Here's a single trade that helps both lines and snags a 1st or 2nd round RB as well

[footstepsfrom#27]

OK...first of all I'm not enthused about the prospect of picking up another 32 year old has been to plug holes in the D-line...are you? And second, I don't think Shanny will spend a #1 there since he almost never does...so I did some digging around the NFL to see if I could find a hidden gem we might get a reasonable shot at...and also somebody that will fit into Jim Bates system...massive interior tackles and speed on the outside. I tried to find a trade that made a lot of sense and solves an immediate need for both trading partners.

I think I've found our man.

This probably passed unnoticed here, but I think this is a definite opportunity.

Detroit has lost starting running back Kevin Jones for at least the first half of next season with a foot injury he sustained in December (http://www.nfl.com/nflnetwork/story/9988518) and the team had hoped he'd make it back in time for the opener but that's not going to happen now, which is why the Lions are looking at the mediocre free agent marekt for running backs. How bad does Detroit need a runner? Worse than any team in the NFL. The 2006 Lions were...

1) Dead last in the NFL in rushing (a pathetic 70 yard per game)
2) Dead last in rushing attempts (86 fewer than Cleveland)
3) Dead last in rushing 1st downs
4) Tied for 28th in yard per carry (3.7)
5) Tied for 28th in rushing TD's (9)

All this was BEFORE they lost their leading rusher. All this is on a team with 2 1000 yard receivers to take the pressure off the running game

Can you get much worse than that?

The word out of Detroit is that they like Adrian Peterson but they're concerned about his durability and might be leery of taking a runner than high in the draft. It's also possible they'd rather take either Joe Thomas with the 2nd pick or else move down a few spots if they thought they could work it out to still get Brady Quinn. The Lions need a QB almost as bad as they need a runner...maybe worse.

Enter Denver...with Tatum Bell. He's fast...VERY fast...and will look even faster on the Detroit artificial turf. Tatum doesn't seem to be an instinctive runner in the stretch zone blocking scheme. Maybe he's better suited to a traditional run blocking scheme instead. Moving Tatum to Detroit would let the Lions avoid the risk of taking Peterson that high, and it would let them buy time till Jones returns, at which time they could move to a 2 back system and take the pressure of both of them by letting Tatum do what he does best...be the change of pace guy. Jones can catch the ball (over 600 yards receiving in 11 games last year)...Tatum...not so much. Perfect fit. If Tatum maintains his 1000 yard production rate and Jones matches his...Detroit should upgrade their running game significantly and still let them get either Thomas or Quinn.

What could we get in return? Well we can start with a 3rd round draft pick for sure. He's definitely worth that to a team dealing from the position of weakness that the Lions are. Toss in the fact that Matt Millen is the 2nd worst GM in the NFL and we might even be able to sqeeze a 2nd out of them for a guy who averaged over 5 yards a carry on grass. But that's not all I want...I want a BIG UGLY for the D-Line...

How 'bout this one? http://www.sptimes.com/2005/04/25/images/small/C_6_bryant_NY208_0425.jpg

http://media.theinsiders.com/Media/College_Football/1735_022504Bryant.JPG http://sports.mcall.com/images/football/nfl/draft/2005/profiles/DRAFT-BRYANT.jpg http://media.scout.com/Media/College_Football/1735_021903Bryant.JPG

Who is this guy? Anthony Bryant; 6'3", 335 lbs, backup DT for Detroit who stepped in when pro bowl DT Shaun Rogers went down in 2006 in the season's 6th game. Bryant was a lowly 6th round pick of the Tampa Bay Bucs in 2005, a draft class for defensive tackcles that included New England's Vince Wolfork, Chicago's Tommy Harris and San Diego's Igor Olshansky. Bryant didn't exactly distinguish himself...he was ranked 39th out of 40 DT's...and Denver's current free agent fill in Anton Gordon ranked 23rd...he's not a pass rusher either. Not exactly a reason to get excited huh?

Not so fast...

Bryant doesn't rush the passer very well. What he does do is eat up space and play the run very well while freeing somebody else to rush. When Cory Redding started at right defensive end in 2004 and 2005, he was about as mediocre as a pass rushing DE as it gets...totaling just 4 sacks in 2 years. In 2006 he moved inside to DT, where it's much harder to pick up sacks...next to the heralded Shaun Rogers, and once again did absolutely nothing for 6 games...no sacks. But Rogers got hurt, and in came Antonio Bryant in his place. Playing next to Bryant, Redding rang up 8 sacks from the DT position in the next 10 games...2nd among all NFL DT's next to Warren Sapp, and he led the NFL over the last 8 games. I was curious about this anonomous dude...so I did a little checking on Bryant's fall in the 2005 draft and found some interesting stuff: http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/2005/bryant_anthony

It's possible that like a lot of big defensive linemen (Minnesota's Pat Willilams for example), this guy might just be a late bloomer who is about to break out, and he might be just what we need right between Warren and Elvis. With Rogers coming back and 3 other reserve DT's on the roster, Detroit can afford to send him our way if they're getting a 1000 yard back in return. Here's why I think he might be the answer we're looking for in the interior D-Line:

First of all, Bryant droped in the draft becaue he had a bad combine in 2004and coupled with academic issues and a problem keeping his weight below 350 lbs at times, which impacted his endurance, he got pushed down the draft list. That does not mean he's stupid or a bad athlete. In fact this guy not only got his degree, he's now working on his Masters as well, so he's obviously not stupid. Athletically, he was out of shape for his workouts for some reason, but he's now one of the strongest players in the NFL. He benched over 505 lbs in college, an Alabama school record, and at the combine, even though not in good shape, he squatted an impressive 755 lbs...now up to 775 lbs. he also clocked a 5.2 40...keep in mind this is a 350 pounder out of shape running that.

