Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Michael Turner (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Renegades of Funk
- Start date
wannabee
Footballguy
http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/493097 Only lost one fumble in two years. And, none last year.
The Mechanic
Footballguy
In my Dynasty LEagueI traded LT2 last year for Larry Johnson and Priest., I also have MR. Turner sitting in the wings....looks like he's ready to go if given the chance.Great find.
Gotta love this kid in dynasty.
With the amount of carries LT2 gets every year his chance may be sooner than later.
Great Video.
M & M
Footballguy
Before I get jumped on I am not saying that Eddie George is anywhere as good as LT2. But I thought it was interesting that some brought up the number of carries being a determinate to a RB's longjecity in the NFL. So I thought I would look at the number of carries of Eddie George's first 5 years and LT2's first 5. Eddie had a slightly higher number of carries than LT2. However, LT2 gets more touches through pass receptions. We all know what happened to Eddie George' carreer after being ridden hard and put away wet. Wondering if there are other comparisons out there regarding number of carries/Touches per game and longjevity. I think this may bode well for whoever is sitting in the RB2 spot on San Diego's depth chart. Here are the numbers:
Eddie George
YR TM G RSH YD Y/R TD TRG REC YD Y/R TD FPT RANK VBD
1996 HOU 16 335 1368 4.1 8 23 182 7.9 0 203 8 78
1997 TEN 16 357 1399 3.9 6 7 44 6.3 1 186 12 54
1998 TEN 16 348 1294 3.7 5 37 310 8.4 1 196 11 69
1999 TEN 16 320 1304 4.1 9 47 458 9.7 4 254 3 124
2000 TEN 16 403 1509 3.7 14 50 453 9.1 2 292 3 133
LT2
YR TM G RSH YD Y/R TD TRG REC YD Y/R TD FPT RANK VBD
2001 SD 16 339 1236 3.6 10 59 367 6.2 0 220 7 85
2002 SD 16 372 1683 4.5 14 101 79 489 6.2 1 307 3 155
2003 SD 16 313 1645 5.3 13 137 100 725 7.2 4 344 3 202
2004 SD 15 339 1335 3.9 17 66 53 441 8.3 1 288 3 130
2005 SD 16 339 1462 4.3 18 76 51 370 7.3 2 318 3 174
Eddie George
YR TM G RSH YD Y/R TD TRG REC YD Y/R TD FPT RANK VBD
1996 HOU 16 335 1368 4.1 8 23 182 7.9 0 203 8 78
1997 TEN 16 357 1399 3.9 6 7 44 6.3 1 186 12 54
1998 TEN 16 348 1294 3.7 5 37 310 8.4 1 196 11 69
1999 TEN 16 320 1304 4.1 9 47 458 9.7 4 254 3 124
2000 TEN 16 403 1509 3.7 14 50 453 9.1 2 292 3 133
LT2
YR TM G RSH YD Y/R TD TRG REC YD Y/R TD FPT RANK VBD
2001 SD 16 339 1236 3.6 10 59 367 6.2 0 220 7 85
2002 SD 16 372 1683 4.5 14 101 79 489 6.2 1 307 3 155
2003 SD 16 313 1645 5.3 13 137 100 725 7.2 4 344 3 202
2004 SD 15 339 1335 3.9 17 66 53 441 8.3 1 288 3 130
2005 SD 16 339 1462 4.3 18 76 51 370 7.3 2 318 3 174
Weiner Dog
Footballguy
It's a good observation. Really. However, LT's carries vs Eddie's carries are two different worlds. To make a long story short, Eddie rarely avoided the first hit, while LT is rarely brought down with the first hit. More importantly, Eddie seemed to take to take the full blunt of each tackle straight on, while LT is normally tackled from the side or pushed out of bounds.Just my opinion of seeing both guys play.
cstu
Footballguy
More people should watch Chargers games and see how good LT is at avoiding hits. Like you said, he's rarely tackled straight on and runs out of bounds before taking a big hit. Obviously, if you run the ball that many times you will take a pounding, but I think LT takes a lot less than most people think when they look at his numbers.
-OZ-
Footballguy
Freudian slip?
I'm not quite seeing the Priest comparison, but C Taylor, Jordan, etc. sure.I agree, he's one of the best handcuffs to have, and one reason I like LT more than SA or LJ, if LT got injured, Turner would be a viable starter still. Can't quite say the same for Morris, and who knows what Priest will do right now?
vandelyons
Footballguy
As I understand it, Michael Turner will be a Restricted Free Agent in 2007, allowing San Diego to retain him by matching another team's offer.
What are the chances that San Diego will opt not to match another team's offer and allow Turner to depart?
Is it safe to say that Turner will be with San Diego in 2007?
What are the chances that San Diego will opt not to match another team's offer and allow Turner to depart?
Is it safe to say that Turner will be with San Diego in 2007?
