Michael Turner vs Larry Johnson (1 Viewer)

[wino1618]

I've heard a lot of people hating on Turner, saying that the Falcons have a bad OL, bad QB, etc, et. Well, don't the Chiefs have the same problem? Yet, people only seem to be holding back on LJ for the injury factor - what about the fact that his line can't block and his QB can't keep defenses honest and he wasn't that good last year before he got hurt.

On the flipside, is Atlanta really as terrible as everyone thinks? Isn't duming Petrino a step up for them? They were really a team without an identity last season, losing Vick without time to form a new plan. And yes, the run game was a not-so-good 26th last year - but that was with Warrick Dunn getting 2/3 of the carries. Isn't Turner an upgrade over that? And assuming they don't throw Ryan to the wolves early, Redman should get the nod at QB - he was much better than Harrington last year. He finished with a QB rating of 90 (Harrington 77), and put up solid numbers in 4/5 starts. I do think Norwood will get his chances, but in the system ATL will be running, there should be enough for at least a 20/10 split of touches. Turner was very capable on passing downs for San Diego; they just had Tomlinson and Darren Sproles.

Sorry, lots of questions, I just haven't seen anyone really put some honest thought to it. All I read is "ATL stinks, Turner will be a bust" and "If LJ can stay healthy, he'll be a bargain", but I see a lot of similarities in the situations surrounding them....what am I missing here?

 

[The Man with the Plan]

I've heard a lot of people hating on Turner, saying that the Falcons have a bad OL, bad QB, etc, et. Well, don't the Chiefs have the same problem? Yet, people only seem to be holding back on LJ for the injury factor - what about the fact that his line can't block and his QB can't keep defenses honest and he wasn't that good last year before he got hurt.

On the flipside, is Atlanta really as terrible as everyone thinks? Isn't duming Petrino a step up for them? They were really a team without an identity last season, losing Vick without time to form a new plan. And yes, the run game was a not-so-good 26th last year - but that was with Warrick Dunn getting 2/3 of the carries. Isn't Turner an upgrade over that? And assuming they don't throw Ryan to the wolves early, Redman should get the nod at QB - he was much better than Harrington last year. He finished with a QB rating of 90 (Harrington 77), and put up solid numbers in 4/5 starts. I do think Norwood will get his chances, but in the system ATL will be running, there should be enough for at least a 20/10 split of touches. Turner was very capable on passing downs for San Diego; they just had Tomlinson and Darren Sproles.

Sorry, lots of questions, I just haven't seen anyone really put some honest thought to it. All I read is "ATL stinks, Turner will be a bust" and "If LJ can stay healthy, he'll be a bargain", but I see a lot of similarities in the situations surrounding them....what am I missing here?

Talent level. LJ is considered a much better player than Michael Turner. He broke his foot last season but in the 2 seasons before he had some of the best seasons by a running ever. Also LJ is at least a decent pass catcher. Michael Turner so far has shown that he's not a factor in the passing game.

 

[wino1618]

I've heard a lot of people hating on Turner, saying that the Falcons have a bad OL, bad QB, etc, et. Well, don't the Chiefs have the same problem? Yet, people only seem to be holding back on LJ for the injury factor - what about the fact that his line can't block and his QB can't keep defenses honest and he wasn't that good last year before he got hurt.

On the flipside, is Atlanta really as terrible as everyone thinks? Isn't duming Petrino a step up for them? They were really a team without an identity last season, losing Vick without time to form a new plan. And yes, the run game was a not-so-good 26th last year - but that was with Warrick Dunn getting 2/3 of the carries. Isn't Turner an upgrade over that? And assuming they don't throw Ryan to the wolves early, Redman should get the nod at QB - he was much better than Harrington last year. He finished with a QB rating of 90 (Harrington 77), and put up solid numbers in 4/5 starts. I do think Norwood will get his chances, but in the system ATL will be running, there should be enough for at least a 20/10 split of touches. Turner was very capable on passing downs for San Diego; they just had Tomlinson and Darren Sproles.

Sorry, lots of questions, I just haven't seen anyone really put some honest thought to it. All I read is "ATL stinks, Turner will be a bust" and "If LJ can stay healthy, he'll be a bargain", but I see a lot of similarities in the situations surrounding them....what am I missing here?

Talent level. LJ is considered a much better player than Michael Turner. He broke his foot last season but in the 2 seasons before he had some of the best seasons by a running ever. Also LJ is at least a decent pass catcher. Michael Turner so far has shown that he's not a factor in the passing game.

I didn't meant to imply that Turner was going to have a better season than LJ. I know that LJ has "done it before" and Turner is "unproven". I just think that people seem to be either overlooking QB/OL when evaluating Johnson, or overestimating it when evaluating Turner. LJ's 2 great seasons came with a healthy and productive Trent Green at QB and before Will Shields and Willie Roaf retired. Last year, he average 3.5 YPC before getting hurt. He now has a lot of mileage and a history of injury. Sure, he could rebound and he does have talent. But he also has a bad OL and a bad QB and the Chiefs spend a 2nd round pick on an RB to spell him, so the 350-carry seasons are no more.

Sure, Turner did not catch many balls. That's because he was backing up an every-down-back in LT. And when he did play extensively, SD usually had a big lead. SD also had Darren Sproles, who is basically in the league because he can return kicks and be a screen/draw RB. But Turner did averaged 5.5 YPC in SD, and he has between-the-tackles size and home-run speed. Norwood averaged 6 yards a carry last year behind Atlanta's so-called bad OL.

 

[greyone]

talent always supercedes situation

 

[puckalicious]

I didn't meant to imply that Turner was going to have a better season than LJ. I know that LJ has "done it before" and Turner is "unproven". I just think that people seem to be either overlooking QB/OL when evaluating Johnson, or overestimating it when evaluating Turner.

LJ's 2 great seasons came with a healthy and productive Trent Green at QB and before Will Shields and Willie Roaf retired. Last year, he average 3.5 YPC before getting hurt. He now has a lot of mileage and a history of injury. Sure, he could rebound and he does have talent. But he also has a bad OL and a bad QB and the Chiefs spend a 2nd round pick on an RB to spell him, so the 350-carry seasons are no more.