In high school Bryant was a phenomenal athlete...and I do mean phenomenal...in both football and basketball as well as track. In football he was a USA Today 1st Team All American, Parade Magazine and Super Prep Dream Team 100 an outstanding basketball player who earned Parade Magazine All American recognition there also with 19 points and 12 rebounds a game...this from a guy who was over 300 pounds...and on top of being named Alabama's top defensive player, he played tight end on offense and caught 15 passes for 440 yards and 8 TD's. In track he won the state 1A championship in the shot put with a throw of 55' 3"...basically he was a total animal.

Bryant's started only a few games in the NFL, but in his first game against Green Bay he had 5 tackles...and he got better in 2006 after getting cut and picked up by the Lions. When you put it all together...his size, strength, youth (he's 25), athletic ability and the way that he seemed to make Corey Redding a better player, plus the fact that he'd be cheap to acquire and isn't making a lot of money...I think he's a great fit. He'll eat space inside and allow Warren to be a better pass rusher, plus keep double teams off Elvis.

Picking up a 3rd will replace the one we gave up in the Cutler trade, giving us significantly more draft leverage to move up, and we can package that pick with our #21 to move up a few spots if we need to and maybe grab Penn State OT Levi Brown or Michael Bush...and if both are gone we can still snag a safety in the 1st round at #21, then come back with the Penn State runner and an O-line guy in rounds 2 and 3. The main point however, is that we can bulk up nicely inside at DT and still address at least 2 of our 3 remaining problems in the draft, and we do it all without having to overpay a free agent in the final stages of his career.

Thoughts...?

[Cito Pelon]

TB has some skills to go along with his speed. If the team did not need to upgrade other positions more, I would say do the trade. It's a lateral trade seems to me is what you're saying?

[footstepsfrom#27]

TB has some skills to go along with his speed. If the team did not need to upgrade other positions more, I would say do the trade. It's a lateral trade seems to me is what you're saying?
TB just doesn't fit as an every down back in this system, but Detroit's desperate for a back and he might just shine in another system, expecially on turf. They need him more than we do and we need Bryant more than they do...plus we get a pick in the deal that gives us greater leverge. Win/Win all the way around...and if we pick up Bush we get a power inside runner to go with Mike Bell...if not we can probably move up high enough to pick up Levi Brown...which is the guy I really want out of this draft.

[chrisp]

I think that's a very intriguing suggestion. the thing I like about it is that we don't give up a huge amount, which makes it a viable possibility.

Thing is, the broncos do tend to keep an eye on people they've evaluated for each draft, and if they rate them and they become available later on. If they ever saw this guy as a good fit for them, they could be interested in him, but if not they will have other plans...

Of course, we have a brand new D-line coach and D-coor, so that could really shake up the ideas about the kind of people we are after.

Good job on that suggestion - I'm not saying its likely to come off, but it is just the kind of thinking we need. Most people just drool over the big names and try to concoct half-baked schemes to move up in the draft, truth is however, that won't happen and what we need is a diamond in the rough like this.

[Dedhed]

I think #34 overall is a complete pipe dream for Tatum. #66 is possible, but not with an added player from Detroit. If we're looking for this Bryant kid and a pick it's probably a 4th or 5th rounder from Detroit.

[BroncoInferno]

Wow; it had to have taken at least four or five hours to dream up and then type that remote senario. At least. You must have been bored to tears.

[Tombstone RJ]

I guess it's a reasonable trade scenario. But Denver would have to deal with Millen, and Millen really isn't that good of a GM (I'm going for the understatement of the entire thread here). So, it will never happen.

Now, if the Broncos offer Tatum Bell in a trade for Detroit's second round pick, Millen might consider that. I wonder if Sundquist is balsy enough to go Mano-y-Mano with Millen... I can here Ted now: "C'mon Matt, you'd be getting an explosive, dynamic RB that is perfect for your team, I'm talking a 2000+ yard RB. All we want is your 2nd. That's it. That's all we want. What do you say, want to get 2000 yard RB for a second round pick? Tell you what Matt, I'll even take that fat slob Bryant off your hands to sweeten the deal...."

[BombsOverBaghdad]

WOW!!

Well thought out and well reasoned -- good work. What I particularly like about your thoughts is that you dared to venture out of the normal thought process of our only likely trade partners are Houston (with Kubes there) and the Redskins.

[ludo21]

good idea.

I didnt read all 6 paragraphs, but Im not sure I agree.

Maybe we get a steal in Bryant, but im more leery of taking a nobody.

[usedupbraids]

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[Orange_Beard]

We would have to toss in a couple of wideouts.

[broncs2bowl]

Good suggestion but I not so sure about giving our leading rusher for some Gap filling nobody....dont get me wrong he could do very well for us, but I just dont think its worth it

[Conklin]

contradictory tho...scared of peterson cuz injury prone but would want tatum cuz he's not?

[Dukes]

Just wanted to give you props for the research and work you did on this. If we could get a 3rd rounder from them then it'd consider it.

[Dempsey Dog]

contradictory tho...scared of peterson cuz injury prone but would want tatum cuz he's not?

True, but there is a lot less pressure in trading a 3rd and a nobody d-lineman for an injury prone Tatum than drafting an injury prone AP in the top five.

Overall, I think this is an interesting scenario. The risk is that if we make this trade we are leaving ourselves a bit exposed at RB. We either need to be really sure we will be able to get a guy we are targeting in the draft, haveve a FA under wraps, or feel a guy likes Cobbs is a solution if we miss out on a RB in the draft.

[Bronco Billy]

First, nice research.