RC94
Footballguy
I think SD will give him an RFA offer that will require another team to give up a 1st round pick if they want to sign him. Therefore, I see him in SD in 2007. He will leave as a UFA after that, though. Provided LT doesn't suffer some sort of horrific injury that puts his future in question.
Gold Plated Nails
Footballguy
^^ The correct answer. Barring something either disastorous with LT or miraculous with Sproles, Turner should be back with a 1 yr contract in 07 and likely gone in 08.
RC94
Footballguy
I can see a trade, but I doubt they give him up straight-up for Lelie, unless Lelie somehow becomes a football player between now and then. I think they would prefer a draft pick than a ##### like Lelie, at least that is what I would hope for if I was a SD fan.While this is entirely possible, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Chargers reach a deal with another team after re-signing Turner. The Chargers are interested in Lelie....
kevthegrad
Footballguy
All I know is this guy looked insanely good in pre-season last year, as well as in his very limited duty filling in for LT.
Turner is a good RB to target if you are rebuilding or have the ability to keep him on your bench for two more seasons. But be prepared to see him languish on the bench for two seasons, as I don't think there's any way San Diego doesn't extend him the highest RFA compensation next year in order to keep him around.
I've been trying to deal him to upgrade my starters as I see his value at a short-term high. He's the most sought after backup RB out there right now besides Benson.
I've been trying to deal him to upgrade my starters as I see his value at a short-term high. He's the most sought after backup RB out there right now besides Benson.
Beaumont
Footballguy
Why would division rivals do this sort of deal? I think there is a reason you hear nothing about Denver dealing Lelie to KC or SD ...While this is entirely possible, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Chargers reach a deal with another team after re-signing Turner. The Chargers are interested in Lelie....
David Yudkin
Footballguy
I don't see any way that the Chargers would get a first round pick as compensation for losing Turner as a RFA. He was a 5th round pick, so that's what they would get back.
The only way they could get back first round picks would be if they franchised him and another team made an offer that the Changers didn't want to match. I doubt that that would happen as the Chargers would never consent to paying Turner as a Top 5 RB, nor would a team part with two first round picks to acquire him.
The other option is if they give him a transition tag (what SEA did with Hutchinson) and SD would get to match any offer (but would not get any compensaton if they declined to match). But they would at a minimum be force to pay him as a Top 10 RB which they wouldn't do.
Basically, it will boil down to if Turner wants to try to move on and if SD wants to match the offer and if not they'd get a 5th round pick. Of course, there's always the chance SD extends Turner's contract.
The only way they could get back first round picks would be if they franchised him and another team made an offer that the Changers didn't want to match. I doubt that that would happen as the Chargers would never consent to paying Turner as a Top 5 RB, nor would a team part with two first round picks to acquire him.
The other option is if they give him a transition tag (what SEA did with Hutchinson) and SD would get to match any offer (but would not get any compensaton if they declined to match). But they would at a minimum be force to pay him as a Top 10 RB which they wouldn't do.
Basically, it will boil down to if Turner wants to try to move on and if SD wants to match the offer and if not they'd get a 5th round pick. Of course, there's always the chance SD extends Turner's contract.
they drafted that little speedy bugger Sproles last year to be a backup RB. Also in preseason last year, Pinnock and other FBs have looked fine (if not better)running short yardage plays.
The Chargers could make due without him. Would they want to?
This board seems to love Turner, if the NFL thinks similarly I'd bet it's a hard money decision for them and eventually they just don't feel paying Turner alot is the right move. This sorta thing is not uncommon either
The Chargers could make due without him. Would they want to?
This board seems to love Turner, if the NFL thinks similarly I'd bet it's a hard money decision for them and eventually they just don't feel paying Turner alot is the right move. This sorta thing is not uncommon either
I believe you only get the original round pick if you elect for the lowest level of RFA. The Chargers could pay Turner a 1 year, $2MM tender at the highest level and anyone signing him would have to deal a 1st & a 3rd as compensation. Are the Chargers willing to do that? I'm not sure. They've got a lot of money invested in LT and previous backups like Chatman played decently enough filling in for LT. As someone mentioned, they drafted Sproles last year as well. He only saw spot duty returning kicks last year, but they might be leaning towards him being the new backup.
Gold Plated Nails
Footballguy
This is correct, there is a difference on what kind of level you offer the RFA. And I have very little doubt they will offer the highest tender.
zamboni
Footballguy
I think team brass saw last year how valuable Turner was, and I don't think they let him go unless some team makes a too-good-to-pass-up trade offer. And given the fact that RBs are viewed as the most replaceable position, I don't see it happening.
As noted above, I think he stays a well-paid backup in 2007 and time will tell if his stock is still high thereafter to command a starting gig in '08. But that's a long way off.
As noted above, I think he stays a well-paid backup in 2007 and time will tell if his stock is still high thereafter to command a starting gig in '08. But that's a long way off.