Sure, Turner did not catch many balls. That's because he was backing up an every-down-back in LT. And when he did play extensively, SD usually had a big lead. SD also had Darren Sproles, who is basically in the league because he can return kicks and be a screen/draw RB. But Turner did averaged 5.5 YPC in SD, and he has between-the-tackles size and home-run speed. Norwood averaged 6 yards a carry last year behind Atlanta's so-called bad OL.

LJ:1050 career carries

1 injury

Can't agree with your bolded points one iota. As stated, talent always > situation. I agree their respective teams are poor but KC's defense is a bit better and have had another year of seasoning under Herm. ATL is under it's 3rd coaching regime in 3 years but I do like their chances of improving over last season.

Also, I don't put too much weight in "done it before" and "unproven" which can quickly become "washed up" and "proven". It's about talent.

 

[The Jacket]

Sure, he could rebound and he does have talent. But he also has a bad OL and a bad QB and the Chiefs spend a 2nd round pick on an RB to spell him, so the 350-carry seasons are no more.

It was a third-round pick, and he was on pace for a top 10 finish last season with the worst O-line and worst passing game in the league before he suffered a fluke injury. I don't think enough people realize that. In by far his worst year ever, he was still going to be a top 10 fantasy back. I'd say it's more than reasonable that people should expect that of him this year, if he can stay healthy. You say the O-line is "bad," but of course that was last year and four of the five O-line positions are different. There's a first-round draft pick (universally regarded as an elite talent, especially as a guy who operates in space and creates holes in the running game, who's playing well in camp); a new, bigger center; a new RG who I can assure you will be no worse than RG John Welbourne last year (a steroid abuser who sucked when off the juice); and a new RT who played reasonably solid at LT last year. Compare that to the Falcons, who have little to no talent on that O-line. At least the Chiefs could become pretty good.

Last year: 160-560-3 + 30-190-1. In a full season, he would've got close to 400 total touches for 1500 yards and 8 scores. That assumes he continued his torrid pace, and doesn't consider that he was just finally starting to get into the easy part of his schedule. I see a floor of 350-1400-7, a reasonable projection of 375-1650-10, and a ceiling of 400-1800-14. I can't say the same of Turner personally. The floor is lower, and the ceiling isn't as high. JMO.

 

[Sinrman]

Mmmmm, no, the KC O-line has been considered one of the best for a number of years (see Priest Holmes, see LJ). It is quickly diminishing with the loss of key players, but it is still a heckuva lot better than the Falcons. Theirs is quite porous.

 

[jurb26]

This one is easy. Reasons I would rank LJ significantly higher than Turner:

1. Work load and opportunity. We know that Edwards will run a healthy LJ A LOT. We also know that LJ is a proven and capable receiver out of the back field. On top of that, it is expected that Norwood is going to get a healthy share of touches in Atl. I would expect that if both guys play a full 16 games, LJ will see at least 66 more touches (or 4 per game).

2. Proven ability. LJ is a superior talent to Turner. I'm sure we will eventually see the "Turner is an elite RB who just happened to be stuck behind the best RB in the game" crowd eventually in this thread. I don't buy it. Even if Turner is a good talent, LJ has proven he is one of the very best in the NFL. Furthermore, LJ has proven the ability to carry the load (a quite heavy one at that) for a full season.

It's really just that simple. Talent and opportunity. LJ has more of both.

 

[Dirty Weasel]

Is it possible you see LJ and Turner as similar bruising RB's and are therefore trying to justify in your mind that their situations are also similar? If so, I can see the comparisons too. LJ waited behind Priest for his shot, and now Turner is out of LT's shadow. Beyond that, the comparisons stop...

- LJ was a first round pick out of college; Turner was a fifth round pick a year later

- LJ is an underrated pass catcher; Turner's pass catching is almost non-existant

- LJ has Kolby Smith and Jamaal Charles as backups, Turner has a more proven Jerious Norwood

- Dunn averaged 3.1YPC behind the same OL that Norwood averaged 6.0YPC; says more for Norwood than the OL

- LJ still has a better OL than Turner

- LJ has TE Gonzo and WR Bowe to take off some of the heat; Turner has TE Milner and WR White

- LJ has Croyle behind center; Turner has Redman and possibly a rookie

LJ's floor is about Turner's ceiling IMO.

 

[bigmiiiiike]

I agree with Sinrman. Forget any arguments about talent, it's very difficult to with a straight face say that LJ is so clearly more talented than Turner. LJ was mediocre while he played last year behind a terrible line, and amazing when he played behind an all-world OLine.

However, to answer your question Wino, I think that LJ's ADP is being docked because of the poor situation with the Chiefs. LJ was the #2 back for consecutive seasons when he was at the top of his game in a top offense, but his ADP now is in the early 2nd round. I think that shows that people think that IF he stays healthy, he'll represent first round value, but not necessarily #2 value (I haven't seen ANYONE say, "If LJ is healthy, he'll be top 3"). So, I believe there is a concern with the Chiefs, and people are probably overly vocal about the injury risk compared to the team risk, but I think you definitely see the team risk built into his ADP, as you clearly do with Turner as well.

 

[Avery]

talent always supercedes situation

Generally speaking...Dynasty: ProbablyRedraft: Not necessarily

 

[Christo]

Is it possible you see LJ and Turner as similar bruising RB's and are therefore trying to justify in your mind that their situations are also similar? If so, I can see the comparisons too. LJ waited behind Priest for his shot, and now Turner is out of LT's shadow. Beyond that, the comparisons stop...

- LJ was a first round pick out of college; Turner was a fifth round pick a year later

- LJ is an underrated pass catcher; Turner's pass catching is almost non-existant

- LJ has Kolby Smith and Jamaal Charles as backups, Turner has a more proven Jerious Norwood

- Dunn averaged 3.1YPC behind the same OL that Norwood averaged 6.0YPC; says more for Norwood than the OL

- LJ still has a better OL than Turner

- LJ has TE Gonzo and WR Bowe to take off some of the heat; Turner has TE Milner and WR White

- LJ has Croyle behind center; Turner has Redman and possibly a rookie

LJ's floor is about Turner's ceiling IMO.

