So we have (what most would say) a top 10 RB, who is still young and comes at a relatively cheap price tag....and we are talking about trading him?Sure, if someone offered a pretty good haul, almost any player could be worth trading...but we aren't going to get anything more than a high 2nd...and at that point it isn't even worth it. You would be giving up a player who has proven he can contribute at a high level for a player who could very easily be a bust. No way the Bucs trade away Martin before his rookie deal expires, anyway. It's not even a realistic scenario.
You could say that about any player at any position on any team
i would say that about anyone other than mccoy and David on the Bucs.
McCoy, David, Revis...only 3 that should be considered safe. Everyone else at this point is expendable in my eyes. That includes Mark Barron. That includes Doug Martin. If Trent Richardson can be had for a 1st we might be able to get at least that for Martin. No one should be safe on the 32nd ranked offense.
Why in the world would you get rid of Martin? He is one of the big bright spots on this offense, that makes ZERO sense
Because it's the deepest group on the team and it can fill a need be it through draft or vet trade. Tedford doesn't need 1 bell cow back.Bottom line, he's good, but he's also replaceable -e.i. last season.See Dal's comments.
No RB is irreplaceable. Luckily some teams still don't seem to get that, so we might be able to recoup some of the picks we used on the guy.Martin is a good back. People act like he's some kind of elite once in a lifetime player. He's not.
McCoy, David, Revis...only 3 that should be considered safe. Everyone else at this point is expendable in my eyes. That includes Mark Barron. That includes Doug Martin. If Trent Richardson can be had for a 1st we might be able to get at least that for Martin. No one should be safe on the 32nd ranked offense.
Why in the world would you get rid of Martin? He is one of the big bright spots on this offense, that makes ZERO sense
Because it's the deepest group on the team and it can fill a need be it through draft or vet trade. Tedford doesn't need 1 bell cow back.Bottom line, he's good, but he's also replaceable -e.i. last season.See Dal's comments.
No RB is irreplaceable. Luckily some teams still don't seem to get that, so we might be able to recoup some of the picks we used on the guy.Martin is a good back. People act like he's some kind of elite once in a lifetime player. He's not.
No one is saying he is elite or "once in a lifetime". We're saying he's very good and still on his rookie contract and we're asking why it makes sense to trade a guy who is very good and on his rookie contract. There is no guarantee that whomever we picked with the draft selection we got for Martin would be as good as he is, so why should we trade away a proven commodity for an unproven one?
whatever pick that came from a martin trade would be on his rookie contract also, so thats a wash. some fans just believe that the chance of drafting a good player at a different position is better than keeping a solid RB. it all just depends on how much a fan values the RB position.
Plenty of people here call Martin elite. And "cheap" is not accurate when referring to him being on his rookie deal. While his salary may be low, the opportunity cost of keeping him instead of trading him is high. If we can get anything remotely close to what the Browns got for Richardson, he is a VERY expensive commodity to keep.And the "proven vs unproven" is a ridiculous argument. Doug is "proven" to not be all that much better than what we have in the other guys on the roster. A better RB offers little difference in impact over his peers. Whereas it would not be hard to improve more than one other area which would have a bigger positive overall impact, so it would be hard for an "unproven" to be better than the proven loser he is replacing.Look at it like this. Which would be more beneficial to the offense: Martin starting over Rainey/James, or a 2nd round speed receiver replacing Owusu/Dawson?
Plenty of people here call Martin elite. And "cheap" is not accurate when referring to him being on his rookie deal. While his salary may be low, the opportunity cost of keeping him instead of trading him is high. If we can get anything remotely close to what the Browns got for Richardson, he is a VERY expensive commodity to keep.And the "proven vs unproven" is a ridiculous argument. Doug is "proven" to not be all that much better than what we have in the other guys on the roster. A better RB offers little difference in impact over his peers. Whereas it would not be hard to improve more than one other area which would have a bigger positive overall impact, so it would be hard for an "unproven" to be better than the proven loser he is replacing.Look at it like this. Which would be more beneficial to the offense: Martin starting over Rainey/James, or a 2nd round speed receiver replacing Owusu/Dawson?
It depends on whether or not that 2nd round speed receiver is a bust or not. Doug isn't a bust, he's a productive player. As this season proved, injuries can rob you at anytime and building depth at all positions is important.
Plenty of people here call Martin elite. And "cheap" is not accurate when referring to him being on his rookie deal. While his salary may be low, the opportunity cost of keeping him instead of trading him is high. If we can get anything remotely close to what the Browns got for Richardson, he is a VERY expensive commodity to keep.And the "proven vs unproven" is a ridiculous argument. Doug is "proven" to not be all that much better than what we have in the other guys on the roster. A better RB offers little difference in impact over his peers. Whereas it would not be hard to improve more than one other area which would have a bigger positive overall impact, so it would be hard for an "unproven" to be better than the proven loser he is replacing.Look at it like this. Which would be more beneficial to the offense: Martin starting over Rainey/James, or a 2nd round speed receiver replacing Owusu/Dawson?
It depends on whether or not that 2nd round speed receiver is a bust or not. Doug isn't a bust, he's a productive player. As this season proved, injuries can rob you at anytime and building depth at all positions is important.
