What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Player Spotlight: Adrian Peterson (1 Viewer)

Jason Wood

Zoo York
2009 Player Spotlight Series

One of Footballguys best assets is our message board community. The Shark Pool is, in our view, the best place on the internet to discuss, debate and analyze all things fantasy football. In what's become an annual tradition, the Player Spotlight series is a key part of the preseason efforts. As many of you know, we consider the Player Spotlight threads the permanent record for analyzing the fantasy prospects of the player in question. Last year, we published more than 120 offensive spotlights covering the vast majority of expected skill position starters. This year will be no different.

Each week we will post a list of players to be discussed. Those threads will remain open for the entire preseason, and should be a central point to discussion expectations for the player in question. Importantly, analysis done in the first week of posting will be part of the permanent record in two ways. 1) At the end of the week, we will tally the projections into a consensus. 2) We will select a number of pull quotes from forum contributors who make a compelling statement or observation. Both the projections and pull quotes will be part of a published article on the main website.

Thread Topic: Adrian Peterson, RB, Minnesota Vikings

Player Page Link: Adrian Peterson Player Page

Each article will include:

Detailed viewpoint from a Footballguys staff member
Highlighted member commentary from the message board threads
FBG Projections
Consensus Member ProjectionsThe Rules

In order for this thread to provide maximum value, we ask that you follow a few simple guidelines:

Focus commentary on the player in question, and your expectations for said player
Back up your expectations in whatever manner you deem appropriate; avoid posts that simply say "I hate him" or "He's the best"
To be included in the final synopsis and consensus outlook, you MUST provide projections for the playerProjections should include (at a minimum):

For QBs: Attempts, Completions, Passing Yards, Passing TDs, Ints, Rush Yards, Rush TDs
For RBs: Rushes, Rushing Yards, Rush TDs, Receptions, Receiving Yards, Receiving TDs
For WRs & TEs: Receptions, Receiving Yards, Receiving TDsNow let's get on with the conversation! We look forward to your contributions and let me offer a personal thanks in anticipation of the great debate and analysis.

 
If Peterson runs wild this year and gets close to or exceeds 2,000 yds rushing, the first thing many people will say is that the addition of Brett Favre had an impact on this happening. Favre is a washed-up, old QB, and "All-Day" will be the one carrying his broken-down a%* all year. Barring injury, Peterson is primed to enjoy a career year in '09, the likes of which only a few have enjoyed. And the primary difference for making life a bit easier for Peterson in '09 will be the addition of a player, yes. But that player is Percy Harvin, not Favre. My projection may actually be on the short end as 2k is certainly within reach.

335 carries

5.7 ypc

1910 rush yds

17 rush TDs

21 receptions

165 rec yds

2 TDs

Cements his status as the #1 RB on the planet. I'd never consider drafting another player at 1.01 in any format.

 
310 carries- 1,500 Rushing yards

14 receptions- 110 Recieving yards

14 Rushing Td's

I am not as high on him as everyone else is. I think he will lose touches to Harvin and goalline touches bacasue of longer TD's with Farve. Another issue is if the Williams' get suspended. If they do then Minnesota will be in more shootouts which favors Taylor.

Just my 2 cents.

 
As awful as Favre is, he's better than Jackson or Ferotte, and Favre's arm, and the addition of Harvin, should help to stretch defenses a little bit, and stop them from stacking the box so much. With that in mind, I worry that Favre's INTs will cost Apete some goal-line/scoring oppurtunites, and I don't know how much losing Matt Birk for John Sullivan will hurt him.

With that in mind, the addition of Phil Loadholt should only help, as should Peterson's absolutely phenomenal skills. Although I'm slightly worried about Taylor vulturing scores, and the possibility of the Wildcat taking away a few touches, I can't see him not having a great year.

340 carries- 1550 yards

15 catches- 200 yards- 1 Rec TD

15 Rushing TDs

 
Adrian Peterson is an awesome RB and he should have his best days ahead of him. He will undoubtedly be drafted first in all non-ppr drafts and top three in ppr leagues. What is interesting is that he is so good in space that you would expect him to be a fine receiver so he could add that to his skill set as he goes along.

I was amazed reviewing his 08 statistics. He had elevn games with over 100 yards, including ten with over 100 rushing alone. He only had one game with less than 70 yards from scrimmage. He averaged 22.8 rushing attempts per game and had over twenty carries in eleven regular season games.

The only downside to drafting Peterson is that you have to be blessed with the top pick or two to qualify. I don't think that an improvement in the Viking passing attack would only improve Peterson's effectiveness. The possibility of the loss of a couple of weeks of Williams suspensions would affect his projections only slightly in my opinion.

Adrian Peterson 340 rushes for 1632 yards 4.8 ypc 40 targets 28 catches 196 yards 7.0 ypr 13 TDs

 
I have a weird feeling he is going to miss some time this year with an injury.

If he stays healthy, he dominates. 340 carries 1700 yards. 15 TDs. 220 yards and 2 TD receiving.

 
Unless something weird happens between now and preseason, he'll remain the consensus #1. Doesn't matter who the QB is, ADP will get his.