So, you're saying that MT has at least one advantage that LJ doesn't.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Mmmmm, no, the KC O-line has been considered one of the best for a number of years (see Priest Holmes, see LJ). It is quickly diminishing with the loss of key players, but it is still a heckuva lot better than the Falcons. Theirs is quite porous.

I disagree. Rudy Niswanger, almost a complete unknown, at center? Damien McIntosh, a failure at LT, at RT? Adrian Jones, a failure with the Jets at guard? Rookie Branden Albert, who has only played a few more games at LT than I have as Croyle's bodyguard? Waters is the last of the Mohicans, but who knows how much he has left.The Falcons line (Baker-Blalock-McClure-Forney/Dahl-Weiner) has just as much youth and uncertainty, but not more than the Chiefs.

 

[David Yudkin]

If the Falcons rushing attack was so bad, how did they rank #1 in rushing yards in 2006 . . . and 2005 . . . and 2004?

Yeah, I get it that Vick had a lot to do with it, but it's not like they've never had any success running the football in Atlanta.

 

[travdogg]

Is it possible you see LJ and Turner as similar bruising RB's and are therefore trying to justify in your mind that their situations are also similar? If so, I can see the comparisons too. LJ waited behind Priest for his shot, and now Turner is out of LT's shadow. Beyond that, the comparisons stop...

- LJ was a first round pick out of college; Turner was a fifth round pick a year later.

- LJ is an underrated pass catcher; Turner's pass catching is almost non-existant

- LJ has Kolby Smith and Jamaal Charles as backups, Turner has a more proven Jerious Norwood

- Dunn averaged 3.1YPC behind the same OL that Norwood averaged 6.0YPC; says more for Norwood than the OL

- LJ still has a better OL than Turner

- LJ has TE Gonzo and WR Bowe to take off some of the heat; Turner has TE Milner and WR White

- LJ has Croyle behind center; Turner has Redman and possibly a rookie

LJ's floor is about Turner's ceiling IMO.

I disagree with the bolded parts.I think Norwood's YPC says more about Dunn than Norwood or the o-line. Any decent back probably puts up 4 YPC on that team.

Atlanta's o-line is better than KC's though they probably are the 2 worst in the league.

I'd much rather have Redman/Ryan than Croyle and so would 30 other teams. 31 if they were honest.

Turner's ceiling is much higher than LJ's floor. I like LJ more than Turner, but its not like they day and night apart. I think LJ is likely a 10-12 RB and Turner is more a 13-17 RB.

 

[maxwelledison]

I agree with Sinrman. Forget any arguments about talent, it's very difficult to with a straight face say that LJ is so clearly more talented than Turner. LJ was mediocre while he played last year behind a terrible line, and amazing when he played behind an all-world OLine.

However, to answer your question Wino, I think that LJ's ADP is being docked because of the poor situation with the Chiefs. LJ was the #2 back for consecutive seasons when he was at the top of his game in a top offense, but his ADP now is in the early 2nd round. I think that shows that people think that IF he stays healthy, he'll represent first round value, but not necessarily #2 value (I haven't seen ANYONE say, "If LJ is healthy, he'll be top 3"). So, I believe there is a concern with the Chiefs, and people are probably overly vocal about the injury risk compared to the team risk, but I think you definitely see the team risk built into his ADP, as you clearly do with Turner as well.

This point is not getting enough attention. That line in KC wasn't just really good; it was arguably one of the great offensive lines of all time. In my view there was/is nothing special about Priest Holmes or LJ. I remember a game where Derrick Blaylock had to come in and he scored four TD's in one half behind that line. LJ is a nice, bruising runner. Turner may or may not be the same but it is not like we are comparing Turner to one of the few RBs who actually is special (LT, Jim Brown, Payton, etc.).

 

[David Yudkin]

I agree with Sinrman. Forget any arguments about talent, it's very difficult to with a straight face say that LJ is so clearly more talented than Turner. LJ was mediocre while he played last year behind a terrible line, and amazing when he played behind an all-world OLine.

However, to answer your question Wino, I think that LJ's ADP is being docked because of the poor situation with the Chiefs. LJ was the #2 back for consecutive seasons when he was at the top of his game in a top offense, but his ADP now is in the early 2nd round. I think that shows that people think that IF he stays healthy, he'll represent first round value, but not necessarily #2 value (I haven't seen ANYONE say, "If LJ is healthy, he'll be top 3"). So, I believe there is a concern with the Chiefs, and people are probably overly vocal about the injury risk compared to the team risk, but I think you definitely see the team risk built into his ADP, as you clearly do with Turner as well.

This point is not getting enough attention. That line in KC wasn't just really good; it was arguably one of the great offensive lines of all time. In my view there was/is nothing special about Priest Holmes or LJ. I remember a game where Derrick Blaylock had to come in and he scored four TD's in one half behind that line. LJ is a nice, bruising runner. Turner may or may not be the same but it is not like we are comparing Turner to one of the few RBs who actually is special (LT, Jim Brown, Payton, etc.).

IMO, LJ's closest comparison is Curtis Martin. Both compiled great totals based mostly on voulme and a beefy OL.

 

[The Jacket]

LJ is far more talented (read: size, speed, power, vision, etc.) than given credit for by some. That was the key point.

Croyle vs. Redman/rookie Ryan is a wash. There's nothing much to differentiate there, especially when you figure in Gonzalez/Bowe >>>>>> whoever the Falcons' scrub TE is/White.

 

[Dirty Weasel]

If the Falcons rushing attack was so bad, how did they rank #1 in rushing yards in 2006 . . . and 2005 . . . and 2004?Yeah, I get it that Vick had a lot to do with it, but it's not like they've never had any success running the football in Atlanta.