Detroit did look good stopping the run last year; at least when they played Denver in the preseason. I haven't seen a lot of this guy, but if he's a solid pass rushers and plays the run well - I'm all for it.

[Bronco Billy]

We would have to toss in a couple of wideouts.

Maybe they'll want Kircus!

[Broncoman13]

good idea.

I didnt read all 6 paragraphs, but Im not sure I agree.

Maybe we get a steal in Bryant, but im more leery of taking a nobody.


I'm not concerned about him being a nobody... I'm concerned that the Lions will realize what FS did and want to keep him. You get a guy that opens things up like that and chances are you're not gonna just let him walk.

We'd never get a 2nd from Detroit for Tatum. I know Tatum is a 1000 yard back and has incredible speed, but he's an underachiever in most's opinion. He's a 215 lb RB with 4.3 speed playing for the Denver Broncos... yet he can't out rush Olandis Gary in our system. I'm sure that throws up red flags all over the place. Then again, we had a lot go wrong on the line so perhaps that will be factored in the equation.

Overall, I'd love to do the deal FS presented. A 3rd from Detroit is basically a low 2nd. Guys like Tony Hunt, Jay Moore, Q. Moses, and Weddle could all be available at the beginning of round 3.

One thing I will add. The only way I'd move Tatum is if we got a guy in FA that we felt could be the #1 man. Jamal Lewis, Ricky Williams, Fred Taylor... somebody that we feel is going to get the bulk of the carries. Going into the draft with only Nash and Mike Bell is not a option. We'll end up reaching on somebody and that's not good.

[Broncoman13]

For the record, I'd take a 3rd staight up from Detroit for Tatum Bell. Again, I think we'd need to have a guy signed that we consider the #1 prior to trading him for anything though.

What's everybody's feelings on trading a low pick or perhaps even Jake Plummer for Fred Taylor?

[BombsOverBaghdad]

I'm not concerned about him being a nobody... I'm concerned that the Lions will realize what FS did and want to keep him. You get a guy that opens things up like that and chances are you're not gonna just let him walk.

We'd never get a 2nd from Detroit for Tatum. I know Tatum is a 1000 yard back and has incredible speed, but he's an underachiever in most's opinion. He's a 215 lb RB with 4.3 speed playing for the Denver Broncos... yet he can't out rush Olandis Gary in our system. I'm sure that throws up red flags all over the place. Then again, we had a lot go wrong on the line so perhaps that will be factored in the equation.

Overall, I'd love to do the deal FS presented. A 3rd from Detroit is basically a low 2nd. Guys like Tony Hunt, Jay Moore, Q. Moses, and Weddle could all be available at the beginning of round 3.

One thing I will add. The only way I'd move Tatum is if we got a guy in FA that we felt could be the #1 man. Jamal Lewis, Ricky Williams, Fred Taylor... somebody that we feel is going to get the bulk of the carries. Going into the draft with only Nash and Mike Bell is not a option. We'll end up reaching on somebody and that's not good.

Agree with everything, until the end................ I do not want an old retred at RB. RB is the one position that we could reasonably expect a rookie to contribute right away. And, I would argue that AP, Lynch, Bush, Leonard, or even Hunt or Irons would likely contribute at (a bare minimum) the same as we could expect from Tater.
If Shanny is so inclined, he will be able to pick up a good RB from this draft.

[Rohirrim]

Do the Broncos have anyone on the training team big enough to keep that dude away from the buffet table? Imagine this scenario: Warren and Bryant are standing in line and there's only one steak left on the grill. Chaos ensues. Hell, he looks like he could play a three gap. ;D

[footstepsfrom#27]

I think #34 overall is a complete pipe dream for Tatum. #66 is possible, but not with an added player from Detroit. If we're looking for this Bryant kid and a pick it's probably a 4th or 5th rounder from Detroit.
That might be true if we were talking about a team that wasn't so desperate for a running game, and second, if the GM's name wasn't Matt Millen. In this trade scenario, I only plan for a 3rd, which is just 2 picks into the 3rd round...so even if we only get a 3rd, it's nearly a 2nd rounder anyway.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Wow; it had to have taken at least four or five hours to dream up and then type that remote senario. At least. You must have been bored to tears.
30 minutes.

[ZONA]

Who knows but I really like the fact you took some time to make an interesting post to generate some refreshing chit chat. Not some stupid rehashed burnt out crap like "Is Mike Bell Our Starter Next Year".

Good job bub.

[footstepsfrom#27]

I'm not concerned about him being a nobody... I'm concerned that the Lions will realize what FS did and want to keep him. You get a guy that opens things up like that and chances are you're not gonna just let him walk.
That's a good point, and this was my concern as well. So I looked at the rest of the Lions DT rotation and found out that backup DT Cleveland Pinkley played for new coach Rod Marinelli in Tampa Bay in 2003 and 2004. Coupled with the fact that they get their pro bowler Shaun Rogers back this year, and have 2 other guys in that rotation, they could afford to let Bryant go if it meant fixing the running game without having to risk the #2 pick on Peterson.
We'd never get a 2nd from Detroit for Tatum. I know Tatum is a 1000 yard back and has incredible speed, but he's an underachiever in most's opinion. He's a 215 lb RB with 4.3 speed playing for the Denver Broncos... yet he can't out rush Olandis Gary in our system. I'm sure that throws up red flags all over the place.
That might be true, or it might be how fans look at it. I'm thinking that the old axiom that any back can run in this system is not true. Denver's coaches have stated that it takes a certain type of back to succeed in this system, so it follows that some backs might be able to succeed in a traditional blocking scheme but not in this system. I think Tatum might be one of those guys because it's his vision and ability to cut back when the hole opens that he struggles most with. Besides...Tatum didn't fail. He's just shown he's not a guy who can get the ball 25 times a game, and if he's sharing time with Kevin Jones, he won't have to. He can return to 12-15 carries a game and split time as the change of pace guy, which is where he's best.
One thing I will add. The only way I'd move Tatum is if we got a guy in FA that we felt could be the #1 man. Jamal Lewis, Ricky Williams, Fred Taylor... somebody that we feel is going to get the bulk of the carries. Going into the draft with only Nash and Mike Bell is not a option. We'll end up reaching on somebody and that's not good.
Michael Bush will probably be thre at #21, though I'd prefer to package something to move up and get Levi Brown, then see if Hunt drops to us in the 3rd. Also...we might be underestimating how much improvement Mike Bell is likely to make in his 2nd year. It would not suprise me that much if we drafted a runner and Bell beat him out anyway. He showed enough this year to think that it's a possibility.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Do the Broncos have anyone on the training team big enough to keep that dude away from the buffet table? Imagine this scenario: Warren and Bryant are standing in line and there's only one steak left on the grill. Chaos ensues. Hell, he looks like he could play a three gap. ;D
Well his weight was a problem before he got to the NFL, but he's controlled it since he got into the league. Also, Bryant can play in either a 1 or 2 gap system and has played in both. This is not a guy who is going to eat his way out of the league...he's a fighter who has worked his way from 6th round nobody to a guy who started and played well for Detroit last year and made a significant difference in their line. The real question, as mentioned earlier, was whether Detroit will want to let him to. I think their running game is so bad they'd consider it to solve that problem without having to take Peterson with the #2 pick. Brady Quinn is the guy they ought to be looking at...and that means trading down.

[SureShot]

Bravo FS! I would love this deal. I see the Lions DC is Tampa Bay's former LBs coach. I wonder if he would give him up.

[Paladin]

I wonder if Ted is reading this thread????...........

[TheDave]

Interesting idea also a very far fetched one.... Like others have said trading Tatum for a reletively high day one pick and a promisssing young lineman is completely unrealistic even with Matt Millen as the GM...

[footstepsfrom#27]

LOL...I'm not sure the Lion's fans have paid much attention to this guy:

http://www.lionbacker.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8271

[footstepsfrom#27]

Interesting idea also a very far fetched one.... Like others have said trading Tatum for a reletively high day one pick and a promisssing young lineman is completely unrealistic even with Matt Millen as the GM...
Keep in mind that there is precedent for this kind of move. Cleveland traded Brown and Ekubahn...TWO D-line guys instead of one...for a thousand yard runner from Denver's system.

Let me turn this scario around. If our only capable RB was Mike Bell, and we knew he'd be unavailable until at least the 2nd half of the season, meaning we were forced to either draft a runner with the 2nd pick in the draft or play with a rookie we take later in round 2 or 3 straight out of the gate in 2008...would we trade a 3rd rounder for Tatum? I would...especially if I had the worst running game in the league. And if it meant tossing in a backup linemen when I had a pro bowl guy returning to take his place anyway, then it seems like a no-brainer.

[TheDave]

Keep in mind that there is precedent for this kind of move. Cleveland traded Brown and Ekubahn...TWO D-line guys instead of one...for a thousand yard runner from Denver's system.

Let me turn this scario around. If our only capable RB was Mike Bell, and we knew he'd be unavailable until at least the 2nd half of the season, meaning we were forced to either draft a runner with the 2nd pick in the draft or play with a rookie we take later in round 2 or 3 straight out of the gate in 2008...would we trade a 3rd rounder for Tatum? I would...especially if I had the worst running game in the league. And if it meant tossing in a backup linemen when I had a pro bowl guy returning to take his place anyway, then it seems like a no-brainer.

You are conveniently forgetting that the Browncos were traded because they were switching schemes from a 4-3 to a 3-4... That is not happening in Detroit.

Also in the case you just proposed. To solve my running back problem i would target a vet like Jamaal Lewis who can be had for free (draft pick wise)... on the other hand if i fail to get a veteran I can use the 2nd pick of the 3rd round and look at someone like a kenny Irons, Tony Hunt, or Brian Leonard... All of who have much more potential than Tatum, IMO. All this is accomplished and i still have a promising young DL lineman behind my injured veteran. I have a hard time believing Millen is that stupid.

[DBroncos4life]

Dalton was a up and coming DT that just needed to get out of Balt to become a starter.

[footstepsfrom#27]

You are conveniently forgetting that the Browncos were traded because they were switching schemes from a 4-3 to a 3-4... That is not happening in Detroit.
And you're forgetting that Cleveland needed a runner in the worst way when they traded those guys. It wasn't the fact that they were switching to the 3-4...Gerard Warren would be perfect as a 3-4 nose tackle and they still traded him...it was because they didn't perceive they needed those guys as much as they needed a runner.
Also in the case you just proposed. To solve my running back problem i would target a vet like Jamaal Lewis who can be had for free (draft pick wise)... on the other hand if i fail to get a veteran I can use the 2nd pick of the 3rd round and look at someone like a kenny Irons, Tony Hunt, or Brian Leonard... All of who have much more potential than Tatum, IMO. All this is accomplished and i still have a promising young DL lineman behind my injured veteran. I have a hard time believing Millen is that stupid.
Well Millen is stupid...there's hardly a debate to be had on that. But you're forgettin who the Lions OC is...Mike Martz...and Martz constructed the most explosive offense in the NFL with the Rams with a runner who was not a feature back who would carry the ball 350 times a year. Marshall Faulk carried about 250 times a season for Martz...and he was a speed guy on turf...same as Tatum on both counts. TB doesn't catch the ball like Faulk did...but they still have Kevin Jones who picked up over 600 yards receiving last year...so that fits with Martz's idea of a back catching the ball. Finally, who is to say that any of the players you mentioned that Detroit could get in the 2nd round will exceed Tatum's production? None of these guys have played a down in the NFL so they're at least as big a risk, if not more...than Tatum. Let's not forget this guy has basically put together back to back thousand yard seasons playing one year splitting time with Anderson and the next year without a viable QB to make the passing game go. And as far as Bryant being the promising young lineman...where does he play? Rogers will start again when he comes back and so will Redding, so at best he's going to be a substitution guy on that line.

Cleveland traded their entire line and got back a Denver system RB plus a 4th rounder because they needed a runner desperately. They could have gone the FA route too but they didn't. There's plenty of reason to think Detroit would trade a single bench player at a position of strength and sacrifice a 3rd round pick in the process to get a guy with 4.3 speed and nearly back to back thousand yard seasons who might be much better on turf who could fit their system.

[TheDave]

And you're forgetting that Cleveland needed a runner in the worst way when they traded those guys. It wasn't the fact that they were switching to the 3-4...Gerard Warren would be perfect as a 3-4 nose tackle and they still traded him...it was because they didn't perceive they needed those guys as much as they needed a runner.

and got one by getting rid of players that were going to be released at some point... Is Bryant about to get released... NO. End of comparison. As for Warren being a perfect nose tackle... you are alone in that assesment.

Well Millen is stupid...there's hardly a debate to be had on that. But you're forgettin who the Lions OC is...Mike Martz...and Martz constructed the highest power offense in the NFL with the Rams with a runner who was not a feature back who would carry the ball 350 times a year. Marshall Faulk carried about 250 times a season for Martz...and he was a speed guy on turf...same as Tatum.

Marshal Faulk = Tatum Bell... stop that. They shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath let alone used a an example of why your rediculously lopsided trade makes sense.


Footsteps you have created a wonderful one sided trade that will make all the sense in the world to your fellow homers. The end result is it won't happen...sorry

[orinjkrush]

good job FS27. not that far fetched. very imaginative.

[youcandoit1687]

Jeez, TheDave, calm down. Footsteps isn't saying that Tatum is going to put up Faulk-like numbers. He is saying their running styles are similar and Kevin Jones has very good receiving ability.

This Bryant guy is their #3 or #4 guy, behind two Pro Bowlers and another guy from Tampa, sounds pretty dispensable to me.

As for our RB situation, I doubt we take a first or second rounder on a RB, maybe early 3rd(pick #66), there is plenty of value there(Antonio Pittman, Kenny Irons, Tony Hunt, even Brian Leonard).

Great work footsteps!

[TheDave]

Jeez, TheDave, calm down. Footsteps isn't saying that Tatum is going to put up Faulk-like numbers. He is saying their running styles are similar and Kevin Jones has very good receiving ability.

Great work footsteps!


Did you really just say that?

As for calming down... Fair enough, i'll let you guys play make believe :thumbs:

[footstepsfrom#27]

and got one by getting rid of players that were going to be released at some point... Is Bryant about to get released... NO. End of comparison. As for Warren being a perfect nose tackle... you are alone in that assesment.
I don't think Cleveland was going to release all those guys...certainly not Warren, which would have caused a salary cap hit in all probability. If that were the case Shanny would have just sat back and waited for it to happen instead of trading a starting RB and a 4th round pick. I didn't say Warren was a perfect NT...I said he's perfect for the 3-4...ie; his body size and athletic ability fits the 3-4, which it does. He was injured last year so I'm not ready to jettison him just yet.
Marshal Faulk = Tatum Bell... stop that. They shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath let alone used a an example of why your rediculously lopsided trade makes sense.
As the others said...it's based on style and similarity their roles, not talent that I based this on. If I thought he was Faulk's equal, I'd obviously not be wanting to trade him now would I?
Footsteps you have created a wonderful one sided trade that will make all the sense in the world to your fellow homers. The end result is it won't happen...sorry
Neither will most of the other stuff we spend time talking about...LOL

It's still fun to speculate...no?

[Dedhed]

Since they're also desperate at QB, and Millen is still a dolt, why not give them Tatum and Plummer for #2 overall?

[footstepsfrom#27]

Since they're also desperate at QB, and Millen is still a dolt, why not give them Tatum and Plummer for #2 overall?
Quinn is probably the guy they want...I'm sure they'd have zero interest in Jake and certainly not for the #2 pick in the draft. I'm guessing you're trying to be funny...if not...are you Matt Millen? ;D

[Dedhed]

Quinn is probably the guy they want...I'm sure they'd have zero interest in Jake and certainly not for the #2 pick in the draft. I'm guessing you're trying to be funny...if not...are you Matt Millen? ;D

Why would they have less interest in Jake than Tatum? He's a better player at a more important position.

[Broncoman13]

I have to agree with Dave on the Marshall Faulk and Tatum Bell comparisons. They're so different it's not even funny.

I'd like to see somebody prove that Tatum is more effective on turf than on grass. Tatum has speed, that's it. Marshal could make a guy miss. He was so smart on the field that he could literally play any position on the field (mentally speaking, not physcially) and that is one of many reasons he was so good.

The Browns traded Warren and Myers for a number of reasons. First and foremost was Warren's lack of passion in Cleveland. They knew he would never turn it around in Cleveland so they got something out of him while they could. Myers was a throw in that we requested.

Michael Bush in the first round would piss me off. I think he'll be a pretty good back, but he's far from first round material at this point. He can't even walk without a limp right now and we're talking about sending a #1 draft pick his way???

A lot of people are high on Tony Hunt. I am too. I like the guy a lot. I think he'll be a pretty good back. Would I trade Tatum Bell straight up for Tony Hunt... HELL NO! And, by suggesting that we draft a RB somewhere in the draft and trade Tatum away, that is in fact what you're doing. A known commodity for a rookie RB that may or may not pan out.

I trade Tatum if I get Adrian Peterson or Marshawn Lynch. Those are the only two RB's in this class that I would gamble on. A healthy Bush perhaps, but there's no guarantee of his health.

Here's a deal that I could go for. Somehow end up with Houston's 2nd round pick. Probably a trade involving Plummer and perhaps Foster. Call me nuts, but I'd give Houston both of them for their 2nd rounder and call it a win/win. Houston needs both of them that much is certain. With that early 2nd you could get a guy like Leonard/Bush/Irons. (Bush and Leonard would be my choices)

This is going to be an interesting draft and Houston's 2nd round pick as well as Detroit's 3rd round pick are in the "money range". This draft lacks the top tier talent. But, anytime you can get guys like Bush, Leonard, or Hunt in the 35-65 range you're in good shape. We haven't even started to talk about the possibilites of Patrick Willis, Tank Tyler, and Jarvis Moss being available in that range!

[footstepsfrom#27]

Why would they have less interest in Jake than Tatum? He's a better player at a more important position.
OK...so you are Matt Millen. :giggle:

Do we really want to have another Jake discussion? I think not. Kitna's already there...and Jake = Kitna. They need a young QB to build around...no way they trade that #2 for PLummer and TB.

[footstepsfrom#27]

I have to agree with Dave on the Marshall Faulk and Tatum Bell comparisons. They're so different it's not even funny.
Well actually they're not that different...but ONCE AGAIN...I'm not comparing their individual talents. I'm comparing the fact that both are NOT EVERY DOWN BACKS and they are less effective when asked to be. From that perspective, they're actually remarkably similar. Faulk averaged 239 carries a year in his career...Tatum carried 236 times last year as a starter. Faulk averged 18.1 carries per game...Tatum last year as a starter averaged 17.9. Production wise...Tatum gets 4.7 ypc and Faulk 4.3. Faulk had only two seasons where he carried over 300 times and he was never a dominant back putting up the really impressive numbers till he got to Mike Martz's offense in St. Louis. Faul comiled mediocre ypc figures in Indianapolis, including 3.7 and 3.0 ypc in two seperate years and never managed more than 4.1. Tatum was consistently over 5 ypc in his rookie year and only declined rapidly in that respect when asked to do what he can't...be the main guy. Faulk jumped from 4.1 his last year in Indy to 5.5 his first year with Martz and he only held those big numbers while the Rams offense was at its peak for the next 3 years and dropped off after that. Based on Faulk's early career in Indy there is no more reason to believe Tatum will be less successful in that offense than Faulk was. Check the stats and you'll see what I mean. The one exception to that was his ability as a pass receiver, which Tatum at this point does not have. But that's why I brought up the fact that they have Kevin Jones for that.
I'd like to see somebody prove that Tatum is more effective on turf than on grass. Tatum has speed, that's it. Marshal could make a guy miss. He was so smart on the field that he could literally play any position on the field (mentally speaking, not physcially) and that is one of many reasons he was so good.
There's no way to prove how good Tatum is on turf until he actually plays on turf, but it usually follows that speed is helped by the turf. John Riggins would be less effective on turf relative to his ability on the grass than Reggie Bush for example.
Here's a deal that I could go for. Somehow end up with Houston's 2nd round pick. Probably a trade involving Plummer and perhaps Foster. Call me nuts, but I'd give Houston both of them for their 2nd rounder and call it a win/win. Houston needs both of them that much is certain. With that early 2nd you could get a guy like Leonard/Bush/Irons. (Bush and Leonard would be my choices)
You are nuts...and now I know you're also Matt Millen. There is no way Houston needs Foster on a team that has problems already protecting the passer, and I don't buy the Jake to Houston stuff either...Kubes will talk to Shanny...and Shanny will let him know what happened...do you think Kubiak needs another bad Jake year at QB? Even if he wanted him he'll wait till FA to get him or offer a measly 5th rounder as a courtesy to Mike...that's it. I don't know if "somehow end up with Houston's 2nd round pick" really qualifies as a trade scenario anymore than the Plummer/Foster idea...:spit:

Finally, the topic of the thread addresses how to fix the D-line and sitll profit from out draft...which this scenario doesn't address.

[2KBack]

your comparison completely ignores the fact that Faulk caught between 40 and 90 passes every single year he was in the league. That means he was getting far more touches than his actual carries would indicate. Tatum caught 24 last year, for a monster 4.8 Yards per catch.

[Dedhed]

OK...so you are Matt Millen. :giggle:

Do we really want to have another Jake discussion? I think not. Kitna's already there...and Jake = Kitna. They need a young QB to build around...no way they trade that #2 for PLummer and TB.
But you are Millen's confidant right? I mean, you seem sure he'd overpay for a relatively ineffective RB. I was using a my trade scenario to point out how absurd it would be to expect Detroit's 2nd (or 3rd) and a player to boot for Tatum.

And the Faulk comparison is laughable.

[Broncoman13]

Well actually they're not that different...but ONCE AGAIN...I'm not comparing their individual talents. I'm comparing the fact that both are NOT EVERY DOWN BACKS and they are less effective when asked to be. From that perspective, they're actually remarkably similar. Faulk averaged 239 carries a year in his career...Tatum carried 236 times last year as a starter. Faulk averged 18.1 carries per game...Tatum last year as a starter averaged 17.9. Production wise...Tatum gets 4.7 ypc and Faulk 4.3. Faulk had only two seasons where he carried over 300 times and he was never a dominant back putting up the really impressive numbers till he got to Mike Martz's offense in St. Louis. Faul comiled mediocre ypc figures in Indianapolis, including 3.7 and 3.0 ypc in two seperate years and never managed more than 4.1. Tatum was consistently over 5 ypc in his rookie year and only declined rapidly in that respect when asked to do what he can't...be the main guy. Faulk jumped from 4.1 his last year in Indy to 5.5 his first year with Martz and he only held those big numbers while the Rams offense was at its peak for the next 3 years and dropped off after that. Based on Faulk's early career in Indy there is no more reason to believe Tatum will be less successful in that offense than Faulk was. Check the stats and you'll see what I mean. The one exception to that was his ability as a pass receiver, which Tatum at this point does not have. But that's why I brought up the fact that they have Kevin Jones for that.

There's no way to prove how good Tatum is on turf until he actually plays on turf, but it usually follows that speed is helped by the turf. John Riggins would be less effective on turf relative to his ability on the grass than Reggie Bush for example.

You are nuts...and now I know you're also Matt Millen. There is no way Houston needs Foster on a team that has problems already protecting the passer, and I don't buy the Jake to Houston stuff either...Kubes will talk to Shanny...and Shanny will let him know what happened...do you think Kubiak needs another bad Jake year at QB? Even if he wanted him he'll wait till FA to get him or offer a measly 5th rounder as a courtesy to Mike...that's it. I don't know if "somehow end up with Houston's 2nd round pick" really qualifies as a trade scenario anymore than the Plummer/Foster idea...:spit:

Finally, the topic of the thread addresses how to fix the D-line and sitll profit from out draft...which this scenario doesn't address.


Not sure what else you wrote after that. You lost all cred with that statement. Tatum Bell is not an every down back. Marshall Faulk was great on 1st and 2nd downs... he then became brilliant on 3rd downs. You go back and look up numbers all you want. I watched him play on the field. He's 10x better than Tatum Bell and you trying to compare the two only makes you look like an idiot. In the words of Mock... Your an idiot.

[footstepsfrom#27]

your comparison completely ignores the fact that Faulk caught between 40 and 90 passes every single year he was in the league. That means he was getting far more touches than his actual carries would indicate. Tatum caught 24 last year, for a monster 4.8 Yards per catch.
I didn't ignore it...I directly addressed it. I stated that Tatum was not a pass receiver like Faulk but that's why Jones was part of thie equation also and that's why they fit well together. I understand what you're saying...that Faulk touched the ball a great deal more than just his rushing carries would indicate, but I think you'd have to agree that catching an 8 yard out pattern and getting shoved out of bounds by the safety beats getting splattered every time you head up the middle of the field on a running play. The point I'm making is that both backs are similar in style...meaning they are not workhorse rushers that pound the ball between the tackles. Both work better in space than between the tackles. Both are speed backs not dozers that will run over people. Factor in the catches for Jones, and you basically have a RBBC that equates to a poor man's Marshall Faulk. Is that "as good" as Faulk? No. But we're talking here about a team that's currently LAST in the NFL in rushing...so it's a major step forward.

[footstepsfrom#27]

But you are Millen's confidant right? I mean, you seem sure he'd overpay for a relatively ineffective RB. I was using a my trade scenario to point out how absurd it would be to expect Detroit's 2nd (or 3rd) and a player to boot for Tatum.
Detroit will over pay in the free agent market even if they have to do so just to get a back that does not fit their system as well as Bell does. They're dealling from a position of extreme weakness right now...worst ground game in the NFL and they have two choices, use their #2 for an RB...something that they appear reluctant to do...or move down so far that another RB is viable there...like to the 15th pick...which also removes Quinn from their consideration. So yes...Detroit WILL overpay for Tatum, however this is not much of an additional price to pay when you consider the facts:

1) Tatum is worth a #3 all by himself. He's got basically back to back thousand yard seasons while splitting time with another back. How many 3rd rounders even make the team? It's debateable that he's not worth a 3rd at best...certainly not a given. I'd say he IS worth a 3rd...and most people in here would agree that he's worth that. I only mentioned a potential 2nd as an afterthought due to the Millen factor...maybe you remember a guy named Mike Lynn and his fine work in the Herschell Walker deal? Same kind of thing here...a POSSIBLE ripoff opportunity...can you say Washington Redskins?

2) There is no garauntee that a backup defensive tackle on the Lions is the player I suspect he is. At this point his trade value is probably very low. He's started only 8 games in his career so it's not like he would fetch much on the open market. I'm basing his value on a prediction, which in turn is based on what I see happened after he entered the lineup...but he's not going to play much anyway when Rogers comes back so where does that leave him in Detroit's plans? Sitting on the bench. If they could leverage a backup DT and a 3rd round pick in a draft where they are likely to pickup at least 1 or 2 additional picks by moving down a few spaces to get Quinn...it makes perfect sense that they'd be willing to pay slightly more for Bell, especially since their other options are less attractive for a team that's last in the NFL in rushing.

And the Faulk comparison is laughable.[/QUOTE]

[footstepsfrom#27]

But you are Millen's confidant right? I mean, you seem sure he'd overpay for a relatively ineffective RB. I was using a my trade scenario to point out how absurd it would be to expect Detroit's 2nd (or 3rd) and a player to boot for Tatum.
Detroit will over pay in the free agent market if they have to just to get a back that does not fit their system as well as Bell does. They're dealling from a position of extreme weakness right now...worst ground game in the NFL and they have two choices, use their #2 for an RB...something that they appear reluctant to do...or move down so far that another RB is viable there...like to the 15th pick...which also removes Quinn from their consideration. So yes...Detroit WILL overpay for Tatum, however this is not much of an additional price to pay when you consider the facts:

1) Tatum is worth a #3 all by himself. He's got basically back to back thousand yard seasons while splitting time with another back. How many 3rd rounders even make the team? It's debateable that he's not worth a 3rd at best...certainly not a given. I'd say he IS worth a 3rd...and most people in here would agree that he's worth that. I only mentioned a potential 2nd as an afterthought due to the Millen factor...maybe you remember a guy named Mike Lynn and his fine work in the Herschell Walker deal? Same kind of thing here...a POSSIBLE ripoff opportunity...can you say Washington Redskins?

2) There is no garauntee that a backup defensive tackle on the Lions is the player I suspect he is. At this point his trade value is probably very low. He's started only 8 games in his career so it's not like he would fetch much on the open market. I'm basing his value on a prediction, which in turn is based on what I see happened after he entered the lineup...but he's not going to play much anyway when Rogers comes back so where does that leave him in Detroit's plans? Sitting on the bench. If they could leverage a backup DT and a 3rd round pick in a draft where they are likely to pickup at least 1 or 2 additional picks by moving down a few spaces to get Quinn...it makes perfect sense that they'd be willing to pay slightly more for Bell, especially since their other options are less attractive for a team that's last in the NFL in rushing.

[chaz]

footsteps...i dont know why people keep making you defend this. Its a good idea, well thought out and makes sense for both sides. some people just like to bitch...nice job tho man

[azbroncfan]

This thread lost all crediblity once Tatum and Marshall Faulk were mentioned in the same breath.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Not sure what else you wrote after that. You lost all cred with that statement. Tatum Bell is not an every down back. Marshall Faulk was great on 1st and 2nd downs... he then became brilliant on 3rd downs. You go back and look up numbers all you want. I watched him play on the field. He's 10x better than Tatum Bell and you trying to compare the two only makes you look like an idiot. In the words of Mock... Your an idiot.
First of all, NOWHERE in here have I said Tatum is the equal of Faulk. What I intened to convey, and used a poor choice of words to do so...is that by "every down back"...I'm not referencing the number of downs on the field...I'm talking about him being a heavy duty workhorse...the Terrell Davis, Larry Johnson, LaDanian Tomlinson kind of guy who you pound a defense with. Faulk made a living off of pass receptions and worked great in space...but was he the Mike Anderson/Jamal Lewis kind of slegehammer back you run on 4th and 1 at the goal line? No. Neither is Tatum. Faulk is similar in size and speed to Faulk, and combined with Jones they make up a rough equivilent of what Martz had in St. Louis in terms of how they would fit into that offense.

Bell and Faulk are not the comparison....it's Bell + Jones compared to Faulk...and while that's still not as good as Faulk, for a team last in the NFL in rushing it's a step up.

You're missing the intent of the thread anyway...this thread is not about whether Bell is as good as Faulk...it's about the kind of player Martz looks for in this offense. That is only part of the equation anyway. The rest of this situation is more relevant...namely what do the Lions do if they don't wish to spend that #2 pick in the draft on a runner. Their opitons are limited, and it's no stretch to say that Bell fits their offense as well as any other available back they could get, probably better than most they could get as late as the 3rd round. The reason Denver should get a throw in pick with the DT is because we're giving up a player whose proven he can play for a draft pick that hasn't.

[footstepsfrom#27]

This thread lost all crediblity once Tatum and Marshall Faulk were mentioned in the same breath.
Marshall Faulk on the field with enormous talent at the other skill postions in the Rams offense is what you're thinking about. Faulk was nowhere near the back he was in St. Louis when he played in Indianapolis. His numbers skyrocketed...so compare his game in Indy with the one you see from Bell...the one that had Jake Plummer at QB, an injured offensive line, and only one real WR target. If you're measuring production on the field, you better at least take into account the context of that production. I allready said that Faulk had it all over Tatum with catching the ball...which is why Jones is part of the RBBC solution we're talking about. Again...not individual talent that's in view here...but the roles these players have and whether they fit in Martz's offensive philosophy.

[BombsOverBaghdad]

footsteps...i dont know why people keep making you defend this. Its a good idea, well thought out and makes sense for both sides. some people just like to b****...nice job tho man

Footsteps, I second the idea ............ everyone needs to relax

[footstepsfrom#27]

Footsteps, I second the idea ............ everyone needs to relax
LOL...funny how this board almost always eventually heads towards the meltdown of "you're an idiot"...but the net effect is why we rarely stay on topic for long IMO...

[Dedhed]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Odysseus]

I love the idea and research. Well done. I think the Broncos should shop for a smart, big OT as well as a DT. I wonder what shape Lepsis will be in when he gets back online? If the Broncos don't focus on retooling both their lines they are making a mistake.

[Atlas]

float a 3rd out there for Haynesworth and call it a day.

[chaz]

float a 3rd out there for Haynesworth and call it a day.

why does everyone want that trashy thug? he is not the kind of person the broncos want/need.

[Atlas]

But you are Millen's confidant right? I mean, you seem sure he'd overpay for a relatively ineffective RB. I was using a my trade scenario to point out how absurd it would be to expect Detroit's 2nd (or 3rd) and a player to boot for Tatum.

And the Faulk comparison is laughable.

You mighht be able to get a mid 3rd for Tatum.

You could trade Tatum for Detroit's third if Denver threw in their 7th. I'm just guessing of course

[Atlas]

why does everyone want that trashy thug? he is not the kind of person the broncos want/need.

Haynesworth isn't a bad guy, he just made a mistake, He has never done anything else to get him noticed besides play some pretty good football.

Besides it was against the Cowboys! I don't see anything wrong with what he did.