It would take a very special level of bust for that 2nd rounder to NOT be an improvement over Owusu, so the odds of that happening are almost nonexistent. And the same could be said for other positions. And if injury is your concern, then you are saying you would keep Martin so you have depth. You really want to make the argument that you should sacrifice a 2nd round pick for depth? At RB?The only thing Martin is doing is keeping guys very nearly as good as him on the bench while making a minimal difference in game impact compared to them. They may even be better than him.
Plenty of people here call Martin elite. And "cheap" is not accurate when referring to him being on his rookie deal. While his salary may be low, the opportunity cost of keeping him instead of trading him is high. If we can get anything remotely close to what the Browns got for Richardson, he is a VERY expensive commodity to keep.And the "proven vs unproven" is a ridiculous argument. Doug is "proven" to not be all that much better than what we have in the other guys on the roster. A better RB offers little difference in impact over his peers. Whereas it would not be hard to improve more than one other area which would have a bigger positive overall impact, so it would be hard for an "unproven" to be better than the proven loser he is replacing.Look at it like this. Which would be more beneficial to the offense: Martin starting over Rainey/James, or a 2nd round speed receiver replacing Owusu/Dawson?
It depends on whether or not that 2nd round speed receiver is a bust or not. Doug isn't a bust, he's a productive player. As this season proved, injuries can rob you at anytime and building depth at all positions is important.
It would take a very special level of bust for that 2nd rounder to NOT be an improvement over Owusu, so the odds of that happening are almost nonexistent. And the same could be said for other positions. And if injury is your concern, then you are saying you would keep Martin so you have depth. You really want to make the argument that you should sacrifice a 2nd round pick for depth? At RB?The only thing Martin is doing is keeping guys very nearly as good as him on the bench while making a minimal difference in game impact compared to them. They may even be better than him.
It happened with both the last 2 WRs we picked in the 2nd round, so I think the odds aren't as long as you are implying
McCoy, David, Revis...only 3 that should be considered safe. Everyone else at this point is expendable in my eyes. That includes Mark Barron. That includes Doug Martin. If Trent Richardson can be had for a 1st we might be able to get at least that for Martin. No one should be safe on the 32nd ranked offense.
Why in the world would you get rid of Martin? He is one of the big bright spots on this offense, that makes ZERO sense
Because it's the deepest group on the team and it can fill a need be it through draft or vet trade. Tedford doesn't need 1 bell cow back.Bottom line, he's good, but he's also replaceable -e.i. last season.See Dal's comments.
No RB is irreplaceable. Luckily some teams still don't seem to get that, so we might be able to recoup some of the picks we used on the guy.Martin is a good back. People act like he's some kind of elite once in a lifetime player. He's not.
Exactly doc.
Anyone asking themselves why we didn't see this movement to rid ourselves of Doug Martin until after he was injured. Hoping one of these smart people who have it figured all out can explain to me why we didn't trade him after his rookie season when value was at its highest. Better yet, why wasn't it even mentioned until now?I'm still calling BS. Guy got hurt, back ups were smoke and mirrors ( seriously, read some of these arguments about sporadic yardage outbursts and how Martin is slammed for them but James/Rainey aren't), same crowd cried about Blount, yadda, yadda, yadda. Dougie isn't going anywhere. Please get mad about it.
Anyone asking themselves why we didn't see this movement to rid ourselves of Doug Martin until after he was injured. Hoping one of these smart people who have it figured all out can explain to me why we didn't trade him after his rookie season when value was at its highest. Better yet, why wasn't it even mentioned until now?I'm still calling BS. Guy got hurt, back ups were smoke and mirrors ( seriously, read some of these arguments about sporadic yardage outbursts and how Martin is slammed for them but James/Rainey aren't), same crowd cried about Blount, yadda, yadda, yadda. Dougie isn't going anywhere. Please get mad about it.
I'm calling BS on the "after he was injured". I never wanted a top pick wasted on a RB and was saying we should trade him last year. As was Dal. And others. In fact most of the "trade Martin" crowd was calling for it well before he got hurt. And it's not a matter of "getting mad" so just grow the hell up.
Without a doubt the roster needs blowing up big time.There is next to no quality depth so most of the guys who were depth guys the last few years need to be shown the door & replaced.Then when it comes to the starters we are talent starved at position of great value like QB and DE while idiotically wasting resources overpaying for names, a lot of the time at positions that really aren't important.Problem comes from the idiotic contracts Dom drew up for guy like Nicks where he actually costs almost $4 mill more to release this off season ($13.071 mill) than he would to keep on the roster ($9.357 mill), too many people forget the restructure bonus in 2012 is pro rated and would accelerate while $6 million of his 2014 salary is guaranteed against injury.It's going to take at least a couple of offseasons to clear up the messes Dom left.When a team has no QB or pass rush to go along with next to no depth nobody should be thinking a massive roster turnover isn't needed.This is the most poorly constructed team in the league.
My god we've fit a whole lot of stupid into this one tiny thread.
Without a doubt the roster needs blowing up big time.It's going to take at least a couple of offseasons to clear up the messes Dom left.
Wrong. It can be fixed in one offseason and without blowing up the entire roster .