it seems like the complete opposite. You are the one that has perceived the Jets need a running back and your perception includes that a day two back will be better than Leon, Barlow and Houston. Personally, I'm in favor of BAP, but obviously you have to tweak that to be BAP that fits your system and if they are close you take the player at a position of need (RB) over one of strength (say WR). For instance, it probably makes no sense taking a 280 lb DT like Meekins no matter what some board has him rated, since he won't fit the system. It didn't make sense because I didn't clarify. Hypothetical situation: Jets trade away the number one pick for Turner. The opportunity cost on that is they miss out on getting D-line help (top prospects in the 2007 draft are defensive line). The second opportunity cost they forfeit is the potential to get a RB on day two (RB prospects are projected here), even if one falls right into their laps, they are not gonna take him because of the investment in Turner. Its hard to explain this in writing. Just visualize Bradways drafts- he always targeted a specific player, advertised it, got exploited, and once he got that player, he would pass on a player he could have gotten to fill that need in the later rounds. If you're gonna go BAP, you have to go BAP completely. You can't go "need" in round one and then BAP after that. It doesn't work out. If anything, the draft should be the opposite; BAP on day one, need on day two, because you can afford to reach and take a chance, reward vs risk becomes exponentially greater in each successive round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Troll Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 IMO, Turner is better than any back in this draft besides Adrian Peterson. That's why I'd trade the first for him. I don't like trading picks for players, never have. I never liked the McCareins trade. I HATED the Jolley trade from day one. But, this is different. I think Michael Turner will be a top ten back whenever he gets to carry the load. And, that, to me, is worth more than a 3-4 defensive end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Preston Howley III Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 You don't draft "need" in round one, you draft BAP. You draft "need" in the later rounds, when reward vs risk becomes exponentially greater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugg Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 It didn't make sense because I didn't clarify. Hypothetical situation: Jets trade away the number one pick for Turner. The opportunity cost on that is they miss out on getting D-line help (top prospects in the 2007 draft are defensive line). The second opportunity cost they forfeit is the potential to get a RB on day two (RB prospects are projected here), even if one falls right into their laps, they are not gonna take him because of the investment in Turner. Its hard to explain this in writing. Just visualize Bradways drafts- he always targeted a specific player, advertised it, got exploited, and once he got that player, he would pass on a player he could have gotten to fill that need in the later rounds. If you're gonna go BAP, you have to go BAP completely. You can't go "need" in round one and then BAP after that. It doesn't work out. If anything, the draft should be the opposite; BAP on day one, need on day two, because you can afford to reach and take a chance, reward vs risk becomes exponentially greater in each successive round. One thing we know about Tannebaum and Mangini-as clear as it is they need a back, they aren't tipping their hand until they have to. I admit liking the Robertson move. But Bradway got set up like a bowling pin, and same thing with Satana Moss, which was much worse. And both of those pale compared to his urgent hearfelt mancrushes on Mccariens and Doug Jolley. At least Robertson has played and contributed. If this FO goes for Turner for one of those top 3 picks, it's because they've looked over the talent and figured Turner is better than the alternatives,and they can still get players with those other 2 picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Troll Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 You don't draft "need" in round one, you draft BAP. You draft "need" in the later rounds, when reward vs risk becomes exponentially greater. I do not personally believe that there are 24 players in this draft that are better than Michael Turner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmike1 Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Alot of people said that Derrick Blaylock would be a great back if he got a chance to start too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Troll Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Alot of people said that Derrick Blaylock would be a great back if he got a chance to start too. Who? I never heard anyone say that. What I heard everyone say was that he would make a decent backup for Curtis. Nobody ever thought he was the "answer". He ain't no Randy Johnson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjam76 Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Does this staff know RB talent? So far they've shown they don't. They wanted Suggs from Cleveland for a draft pick. He didn't pass the physical. Then they got Kevan Barlow from SF.. Yeah that turned out well. While this new staff has done a good job, they haven't shown that they exactly know how to pick up a quality RB. they had no RB because everybody and their mother's knew Curtis Martin, even if he came back, probably couldn't carry the load like he used to. So if they go full throttle for Turner, they better know he's a star. As far as Deuce in New Orleans, it's not even close to the same situation. He already is a pro bowl running back. He was coming off injury. Turner has what, 50 carries in 3 years. and Why hasn't he caught more passes in 3 years? Yeah LT is who he is, but for a team like the Chargers, it isn't a good sign that Turner really hasn't even made contributions in mop up duty. Like I said, I wouldn't trade a first or second round pick for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetfan5388 Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Bring em here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjam76 Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 If the offensive line doesn't improve drastically on rush blocking and the defense can't stop teams from making first downs, scoring when in the red zone, giving up big plays, scoring with under 2 minutes left, then it really won' t matter if Washington or Turner gain 1000+ yards next year. THe defense stinks. Plain and simple. They had a few decent games here and there, but when the team needed them to make stops during the year, they never did. THe defense needs to improve drastically for this team to take a step forward. A new RB is nice, but it's kinda pointless if the team gives up 20+ points a game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoFlaJets Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 If the offensive line