Lock him in for 350/1600/12 & 20/150/0 as his floor. He could have a truly phenominal season as his upside.

 
If Peterson runs wild this year and gets close to or exceeds 2,000 yds rushing, the first thing many people will say is that the addition of Brett Favre had an impact on this happening. Favre is a washed-up, old QB, and "All-Day" will be the one carrying his broken-down a%* all year. Barring injury, Peterson is primed to enjoy a career year in '09, the likes of which only a few have enjoyed. And the primary difference for making life a bit easier for Peterson in '09 will be the addition of a player, yes. But that player is Percy Harvin, not Favre. My projection may actually be on the short end as 2k is certainly within reach.335 carries5.7 ypc1910 rush yds17 rush TDs21 receptions165 rec yds2 TDsCements his status as the #1 RB on the planet. I'd never consider drafting another player at 1.01 in any format.
You dont think Favre had anything to do with Thomas Jones stats last year? I disagree... The passing game HAS to be respected, at least more than if any other of the MIN QBs are in. that would open things up more for AP. I expect a huge year... similar to the numbers you posted, but Favre WILL have something to do with that.
 
350 carries, 1700 yards rushing, 16 TDs

29 receptions, 209 yards receiving, 1 TD (I have a feeling he's going to catch a swing pass and break it long)

 
If Peterson runs wild this year and gets close to or exceeds 2,000 yds rushing, the first thing many people will say is that the addition of Brett Favre had an impact on this happening. Favre is a washed-up, old QB, and "All-Day" will be the one carrying his broken-down a%* all year. Barring injury, Peterson is primed to enjoy a career year in '09, the likes of which only a few have enjoyed. And the primary difference for making life a bit easier for Peterson in '09 will be the addition of a player, yes. But that player is Percy Harvin, not Favre. My projection may actually be on the short end as 2k is certainly within reach.335 carries5.7 ypc1910 rush yds17 rush TDs21 receptions165 rec yds2 TDsCements his status as the #1 RB on the planet. I'd never consider drafting another player at 1.01 in any format.
Do you know how rare it is for a RB to average 5.7 yds per carry?
 
Michael Fox said:
If Peterson runs wild this year and gets close to or exceeds 2,000 yds rushing, the first thing many people will say is that the addition of Brett Favre had an impact on this happening. Favre is a washed-up, old QB, and "All-Day" will be the one carrying his broken-down a%* all year. Barring injury, Peterson is primed to enjoy a career year in '09, the likes of which only a few have enjoyed. And the primary difference for making life a bit easier for Peterson in '09 will be the addition of a player, yes. But that player is Percy Harvin, not Favre. My projection may actually be on the short end as 2k is certainly within reach.335 carries5.7 ypc1910 rush yds17 rush TDs21 receptions165 rec yds2 TDsCements his status as the #1 RB on the planet. I'd never consider drafting another player at 1.01 in any format.
Do you know how rare it is for a RB to average 5.7 yds per carry?
Oh, kind of like the 5.6 Adrian Peterson had his Rookie Season? :PVikings Get:CLEDETSFGBSTLBALPITGBDETSEACHIARICINCARCHINYGI can see Adrian Peterson lighting off the run defenses on all but a few of those teams. He has the possibility of putting up 200+ / 2TDs against more than half of that schedule.1,950 Yards / 367 Carries / 11 TD260 Yards / 33 Receptions / 1 TDHis hardest games are against Pitt, NYG, and Ravens. And those teams don't really have explosive offenses, so I can easily see those becoming battles of the run. Where AP still manages to put up 100 yards and a TD.It's the pure fact defenses must respect Brett Favre. Look at the Jets last year. Sure you can question whether Brett's skill was up to par last season. But he made defenses respect the passing game. They couldn't just drop 8 men in the box, or Favre would burn them. I see the same effect happening this season, but with Favre dropping more dump passes to AP's way.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If Peterson runs wild this year and gets close to or exceeds 2,000 yds rushing, the first thing many people will say is that the addition of Brett Favre had an impact on this happening. Favre is a washed-up, old QB, and "All-Day" will be the one carrying his broken-down a%* all year. Barring injury, Peterson is primed to enjoy a career year in '09, the likes of which only a few have enjoyed. And the primary difference for making life a bit easier for Peterson in '09 will be the addition of a player, yes. But that player is Percy Harvin, not Favre. My projection may actually be on the short end as 2k is certainly within reach.335 carries5.7 ypc1910 rush yds17 rush TDs21 receptions165 rec yds2 TDsCements his status as the #1 RB on the planet. I'd never consider drafting another player at 1.01 in any format.
You dont think Favre had anything to do with Thomas Jones stats last year? I disagree... The passing game HAS to be respected, at least more than if any other of the MIN QBs are in. that would open things up more for AP. I expect a huge year... similar to the numbers you posted, but Favre WILL have something to do with that.
Great post all around.
 
