RUMOR: Norm Hitzges: Chiefs interested in trading LJ to Cowboys?

[ABQCOWBOY]

I'd take Emmitt and (name any backup RB, I don't care) over Jones and Barber anyday.

I don't care if Barber is more talented than random backup. Because I am giving the ball to Emmitt 25 carries per game. I'd rather have an elite back carrying the rock 25 times per game with a bad backup getting under 5 touches than a mediocre RB getting 15 touches and a good BACKUP RB getting 10 touches per game.

That's great. Just one problem here. LJ is not Emmitt.

 

[Vintage]

A deal simular to that would suggest that he wants just that. A deal simular to the one LT got. There is no reason to think that he's going to sign a 6 year deal friendly to the club. Get real. This guy is looking to get paid because he too knows that his shelf life is limited. He's even said as much publically.

The statement you make on Johnson helping us and improving our RB position is relative. He may but it's not a given. There is no guarante he will come back stronger then he was last year. There is also no guarante that Jones and Barbar will not improve on there performances from last year. I am not in favor of paying huge money on bad contracts to players who may provide only a minimul improvement, if at all. It's not good business sense IMO. I am not for it.

Where did I say it would be friendly to the club?

A 6 year deal guaranteeing him in the same neighborhood (ie, maybe not EXACTLY) the same amount of money and the same averages is something LJ probably would be very interested in, seeing as how it would make him amongst the highest paid RBs in the league...

And if LJ represents only a "may provide only a minimal improvement, if at all" then there is no point in continuing this debate with you. Because I cannot think of any sane person who could come to the rationalization that Larry Johnson is a small, if at all, improvement over Jones or Barber.

Hostile is right. This thread is so over and done.



Edit: Doomsday, I agree...

 

[YosemiteSam]

Everyone should just give it up. There is NOWAY the Cowboys are going to trade for Johnson.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Where did I say it would be friendly to the club?

A 6 year deal guaranteeing him in the same neighborhood (ie, maybe not EXACTLY) the same amount of money and the same averages is something LJ probably would be very interested in, seeing as how it would make him amongst the highest paid RBs in the league...

And if LJ represents only a "may provide only a minimal improvement, if at all" then there is no point in continuing this debate with you. Because I cannot think of any sane person who could come to the rationalization that Larry Johnson is a small, if at all, improvement over Jones or Barber.

Hostile is right. This thread is so over and done.

Statistically, the numbers generated by LJ last year and the numbers generated by the combination of JJ and MB were very close with the slight edge going to JJ/MB. It is very likely that LJ will not have the same kind of year this coming season. It's also likely that JJ and MB are going to imrpove. What you are trying to say is not lost on me. If you looked at either MB or JJ and compared them with LJ, they would not be comparable over the long hall. However, that's not how our offense works currently. We are designed to be a two back system. For that reason, you can't look at it as LJ in comparison to MB or JJ. You must look at them both and compare.

LJ has publically said that he want to be the highest paid RB in football. Now, you can say that we could pay him close or slightly less but until he acknowledges the fact that this would be acceptable, I don't know how you can bank on that. I take him for his word which is pay me or I will sit out. 12 Million signing bonus, 7.5 to 8 Million per year with another 9 million guaranted regardless of if he gets cut or not is a great deal of money. That's the contract, as I understand it, that LT has. No thank you.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Everyone should just give it up. There is NOWAY the Cowboys are going to trade for Johnson.

I agree.

 

[joseephuss]

I'd take Emmitt and (name any backup RB, I don't care) over Jones and Barber anyday.

I don't care if Barber is more talented than random backup. Because I am giving the ball to Emmitt 25 carries per game. I'd rather have an elite back carrying the rock 25 times per game with a bad backup getting under 5 touches than a mediocre RB getting 15 touches and a good BACKUP RB getting 10 touches per game.

Emmitt never got 25 carries per game in any season. The most for a full season was 377(in 1995 at age 26) carries over 16 games for 23.6 carries per game. He also had one season( in 1994) of 368 carries over only 15 games due to injury for 24.5 carries per game. After that his top season was 329 carries(20.6 per game) for 1397 yards. That is a good season. It is not a great season, which what he was being paid to provide. The same that Larry Johnson will be asked to do. Provide great seasons.