doesn't improve drastically on rush blocking and the defense can't stop teams from making first downs, scoring when in the red zone, giving up big plays, scoring with under 2 minutes left, then it really won' t matter if Washington or Turner gain 1000+ yards next year. THe defense stinks. Plain and simple. They had a few decent games here and there, but when the team needed them to make stops during the year, they never did. THe defense needs to improve drastically for this team to take a step forward. A new RB is nice, but it's kinda pointless if the team gives up 20+ points a game. good post by the new guy-also, what some of us have been saying for a while here is if we get a couple of road graders on the offensive line again this year we might be able to turn anybody into a thousand yard rusher-like Denver always did with THEIR great OL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 good post by the new guy-also, what some of us have been saying for a while here is if we get a couple of road graders on the offensive line again this year we might be able to turn anybody into a thousand yard rusher-like Denver always did with THEIR great OL How about we get them AND Turner who will in turn get 2000+ yards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancemehl Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Wow Dolphins fans STILL trying to hang their hat on Ricky Williams. I'm glad you're confident in the RB you got with the 4th pick overall. What's his name again? #2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Turner has what, 50 carries in 3 years. 157 Carries 6.0 YPC 5TD's (behind LT the TD machine) He almost had twice the yards LEON did with half the carries and playing only 13 games BEHIND LT.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fin Fan In Cali Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Here are his stats. http://www.chargers.com/team/roster/michael-turner-stats.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mangenious420 Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 How about we get them AND Turner who will in turn get 2000+ yards. 2000+? Relax over there buddy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 2000+? Relax over there buddy. How about you get more excited? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 good post by the new guy-also, what some of us have been saying for a while here is if we get a couple of road graders on the offensive line again this year we might be able to turn anybody into a thousand yard rusher-like Denver always did with THEIR great OL Denver has always done it without road graders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Denver has always done it without road graders. They did take a mauling RT in the 1st rd acouple yrs ago. And really, zone blocking teams rarely win superbowls. John Elway and Terrell Davis can make any decent Oline look great. Fact is, the broncos running game in the playoffs since those 2 guys have retired, has not been very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 It didn't make sense because I didn't clarify. If you're gonna go BAP, you have to go BAP completely. You can't go "need" in round one and then BAP after that. It doesn't work out. If anything, the draft should be the opposite; BAP on day one, need on day two, because you can afford to reach and take a chance, reward vs risk becomes exponentially greater in each successive round. OK, I understand what you are saying now. I still prefer to get the best player. Obviously if guys are identical to the 4th decimal point and one is a center and one an RB we should look to the RB, but you are better off stockpiling talent. For instance if we are up at the top of the draft I wouldn't be averse to taking Calvin Johnson. We are not so set at any position I'd turn down a player with a high grade. I think that at the bottom of the draft is where you really have to take BAP. The difference between players at that point is in the league/out of the league. Not starter/non-starter. The big difference is there are usually more players lumped up at that grade so that you can take more need picks unless somebody you love slips though the cracks. Does this staff know RB talent? So far they've shown they don't. They are also the guys that drafted Leon Washington in the 4th round. Getting Suggs for a DB that was going to get cut showed that they don't know RB talent? They might as well have let that trade go through for all the value we got out of Strait. Sure they burned a 4th on Barlow, but he did score a boatload of TDs and he's been hurt or he might have been better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjam76 Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Chad P is not Elway. Kellen Clemmons has not looked anything like Elway. At this point I look at Turner as another Lamont Jordan. Might put up some decent numbers here and there, but there is a reason he's still a backup after 3 years in the nFL. If he was worth anything, SD might have gotten something for him already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjam76 Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Barlow was a bad move. Plain and simple. If they thought they needed a RB, they should have done something in the draft or during the off season, not during the preseason.. Because it looked like a desperate move and in the end, that's what it was. Barlow was really a wasted draft pick when it comes down to it. I'm not giving this a team a pass because Curtis Martin was hurt. Everybody knew that. Many people thought he was done a few years back. So either they should have done something in the offseason about the RB position or figure if Washington, Houston, and Blaylock were what they need. Turner is another backup that may or may not be anything special. Giving up a 1st round draft pick is a bad move. A 2nd round draft pick isn't that great a move... So far I am not sold on this teams ability to pick great players.. For all the good the Jets did this season, nobody the staff picked was outstanding. THere were good performances here and there, but no stars. So if they trade a couple of high draft picks for Turner and he turns out to be about as good as Lamont Jordan has been, it might not really be worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Chad P is not Elway. Kellen Clemmons has not looked anything like Elway. At this point I look at Turner as another Lamont Jordan. Might put up some decent numbers here and there, but there is a reason he's still a backup after 3 years in the nFL. If he was worth anything, SD might have gotten something for him already. They are going to get something. By offering him the tender they will get a 1st or a 1st and a third. Doesn't have to be ours, but if they want to keep him, they will or they'll get a minimum of a 1st round pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjam76 Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 What SD will get for him, doesn't mean he's worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasonJet Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Jets have two glaring needs: Run D and Run O. The top 50-60 prospects are stacked with defensive linemen, this is why I think the Jets go defense on day one. 60 through 200 is stacked with RB's, and thats why I think the Jets will target a back on day two. Pure logistical assumption based on demograghics by position, and how they are ranked accordingly. If you piss your only first rounder away on a RB, chances are, you won't be able to address the porous run D later on in the draft. If the Jets draft BAP, they'll wind up with a bunch of special teamers and backups, similar to Bradway's M.O. panic moves of trading picks and reaching, targeting a specific player, based exclusively on a perceived need. Just because you "need" a RB, or just because you think you need a RB, does not preclude bargaining from a position of zero leverage, and getting fleeced in the process by the one team that may have a "legitimate" (based purely on assumption) player. If circumstances aren't to your convenience, why allow yourself to be exploited? All the hype around Michael Turner is based on the one variable, that he is the exclusive candidate. Not the best candidate, just the only one available. Thats pretty stupid reasoning if you think about it: The Jets need a RB; Michael Turner is the sole option at this present moment in time; lets become victims of circumstance and hope it works out, rather than explore other options, like the draft. I completely agree. The Jets do need a running back, but it is hardly the only thing they need. Tangini would be out of their minds to give up a precious 1st-round pick for a guy that has 1 career start and hasn't come close to proving that he can be a starting RB over a whole season. I can't believe some fans actually are advocating giving up a 1st rounder for a completely unproven player. This idea is just as ridiculous as the idea that we should trade Vilma. This team just has too many needs on both sides of the ball to giving up a 1st-round pick for an unproven player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Barlow may have been a bad move, but a 4th rounder for a guy who has rushed for 1,000 in the past is not horrible. Especially when you figure that he scored 6 tds on a team that is horrid in short yardage run situations. I don't care one way or the other about picks for Turner. I think most of it is hype for highlights, though some knowlegable posters love the guy. I'm not against trading one pick for the guy, but a 1 & a 3 is out of the question from where I sit. You state the FO is bad at rating rbs: Suggs for Strait is a push, Washington was a bargain as our 2nd pick of the 4th. Even if Barlow for a 4th is a bad move it doesn't indicate that they have no ability to rate rbs. I agree that the Barlow move smacked of desperation. Part of that is that Martin didn't come back and Blaylock looked atrocious. They may have figured they needed RB help, but were willing to live with RBBC until they saw how bad Blaylock was in this system and Houston being hurt all the time. Kind of hard to go into the season with a 4th round pick as your only viable back. Sort of like trading a pick for Ramsey. Sure it didn't work out, but it was worth a shot since you didn't even know if you had the bodies to compete for the spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasonJet Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 The only reason why Turner was that late was partly because of the school he went too. Northern Illinois I believe and that's not a very high college of producing Running Backs. So the fact that Tomlinson went to TCU prevented him from being a high draft pick? If he was really that good he would have been drafted much higher. People need to stop going crazy. It is PURE INSANITY to give up a 1ST ROUND PICK for this guy. Just think about it for one second. This guy has DONE NOTHING to prove he is worth a 1st round pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 At this point I look at Turner as another Lamont Jordan. Might put up some decent numbers here and there, but there is a reason he's still a backup after 3 years in the nFL. If he was worth anything, SD might have gotten something for him already. What SD will get for him, doesn't mean he's worth it. I'm not the one that said if he was worth anything SD might have gotten something. Why would they bother? They have him the whole year and can guarantee their compensation based upon their tender offer. I didn't say he was worth it. Personally, I don't care, but don't act like they should/would have traded the guy if he had any value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjam76 Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 The Jets didn't trade picks and people for Bush or anybody else last year? Why would they trade maybe a 1st and a 3rd for a guy like Turner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonCorleone Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Get it through your heads- Jets are going D-line, D-line, D-line. And not necessarily in that order. They aint trading a #1 draft pick to San Diego for no Michael Turner. Day two of the draft is loaded with RB's. We got Leon Washington that way, and we're gonna get another one that way. I agree. I hope that we are somehow able to get some beefy monster on our line. We are one of the smallest DL's in football. How could this have happened? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjam76 Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 So far the Colts have won because of defense. The Bears defense, while giving up some points, came up big with an interception and then two huge stops. One to end the game and the first Seahawk possession in overtime. The Saints D made some stops down the stretch. THe Pats always make huge stops on Defense.. People have a distorted view of this Jets team. THey had an easy schedule, so for them to improve next year that defense needs to make important stops. Yeah a RB would be nice, but without improving this defense, the Jets will never win anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoFlaJets Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 don't think the Jets brass aren't watching to see how Michael Turner is performing against their biggest rival-so far Turner is causing the Pats trouble Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afosomf Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 sign me up i will take Turner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fin Fan In Cali Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 If you guys could get Turner, I think that would be huge for your team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjam76 Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 He's had 2 carries.. 2 carries doesn't make him a RB who can carry the load. People don't think Washington can carry the ball 25 times a game. How do we know Turner can carry 25 times a game? Like I said, a 3rd round pick for him probably wouldn't be that bad. But a 1st and a 3rd is just a bad move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.