Not only did Vick's rushing yards overinflate the team's totals, but it also inflated every other player to carry for the Falcons.2001 - Vick's 1st season, he has 31 carries, 289 yards, 9.3YPCWith Vick (8 games) - 224 carries, 1029 yards, 4.6YPCWithout Vick (8 games) - 215 carries, 733 yards, 3.4YPCOverall with Vick's stats included - 439 carries, 1762 yards, 4.0YPCOverall without Vick stats included - 408 carries, 1473 yards, 3.6YPCFalcons finish 16th in attempts, 16th in yards, and 16th in YPC2002 - Vick's 2nd season, he has 113 carries, 777 yards, 6.9YPCWith Vick (15 games) - 499 carries, 2301 yards, 4.6YPCWithout Vick (1 game) - 24 carries, 67 yards, 2.8YPCOverall with Vick's stats included - 523 carries, 2368 yards, 4.5YPCOverall without Vick stats included - 410 carries, 1591 yards, 3.9YPCFalcons finish 2nd in attempts, 4th in yards, and 9th in YPC2003 - Vick's 3rd season, he has 40 carries, 255 yards, 6.4YPCWith Vick (5 games) - 168 carries, 732 yards, 4.4YPCWithout Vick (11 games) - 267 carries, 1217 yards, 4.6YPCOverall with Vick's stats included - 435 carries, 1949 yards, 4.5YPCOverall without Vick stats included - 395 carries, 1694 yards, 4.3YPCFalcons finish 19th in attempts, 14th in yards, and 8th in YPC2004 - Vick's 4th season, he has 120 carries, 902 yards, 7.5YPCWith Vick (15 games) - 500 carries, 2579 yards, 5.2YPCWithout Vick (1 game) - 24 carries, 93 yards, 3.9YPCOverall with Vick's stats included - 524 carries, 2672 yards, 5.1YPCOverall without Vick stats included - 404 carries, 1770 yards, 4.4YPCFalcons finish 5th in attempts, 1st in yards, and 1st in YPC2005 - Vick's 5th season, he has 102 carries, 597 yards, 5.9YPCWith Vick (15 games) - 505 carries, 2430 yards, 4.8YPCWithout Vick (1 game) - 26 carries, 116 yards, 4.5YPCOverall with Vick's stats included - 531 carries, 2546 yards, 4.8YPCOverall without Vick stats included - 429 carries, 1949 yards, 4.5YPCFalcons finish 3rd in attempts, 1st in yards, and 1st in YPC2006 - Vick's 6th season, he has 123 carries, 1039 yards, 8.4YPCWith Vick (16 games) - 537 carries, 2939 yards, 5.5YPCWithout Vick (0 games) - N/AOverall with Vick's stats included - 537 carries, 2939 yards, 5.5YPCOverall without Vick stats included - 414 carries, 1900 yards, 4.6YPCFalcons finish 1st in attempts, 1st in yards, and 1st in YPC2007 - Bye bye, VickWithout Vick (16 games) - 385 carries, 1520 yards, 3.9YPCFalcons finish 29th in attempts, 26th in yards, and 20th in YPCIn the 74 games Vick played since coming to town in 2001, the Falcons have 2433 carries, 12010 yards, 4.9YPCIn the 38 games without Vick since coming to town in 2001, the Falcons have 941 carries, 3746 yards, 4.0YPCI'm not cherry-picking stats here. What you see above is the entire Falcons rushing game since 2001. The Falcons average nearly a whole yard per carry without Vick. Do you think it's the RB's that are losing that yard per carry? I certainly do. Without Vick, the Falcons are an average running team.

 

[David Yudkin]

I'm not cherry-picking stats here. What you see above is the entire Falcons rushing game since 2001. The Falcons average nearly a whole yard per carry without Vick. Do you think it's the RB's that are losing that yard per carry? I certainly do. Without Vick, the Falcons are an average running team.

Without Vick or without proper planning to be without Vick, the team has suffered in having no Plan B . . . the Falcons have not had much of a passing game and defenses could concentrate on stuffing the run and not having to worry about Vick.I don't think that the team has forgotten how to block, but they have been in a lousy situation in preparing a better game plan. Losing a centerpiece QB, switching coaches and coordinators, trading Schaub , having to settle on scrub QBs, etc. have all left marks against the success of the offense.I'm not a huge Turner fan this year for a variey of reasons, most notably that he may not see anywhere near the touches that LJ will get. I think Norwood may play a greater role this year as well.If the Falcons get any sense of stability on offense I believe they will do better running the football (although nowhere near as well as they had done for several years with Vick).While you posted the Falcons numbers, you didn't list off the Chiefs. KC ranked 30-32nd in the major rushing categories . . . worse than Atlanta did. THey had a putrid 3.3 ypc team average. i suspect that what they lack in quality they will make up for in volume.

 

[sholditch]

Is it possible you see LJ and Turner as similar bruising RB's and are therefore trying to justify in your mind that their situations are also similar? If so, I can see the comparisons too. LJ waited behind Priest for his shot, and now Turner is out of LT's shadow. Beyond that, the comparisons stop...

- LJ was a first round pick out of college; Turner was a fifth round pick a year later

- LJ is an underrated pass catcher; Turner's pass catching is almost non-existant

- LJ has Kolby Smith and Jamaal Charles as backups, Turner has a more proven Jerious Norwood

- Dunn averaged 3.1YPC behind the same OL that Norwood averaged 6.0YPC; says more for Norwood than the OL

- LJ still has a better OL than Turner

- LJ has TE Gonzo and WR Bowe to take off some of the heat; Turner has TE Milner and WR White

- LJ has Croyle behind center; Turner has Redman and possibly a rookie

LJ's floor is about Turner's ceiling IMO.

I would have left these out. They weaken an otherwise good argument.

 

[Dirty Weasel]

I'm not cherry-picking stats here. What you see above is the entire Falcons rushing game since 2001. The Falcons average nearly a whole yard per carry without Vick. Do you think it's the RB's that are losing that yard per carry? I certainly do. Without Vick, the Falcons are an average running team.

Without Vick or without proper planning to be without Vick, the team has suffered in having no Plan B . . . the Falcons have not had much of a passing game and defenses could concentrate on stuffing the run and not having to worry about Vick.While I agree to the proper planning part, you made my point here. With or without Vick, teams still concentrated on stuffing the ATL running game. They simply had to plan on stopping multiple runners instead of one when Vick was QB.