 

[slick325]

I'd take Emmitt and (name any backup RB, I don't care) over Jones and Barber anyday.

I don't care if Barber is more talented than random backup. Because I am giving the ball to Emmitt 25 carries per game. I'd rather have an elite back carrying the rock 25 times per game with a bad backup getting under 5 touches than a mediocre RB getting 15 touches and a good BACKUP RB getting 10 touches per game.

I agree. I said this in a previous post. Give me one elite running back over two average backs any day.

Although I don't think this trade will occur, especially how it is currently rumored to be presented, I think folks are putting too much weight on LJ's 400 carries last season. If LJ came to Dallas he would not be asked to carry the ball 400 times because of the weapons around him.

Teams would have the nightmare decision of stacking the box and leaving T.O. or Terry Glenn one on one with Witten free to roam the middle one on one or leave safeties back and allow LJ to carve them up. This is similar to the decisions teams had to make when facing the '92-'96 Cowboys except those teams NEVER had a 2nd WR the caliber of Terry Glenn. As Joseephuss pointed out Emmitt never had a season where he averaged 25 carries per game. This, IMO, is a direct result of the talent around him. There were games where Dallas would ride Emmitt to victory but there were also games where Troy's arm and Michael's/Jay's hands saved the day.

My point is this, KC's offense has two weapons (LJ and Gonzo), that's it. In order for them to be competitive they MUST get those two an inordinate amount of touches. In Dallas, the talent is much better and LJ would not be asked to be our only weapon. Being in a balanced attack may add years to his career actually because his situation wouldn't be like Earl Campbell or Eric Dickerson or Barry Sanders anymore. It would be more like Emmitt Smith (early Dallas years) and Marshall Faulk (Greatest Show on Turf years). Just my humble opinion.

 

[peplaw06]

The two back approach is better IMO. Had we not had Barbar and Jones, what happens when Jones is out? Those two backs have done well for us together. I don't see the reasoning behind giving away picks, players and awarding a huge cap number to somebody who is likely to produce less then he did the year before. On the other hand, you keep MB and JJ and chances are good that they are actually going to continue to improve. I'm not for trading for LJ under the terms I understand them to be.

Yeah, but I don't think we're talking about letting JJ go are we? If we traded LJ for MB3 and a pick (not in the 1st), we'd still have a very capable backup in JJ, who could easily take some of the load from LJ.

As for the cap issues... it's an issue for sure. But we have cap room this season, the cap is going up next season. I'd be worried about giving TNew, Romo and LJ all big deals and the hit that will take on next season's cap. But if they can work something out where we fall under the cap, then I'd be for it. Unused cap space is just wasted anyway. You have flexibility for contingencies in the season, say if someone gets injured, but usually you don't find high-priced players at that point anyway.

 

[Doomsday101]

I agree. I said this in a previous post. Give me one elite running back over two average backs any day.

Although I don't think this trade will occur, especially how it is currently rumored to be presented, I think folks are putting too much weight on LJ's 400 carries last season. If LJ came to Dallas he would not be asked to carry the ball 400 times because of the weapons around him.

Teams would have the nightmare decision of stacking the box and leaving T.O. or Terry Glenn one on one with Witten free to roam the middle one on one or leave safeties back and allow LJ to carve them up. This is similar to the decisions teams had to make when facing the '92-'96 Cowboys except those teams NEVER had a 2nd WR the caliber of Terry Glenn. As Joseephuss pointed out Emmitt never had a season where he averaged 25 carries per game. This, IMO, is a direct result of the talent around him. There were games where Dallas would ride Emmitt to victory but there were also games where Troy's arm and Michael's/Jay's hands saved the day.

My point is this, KC's offense has two weapons (LJ and Gonzo), that's it. In order for them to be competitive they MUST get those two an inordinate amount of touches. In Dallas, the talent is much better and LJ would not be asked to be our only weapon. Being in a balanced attack may add years to his career actually because his situation wouldn't be like Earl Campbell or Eric Dickerson or Barry Sanders anymore. It would be more like Emmitt Smith (early Dallas years) and Marshall Faulk (Greatest Show on Turf years). Just my humble opinion.

Very good post.

 

[burmafrd]

400 carries a season is 25 per game. Its been clear that once you go over that amount of carries a RB quickly declines. Johnson has only had the full load for a little over 2 years. So the wear and tear is not so bad. However, it has to be thought about: a RB typically lasts 5-7 years at best, expecially a starter. Players like Emmitt and Walter Payton are the EXCEPTIONS (huge ones at that). LJ runs upright and takes punishment- also deals it out. My question is he another Earl Campbell- who had about 5 years and then got broken down? They run a lot alike.
Above all else is the money: LJ wants MASSIVE bucks. To me, the only RB in football that deserves that kind of money is LT- NO ONE ELSE.

 

[BlueStar II]

I live in the Kansas City area, and while Johnson is a top runner, around here, he's considered to be somewhat one-dimensional. Meaning that he is basically a runner only, he's never shown much willingness or ability as a blocker and pass receiver either. Personally, I would much rather see us pass on a trade like this proposed trade. Considering the salary that Johnson will demand, plus giving up a player of ours as well as an additional pick, I say....pass on this trade.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Yeah, but I don't think we're talking about letting JJ go are we? If we traded LJ for MB3 and a pick (not in the 1st), we'd still have a very capable backup in JJ, who could easily take some of the load from LJ.

As for the cap issues... it's an issue for sure. But we have cap room this season, the cap is going up next season. I'd be worried about giving TNew, Romo and LJ all big deals and the hit that will take on next season's cap. But if they can work something out where we fall under the cap, then I'd be for it. Unused cap space is just wasted anyway. You have flexibility for contingencies in the season, say if someone gets injured, but usually you don't find high-priced players at that point anyway.

As I understand it, the deal would be for MB and Clevelands first. We would then have to sign LJ. I agree with you that if we made the trade, we would still have JJ but the problem there is that JJ also wants to get paid. He's in the last year of his contract. If we signed LJ and paid him what he wants to make, then how are you going to pay JJ as well, to say nothing of Romo. You can't have a RB making more then your starting QB. A contract like the one LJ would want carries a lot of issues with it IMO. I guess I just would not want to give up a 1st and MB and also have to give a contract like the one LJ would want. Now, if it were a second and MB and maybe a more reasonable contract, I'd be all over it. The problem is that I don't think it will be. I think LJ is going to want that block buster deal. If we trade MB and can't sign JJ, then LJ is going to be back to carrying the ball 350 to 400 times a season. He won't last long with that work load IMO.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

400 carries a season is 25 per game. Its been clear that once you go over that amount of carries a RB quickly declines. Johnson has only had the full load for a little over 2 years. So the wear and tear is not so bad. However, it has to be thought about: a RB typically lasts 5-7 years at best, expecially a starter. Players like Emmitt and Walter Payton are the EXCEPTIONS (huge ones at that). LJ runs upright and takes punishment- also deals it out. My question is he another Earl Campbell- who had about 5 years and then got broken down? They run a lot alike.
Above all else is the money: LJ wants MASSIVE bucks. To me, the only RB in football that deserves that kind of money is LT- NO ONE ELSE.

I agree with this line of reasoning. I don't think too much is being made of the fact that he has carried the ball a lot in the short time he has been a starter. He actually reminds me more of George Rodgers in his running style but it's pretty much the same. His shelf life is going to be finite, IMO. Signing a big guaranted contract, which is what LJ wants, is a mistake to me. Just will never see the return on investment IMO.

 

[Vintage]

As I understand it, the deal would be for MB and Clevelands first. We would then have to sign LJ. I agree with you that if we made the trade, we would still have JJ

And as I stated earlier, I wouldn't do that trade. I would do a trade that would reflect something that is more fair and equal in value (though, I dunno what that would be)...but I don't see how adding Johnson is anything BUT an upgrade.

but the problem there is that JJ also wants to get paid. He's in the last year of his contract. If we signed LJ and paid him what he wants to make, then how are you going to pay JJ as well, to say nothing of Romo.

He's mediocre. We can replace him after the year.

You can't have a RB making more then your starting QB.

Why not? Isn't San Diego doing it? I don't hear complaints coming from Rivers.

A contract like the one LJ would want carries a lot of issues with it IMO.

Like....?

I guess I just would not want to give up a 1st and MB and also have to give a contract like the one LJ would want. Now, if it were a second and MB and maybe a more reasonable contract, I'd be all over it.

Wait a minute.....

