Michael Turner (1 Viewer)

[wertwert]

Have the money to pay him what? You think Turner would sign an extension to backup LT for the rest of his career?

If I were the Chargers, I'd offer Turner an extension, and I'd front-load it to help make it attractive. But I wouldn't expect him to sign it. He'll wait and see what offers he gets as a free agent from other clubs. It'd be worth a shot to make the offer, though.

With Rivers having another year under his belt, the only other resaon I think he would stay is to play for a ring.

 

[Limp Ditka]

But you've traded for the great Kevan Bar-very-low. What more could you want?

Adrian Peterson?But, we can't fully express these feelings until we have a good 8-10 losses.

Bears would be more than willing to part with Adrian Peterson

I belive he means the one still in college.......

I believe he knew that.......

...........

 

[BoltBacker]

I would think SD would trade LT and make Turner the starter next year. They got rid of their Starting QB from last year and it seems to have worked out for them!

They won't trade LT. I like Turner a lot, but Tomlinson is better.

An awful lost can happen between now and the end of the '07 season. I'm certainly not wishing it on anyone but for all we know Tomlinson could have a devestating injury in the next 18+ games. He's already got a ton of miles on him.

 

[BoltBacker]

I would think SD would trade LT and make Turner the starter next year. They got rid of their Starting QB from last year and it seems to have worked out for them!

They won't trade LT. I like Turner a lot, but Tomlinson is better.

An awful lot can happen between now and the end of the '07 season. I'm certainly not wishing it on anyone but for all we know Tomlinson could have a devastating injury in the next 18+ games. He's already got a ton of miles on him.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I would think SD would trade LT and make Turner the starter next year. They got rid of their Starting QB from last year and it seems to have worked out for them!

They won't trade LT. I like Turner a lot, but Tomlinson is better.

An awful lot can happen between now and the end of the '07 season. I'm certainly not wishing it on anyone but for all we know Tomlinson could have a devastating injury in the next 18+ games. He's already got a ton of miles on him.

I don't know which post to respond to. If LT is crippled, it will be impossible to trade him. So I maintain that he won't be traded.

 

[Englishteacher]

I can see him in Jacksonville next year....

 

[cstu]

I don't think it would cost them a first rounder unless SD franchised him. Could be wrong. I think it would be a good move for the Jets.

He is a restricted free agent, they just have to tender him a contract. If they do the highest tender, another team would have to give up a 1st and 3rd rd pick to sign him. In other words, if Turner is going to be on the move this offseason, it will likely be a trade (as long as he works out an extension with the other club). My best guess is Turner will be gone for a high 2nd rd pick or low 1st rder. Anything else and I doubt the Chargers do anything cept let him play 1 more year as LTs backup and then set sail to rich waters in 08.

the Chargers have the money to pay him....but I don't think they will. They'll get a pick for him and bring in a veteran back-up. Also Sproles will be healthy, not that he makes that much difference.

Have the money to pay him what? You think Turner would sign an extension to backup LT for the rest of his career? And at what cost to the Chargers, $25 Million? There is noway Turner is a Bolt after the 07 season, and my bet is he will be on the move after this year for a late 1st rd or early 2nd rd pick.

What are they, 17 million under the cap? I don't think he'll sign....the Chargers could keep if they wanted to, which is what I stated above. I think he'll be gone for a pick and the Chargers will bring in a veteran back-up.I think he'll be a Jag next year.

They won't sign him but will give him a 1st round tender. If someone is willing to give up a 1st round pick for him that's fine with me, though I think he'll be on the team through 2007 and leave as an UFA. As far as SD trading LT, there's no chance in hell. He'll be 28 next year with at least a good 4 years left. Even if he's injured this year and can't play next year then they'll keep him and let Turner start. I like Turner a lot but he's no LT.

 

[Horses Mouth]

if the general consensus was that he's an elite talent why wouldn't a team give up their first for him? am i missing something?

 

[Phurfur]

if the general consensus was that he's an elite talent why wouldn't a team give up their first for him? am i missing something?

Who said they won't?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

if the general consensus was that he's an elite talent why wouldn't a team give up their first for him? am i missing something?

It'll likely be a first and a third. He may not be that elite. It'll be interesting to see what happens. There's some more info and discussion here, here, and here.

 

[Horses Mouth]

i guess the real question is that team most likely will offer a first, but will SD match?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

i guess the real question is that team most likely will offer a first, but will SD match?

The Chargers will make the highest qualifying offer of around $2 million. Another team may offer $3.5 million a year or so. I doubt the Chargers would match that. But in that case the other team would give up a first and a third to the Chargers, which is pretty steep, so it may not happen.

 

[gbill2004]

Is Turner that good, or is he a product of the SD offensive system?

 

[mhrutkowski]

Is Turner that good, or is he a product of the SD offensive system?

One of his best assets is his ability to break tackles, so I give him a lot of credit.

 

[gbill2004]

Is Turner that good, or is he a product of the SD offensive system?

One of his best assets is his ability to break tackles, so I give him a lot of credit.

OK - put Turner on the Jets or Raiders - is he as good offensively? I'd argue there is no way he'd put up even half the numbers there, that he does in SD.

 

[Loopdog]

i think they would only give that much (1st and 3rd) if he was franchised correct? or is that just the going rate for tier 1 reserved free agents....a 1st and 3rd?

 

[BigRed]

Is Turner that good, or is he a product of the SD offensive system?

What "offensive system?" That isn't exactly the Colts out there. He's just a good back. No LT, but a good back.

 

[Homer]

Because Norv has never won a stinkin' thing in more than a decade?

 

[mhrutkowski]

Is Turner that good, or is he a product of the SD offensive system?

One of his best assets is his ability to break tackles, so I give him a lot of credit.

OK - put Turner on the Jets or Raiders - is he as good offensively? I'd argue there is no way he'd put up even half the numbers there, that he does in SD.

Well, that's an extreme example. I don't think the SD system is the Colts or Broncos, either.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

i think they would only give that much (1st and 3rd) if he was franchised correct? or is that just the going rate for tier 1 reserved free agents....a 1st and 3rd?

A franchise tag is two firsts.A restricted free agent is a first and a third if given a ~$2M qualifying offer (just a first if given a ~$1.5M qualifying offer).

 

[Englishteacher]

i think they would only give that much (1st and 3rd) if he was franchised correct? or is that just the going rate for tier 1 reserved free agents....a 1st and 3rd?

A franchise tag is two firsts.A restricted free agent is a first and a third if given a ~$2M qualifying offer (just a first if given a ~$1.5M qualifying offer).

man, that's all moneywise for a first and third round pick? SD would be crazy not to tender that and a first and third is a lot to ask for from another team

 

[Mungo Burrows]

Is Turner that good, or is he a product of the SD offensive system?

One of his best assets is his ability to break tackles, so I give him a lot of credit.

OK - put Turner on the Jets or Raiders - is he as good offensively? I'd argue there is no way he'd put up even half the numbers there, that he does in SD.

Keep in mind, as a restricted free agent, he would have to reach agreement with the other team on a contract...He may not want to sign with teams that bad, unless they completely blow his contract out of the water.

 

[Englishteacher]

Is Turner that good, or is he a product of the SD offensive system?

One of his best assets is his ability to break tackles, so I give him a lot of credit.

OK - put Turner on the Jets or Raiders - is he as good offensively? I'd argue there is no way he'd put up even half the numbers there, that he does in SD.

Keep in mind, as a restricted free agent, he would have to reach agreement with the other team on a contract...He may not want to sign with teams that bad, unless they completely blow his contract out of the water.

if their's a starting job involved he's gone no matter what, period. Why would someone want to play their whole career behind LT?

 

[Gandalf]

I agree a first and a third is a lot for a team to give up. However, I bet there will be some desperate team starved for a starting RB that would be willing to take a chance on a guy who has proven himself in the NFL, like Turner, rather than draft two risky rookies. I'm not saying that this is the rule, but I certainly think it's possible. Look at it another way, where would Turner be drafted if he were to hypothetically be in the NFL draft next year? I'd bet he'd be a top 15 pick. That might be worth a first and a third to some teams.

 

[Englishteacher]

I agree a first and a third is a lot for a team to give up. However, I bet there will be some desperate team starved for a starting RB that would be willing to take a chance on a guy who has proven himself in the NFL, like Turner, rather than draft two risky rookies. I'm not saying that this is the rule, but I certainly think it's possible. Look at it another way, where would Turner be drafted if he were to come out next year. I'd be he'd be a top 15 pick. That might be worth a first and a third to some teams.

not exactly when Edge and SA haven't garnered firstround pick offers. A rookie RB that goes in the 1st round will provide low cap numbers the first couple few years. The trade market and seemingly the draft deemphasizes the position. I know we had RB, CB, and CW all go in the top 5 recently but they were all exceptional backs and that was perhaps the weakest draft in recent times

 

[PatsWillWin]

I agree a first and a third is a lot for a team to give up. However, I bet there will be some desperate team starved for a starting RB that would be willing to take a chance on a guy take a chance on a guy who has proven himself in the NFL, like Turner, rather than draft two risky rookies. I'm not saying that this is the rule, but I certainly think it's possible. Look at it another way, where would Turner be drafted if he were to hypothetically be in the NFL draft next year? I'd be he'd be a top 15 pick. That might be worth a first and a third to some teams.

"Take a chance" with a 1st and a 3rd round pick? Unlikely.

 

[Gandalf]

I agree a first and a third is a lot for a team to give up. However, I bet there will be some desperate team starved for a starting RB that would be willing to take a chance on a guy who has proven himself in the NFL, like Turner, rather than draft two risky rookies. I'm not saying that this is the rule, but I certainly think it's possible. Look at it another way, where would Turner be drafted if he were to come out next year. I'd be he'd be a top 15 pick. That might be worth a first and a third to some teams.

not exactly when Edge and SA haven't garnered firstround pick offers. A rookie RB that goes in the 1st round will provide low cap numbers the first couple few years. The trade market and seemingly the draft deemphasizes the position. I know we had RB, CB, and CW all go in the top 5 recently but they were all exceptional backs and that was perhaps the weakest draft in recent times

Wasn't the Edge and SA lack of interest also a result of their commanding salaries? It's a question not a statement. I was always under that impression, but it might be a wrong one.As a dynasty owner of Turner, I'm thinking that he stays in San Diego one more year. But he'll be a UFA in 2008 and then be a starter somewhere. So I'd be happy with that. Though more happy if he slips through San Diego's fingers.

 

[Wadsworth]

Might not San Diego be wise to shop him on their own before making the 2m or 1.5m offer? After all not all first round picks are created equally. Would you rather have a 1st and a 3rd from the Super Bowl winner or Houston's first for example? Also it would allow them to move him out of the divison and possibly out of the AFC. I don't know, if I thought I was going to lose him anyways, I'd rather have some control over where he goes and what I get back.

 

[Gandalf]

I agree a first and a third is a lot for a team to give up. However, I bet there will be some desperate team starved for a starting RB that would be willing to take a chance on a guy take a chance on a guy who has proven himself in the NFL, like Turner, rather than draft two risky rookies. I'm not saying that this is the rule, but I certainly think it's possible. Look at it another way, where would Turner be drafted if he were to hypothetically be in the NFL draft next year? I'd be he'd be a top 15 pick. That might be worth a first and a third to some teams.

"Take a chance" with a 1st and a 3rd round pick? Unlikely.

Take a chance is probably the wrong choice of words because the teams going after Turner would be taking less of a chance by using their 1st and 3rd on him. Turner is more of a known commodity. That's what I meant to say anyway.

 

[Ozymandias]

Turner is 24. Tomlinson is 27. I doubt that Turner wants to spend the next three or four years as a backup; he'd rather go somewhere and be the man. A first and third is a lot, but there will be some team that thinks they have all the pieces together except for an elite RB. Jax would be one, as Freddie is 30 (perhaps they have one, but I doubt it). Indy might be another.

 

[derek19]

The main reason is because i just traded him away and they don't want me to feel stupid or get pissed off for trading him away.....

 

[Gandalf]

Might not San Diego be wise to shop him on their own before making the 2m or 1.5m offer? After all not all first round picks are created equally. Would you rather have a 1st and a 3rd from the Super Bowl winner or Houston's first for example? Also it would allow them to move him out of the divison and possibly out of the AFC. I don't know, if I thought I was going to lose him anyways, I'd rather have some control over where he goes and what I get back.

That's actually a good point. I would think a good team with later round draft picks would be more willing to move their picks. Also, teams that are rebuilding are unlikely to build around Turner. However, I could see more established teams that need a RB back using their picks in this manner. It's probably a longshot, but it is a possibility. Stranger things have happened in the NFL.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Might not San Diego be wise to shop him on their own before making the 2m or 1.5m offer?

Not before making him the $2M offer. The Chargers can't trade him until they actually sign him (since he'd be a free agent), and they won't be able to sign him until after Turner entertains offers from other clubs, and that will only happen after the qualifying offer is made.

 

[gman8343]

I agree a first and a third is a lot for a team to give up. However, I bet there will be some desperate team starved for a starting RB that would be willing to take a chance on a guy take a chance on a guy who has proven himself in the NFL, like Turner, rather than draft two risky rookies. I'm not saying that this is the rule, but I certainly think it's possible. Look at it another way, where would Turner be drafted if he were to hypothetically be in the NFL draft next year? I'd be he'd be a top 15 pick. That might be worth a first and a third to some teams.

"Take a chance" with a 1st and a 3rd round pick? Unlikely.

Take a chance is probably the wrong choice of words because the teams going after Turner would be taking less of a chance by using their 1st and 3rd on him. Turner is more of a known commodity. That's what I meant to say anyway.

I agree. Turner has showed he can have success, plenty of 1st rounders bust.

 

[Borat]

if the general consensus was that he's an elite talent why wouldn't a team give up their first for him? am i missing something?

Has this general consensus been agreed upon by NFL GMs, or by fantasy football owners?

 

[NEUPJ]

I have no idea why they wouldn't. Obviously the guy is a stud stuck behind Tomlinson. In his limited reps he's looked great. There's no chance he can't produce over a full season.

Sincerely,

Trung Candidate

 

[cstu]

Could a team with a high pick trade their 2nd and 4th round picks with say the Super Bowl champ and give those to the Chargers?

 

[BoulderBob]

I have no idea why they wouldn't. Obviously the guy is a stud stuck behind Tomlinson. In his limited reps he's looked great. There's no chance he can't produce over a full season.

Sincerely,

Trung Candidate

Trung Candidate possesed half the talent of Turner, if you don't believe me, the film doesn't lie...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aH6saX-bMWg

A team like, say Denver or Jaxsonville will give up a first round pick for him, if they are picking in the late first round. IMO, there are only a select few RB's that have Turner's talent, and one them just so happens to play on his team. The guy will be a superstar in the NFL, and I'd bet everything I own, which isn't much, that he produces fantasy stud numbers regardless of what team signs him.

 

[Gr00vus]

At least there's one Charger thread during thier bye week. It's no fun seeing nothing but Carnell Williams threads.

The Chargers will tender the maximum to Turner next year. If someone signs him for more, they'll be happy to take the 1st and 3rd round picks - the risk they run here is that someone they don't want to see sign him signs him. Turner would be scary in a Mike Shanahan offense - fortunately Shanahan seems to like drafting his own guys or working on reclamation projects - he doesn't seem to buy into prominent free agents, though with Turner I could understand him making an exception. Turner on the Broncos is my greatest fear. If no one signs him away from them, I think they'll trade him for a couple of draft picks, definitely to someone outside the division, hopefully to someone outside the conference next year. I don't think they'll run the double risks of letting him walk for nothing and letting him walk to a team they're directly competing with the following year. Some of you are saying that would be for the Chargers, not having Turner around to backup LaDainian, but two guys on the practice squad - Jenkins and Gross - both looked like they could do just fine in the backup role, Gross in particular looked promising in the few glimpses I got of him.

Just my opinion.

 

[Dazz]

The issue isn't simply the draft picks, it's the money. The value of drafting a guy is markedly higher than signing Turner as a RFA, giving up your first and third round picks (which is a LOT for someone that has never played full time), and losing all of that cap space. Turner is a good, solid player - he is not two of them. That's what a first and third is, a solid or potentially great HB (given how deep this draft is) and a solid or potentially great third round pick. It's a very risky game to give away depth for the sake of frontline starters, especially when you don't have to in the first place. Could Turner be a home run for an aging team that has one or two years left in contention? Yes, easily. But I would say that team is better off prioritizing the future.

When it comes to Jacksonville and Denver, neither of those offices have demonstrated any willingness to sacrifice that so far. Especially the Jags, signing Turner after the Chargers tender him would be the anti-thesis of everything Shack Harris and Jack del Rio have done to bring that team back up. As a Jags fan I hope they don’t, because it would be a mistake.

 

[Ozymandias]

I have no idea why they wouldn't. Obviously the guy is a stud stuck behind Tomlinson. In his limited reps he's looked great. There's no chance he can't produce over a full season.

Sincerely,

Trung Candidate

Trung Candidate possesed half the talent of Turner, if you don't believe me, the film doesn't lie...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aH6saX-bMWg

Trung was never a candidate.

 

[cstu]

The issue isn't simply the draft picks, it's the money. The value of drafting a guy is markedly higher than signing Turner as a RFA, giving up your first and third round picks (which is a LOT for someone that has never played full time), and losing all of that cap space. Turner is a good, solid player - he is not two of them. That's what a first and third is, a solid or potentially great HB (given how deep this draft is) and a solid or potentially great third round pick. It's a very risky game to give away depth for the sake of frontline starters, especially when you don't have to in the first place. Could Turner be a home run for an aging team that has one or two years left in contention? Yes, easily. But I would say that team is better off prioritizing the future.

When it comes to Jacksonville and Denver, neither of those offices have demonstrated any willingness to sacrifice that so far. Especially the Jags, signing Turner after the Chargers tender him would be the anti-thesis of everything Shack Harris and Jack del Rio have done to bring that team back up. As a Jags fan I hope they don’t, because it would be a mistake.

Turner is much more proven than a rookie and would be cheaper than a high 1st round RB (see Jordan's 5 year/$27.5M/$11M guaranteed and Benson's 5 year/$35M/$17M guaranteed contracts). If team can trade up from the 2nd/trade down in the 1st to a very late 1st than it could turn out to be a very good deal. The team would also be getting Turner at only 25.

 

[smcindoe]

I like him as much as the next guy, but if no NFL teams would give up a first round pick for Edge or Alexander I have really tough time thinking they'll pony up for Turner.

 

[Gerg73]

Trust me, there's NO WAY any Team gives up a 1st AND a 3rd for him. There is no precedent for this to happen..is there?

The Galloway signing/trade was a DISASTER for the Cowboys who gave up 2 1st rounders. There have been Coaches traded for 1st rounders. But I can't think of ANY RFA's being tendered the highest tender and then signing with another Team.

I think the MOST LIKELY scenario is a Sign and trade for a 1st/2nd round pick in next years draft.

The Chargers will offer him the max, then he'll REQUEST(DEMAND) a trade. The Chargers can still use help in the Secondary and a late 1st or early 2nd round pick will be more valuable than a backup RB. They can then draft another RB somewhere on the 2nd day.

My Prediction.....Michael Turner RB Cleveland Browns.

 

[Football Jones]

No way somebody gives their 1st & 3rd for Turner. He's a good RB, but it's not going to happen. He'll be in San Diego until '08.

RBs are gold in FF, but they're not viewed as such in the NFL. Quality RBs can be found in the 3rd, much less the 1st. I just can't see a team giving both their 1st and 3rd round picks for a RB not named LT or LJ.

 

[Madscott]

There's a bit of confusion going on about Turner's status as RFA and being either franchised or transition tagged. If Turner doesn't receive the teams transition or franchise designation, the only draft compensation that the Chargers would receive for losing him to another team would be the compensatory picks that are doled out prior to the draft.

Per NFL.com....

Q -- Other than accrued seasons, what determines a restricted free agent?

A -- He has received a "qualifying" offer (a salary level predetermined by the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the league and its players) from his old club. He can negotiate with any club through April 21. If the restricted free agent accepts an offer sheet from a new club, his old club can match the offer and retain him because it has the "right of first refusal." If the old club does not match the offer, it can possibly receive draft-choice compensation depending on the amount of its qualifying offer. If an offer sheet is not executed, the player’s rights revert to his old club after April 21.

http://www.nfl.com/freeagency/qaFrom that I don't see that there would be a 1st and 3rd pick involved from another team unless that's what the Chargers were asking for a signed Turner.

Even the transition tag doesn't come with compensation. According to that Q&A, the only label that garners draft picks from another team would be the franchise tag and that would be 2 first rd. picks.

All of that said, I believe that the Chargers are going to want to make that minimum qualifying offer to retain his services and at least make sure they can garner a compensatory pick for him should they lose him. A damn reasonable price IMHO for a decent RB.

 

[David Yudkin]

An initial contract offer made to RFAs. This offer determines what type of compensation the player's original team receives if the RFA signs with another team. The original team is awarded draft choices from the signing team. The highest compensation is a package of 1st and 3rd round picks. Players tendered minimum offers carry compensation equivalent to the round in which they were originally drafted. For instance, a RFA was originally a 6th round pick, and is given a minimum tender "Qualifying Offer." If he signs an "Offer Sheet" with another team and the original team declines to match the offer, the original team will receive the signing team's 6th round pick. Players who were originally rookie free agents carry no compensation if a minimum qualifying offer is tendered.

LINK

 

[Madscott]

An initial contract offer made to RFAs. This offer determines what type of compensation the player's original team receives if the RFA signs with another team. The original team is awarded draft choices from the signing team. The highest compensation is a package of 1st and 3rd round picks. Players tendered minimum offers carry compensation equivalent to the round in which they were originally drafted. For instance, a RFA was originally a 6th round pick, and is given a minimum tender "Qualifying Offer." If he signs an "Offer Sheet" with another team and the original team declines to match the offer, the original team will receive the signing team's 6th round pick. Players who were originally rookie free agents carry no compensation if a minimum qualifying offer is tendered.

LINK

I stand corrected. The supposition still is that the compensation would be a 1st and 3rd and it still seems a bit a stretch to assume that they would automatically be granted that.

 

[broncofan13000]

An initial contract offer made to RFAs. This offer determines what type of compensation the player's original team receives if the RFA signs with another team. The original team is awarded draft choices from the signing team. The highest compensation is a package of 1st and 3rd round picks. Players tendered minimum offers carry compensation equivalent to the round in which they were originally drafted. For instance, a RFA was originally a 6th round pick, and is given a minimum tender "Qualifying Offer." If he signs an "Offer Sheet" with another team and the original team declines to match the offer, the original team will receive the signing team's 6th round pick. Players who were originally rookie free agents carry no compensation if a minimum qualifying offer is tendered.

LINK

I Turner speculation.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I stand corrected. The supposition still is that the compensation would be a 1st and 3rd and it still seems a bit a stretch to assume that they would automatically be granted that.

It's not a subjective thing. It's automatic, based on the qualifying offer amount.