I don't think that the team has forgotten how to block, but they have been in a lousy situation in preparing a better game plan. Losing a centerpiece QB, switching coaches and coordinators, trading Schaub , having to settle on scrub QBs, etc. have all left marks against the success of the offense.

This is not entirely true. Without Vick, the passing game got better. How much better you ask? Well, in Vick's 6 years, his completion % was 53.8, with a career best of 56.4 in 2004. From 2001-2006, the Falcons never reached a 60% completion rate. They finished 23rd, 25th, 28th, 31st, 27th, and 32nd in pass attempts. Now, think about that for a moment - not only did they rarely throw, but even when they did, they couldn't complete a pass. Enter the 3-headed QBBC of Harrington, Redman, and Leftwich in 2007. Combined, they throw over 60% completion rate, and finish 14th in pass attempts. So, not only did they throw more, but they completed at a higher rate. And think about this - teams weren't scared of a mobile QB, so they could defend the pass more.

I'm not a huge Turner fan this year for a variey of reasons, most notably that he may not see anywhere near the touches that LJ will get. I think Norwood may play a greater role this year as well.

I agree completely. Norwood has proven to be an explosive player, and will be on the field quite a bit more than LJ's backups.

If the Falcons get any sense of stability on offense I believe they will do better running the football (although nowhere near as well as they had done for several years with Vick).

Dunn was lost without Vick last year. Why on earth he got the workload he did compared to Norwood is a mystery to me. Yes, they will be better running the ball in 2008. But alot of that will be because they will upgrade from Dunn to Turner.

While you posted the Falcons numbers, you didn't list off the Chiefs. KC ranked 30-32nd in the major rushing categories . . . worse than Atlanta did. THey had a putrid 3.3 ypc team average. i suspect that what they lack in quality they will make up for in volume.

I didn't list the Chiefs because I was rebutting your post about the Falcons having the best running attack from 2004-2006. You were saying Vick was a big part of it, and I disagree. He wasn't a big part - he was the sole reason they had the best running attack.

 

[Dirty Weasel]

Is it possible you see LJ and Turner as similar bruising RB's and are therefore trying to justify in your mind that their situations are also similar? If so, I can see the comparisons too. LJ waited behind Priest for his shot, and now Turner is out of LT's shadow. Beyond that, the comparisons stop...

- LJ was a first round pick out of college; Turner was a fifth round pick a year later

- LJ is an underrated pass catcher; Turner's pass catching is almost non-existant

- LJ has Kolby Smith and Jamaal Charles as backups, Turner has a more proven Jerious Norwood

- Dunn averaged 3.1YPC behind the same OL that Norwood averaged 6.0YPC; says more for Norwood than the OL

- LJ still has a better OL than Turner

- LJ has TE Gonzo and WR Bowe to take off some of the heat; Turner has TE Milner and WR White

- LJ has Croyle behind center; Turner has Redman and possibly a rookie

LJ's floor is about Turner's ceiling IMO.

I would have left these out. They weaken an otherwise good argument.

Haha, I know. I coulda kicked myself in the ### for that...

 

[puckalicious]

Turner's ceiling is much higher than LJ's floor. I like LJ more than Turner, but its not like they day and night apart. I think LJ is likely a 10-12 RB and Turner is more a 13-17 RB.

You've contradicted yourself within 1 sentence. First you state Turner's ceiling is MUCH higher than LJ's floor, then go on to state Turner's ceiling is 13th, while LJ's floor is 12th. Color me confused. Which statement is what you believe?

 

[MCguidance]

I agree with Sinrman. Forget any arguments about talent, it's very difficult to with a straight face say that LJ is so clearly more talented than Turner. LJ was mediocre while he played last year behind a terrible line, and amazing when he played behind an all-world OLine.

However, to answer your question Wino, I think that LJ's ADP is being docked because of the poor situation with the Chiefs. LJ was the #2 back for consecutive seasons when he was at the top of his game in a top offense, but his ADP now is in the early 2nd round. I think that shows that people think that IF he stays healthy, he'll represent first round value, but not necessarily #2 value (I haven't seen ANYONE say, "If LJ is healthy, he'll be top 3"). So, I believe there is a concern with the Chiefs, and people are probably overly vocal about the injury risk compared to the team risk, but I think you definitely see the team risk built into his ADP, as you clearly do with Turner as well.

This point is not getting enough attention. That line in KC wasn't just really good; it was arguably one of the great offensive lines of all time. In my view there was/is nothing special about Priest Holmes or LJ. I remember a game where Derrick Blaylock had to come in and he scored four TD's in one half behind that line. LJ is a nice, bruising runner. Turner may or may not be the same but it is not like we are comparing Turner to one of the few RBs who actually is special (LT, Jim Brown, Payton, etc.).

IMO, LJ's closest comparison is Curtis Martin. Both compiled great totals based mostly on voulme and a beefy OL.

Curtis never getting any love. in 2004, when Martin lead the league in rushing, McKenzie, Fabini, Kendall, Moore, and Mawae were good but not nearly as dominant as LJ's was during his reign (Mawae was the only one to make 2nd Team All-Pro). If I recall correctly, Roaf and Waters made 1st team All-Pro, Will Shields and Tony Gonzalez made 2nd team. Throw in Tony Richardson at 2nd team, and you can see the difference in their o-lines.Not nitpicking, but that Chiefs O-line was ridiculous.

 

[massraider]

If the Falcons rushing attack was so bad, how did they rank #1 in rushing yards in 2006 . . . and 2005 . . . and 2004?Yeah, I get it that Vick had a lot to do with it, but it's not like they've never had any success running the football in Atlanta.

Th system helped. They previously had the ZBS in ATL, and before last season, Tom Cable left to coach the Raiders O-line, and coached them to the #6 rushing attack in the league.AFAIK, they went to a more power, straight ahead scheme in ATL last year.

 

[travdogg]

Turner's ceiling is much higher than LJ's floor. I like LJ more than Turner, but its not like they day and night apart. I think LJ is likely a 10-12 RB and Turner is more a 13-17 RB.

You've contradicted yourself within 1 sentence. First you state Turner's ceiling is MUCH higher than LJ's floor, then go on to state Turner's ceiling is 13th, while LJ's floor is 12th. Color me confused. Which statement is what you believe?

I was stating more where I have them ranked than what their ceilings/floors are.Either of these guys could be top-10 RB's. Turner could be a top-10 RB(I don't expect it) and LJ could finish about 20th(also unexpected.) That's the point I was trying to make.

 

[switz]

LJ is far more talented (read: size, speed, power, vision, etc.) than given credit for by some. That was the key point.

Croyle vs. Redman/rookie Ryan is a wash. There's nothing much to differentiate there, especially when you figure in Gonzalez/Bowe >>>>>> whoever the Falcons' scrub TE is/White.

If Turner went to Penn State and LJ went to Eastern Illinois, no one would think LJ was more talented. LJs talent is very overrated, and Turners is far underated.I would say Turner is arguably the more talented of the two.

 

[puckalicious]

LJ is far more talented (read: size, speed, power, vision, etc.) than given credit for by some. That was the key point.

Croyle vs. Redman/rookie Ryan is a wash. There's nothing much to differentiate there, especially when you figure in Gonzalez/Bowe >>>>>> whoever the Falcons' scrub TE is/White.

If Turner went to Penn State and LJ went to Eastern Illinois, no one would think LJ was more talented. LJs talent is very overrated, and Turners is far underated.I would say Turner is arguably the more talented of the two.

So you're saying the only reason LJ was drafted in the 1st round, and Turner in the 5th round, was their school? And by the way Turner went to Northern Illinois.

 

[The Jacket]

If Turner went to Penn State and LJ went to Eastern Illinois, no one would think LJ was more talented. LJs talent is very overrated, and Turners is far underated.

Northern Illinois, and Turner went there because he wasn't talented enough to be recruited by the likes of USC, Ohio State or Penn State. He didn't rush for 2000 yards against/with comparable competition for the same reason. He wasn't drafted nearly as high for the same reason.

And the same reason still stands today. There's nothing much overrated about 6'1", 230lb., 4.4 speed, and great balance, power and agility.

I would say Turner is arguably the more talented of the two.

Arguable how?

 

[Christo]

If Turner went to Penn State and LJ went to Eastern Illinois, no one would think LJ was more talented. LJs talent is very overrated, and Turners is far underated.

Northern Illinois, and Turner went there because he wasn't talented enough to be recruited by the likes of USC, Ohio State or Penn State. He didn't rush for 2000 yards against/with comparable competition for the same reason. He wasn't drafted nearly as high for the same reason.

And the same reason still stands today. There's nothing much overrated about 6'1", 230lb., 4.4 speed, and great balance, power and agility.

I would say Turner is arguably the more talented of the two.

Arguable how?

Because things change?I'm not saying switz is correct. But your whole argument is based upon the fact that they weren't the same in HS.

 

[mdog1967]

Mmmmm, no, the KC O-line has been considered one of the best for a number of years (see Priest Holmes, see LJ). It is quickly diminishing with the loss of key players, but it is still a heckuva lot better than the Falcons. Theirs is quite porous.

I disagree. Rudy Niswanger, almost a complete unknown, at center? Damien McIntosh, a failure at LT, at RT? Adrian Jones, a failure with the Jets at guard? Rookie Branden Albert, who has only played a few more games at LT than I have as Croyle's bodyguard? Waters is the last of the Mohicans, but who knows how much he has left.The Falcons line (Baker-Blalock-McClure-Forney/Dahl-Weiner) has just as much youth and uncertainty, but not more than the Chiefs.

Good post: AND - contrary to what others think I view and have always viewed Turner as the better talent. The Success that LJ enjoyed could be attributed to the best line in football for a short time. Priest Holmes and LJ enjoyed similar numbers while playing behind the now defunct gruesome line of the KC Chiefs. Picking LJ as anything more than a late round second or early third back in your redrafts is not very bright, picking him for long term Dynasty drafts is less than stupid. Turner may well bust in Atlanta, I wouldn't count on it. Before the bright old mind of Bobby laid waist to a spectacular O-Line in Atlanta they were considered one of the elite in the NFL. They have youth and a coach not named Herm Edwards going for them. I think the talent level in Atlanta along the trench is far superior than KC. QB talent is about equal about now and the WR is as good in Atlanta as in KC. The Falcons play in the NFC south, much softer Defense than the AFC west. Yes I consider the Raiders, SD, Denver as better collectively than Carolina, Tampa, New Orleans.The Chiefs have a better schedule fantasy wise for Running Back Production this year, but even then its only marginally better than the Falcons.You might want to read deeper into the reports of LJ in camp. When the single most news worthy item for LJ is he made it through the day you have to wonder how healthy is he?.Take Turner walking away.

 

[The Jacket]

Because things change?

I'm not saying switz is correct. But your whole argument is based upon the fact that they weren't the same in HS.

Not at all. But I can hardly prove LJ is a more talented runner right now, so I have to put a little more out there than my opinion.Personally, I don't even think it's close, but that's not worth a lot in its own right.

 

[switz]

If Turner went to Penn State and LJ went to Eastern Illinois, no one would think LJ was more talented. LJs talent is very overrated, and Turners is far underated.

Northern Illinois, and Turner went there because he wasn't talented enough to be recruited by the likes of USC, Ohio State or Penn State.

Yep Northern, typo on my part. And no, it's not that Turner wasn't talented enough, it's that the HS he went to is total crap. He did get a full scholarship to NIU as well, and that played a role in his decision I'm sure. But you obviously don't know much about Turner if you think he wasn't talented enough to be recruited by a big school.

He didn't rush for 2000 yards against/with comparable competition for the same reason. He wasn't drafted nearly as high for the same reason.

Yeah, his 1936 yards his senior college season really stunk He went to a smaller school, and didn't start until his senior year, which is why he was drafted later. It's not a lack of talent.

And the same reason still stands today. There's nothing much overrated about 6'1", 230lb., 4.4 speed, and great balance, power and agility.

And Turner is 6'0 228 and runs a 4.4 with great balance, power and agility.

I would say Turner is arguably the more talented of the two.

Arguable how?

From watching them both, Turner has an extra gear that Johnson doesn't, and Turner despite being a big back seems a little more nimble. Plus, Turner is a team player, whereas Johnson is self-oriented. That isn't so much talent, but does make me like Turner more.Here are a few quotes about Turner from when he was in college:

“He (Turner) is a big back, six feet, 228 pounds, and runs a :04.4.

This guy will be playing on Sundays. Their offense revolves around

giving him the football. They play action fake off of him and get some

really big plays. Most teams have to put an extra guy in the box to

stop him, but they still have trouble stopping him with eight or nine

people in the box. That is how good he is."

—-Ralph Friedgen, University of Maryland head football coach

"He (Turner) can break it. But the thing you see over and over and

over is how many...physical runs he makes in that tackle box area.

That's always a mark of a great back."

—-Dan McCarney, Iowa State head football coach

“Last year, talented RB Michael Turner rushed for more than 200 yards in five games, all against MAC opposition. While he didn't reach that plateau on Saturday, he proved to the NFL brass on hand that he should be a definite first-day selection, possibly figuring as early as Round 2."

—Mel Kiper, ESPN.com

“The honors that Michael has started to receive are well-deserved. This past season was as good a rushing performance as I’ve been around. He’s a bull. And I still say that Michael is a work in progress. He’s only going to get better.”

—Joe Novak, Northern Illinois head coach

“We needed 15 guys to stop Turner. Eleven wasn’t enough.”

—Tom Amstutz, Toledo head coach

“I have coached Travis Prentice, the MAC’s all-time leading rusher. I was at Miami when Deland McCullough played and have defended many of the other great runningbacks the MAC has had to offer. I would have to say that Michael Turner is one of the top three backs I have seen come through the MAC.”

—Terry Hoeppner, Miami (OH) head coach

 

[zamboni]

If Turner went to Penn State and LJ went to Eastern Illinois, no one would think LJ was more talented. LJs talent is very overrated, and Turners is far underated.

Northern Illinois, and Turner went there because he wasn't talented enough to be recruited by the likes of USC, Ohio State or Penn State.

By that logic, Marques Colston isn't as talented as other WRs because he went to Hofstra.Alma maters can often be misleading - sometimes guys just don't get noticed as much or blossom later.

 

[The Jacket]

By that logic, Marques Colston isn't as talented as other WRs because he went to Hofstra.Alma maters can often be misleading - sometimes guys just don't get noticed as much or blossom later.

There are exceptions to every rule. And Colston isn't as talented as a lot other receivers. He's more productive than a lot, works harder than a lot, runs better routes than a lot, has a better QB than a lot, etc., but that's not (physical) talent.

 

[The Jacket]

Yep Northern, typo on my part. And no, it's not that Turner wasn't talented enough, it's that the HS he went to is total crap. He did get a full scholarship to NIU as well, and that played a role in his decision I'm sure. But you obviously don't know much about Turner if you think he wasn't talented enough to be recruited by a big school.

Seriously? A high school argument?If Turner was that talented, a big school WOULD HAVE NOTICED HIM. He wasn't.

Yeah, his 1936 yards his senior college season really stunk He went to a smaller school, and didn't start until his senior year, which is why he was drafted later. It's not a lack of talent.

So less rushing yards than Johnson with/against comparable talent. Your small school point is worthless. Turner was drafted later because of lesser talent (not a complete lack of). It's got nothing to do with his school. Really talented backs who produce at a small school level get taken high. Forte, Chris Johnson, etc. Turner was NOT in their league as a prospect, and neither of those two guys are in LJ's league as prospects.

From watching them both, Turner has an extra gear that Johnson doesn't, and Turner despite being a big back seems a little more nimble. Plus, Turner is a team player, whereas Johnson is self-oriented. That isn't so much talent, but does make me like Turner more.

Johnson has an extra gear. If you really don't think that (seriously?) I'll find you a few videos to show it. I really don't think Turner is more nimble. It's probably the other way around. Despite Johnson's height, he's got wiggle. Turner's north and south all the way.

And I really don't give a damn about their supposed egos. LJ's a superstar living that lifestyle, Turner is a career backup who no one cares about. If the roles were different and the egos were the same, so be it. It's really not a credit to Turner's talent whatsoever.

Here are a few quotes about Turner from when he was in college:

I don't have the time or interest to be finding pre-draft quotes on Larry Johnson. He was a first-round pick liked by far more experts and draft "gurus," and these quotes add very little to anything.

 

[switz]

Really talented backs who produce at a small school level get taken high. Forte, Chris Johnson, etc. Turner was NOT in their league as a prospect, and neither of those two guys are in LJ's league as prospects.I don't have the time or interest to be finding pre-draft quotes on Larry Johnson. He was a first-round pick liked by far more experts and draft "gurus," and these quotes add very little to anything.

Matt Forte was rated a 3rd round back, Turner was rated a 2nd round back. Chris Johnson was rated a 2nd round back, Turner was rated a 2nd round back. Turner fell in the draft further than his pre-draft ranking.And regardless of where they were drafted, that has little to nothing to do with their talent level.And yes, the small school thing DOES matter, as it was brought up a ton of times in regards to Turner.

 

[The Jacket]

Matt Forte was rated a 3rd round back, Turner was rated a 2nd round back. Chris Johnson was rated a 2nd round back, Turner was rated a 2nd round back. Turner fell in the draft further than his pre-draft ranking.

Wow, are you serious? I thought you were one of the solid posters here, but this is garbage. It doesn't matter what Turner was supposedly "rated." He was a fifth-round pick. Forte and Johnson, despite having "lower grades" and playing at smaller schools, were top picks.

Are we seriously basing our opinions on trash that the likes of Mel Kiper put out there?

And yes, the small school thing DOES matter, as it was brought up a ton of times in regards to Turner.

It was brought up even more for Chris Johnson. No. 24 overall pick regardless.There's talent, and then there's "talent."

 

[switz]

Matt Forte was rated a 3rd round back, Turner was rated a 2nd round back. Chris Johnson was rated a 2nd round back, Turner was rated a 2nd round back. Turner fell in the draft further than his pre-draft ranking.

Wow, are you serious? I thought you were one of the solid posters here, but this is garbage. It doesn't matter what Turner was supposedly "rated." He was a fifth-round pick. Forte and Johnson, despite having "lower grades" and playing at smaller schools, were top picks.

Are we seriously basing our opinions on trash that the likes of Mel Kiper put out there?

And yes, the small school thing DOES matter, as it was brought up a ton of times in regards to Turner.

It was brought up even more for Chris Johnson. No. 24 overall pick regardless.There's talent, and then there's "talent."

Chris Johnson runs a 4.24. That is incredibly rare, and it's the main reason he was drafted so highly.If he ran a 4.4 (like most RBs) he would not have been drafted in the first 5 rounds. The NFL loves, loves, loves speed. It's what got Michael Bennett (a HORRIBLE RB) drafted in the first round.

So throw Chris Johnson out the window.

Matt Forte on the other hand, would be a good argument. And look who drafted him, are you really going to use the Bears as an example of good drafting???

Terrell Davis was what a 6th or 7th rounder? Was he talentless? Again, your argument of draft position is weak. That's all I'm saying.

College production? Yes, LJ was better, no doubt. But by what margin? Not that huge of a margin.

NFL production? Hard to say as Turner has been behind one of the best of all time. Larry Johnson looked great behind an awesome OL, and pedestrian behind a bad OL.

 

[The Jacket]

We will have to agree to disagree.

But I didn't use draft position as the only reason (though it's certainly valid in a discussion about physical talent, not the overall quality of a player), and LJ didn't run behind a very good line in 2006 at all, yet he gained almost 1800 yards. I realize he had a lot of carries, but his average wasn't that bad, especially when you consider the weak passing game led by Damon Huard.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

If Turner went to Penn State and LJ went to Eastern Illinois, no one would think LJ was more talented. LJs talent is very overrated, and Turners is far underated.

Northern Illinois, and Turner went there because he wasn't talented enough to be recruited by the likes of USC, Ohio State or Penn State.

By that logic, Marques Colston isn't as talented as other WRs because he went to Hofstra.Alma maters can often be misleading - sometimes guys just don't get noticed as much or blossom later.

....like Mississippi Valley State

 

[Christo]

Yep Northern, typo on my part. And no, it's not that Turner wasn't talented enough, it's that the HS he went to is total crap. He did get a full scholarship to NIU as well, and that played a role in his decision I'm sure. But you obviously don't know much about Turner if you think he wasn't talented enough to be recruited by a big school.

Seriously? A high school argument?If Turner was that talented, a big school WOULD HAVE NOTICED HIM. He wasn't.

Larry AllenTerrell OwensBrian WestbrookJared AllenDeMarcus WareAsante SamuelDarren SharperNeed I go on?

 

[Colin Dowling]

Michael Turner and Marion Barber stuck out to anyone with eyes as being drafted far lower than their talent level. I'm not sure I'm ready to say Turner in 2008 >> LJ in 2008, but it's silly to act as if the gulf between the two is great just b/c Turner went to a MAC school. Michael Turner just spent a few years in a system very friendly to RB production, and he did fine. I have no idea how he'll shake out in Atlanta, but he is clearly a talented player.

 

[zamboni]

By that logic, Marques Colston isn't as talented as other WRs because he went to Hofstra.

Alma maters can often be misleading - sometimes guys just don't get noticed as much or blossom later.

There are exceptions to every rule. And Colston isn't as talented as a lot other receivers. He's more productive than a lot, works harder than a lot, runs better routes than a lot, has a better QB than a lot, etc., but that's not (physical) talent.

Couldn't disagree more, but not worth getting into.

 

[joffer]

i'm a big LJ fan, but i don't see a huge talent gap.

LJ is going in the late 1st/early 2nd

Turner is going generally in the 4th

the difference between those two ADPs IMO is

a) projected # of touches and backfield competition

b) track record of having done it before.

 

[The Fatness]

I hate the argument based on high school production or draft position years after the fact. Guys have inherent skill, but they also improve and learn (especially running behind one of the best backs in the game).

As a Chagers fan I can only suggest that you watch some film on Turner. IMHO, I don't think that Turner is quite a "shifty" as LJ, but he's certainly as difficult to tackle. He does run a little North/South and wasn't as quick to the hole as LT2, but he consistently got yards after the first hit and often punched through for a significant gain. Will that mean durability issues with a full load? Who knows! I've been waiting years to see him get his shot and he's still one of my favorite players even after leaving SD.

With fresher legs, less injuries and comparable teams I give LJ the slight edge due primarily to TD production. Norwood will eat into some of Turners carries, but also keep teams guessing. Alternatively, KC has one less threat for defenses to worry about, which means a greater focus on stopping (and injuring) LJ.

I don't think Turner is a top 10 back, but I do think that he's undervalued!

 

[The Jacket]

Couldn't disagree more, but not worth getting into.

Not to "get into it," but did you read exactly what I said and consider what that means when looking at all the WRs in the NFL? There aren't many better than Colston, but quite a few I'd take in terms of physical talent. Roy Williams, Calvin Johnson, etc. They don't compare as receivers, but Colston doesn't compare as a specimen.That was my only point since that's what the discussion became.

 

[switz]

Couldn't disagree more, but not worth getting into.

Not to "get into it," but did you read exactly what I said and consider what that means when looking at all the WRs in the NFL? There aren't many better than Colston, but quite a few I'd take in terms of physical talent. Roy Williams, Calvin Johnson, etc. They don't compare as receivers, but Colston doesn't compare as a specimen.That was my only point since that's what the discussion became.

From this post, I don't think we use the term "talent" to mean the same thing. It's more than size and speed, which is what you seem to limit it to.

 

[The Jacket]

From this post, I don't think we use the term "talent" to mean the same thing. It's more than size and speed, which is what you seem to limit it to.

I've stressed physical talent, and of course it encompasses more abilities than size and speed. But that really doesn't matter when it comes to LJ/Turner because everything else -- awareness, vision, etc. -- is in favor of the guy who's dominated at the NFL level, not a guy who's been a decent change-of-pace back.