Last edited by a moderator:
coolnerd
Footballguy
There is also a Mid-level where the team gets a first round only, the price is somewhere around 1.25-1.5, but do agree that they would offer the highest level as in today's markey 2MM for a top-end back-up is not crazy money. If did not tender at the highest i could see some team with a lower first round going after Turner.
-OZ-
Footballguy
Why would division rivals do this sort of deal? I think there is a reason you hear nothing about Denver dealing Lelie to KC or SD ...While this is entirely possible, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Chargers reach a deal with another team after re-signing Turner. The Chargers are interested in Lelie....
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nf...rt_x.htm?csp=34Now, I realize an agent isn't Denver's front office, but to say we hear "nothing"? No, just nothing with any weight to it.
T Man
Footballguy
I would think that the Chargers would take a 1st rounder for Turner. As such, I would not be surprised to see the middle tender given to him next year. If a team wants to make an offer it does so with the knowledge that it will cost them a #1.
Since I doubt any team would give a #1 next year (unless LT is hurt and MT lights it up this year), there is no reason to give the highest tender.
My $.02
Since I doubt any team would give a #1 next year (unless LT is hurt and MT lights it up this year), there is no reason to give the highest tender.
My $.02
Beaumont
Footballguy
I dont doubt KC and SD are interested, as the agent said ... I doubt Denver is interested in trading Lelie to KC or SD ... that is what we have not seen ...Why would division rivals do this sort of deal? I think there is a reason you hear nothing about Denver dealing Lelie to KC or SD ...While this is entirely possible, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Chargers reach a deal with another team after re-signing Turner. The Chargers are interested in Lelie....
Now, I realize an agent isn't Denver's front office, but to say we hear "nothing"? No, just nothing with any weight to it.
coolnerd
Footballguy
I am tryng to figure how Michael turner has anything but longshot value to be top 5 value. LT2 while having a lot of touches over the last couple of years has in relative terms been healthy and has shown he can play through minor issues at a productive level. LT injury risk is no more than normal for all RBs IMO.
Turner while showing nice flashes has not really carried the ball for an entire game more than once or twice at most and has not had many overall regular season touches for me to determine if he could handle an increase load. Turner has the talent to be a quality handcuff candidate, but the factore which made Larry Johnson a 5th rouner last year are not there.
10th-12th round appears to be about right to target him.
Turner while showing nice flashes has not really carried the ball for an entire game more than once or twice at most and has not had many overall regular season touches for me to determine if he could handle an increase load. Turner has the talent to be a quality handcuff candidate, but the factore which made Larry Johnson a 5th rouner last year are not there.
10th-12th round appears to be about right to target him.
Big Score
Footballguy
I thought it was just two years ago that LT2 was hampered most of the year by his groin?
2 days ago he had a bad neck
PahtyTom
Footballguy
That is not major like Priest's hip surgery was.
Slinger
Footballguy
Yeah that's what I meant.I agree that Michael Turner is a very good talent, but the Chargers don't feel the pressure of starting him as the Chiefs did with LJ because Turner wasn't a 1st rounder.
Big Score
Footballguy
Gotcha.
Construction Man Jim
Footballguy
Not remotely comparable at all.
Nobody is debating whether Michael Turner has surpassed LaDanian Tomlinson as the better back in San Diego. (All things being equal - not considering system or o-line - a healthy majority of league insiders would likely still say LT2 is the best RB in the league, let alone on the Chargers).
There is no reasonable basis to expect LaDanian Tomlinson to miss significant time in 2006 due to injury. He has been nicked up from time to time but his track record and the stage he is at in his career (his prime) are very different than where Priest Homes was heading into last season. Furthermore, Turner did not close out 2005 with five monster games because LT2 was out injured with a significant injury. And no one is talking about LT2 and MT splitting carries 60-40 this year.
Bottom Line: Turner is a very good hand cuff. But don't get carried away, he is no LaDanian.
* Note: this is coming from someone who recognized the opportunity to get a top 5 RB late and drafted LJ in both my big money leagues last year (won one, lost the other one by literally .5 points).
Nobody is debating whether Michael Turner has surpassed LaDanian Tomlinson as the better back in San Diego. (All things being equal - not considering system or o-line - a healthy majority of league insiders would likely still say LT2 is the best RB in the league, let alone on the Chargers).
There is no reasonable basis to expect LaDanian Tomlinson to miss significant time in 2006 due to injury. He has been nicked up from time to time but his track record and the stage he is at in his career (his prime) are very different than where Priest Homes was heading into last season. Furthermore, Turner did not close out 2005 with five monster games because LT2 was out injured with a significant injury. And no one is talking about LT2 and MT splitting carries 60-40 this year.
Bottom Line: Turner is a very good hand cuff. But don't get carried away, he is no LaDanian.
* Note: this is coming from someone who recognized the opportunity to get a top 5 RB late and drafted LJ in both my big money leagues last year (won one, lost the other one by literally .5 points).
Last edited by a moderator:
