What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Peterson v Lacy - The Redraft Throwdown (1 Viewer)

Soulfly3

Soulfly3

Footballguy
Alright, gents... Think this would be an interesting debate.

Now, let me preface this by saying I truly think the 2 are neck and neck for redraft purposes this year - in fact, so much so that Id strongly consider taking Lacy over Peterson.

The theory many abide by is "you don't win the league in the first round, but you can lose it...." In this case, barring injury, you're guaranteed a great return.

But in a game where every point counts, I think debating between these two players at 1.03 is the best debate of the "big 5 RBs"

2013:

Peterson: 1266/10 + 171/1

Lacy: 1178/11 + 257+0

----------------------------

So, while we know that AP is an elite (but imo, dwindling) talent on an inferior team, we have GB who has an offensively explosive team w an up and coming RB in Lacy.

So... sitting at 1.03, who do you take? Why? How many more pts are you expecting?

Thanks everyone

 
I have two #3 picks (12 team, standard, typical leagues).

Assuming Charles and McCoy are gone I'm looking at Peterson or Calvin. You want the most safe, don't lose the league with your first pick, pick, I think it's Calvin. RB's are just too volatile and injury prone.

But of course an elite RB is worth more than an elite WR in most leagues.

I take Peterson ahead of Lacy because he is far more proven. I don't think he is too old just yet, he has proven that he can produce even with a bad team around him, and with Norv in Minnesota the offense should be better than some of Peterson's other seasons.

 
It would be difficult if one had a higher ceiling and the other had a higher floor, but that's not the case. One of them has the higher ceiling AND the higher floor.

 
steveski said:
It would be difficult if one had a higher ceiling and the other had a higher floor, but that's not the case. One of them has the higher ceiling AND the higher floor.
Click to expand...
floor, I agree.

But ceiling is where I think there argument takes off... Peterson, as awesome as he is, is getting older and has taken tons of abuse... stars on a team that should be better than last year, but is still fairly impotent compared to GB.

Lacy, I could argue has the higher ceiling TODAY, solely based on age, carries, team, division etc

 
Soulfly3 said:
steveski said:
It would be difficult if one had a higher ceiling and the other had a higher floor, but that's not the case. One of them has the higher ceiling AND the higher floor.
Click to expand...
floor, I agree.

But ceiling is where I think there argument takes off... Peterson, as awesome as he is, is getting older and has taken tons of abuse... stars on a team that should be better than last year, but is still fairly impotent compared to GB.

Lacy, I could argue has the higher ceiling TODAY, solely based on age, carries, team, division etc
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if this makes sense, but I'd say that Lacy has a higher chance of hitting his ceiling than AP does. Lacy seems to have the perfect situation like you said. I still think AP has a much higher ceiling though and I think there's a good chance that the new Norv offense with Patterson and Teddy can actually be threatening enough for teams to not stack the box against AP every play. Obviously there is a lot more risk there than there is for Lacy, but I still feel like it's possible. And we know what AP's floor is and it's basically a top 10 RB.

 
I am clear on this, after this season Lacy will be the unquestioned #1 back heading into drafts next year. In a Packer offense that made Benson have value when he played for them, a guy like Lacy is going to be used often and has been made clear by the coaches.He is in a position of mass production this year.

Peterson is a freak, the best RB in the game, no one is better even at his age I will still take him on the NFL field. Put him on the Packers I will take him #1 overall in every draft every format. But this is fantasy football and his team and offense against Lacys team an offense and how he will be used, the edge goes to the Bama guy.

Lacy wins this, I would even make a case for Lacy over Charles and McCoy.

 
I have them projected within 8 points of each other - which makes them virtually even.

On the clock I take Peterson based on his (much) longer track record. I don't think you'll be disappointed either way - outside of an injury (which we can't predict) - may as well play it safe.

 
steveski said:
It would be difficult if one had a higher ceiling and the other had a higher floor, but that's not the case. One of them has the higher ceiling AND the higher floor.
Click to expand...
I disagree on the floor. I think you can very much tie the floor of a RB to the overall offense (when comparing two RBs in a similar tier). The floor of the Packers offense is significantly higher than the floor of the Vikings offense. I believe this significant increase in points scored leads to Lacy actually having a much higher floor.

 
Portis Homer said:
steveski said:
It would be difficult if one had a higher ceiling and the other had a higher floor, but that's not the case. One of them has the higher ceiling AND the higher floor.
Click to expand...
I disagree on the floor. I think you can very much tie the floor of a RB to the overall offense (when comparing two RBs in a similar tier). The floor of the Packers offense is significantly higher than the floor of the Vikings offense. I believe this significant increase in points scored leads to Lacy actually having a much higher floor.
Click to expand...
interesting... I see that argument, and I partially agree...

but gun to my head, I saw Peterson has the higher floor based on history. higher upside this season, lacy.

 
Soulfly3 said:
steveski said:
It would be difficult if one had a higher ceiling and the other had a higher floor, but that's not the case. One of them has the higher ceiling AND the higher floor.
Click to expand...
floor, I agree.

But ceiling is where I think there argument takes off... Peterson, as awesome as he is, is getting older and has taken tons of abuse... stars on a team that should be better than last year, but is still fairly impotent compared to GB.

Lacy, I could argue has the higher ceiling TODAY, solely based on age, carries, team, division etc
Click to expand...
Eddie Lacy (Green Bay) and Adrian Peterson (Minnesota) are in the same division.


Portis Homer said:
steveski said:
It would be difficult if one had a higher ceiling and the other had a higher floor, but that's not the case. One of them has the higher ceiling AND the higher floor.
Click to expand...
I disagree on the floor. I think you can very much tie the floor of a RB to the overall offense (when comparing two RBs in a similar tier). The floor of the Packers offense is significantly higher than the floor of the Vikings offense. I believe this significant increase in points scored leads to Lacy actually having a much higher floor.
Click to expand...
Peterson has been on some pretty poor offenses/teams, and yet he has produced as a top 8 RB in all of his 7 seasons. How can a second year guy who was RB7 in his one season have a higher floor than the man who has been a top 8 RB for all 7 of his years? I mean, he was RB8 in the one injury season where he only played 12 games. (standard)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Leonidas said:
Soulfly3 said:
steveski said:
It would be difficult if one had a higher ceiling and the other had a higher floor, but that's not the case. One of them has the higher ceiling AND the higher floor.
Click to expand...
floor, I agree.

But ceiling is where I think there argument takes off... Peterson, as awesome as he is, is getting older and has taken tons of abuse... stars on a team that should be better than last year, but is still fairly impotent compared to GB.

Lacy, I could argue has the higher ceiling TODAY, solely based on age, carries, team, division etc
Click to expand...
Eddie Lacy (Green Bay) and Adrian Peterson (Minnesota) are in the same division.
Click to expand...
Ha. Yes, I do know that... Point being, it's a division I believe has weak/exploitable defenses that GB are likelier to put up big points against than Peterson.

 
Leonidas said:
Soulfly3 said:
steveski said:
It would be difficult if one had a higher ceiling and the other had a higher floor, but that's not the case. One of them has the higher ceiling AND the higher floor.
Click to expand...
floor, I agree.

But ceiling is where I think there argument takes off... Peterson, as awesome as he is, is getting older and has taken tons of abuse... stars on a team that should be better than last year, but is still fairly impotent compared to GB.

Lacy, I could argue has the higher ceiling TODAY, solely based on age, carries, team, division etc
Click to expand...
Eddie Lacy (Green Bay) and Adrian Peterson (Minnesota) are in the same division.


Portis Homer said:
steveski said:
It would be difficult if one had a higher ceiling and the other had a higher floor, but that's not the case. One of them has the higher ceiling AND the higher floor.
Click to expand...
I disagree on the floor. I think you can very much tie the floor of a RB to the overall offense (when comparing two RBs in a similar tier). The floor of the Packers offense is significantly higher than the floor of the Vikings offense. I believe this significant increase in points scored leads to Lacy actually having a much higher floor.
Click to expand...
Peterson has been on some pretty poor offenses/teams, and yet he has produced as a top 8 RB in all of his 7 seasons. How can a second year guy who was RB7 in his one season have a higher floor than the man who has been a top 8 RB for all 7 of his years? I mean, he was RB8 in the one injury season where he only played 12 games. (standard)
Click to expand...
I think it's pretty obvious, I believe the RB on an offense that scores 50+ TDs has a higher floor than a RB on an offense that scores 30+ TDs, if they are similar tiers and talents. Another factor is the percentage of sustained drives vs. 3 and outs. I'm not saying it's a science, clearly Peterson has had all-world seasons on bad offenses, he's one of the greatest RBs of all time. My personal believe that I draft based on, is that you can tie the floor of a RB to the offense, as the TDs will be there.

And it's not based on any statistical research, so I could very well be wrong. I've just had too many years where my lead RB was on a poor offense, and despite his glowing history, underperformed when healthy and I wished I had taken overall offense more into account (Larry Johnson on the decaying KC offense jumps to mind, Steven Jackson on the decaying STL offense as well).

You can disagree. Unlike many on this board, I'm not looking at changing your opinion or trying to win an argument. I'm not even saying I'm correct. It is just my philosophy that I feel most comfortable drafting based on.

 
Portis Homer said:
I think it's pretty obvious, I believe the RB on an offense that scores 50+ TDs has a higher floor than a RB on an offense that scores 30+ TDs, if they are similar tiers and talents. Another factor is the percentage of sustained drives vs. 3 and outs. I'm not saying it's a science, clearly Peterson has had all-world seasons on bad offenses, he's one of the greatest RBs of all time. My personal believe that I draft based on, is that you can tie the floor of a RB to the offense, as the TDs will be there.

And it's not based on any statistical research, so I could very well be wrong. I've just had too many years where my lead RB was on a poor offense, and despite his glowing history, underperformed when healthy and I wished I had taken overall offense more into account (Larry Johnson on the decaying KC offense jumps to mind, Steven Jackson on the decaying STL offense as well).

You can disagree. Unlike many on this board, I'm not looking at changing your opinion or trying to win an argument. I'm not even saying I'm correct. It is just my philosophy that I feel most comfortable drafting based on.
Click to expand...
I agree with your philosophy and would be right by your side if we were talking about any RB in the league besides Adrian Peterson.

 
Overall, I agree this is a tomato/tomahto type of discussion but what I do find very interesting is that

in every known reality of the universe, any RB who has this much workload and age gets ripped apart...EXCEPT ADP.

Foster and Rice and MJD and Gore and SJAX. They are all right there with ADP in terms of use/productivity/age (to a degree) over the last few years and all the others have had their turns at getting tossed to the metaphorical garbage heap. But not ADP. He is the universal outlier' the exception to the rule; and everyone gives him a pass.

BUT...father time is undefeated and one of these days it WILL happen. Even ADP will hit his wall and when RBs hit the wall, it's over.

So for this debate, in a case where so many people basically have them split by a handful of points, give me the 22 year old guy with much less wear and tear.

 
AP. Err on the side of caution at the top of the draft. AP is about as sure as they come. Great debate, though. Lacy posters have given me some moments of pause.

 
Agree this is a good discussion but in 95% of leagues this wont be an issue since AP will go top 4. A more realistic draft situation is Lacy vs Megatron

 
G5781 said:
Agree this is a good discussion but in 95% of leagues this wont be an issue since AP will go top 4. A more realistic draft situation is Lacy vs Megatron
Click to expand...
Yes and no...

I just threw a scenario out for the OP... You're sitting in spot 1.03 or 1.04. You have AP and Lacy to pick from...

I honestly dont know, and may try to move down so i can take whoever is left of the 2. But gun to my head, I may go Lacy

 
I took the last 8 games of each player from last season (RUSHING ONLY), just to see how they faired H2H, since I do worry about the Peterson "wall"

Peterson: 94yds/game on 20.5 carries/game

Lacy: 73yards/game on 18.75 carries/game

----------------

Was actually shocked to see this.... I though Peterson would have slowed down over the 2nd half the season, but apparently not.

Hmmm... now my mind is flipping agian.

 
Soulfly3 said:
floor, I agree.

But ceiling is where I think there argument takes off... Peterson, as awesome as he is, is getting older and has taken tons of abuse... stars on a team that should be better than last year, but is still fairly impotent compared to GB.

Lacy, I could argue has the higher ceiling TODAY, solely based on age, carries, team, division etc
Click to expand...
Peterson nearly broke the NFL rushing record while playing a terrible team a half a year after major reconstructive knee surgery. His ceiling is as high as anyone in the league, and certainly higher than Lacy's.

Being 29 may add a new element to his floor, but it does not impact his ceiling.

 
Norval Turner on Adrian Peterson-

I really think he is going to be a guy that when the season is in the month of December that people are going to be talking about him in the MVP conversations. Because I think he is committed to having that kind of year. I think this system, the guys who benefit the most from this system when you talk about guys who have had great production with me, are obviously the WR and the RBs. We have had great success with RB both running the ball and catching the ball.
Click to expand...
 
FreeBaGeL said:
Peterson nearly broke the NFL rushing record while playing a terrible team a half a year after major reconstructive knee surgery. His ceiling is as high as anyone in the league, and certainly higher than Lacy's.

Being 29 may add a new element to his floor, but it does not impact his ceiling.
Click to expand...
I see your viewpoint - but I cant see how getting closer to 30 doesnt impact his ceiling.

fwiw, I think AP is the best RB in the game. I really do... but AP is only getting older and his team is really not getting too much better.

 
Portis Homer said:
I think it's pretty obvious, I believe the RB on an offense that scores 50+ TDs has a higher floor than a RB on an offense that scores 30+ TDs, if they are similar tiers and talents. Another factor is the percentage of sustained drives vs. 3 and outs. I'm not saying it's a science, clearly Peterson has had all-world seasons on bad offenses, he's one of the greatest RBs of all time. My personal believe that I draft based on, is that you can tie the floor of a RB to the offense, as the TDs will be there.

And it's not based on any statistical research, so I could very well be wrong. I've just had too many years where my lead RB was on a poor offense, and despite his glowing history, underperformed when healthy and I wished I had taken overall offense more into account (Larry Johnson on the decaying KC offense jumps to mind, Steven Jackson on the decaying STL offense as well).

You can disagree. Unlike many on this board, I'm not looking at changing your opinion or trying to win an argument. I'm not even saying I'm correct. It is just my philosophy that I feel most comfortable drafting based on.
Click to expand...
Well for starters, we're not talking about similar talents here.

Secondly, you're eliminating an entire aspect to "floor" here. Lacy is still very unproven. The list of RBs that have had great rookie seasons and then fallen off a cliff in year two is a very long one. Eddie Lacy's floor includes the risk that he will follow a similar path to Kevin Jones, Julius Jones, Steve Slaton, Trent Richardson, or any of a dozen other guys that have had a strong fantasy rookie year and fallen flat in year 2.

Lastly, I do think that you're putting too much stock into the strength of the offense, as many FFers do. For instance, here is the rank of the passing offenses of the top 10 fantasy RBs of 2012.

1) 31st

2) 10th

3) 11th

4) 27th

5) 20th

6) 15th

7) 25th

8) 19th

9) 32nd

10) 4th

2011 was similar, while 2013 turned things around quite a bit. Regardless, over the last 5 years there is a stronger statistical correlation to the theory that a BAD passing offense results in a strong fantasy running back than there is that a GOOD passing offense results in a strong fantasy running back.

 
Soulfly3 said:
FreeBaGeL said:
Peterson nearly broke the NFL rushing record while playing a terrible team a half a year after major reconstructive knee surgery. His ceiling is as high as anyone in the league, and certainly higher than Lacy's.

Being 29 may add a new element to his floor, but it does not impact his ceiling.
Click to expand...
I see your viewpoint - but I cant see how getting closer to 30 doesnt impact his ceiling.

fwiw, I think AP is the best RB in the game. I really do... but AP is only getting older and his team is really not getting too much better.
Click to expand...
Most running backs hit a wall pretty quickly at some time around 30. For some guys it's 29, for some guys it's 33. It's not typically a slow dropoff. Either Peterson will hit it this year or he won't. In that sense it affects his floor, as he could be affected by it (unlikely) and see a huge drop in production, but it does not affect his ceiling as their is a distinct, and high possibility that it will have no effect on him at all.

Tiki Barber's two best seasons (his ceiling) were at ages 29 and 30. Shaun Alexander's best season was at age 28. Curtis Martin's best season was at age 31.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
FreeBaGeL said:
Portis Homer said:
I think it's pretty obvious, I believe the RB on an offense that scores 50+ TDs has a higher floor than a RB on an offense that scores 30+ TDs, if they are similar tiers and talents. Another factor is the percentage of sustained drives vs. 3 and outs. I'm not saying it's a science, clearly Peterson has had all-world seasons on bad offenses, he's one of the greatest RBs of all time. My personal believe that I draft based on, is that you can tie the floor of a RB to the offense, as the TDs will be there.

And it's not based on any statistical research, so I could very well be wrong. I've just had too many years where my lead RB was on a poor offense, and despite his glowing history, underperformed when healthy and I wished I had taken overall offense more into account (Larry Johnson on the decaying KC offense jumps to mind, Steven Jackson on the decaying STL offense as well).

You can disagree. Unlike many on this board, I'm not looking at changing your opinion or trying to win an argument. I'm not even saying I'm correct. It is just my philosophy that I feel most comfortable drafting based on.
Click to expand...
Well for starters, we're not talking about similar talents here.

Secondly, you're eliminating an entire aspect to "floor" here. Lacy is still very unproven. The list of RBs that have had great rookie seasons and then fallen off a cliff in year two is a very long one. Eddie Lacy's floor includes the risk that he will follow a similar path to Kevin Jones, Julius Jones, Steve Slaton, Trent Richardson, or any of a dozen other guys that have had a strong fantasy rookie year and fallen flat in year 2.

Lastly, I do think that you're putting too much stock into the strength of the offense, as many FFers do. For instance, here is the rank of the passing offenses of the top 10 fantasy RBs of 2012.

1) 31st

2) 10th

3) 11th

4) 27th

5) 20th

6) 15th

7) 25th

8) 19th

9) 32nd

10) 4th

2011 was similar, while 2013 turned things around quite a bit. Regardless, over the last 5 years there is a stronger statistical correlation to the theory that a BAD passing offense results in a strong fantasy running back than there is that a GOOD passing offense results in a strong fantasy running back.
Click to expand...
Great analysis, and I see you've mentioned that '2013 turned things around'...

But maybe that's what we should be looking at. 2013 was a very special year in terms of passing. Record setting even.

So perhaps it makes more sense to look at that trend than that of 2-3years ago (but not discredit it either )

 
I honestly thought this was a mock/joke thread and I'm honestly shocked that the majority agree with Soulfly. Man, I wish all of you who are in the pro-Lacy camp would join my leagues.

When picking a RB in the top 7 picks, my primary goal is to select the guy who has the HIGHEST PROBABILITY of finishing top 5 on the year. Adrian Peterson is my #1 pick in a redraft ppr league. In fact, just last night I had the #1 in a Draftmaster league and it was a no-brainer for me to select AP.

A few of you have mentioned that AP and Lacy are in equal tiers... they both have similar floors and similar ceilings. Some even pounding the desk that LACY has the higher ceiling!!

Really, folks? REALLY??!! AP is worlds apart from Lacy from an athletic standpoint. It's not even close. It's so lop-sided I'm not even going to post the stats to back it because it's a waste of time.

So, purely from an athletic standpoint, AP has the much higher ceiling.

AP is the best RB drafted in the last 10 years. Yes, he is 29 this year but his skills are not diminishing yet. AP has a 2,000 yard season on his resume. AP did have his worst season as a pro last season (not counting his injury season) but I think it's obvious it was the coaching/surrounding cast that played a major role in his down season. I fully expect a bounce-back season for AP with Norv Turner now running the offense and with Cassel or Bridgewater as the starters (no more Ponder).

I want to go on record as predicting that this comparison will not be close by the time the season is over (barring injury to either, of course). In fact, I also want to predict a disappointing year for Lacy. I'm projecting Lacy to end up outside of the top 10 while AP will be firmly inside the top 5 RBs this season.

Slice it any way you like, but AP is the proven ELITE RB of these two and he is still under 30 years old. AP might be in that rare breed of a Curtis Martin or Emmitt Smith - elite players who did play well after 30. Regardless of that, I'm CERTAIN that AP has at least 1 elite season left in his tank and every Lacy fan in this thread will be kicking themselves come December for trying to out-smart basic logic.

I would have a different argument if we were talking about a player like Jamaal Charles who DOES have elite athleticism. Eddie Lacy is the definition of JAG who is in an IDEAL situation. If everything doesn't lineup perfectly, Lacy's production will suffer immensely. AP can thrive even with 3rd tier talent at QB and O-line. Lacy cannot. If Rodgers were to get injured.... guess what? Lacy isn't going to be a reliable RB1 for your fantasy team.

These are all things to consider. IF everything goes according to plan for the Packers (no injuries to Rodgers, the O-line or key WRs), then Lacy has a chance to be in the top 10 RBs. Even with all things lining up perfectly, it will be a challenge for Lacy to justify his top 5 pick (in fantasy). If nothing goes right for the Vikings (Cassel sucks, Bridgewater sucks, O-line gets injured....) but AP remains healthy, he still has a very good chance to justify his top 5 pick.

Don't out-think yourselves fellow FBGers. This is an easy debate.

 
Soulfly3 said:
FreeBaGeL said:
Portis Homer said:
I think it's pretty obvious, I believe the RB on an offense that scores 50+ TDs has a higher floor than a RB on an offense that scores 30+ TDs, if they are similar tiers and talents. Another factor is the percentage of sustained drives vs. 3 and outs. I'm not saying it's a science, clearly Peterson has had all-world seasons on bad offenses, he's one of the greatest RBs of all time. My personal believe that I draft based on, is that you can tie the floor of a RB to the offense, as the TDs will be there.

And it's not based on any statistical research, so I could very well be wrong. I've just had too many years where my lead RB was on a poor offense, and despite his glowing history, underperformed when healthy and I wished I had taken overall offense more into account (Larry Johnson on the decaying KC offense jumps to mind, Steven Jackson on the decaying STL offense as well).

You can disagree. Unlike many on this board, I'm not looking at changing your opinion or trying to win an argument. I'm not even saying I'm correct. It is just my philosophy that I feel most comfortable drafting based on.
Click to expand...
Well for starters, we're not talking about similar talents here.

Secondly, you're eliminating an entire aspect to "floor" here. Lacy is still very unproven. The list of RBs that have had great rookie seasons and then fallen off a cliff in year two is a very long one. Eddie Lacy's floor includes the risk that he will follow a similar path to Kevin Jones, Julius Jones, Steve Slaton, Trent Richardson, or any of a dozen other guys that have had a strong fantasy rookie year and fallen flat in year 2.

Lastly, I do think that you're putting too much stock into the strength of the offense, as many FFers do. For instance, here is the rank of the passing offenses of the top 10 fantasy RBs of 2012.

1) 31st

2) 10th

3) 11th

4) 27th

5) 20th

6) 15th

7) 25th

8) 19th

9) 32nd

10) 4th

2011 was similar, while 2013 turned things around quite a bit. Regardless, over the last 5 years there is a stronger statistical correlation to the theory that a BAD passing offense results in a strong fantasy running back than there is that a GOOD passing offense results in a strong fantasy running back.
Click to expand...
Great analysis, and I see you've mentioned that '2013 turned things around'...

But maybe that's what we should be looking at. 2013 was a very special year in terms of passing. Record setting even.

So perhaps it makes more sense to look at that trend than that of 2-3years ago (but not discredit it either )
Click to expand...
I'm very open to the idea that the modern NFL is a different ballgame in this respect, but 2011-2012 are just as much a part of that modern era as 2013 was. Passing yardage was up by a couple of yards in 2013 over 2012, but nothing over the top.

FWIW, here are the passing rankings of the teams that 2013's top 10 fantasy RBs played on.

1) 24th

2) 9th

3) 5th

4) 26th

5) 1st

6) 6th

7) 14th

8) 23rd

9) 21st

10) 28th

So even when I say "turn it around" it just means that there is a more even mix of bad passing teams and good passing teams that make up the top 10 running backs, as compared to 2011/2012 where the list was completely dominated by bad passing teams. Even in a "turn it around" year the list is made up of 4 teams in the top 10 in the league in passing and 5 teams in the bottom 10 in the league in passing.

It's also worth noting that only once in the past 3 years has a player from one of the top 3 passing offenses made it into the top 10 list of fantasy running back production.

 
Rhythmdoctor said:
I honestly thought this was a mock/joke thread and I'm honestly shocked that the majority agree with Soulfly.

Don't out-think yourselves fellow FBGers. This is an easy debate.
Click to expand...
Is it though? Great post... I dont think anyone disagrees with you about AP being a phenom

But the issue is, they finished w identical FP last season. Both w nearly 300 touches of the ball.

One was a rookie, one was not.

I dont think ANYONE is putting them on equal talent terms... but fantasy doesnt care about title, but about yards and TDs.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm happy with either one. Gun to my head I am very excited to see what Norv & Peterson can accomplish together.

 
FreeBaGeL said:
Portis Homer said:
I think it's pretty obvious, I believe the RB on an offense that scores 50+ TDs has a higher floor than a RB on an offense that scores 30+ TDs, if they are similar tiers and talents. Another factor is the percentage of sustained drives vs. 3 and outs. I'm not saying it's a science, clearly Peterson has had all-world seasons on bad offenses, he's one of the greatest RBs of all time. My personal believe that I draft based on, is that you can tie the floor of a RB to the offense, as the TDs will be there.

And it's not based on any statistical research, so I could very well be wrong. I've just had too many years where my lead RB was on a poor offense, and despite his glowing history, underperformed when healthy and I wished I had taken overall offense more into account (Larry Johnson on the decaying KC offense jumps to mind, Steven Jackson on the decaying STL offense as well).

You can disagree. Unlike many on this board, I'm not looking at changing your opinion or trying to win an argument. I'm not even saying I'm correct. It is just my philosophy that I feel most comfortable drafting based on.
Click to expand...
Well for starters, we're not talking about similar talents here.

Secondly, you're eliminating an entire aspect to "floor" here. Lacy is still very unproven. The list of RBs that have had great rookie seasons and then fallen off a cliff in year two is a very long one. Eddie Lacy's floor includes the risk that he will follow a similar path to Kevin Jones, Julius Jones, Steve Slaton, Trent Richardson, or any of a dozen other guys that have had a strong fantasy rookie year and fallen flat in year 2.

Lastly, I do think that you're putting too much stock into the strength of the offense, as many FFers do. For instance, here is the rank of the passing offenses of the top 10 fantasy RBs of 2012.

1) 31st

2) 10th

3) 11th

4) 27th

5) 20th

6) 15th

7) 25th

8) 19th

9) 32nd

10) 4th

2011 was similar, while 2013 turned things around quite a bit. Regardless, over the last 5 years there is a stronger statistical correlation to the theory that a BAD passing offense results in a strong fantasy running back than there is that a GOOD passing offense results in a strong fantasy running back.
Click to expand...
Again, I'm not trying to convince you I'm right, I'm very comfortable with my own position.

1) There is not a single RB with the talent level of Adrian Peterson. However, I think Eddie Lacy is a very talented player, and I don't think there is a giant difference in talent between him and an older Adrian Peterson to make the comparison so insane. And, I purposely worded as same tier/talent, not just talent.

2) You pick out that I'm leaving out unproven as a component of floor. I can just as easily pick out you leaving out age and number of carries as a component of floor. There are thousands of variables to take into account, but when I have two players rated closely, as I do with these two, and the end of the day the most important variable to me to break a tie is the quality of the overall offense.

3) You can't use 2012 as proof that my argument is wrong, while in small fine print remarking that the most recent year of evidence supports my point but is somehow an outlier.

Also, you're using passing ranking, which has a number of flaws in regards to directly relating to my argument. My main argument would be, most of the top passing offenses of the past 5 years do not have a bell cow RB who is getting the majority of the carries and therefore has a reasonable chance to make the top 10 individual runners. I'm looking at the top 10 passing offenses in 2012 - the year you chose:

#1 Saints - True RBBC with Thomas/Sproles/Ingram

#2 Lions - True RBBC with LeShoure/Bell and others

#3 Cowboys - Murray was hurt and missed half the year so no one runner would be top 10

#4 Pats - Ridley made top 10, despite sharing significant work with Vereen.

#5 Broncos - Starter changed between Hillman, Moreno, and McGahee

#6 Falcons - Turner made your list at 6, despite being a terrible runner the offense got him significant goal-line carries - my exact argument

#7 Colts - RBBC and changing starter between Ballard and Brown

#8 Raiders - McFadden missed half the year

#9 Packers - RBBC

#10 Bucs - Martin finished 2nd

Of the top 10 passing offenses in 2012, your year of argument, everyone that had one starter healthy for most of the year finished top 10 rushing.

 
Give me Peterson. He's the best Running Back talent that I've ever seen who should be playing in a higher scoring Offense than last year's group. I will gladly draft Adrian Peterson until he retires. Because if you've drafted him every year since he was a Rookie, he's been 100% worthwhile for your team.

I had him last year and when you get to watch him carve defenses while scoring you Fantasy Points, it's great.

-

I think Eddie Lacy is great, I don't understand how he's willing to produce the way he does. Instead of outrunning guys, guys bounce right off him. When you watch him play, he just demoralizes defenses with a key broken tackle. He's relentless. Packers will be in the redzone a lot, as well.

I don't think you can lose either way (barring injury). Peterson is the proven guy, he knows he's in the twilight of his career. He'll make a few more attempts at trying to break the rushing record. He's in a class of his own.

 
Rhythmdoctor said:
I honestly thought this was a mock/joke thread and I'm honestly shocked that the majority agree with Soulfly. Man, I wish all of you who are in the pro-Lacy camp would join my leagues.
Click to expand...
This is why I just lurk and almost never post. Anyone spending their day looking at the Shark Pool is more than competent at fantasy football, and even if you disagree with their opinion, it doesn't make them stupid or their opinion wrong. Every year, multiple conventional opinions turn out wrong, it doesn't make people who believed them stupid. Every year, multiple unconventional opinions turn out correct.

The "I wish all of you who are in the pro-Lacy camp would join my leagues" is so condescending and un warranted.

 
Portis Homer said:
Rhythmdoctor said:
I honestly thought this was a mock/joke thread and I'm honestly shocked that the majority agree with Soulfly. Man, I wish all of you who are in the pro-Lacy camp would join my leagues.
Click to expand...
This is why I just lurk and almost never post. Anyone spending their day looking at the Shark Pool is more than competent at fantasy football, and even if you disagree with their opinion, it doesn't make them stupid or their opinion wrong. Every year, multiple conventional opinions turn out wrong, it doesn't make people who believed them stupid. Every year, multiple unconventional opinions turn out correct.

The "I wish all of you who are in the pro-Lacy camp would join my leagues" is so condescending and un warranted.
Click to expand...
He's passing it off as a who do I draft at 1.03 when Charles and McCoy are gone question in a shark pool thread. Not sure how anyone would expect that he get serious answers.

 
Biabreakable said:
Norval Turner on Adrian Peterson-

I really think he is going to be a guy that when the season is in the month of December that people are going to be talking about him in the MVP conversations. Because I think he is committed to having that kind of year. I think this system, the guys who benefit the most from this system when you talk about guys who have had great production with me, are obviously the WR and the RBs. We have had great success with RB both running the ball and catching the ball.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
no way I am passing on Peterson with Turner there.

 
tjnc09 said:
He's passing it off as a who do I draft at 1.03 when Charles and McCoy are gone question in a shark pool thread. Not sure how anyone would expect that he get serious answers.
Click to expand...
Actually SHOCKED it took this long.

Because ya, this isnt a legit question and debate as you can see by the monotony of this thread. totally one sided.

move along.

 
Soulfly3 said:
tjnc09 said:
He's passing it off as a who do I draft at 1.03 when Charles and McCoy are gone question in a shark pool thread. Not sure how anyone would expect that he get serious answers.
Click to expand...
Actually SHOCKED it took this long.

Because ya, this isnt a legit question and debate as you can see by the monotony of this thread. totally one sided.

move along.
Click to expand...
lol, the Shark Pool police was trying to let us know how people should respond to a thread that shouldn't even be in the Shark Pool.

And I answered your question. If you look at Tomlinson's production w Turner at similar stages in career as ADP, I think you are a fool to pass up that combination.

 
tjnc09 said:
lol, the Shark Pool police was trying to let us know how people should respond to a thread that shouldn't even be in the Shark Pool.
Click to expand...
why shouldnt it be in the pool?

im not asking who to draft, I play dynasty and redraft isnt for... weeks

this is exactly what the shark pool is for.

 
tjnc09 said:
Soulfly3 said:
tjnc09 said:
He's passing it off as a who do I draft at 1.03 when Charles and McCoy are gone question in a shark pool thread. Not sure how anyone would expect that he get serious answers.
Click to expand...
Actually SHOCKED it took this long.

Because ya, this isnt a legit question and debate as you can see by the monotony of this thread. totally one sided.

move along.
Click to expand...
lol, the Shark Pool police was trying to let us know how people should respond to a thread that shouldn't even be in the Shark Pool.

And I answered your question. If you look at Tomlinson's production w Turner at similar stages in career as ADP, I think you are a fool to pass up that combination.
Click to expand...
The Shark Pool, since I came here in 2004, is filled with comparisons between two players with similar ADPs during draft time. I don't feel like this is a WDIS thread.

You're ignoring the fact Turner had Philip Rivers in the prime of his career alongside Vincent Jackson, rather than Matt Cassel. It is not the same situation. No one who slightly prefers Lacy in GB vs Peterson in Minny is a fool.

 
Soulfly3 said:
Rhythmdoctor said:
I honestly thought this was a mock/joke thread and I'm honestly shocked that the majority agree with Soulfly.

Don't out-think yourselves fellow FBGers. This is an easy debate.
Click to expand...
Is it though? Great post... I dont think anyone disagrees with you about AP being a phenom

But the issue is, they finished w identical FP last season. Both w nearly 300 touches of the ball.

One was a rookie, one was not.

I dont think ANYONE is putting them on equal talent terms... but fantasy doesnt care about title, but about yards and TDs.
Click to expand...
The problem with using last years' stats to project for THIS year is exactly that.... we are talking about last season.

If accurately forecasting future FF production was as simple as using last years' data, everyone would be great at fantasy. It's not that easy, however. Each season, each player and each team has a unique set of circumstances that play a part in production. The only common event between Lacy and AP last season, was that it was 2014. There is zero correlation between their individual contributions to their teams. What conclusions can you make taking one season and saying "both players had 4.5 ypc and 10 TDs"? I would say, "great!", "so what?".

 
you dont think using last year's stats are relevant at all? how?

both are bellcow backs. both have clear paths ahead w no competition. one is very established, but one came in and established himself very well. of course we look at last year's stats.

does it mean 100% that they're comparable players? of course not. but if you dont look at history you have NO indicator of what a player's worth is, how he performed and where his future lies.

 
Portis Homer said:
Rhythmdoctor said:
I honestly thought this was a mock/joke thread and I'm honestly shocked that the majority agree with Soulfly. Man, I wish all of you who are in the pro-Lacy camp would join my leagues.
Click to expand...
This is why I just lurk and almost never post. Anyone spending their day looking at the Shark Pool is more than competent at fantasy football, and even if you disagree with their opinion, it doesn't make them stupid or their opinion wrong. Every year, multiple conventional opinions turn out wrong, it doesn't make people who believed them stupid. Every year, multiple unconventional opinions turn out correct.

The "I wish all of you who are in the pro-Lacy camp would join my leagues" is so condescending and un warranted.
Click to expand...
If you have read any of my posts, you will recognize that I am far from condescending. The comment you are referring to was a light-hearted jab and definitely not intended to insult or demean anyone. I'm sorry you were offended. That certainly was not the tone I was trying to portray. One of the downsides of typed text as a form of communication. Non-verbal communication is such an important role in communicating and that gets lost on a forum.

 
Portis Homer said:
tjnc09 said:
Soulfly3 said:
tjnc09 said:
He's passing it off as a who do I draft at 1.03 when Charles and McCoy are gone question in a shark pool thread. Not sure how anyone would expect that he get serious answers.
Click to expand...
Actually SHOCKED it took this long.

Because ya, this isnt a legit question and debate as you can see by the monotony of this thread. totally one sided.

move along.
Click to expand...
lol, the Shark Pool police was trying to let us know how people should respond to a thread that shouldn't even be in the Shark Pool.

And I answered your question. If you look at Tomlinson's production w Turner at similar stages in career as ADP, I think you are a fool to pass up that combination.
Click to expand...
The Shark Pool, since I came here in 2004, is filled with comparisons between two players with similar ADPs during draft time. I don't feel like this is a WDIS thread.

You're ignoring the fact Turner had Philip Rivers in the prime of his career alongside Vincent Jackson, rather than Matt Cassel. It is not the same situation. No one who slightly prefers Lacy in GB vs Peterson in Minny is a fool.
Click to expand...
Norv did pretty well with his other QB/RB combos:

Gus Frerotte & Terry Allen

Brad Johnson & Terry Allen

Brad Johnson and Stephen Davis

Kerry Collins and Lamont Jordan

Doug Flutie and LaDanian Tomlinson

Jay Fiedler & Ricky Williams

Brian Griese and Ricky Williams

Alex Smith and Frank Gore

 
Rhythmdoctor said:
I honestly thought this was a mock/joke thread and I'm honestly shocked that the majority agree with Soulfly. Man, I wish all of you who are in the pro-Lacy camp would join my leagues.

When picking a RB in the top 7 picks, my primary goal is to select the guy who has the HIGHEST PROBABILITY of finishing top 5 on the year. Adrian Peterson is my #1 pick in a redraft ppr league. In fact, just last night I had the #1 in a Draftmaster league and it was a no-brainer for me to select AP.

A few of you have mentioned that AP and Lacy are in equal tiers... they both have similar floors and similar ceilings. Some even pounding the desk that LACY has the higher ceiling!!

Really, folks? REALLY??!! AP is worlds apart from Lacy from an athletic standpoint. It's not even close. It's so lop-sided I'm not even going to post the stats to back it because it's a waste of time.

So, purely from an athletic standpoint, AP has the much higher ceiling.

AP is the best RB drafted in the last 10 years. Yes, he is 29 this year but his skills are not diminishing yet. AP has a 2,000 yard season on his resume. AP did have his worst season as a pro last season (not counting his injury season) but I think it's obvious it was the coaching/surrounding cast that played a major role in his down season. I fully expect a bounce-back season for AP with Norv Turner now running the offense and with Cassel or Bridgewater as the starters (no more Ponder).

I want to go on record as predicting that this comparison will not be close by the time the season is over (barring injury to either, of course). In fact, I also want to predict a disappointing year for Lacy. I'm projecting Lacy to end up outside of the top 10 while AP will be firmly inside the top 5 RBs this season.

Slice it any way you like, but AP is the proven ELITE RB of these two and he is still under 30 years old. AP might be in that rare breed of a Curtis Martin or Emmitt Smith - elite players who did play well after 30. Regardless of that, I'm CERTAIN that AP has at least 1 elite season left in his tank and every Lacy fan in this thread will be kicking themselves come December for trying to out-smart basic logic.

I would have a different argument if we were talking about a player like Jamaal Charles who DOES have elite athleticism. Eddie Lacy is the definition of JAG who is in an IDEAL situation. If everything doesn't lineup perfectly, Lacy's production will suffer immensely. AP can thrive even with 3rd tier talent at QB and O-line. Lacy cannot. If Rodgers were to get injured.... guess what? Lacy isn't going to be a reliable RB1 for your fantasy team.

These are all things to consider. IF everything goes according to plan for the Packers (no injuries to Rodgers, the O-line or key WRs), then Lacy has a chance to be in the top 10 RBs. Even with all things lining up perfectly, it will be a challenge for Lacy to justify his top 5 pick (in fantasy). If nothing goes right for the Vikings (Cassel sucks, Bridgewater sucks, O-line gets injured....) but AP remains healthy, he still has a very good chance to justify his top 5 pick.

Don't out-think yourselves fellow FBGers. This is an easy debate.
Click to expand...
there is too much hyperbole and bad information in this post for me. I fundamentally disagree with everything you've posted here with the exception of ADP being the best RB of the past 10 years. Did you even play FFB last year?

If Rodgers were to get injured.... guess what? Lacy isn't going to be a reliable RB1 for your fantasy team
Click to expand...
Rodgers DID get injured-from week 10-16 he was out. During that time Lacy averaged 114 yfs, 3 receptions and .86 TD's per game. WTF are you talking about?

IF everything goes according to plan for the Packers (no injuries to Rodgers, the O-line or key WRs), then Lacy has a chance to be in the top 10 RBs.
Click to expand...
Nothing went to plan for the Packers last year. They were decimated by injuries to their QB, WR's, TE. Hell even Lacy missed two games due to concussion. And he still finished as RB8. :doh:

To each his own, but damn, that's a lot of words to really say nothing.

ETA:

The problem with using last years' stats to project for THIS year is exactly that.... we are talking about last season.
Click to expand...
0-2

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Portis Homer said:
tjnc09 said:
Soulfly3 said:
tjnc09 said:
He's passing it off as a who do I draft at 1.03 when Charles and McCoy are gone question in a shark pool thread. Not sure how anyone would expect that he get serious answers.
Click to expand...
Actually SHOCKED it took this long.

Because ya, this isnt a legit question and debate as you can see by the monotony of this thread. totally one sided.

move along.
Click to expand...
lol, the Shark Pool police was trying to let us know how people should respond to a thread that shouldn't even be in the Shark Pool.

And I answered your question. If you look at Tomlinson's production w Turner at similar stages in career as ADP, I think you are a fool to pass up that combination.
Click to expand...
The Shark Pool, since I came here in 2004, is filled with comparisons between two players with similar ADPs during draft time. I don't feel like this is a WDIS thread.

You're ignoring the fact Turner had Philip Rivers in the prime of his career alongside Vincent Jackson, rather than Matt Cassel. It is not the same situation. No one who slightly prefers Lacy in GB vs Peterson in Minny is a fool.
Click to expand...
That's a strange argument considering Lacy didn't play with his elite QB half of last season and still fared okay. Why is it that can be ignored but ADP can't be successful without a household QB name even with his proven track record? He ran for over 2000 yards in 2012 after a serious knee injury with Christian Ponder as QB and added another 4.5 average in their lone Wild Card game with Joe Webb behind center. If it is anyone who has proven he can be the workhorse on a team with or without surrounding offensive talent, it's ADP.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Soulfly3
MHJ v Nabers v Odunze - Who is truly #1?
2
Replies
61
Views
4K
Soulfly3
Soulfly3
Ministry of Pain
The Curious Case of Eric Bieniemy
2 3
Replies
135
Views
6K
TripItUp
TripItUp
Ministry of Pain
Did anyone in Redraft pair Justin Fields with Anthony Richardson? What are your current options as you move forward?
Replies
10
Views
654
tickle
tickle

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top