Caution - the following includes speculation so if you value the next five minutes of your life more highly than fantasy speculation, move on. You have been notified.
I noted an interesting quote in the Canepa article from the SD Union Tribune, towards the end...
Canepa article
“Now the bluffing game is on,” he says, “and it could go all the way to the draft. We don't want to give up on a No. 1. It's very much on the front burner, and it hasn't subsided. The game is on now.”
The quote is from Smith, who is being portrayed as a western gambler in the article (kinda schmoozy).
First off, he seems to admit to bluffing, meaning that there could be six teams or just the two; he may hold onto Turner another year or be anxious to get maximal value; and his asking price may be negotiable, or not.
Secondly, he states "it could go all the way to the draft." Interesting in that it suggests that if a trade is not done before the draft, he would not be interested. I am assuming that this means he thinks he can get a near-comparable RB from the first 40 picks or so in the draft, but there is nothing in the free agency pool that excites him.
Now, it would appear that there are only two RB going in the first round in most mocks (partially representing need, which would be changed if SD had an additional pick and newly developed need due to trade). The rests of the RBs have been disparaged upon by many, including the Dallas reporter that was interviewed in the Audible (sorry his name escapes me). So, either SD believes in they can grab Lynch or can develop some second tier RB like Booker, Pittman or Jackson. This pins the season's hopes on LT's durability obviously.
He appears to be stating they want at least one first round pick, so one assumes there is someone in the conscensus top 32 - 40 they want if they lose Turner.
Now, interestingly, Canepa's article suggests a high second might seal the deal as well. Again, not a second, but a high second, which is why I extended my range to the top 40 picks. Maybe there is a DB that can handle the return duties they have targeted. I don't know. Just interesting to pick apart the mindset (and continue to dwell on the MT situation).
It is also stated that there are six teams interested. Looking at the depth charts of the teams, ignoring intra-conference or divisional realties against trades, I speculate on the possible suspects:
Tenn - known
Buff - known
GB - assumed and in dire need of a legit franchise back. I feel this is nearly guaranteed to be one of the six
Dallas -mentioned but no need based upon talent on roster. If they have a pending offer for J Jones or would consider trading him and a lower pick, maybe. I really don't see this as anything other than kicking the tires.
Balt - just picked up McGahee and have serviceable backups in Smith and Anderson, no
Ari - Edge came on late last season, but they are changing offenses blocking schemes IIRC. However, unless they drop Edge (high pricetag), won't happen. Also, they are pretty well stocked with Shipp and JJ. I say no.
Atl - Dunn is an excellent back but aging and Norwood apparently is not believed by many to be capable of running in the new scheme IIRC, so Atl is a strong possibility and was mentioned once somewhere by a poster I believe. This would give Atl a year with Dunn to bring Turner up to speed and Norwood could be an excellent 3rd down back.
Cin - Rudi is beginning to show some wear as well and there is no quality back up as Perry is always on the IR it seems. Turner could plug into Rudi's role easily and with the loss of WRs this offseason to FA and sanctions, Cin would have reason to fortify the running game. I could see this possibility.
Car- the Panthers have talent, but have not re-established the running game dominance that they had with Davis. Turner is a similar strong, bullish back and he could take pressure off the passing game. DW would be an excellent back up. Foster does not seem to the present or future of the Panthers running game. Possible but not real likely.
Cle - yes they picked up Jamal Lewis, but is he a patch or can he be a feature back? I have lost a lot of enthusiasm for Lewis. Need is there but I don't know if the Browns would make this move. Possible but not likely.
Bears - I like Adrian Peterson better than Benson (there, I said it) but they have two very capable RBs assuming Benson can get along with his team mates and show some durability. I think Turner would be an upgrade, but the need is not there.
Denver - No, Henry and MA, two starters.
Hou - they actually have some good talent. Picked up Green and Dayne played excellently last game or two. Gado has shown he can be inserted in case of injury and Lundy has promise. No need and other needs to address. No.
Det - already addressed the position. NO.
Ind - this is my sleeper. Different conference, Addai excelled in split time last year, could they be looking to do that again? I don't know if they have the cap room but Turner would make this offense so complete and add depth and a dimension to the game. I would think Colts fans would love this as much as fantasy fans would hate it.
Jac - No, MJD is probably the future and Freddy did better last year than he has in a long time.
Min - No, they picked up their FA high dollar back last year. People knock on Taylor but he was dependable last year. Needs a reliever to keep the mileage down, but I don't see this.
KC - No, see StL
NO - NO, kinda funny looking at that, I mean New Orleans, No.
Miami - no, Brown is doing well enough and if Ricky is better than I suspect (he didn't exactly light up the CFL prior to his injury) then they are set at RB
NYG - don't see it.
NE - If Mauroney is ok, then no immediate need, but I have heard comments that make me wonder about his shoulder IIRC. Impossible to guess what Patriots would do, but I don't see this. Not unless Mauroney has something that would limit his play.
Phi - no, only thing that would make this possible is Buckhalter having knee problems but I have not heard a word about this, so I am saying no.
NYJ - the pantry is full so why go shopping? I think they made their move for the off season.
STL - no, see KC
Oak - made their move at RB with Rhodes. They have a high second, but what a mess that backfield would be. Waste of thought unless they threw a player of interest (Rhodes?) in with it.
SF - no, Gore is the franchise back
Sea - hmm, Alexander was injured, high mileage and Morris was only adequate as a back up. I would like this. Similar to the Ind situation. Again, speaking as fan not fantasy
TB - maybe, there was a mumble about going for peterson, maybe a high second from TB would do it?
Was - no
So, who comes out as the possible six teams (ignoring conference/divisional restrictions)?
Likely..........Kicking the tires..........Unlikely
Tenn...........Dallas........................Philly
Buff............Cincinatti....................Oakland
GB...............................................Carolina
Atl...............Indianapolis...............Cleveland
...................Seattle
edited to correct spacing