The problem is that I don't think it will be. I think LJ is going to want that block buster deal. If we trade MB and can't sign JJ, then LJ is going to be back to carrying the ball 350 to 400 times a season. He won't last long with that work load IMO.

So this precludes us from getting a competant backup via the draft or free agency next year, after Jones leaves?

 

[Vintage]

I agree with this line of reasoning. I don't think too much is being made of the fact that he has carried the ball a lot in the short time he has been a starter. He actually reminds me more of George Rodgers in his running style but it's pretty much the same. His shelf life is going to be finite, IMO. Signing a big guaranted contract, which is what LJ wants, is a mistake to me. Just will never see the return on investment IMO.

Well, now I am convinced.

You win.

 

[superpunk]

Good post slick. The notion that Johnson is somehow comparable to JJ/MB3 is laughable. I mean, the tandem nearly produced on par with Tomlinson, too.

The real point is how much better we'd be if that #1 back was Johnson, instead of Julius. I hate that Parcells decided two-back was the way to go. I need a stud.

His shelf life is going to be finite, IMO.

 

[slick325]

Good post slick. The notion that Johnson is somehow comparable to JJ/MB3 is laughable. I mean, the tandem nearly produced on par with Tomlinson, too.

The real point is how much better we'd be if that #1 back was Johnson, instead of Julius. I hate that Parcells decided two-back was the way to go. I need a stud.

Thanks. IMO the reason I think Parcells went to the two back attack is because he realized he didn't have a workhorse in Julius Jones in the 1st place. He had a show pony. Bill NEVER used a two headed attack before he got to Dallas and sold all of us on how it was the thing to do. He said that in order to not hurt the feelings of his somewhat sensitive show pony. IMO.

Bill sure used Joe Morris to death in NY. Then Otis Anderson. Then went to NE and rode one workhorse named Curtis Martin. Then brought that same workhorse with him to the Jets. The bottom line is if Parcells had that one back he could depend on we wouldn't even know our backups name right now.

 

[Doomsday101]

Thanks. IMO the reason I think Parcells went to the two back attack is because he realized he didn't have a workhorse in Julius Jones in the 1st place. He had a show pony. Bill NEVER used a two headed attack before he got to Dallas and sold all of us on how it was the thing to do. He said that in order to not hurt the feelings of his somewhat sensitive show pony. IMO.

Bill sure used Joe Morris to death in NY. Then Otis Anderson. Then went to NE and rode one workhorse named Curtis Martin. Then brought that same workhorse with him to the Jets. The bottom line is if Parcells had that one back he could depend on we wouldn't even know our backups name right now.

True. I do agree with Parcells regarding the reason and that is so many college RB are not asked to carry the load and if you’re not doing it at the college level then chances are you’re not going to be able to do so at the Pro level. Guys like LT and LJ did carry the load in college and they are showing they can do it at this level as well.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

And as I stated earlier, I wouldn't do that trade. I would do a trade that would reflect something that is more fair and equal in value (though, I dunno what that would be)...but I don't see how adding Johnson is anything BUT an upgrade.



He's mediocre. We can replace him after the year.



Why not? Isn't San Diego doing it? I don't hear complaints coming from Rivers.



Like....?




Wait a minute.....



So this precludes us from getting a competant backup via the draft or free agency next year, after Jones leaves?

I would not do that trade either. However, I have seen nothing to indicate that KC or LJ would be willing to accept less.

I do not believe that JJ is mediocre. I think he's better then that but that is only my opinion. I guess I just don't understand the need to tear down what is in place and is already working only to have to go out and spend more draft picks on people to replace them. I don't see the logic in that.

Rivers is still playing in his rookie contract. He can't complain one way or the other until his contract is up. However, the time will come when San Diego is going to have to make a decision. To me, this is beside the point, LJ is not LaDanian so to me, it's not even a discussion on paying him as if he were.

We already have compatent backs on this team. Why should we go out and get more if we don't have to. This still comes down to production. The two we have now are producing. You can say that LJ would produce more but there is nothing you or anybody can produce to assure this fact. It is a very real possability that he might not produce more next year.

 

[slick325]

True. I do agree with Parcells regarding the reason and that is so many college RB are not asked to carry the load and if you’re not doing it at the college level then chances are you’re not going to be able to do so at the Pro level. Guys like LT and LJ did carry the load in college and they are showing they can do it at this level as well.

Good point.