Michael Fox said:
If Peterson runs wild this year and gets close to or exceeds 2,000 yds rushing, the first thing many people will say is that the addition of Brett Favre had an impact on this happening. Favre is a washed-up, old QB, and "All-Day" will be the one carrying his broken-down a%* all year. Barring injury, Peterson is primed to enjoy a career year in '09, the likes of which only a few have enjoyed. And the primary difference for making life a bit easier for Peterson in '09 will be the addition of a player, yes. But that player is Percy Harvin, not Favre. My projection may actually be on the short end as 2k is certainly within reach.335 carries5.7 ypc1910 rush yds17 rush TDs21 receptions165 rec yds2 TDsCements his status as the #1 RB on the planet. I'd never consider drafting another player at 1.01 in any format.
Do you know how rare it is for a RB to average 5.7 yds per carry?
Oh, kind of like the 5.6 Adrian Peterson had his Rookie Season? :PVikings Get:CLEDETSFGBSTLBALPITGBDETSEACHIARICINCARCHINYGI can see Adrian Peterson lighting off the run defenses on all but a few of those teams. He has the possibility of putting up 200+ / 2TDs against more than half of that schedule.1,950 Yards / 367 Carries / 11 TD260 Yards / 33 Receptions / 1 TDHis hardest games are against Pitt, NYG, and Ravens. And those teams don't really have explosive offenses, so I can easily see those becoming battles of the run. Where AP still manages to put up 100 yards and a TD.It's the pure fact defenses must respect Brett Favre. Look at the Jets last year. Sure you can question whether Brett's skill was up to par last season. But he made defenses respect the passing game. They couldn't just drop 8 men in the box, or Favre would burn them. I see the same effect happening this season, but with Favre dropping more dump passes to AP's way.
Two things:1) yeah, AP averaged 5.6 per carry his rookie year. Then everybody projected similar numbers last year, and he failed to deliver. Guess why? Because it's really freaking hard to average over 5 yards per carry.2) Please don't use last season's defensive rankings to project 2009 strength of schedule. There is, at best, very weak statistical support for such a methodology. Like most other things, defensive rankings revert to the mean over time.
 
1) yeah, AP averaged 5.6 per carry his rookie year. Then everybody projected similar numbers last year, and he failed to deliver. Guess why? Because it's really freaking hard to average over 5 yards per carry.
Peterson's YPC was down (funny to call 4.8 "down") last year because he didn't have nearly as many long runs as his rookie year, despite having 120 more carries. If he breaks off a few more big ones this year (which he's more than capable of doing) his YPC could shoot back up.
 
Michael Fox said:
If Peterson runs wild this year and gets close to or exceeds 2,000 yds rushing, the first thing many people will say is that the addition of Brett Favre had an impact on this happening. Favre is a washed-up, old QB, and "All-Day" will be the one carrying his broken-down a%* all year. Barring injury, Peterson is primed to enjoy a career year in '09, the likes of which only a few have enjoyed. And the primary difference for making life a bit easier for Peterson in '09 will be the addition of a player, yes. But that player is Percy Harvin, not Favre. My projection may actually be on the short end as 2k is certainly within reach.335 carries5.7 ypc1910 rush yds17 rush TDs21 receptions165 rec yds2 TDsCements his status as the #1 RB on the planet. I'd never consider drafting another player at 1.01 in any format.
Do you know how rare it is for a RB to average 5.7 yds per carry?
Oh, kind of like the 5.6 Adrian Peterson had his Rookie Season? :PVikings Get:CLEDETSFGBSTLBALPITGBDETSEACHIARICINCARCHINYGI can see Adrian Peterson lighting off the run defenses on all but a few of those teams. He has the possibility of putting up 200+ / 2TDs against more than half of that schedule.1,950 Yards / 367 Carries / 11 TD260 Yards / 33 Receptions / 1 TDHis hardest games are against Pitt, NYG, and Ravens. And those teams don't really have explosive offenses, so I can easily see those becoming battles of the run. Where AP still manages to put up 100 yards and a TD.It's the pure fact defenses must respect Brett Favre. Look at the Jets last year. Sure you can question whether Brett's skill was up to par last season. But he made defenses respect the passing game. They couldn't just drop 8 men in the box, or Favre would burn them. I see the same effect happening this season, but with Favre dropping more dump passes to AP's way.
Two things:1) yeah, AP averaged 5.6 per carry his rookie year. Then everybody projected similar numbers last year, and he failed to deliver. Guess why? Because it's really freaking hard to average over 5 yards per carry.2) Please don't use last season's defensive rankings to project 2009 strength of schedule. There is, at best, very weak statistical support for such a methodology. Like most other things, defensive rankings revert to the mean over time.
1.) See FreeBaGeL's post.2.) If we cannot use the previous years data for the next year, then how do we project any player? By assuming every defense plays to a certain mean? That would eliminate the most error, but would always heed the lowest amount of accuracy. While focusing directly on precision.
 
Two things:

1) yeah, AP averaged 5.6 per carry his rookie year. Then everybody projected similar numbers last year, and he failed to deliver. Guess why? Because it's really freaking hard to average over 5 yards per carry.

2) Please don't use last season's defensive rankings to project 2009 strength of schedule. There is, at best, very weak statistical support for such a methodology. Like most other things, defensive rankings revert to the mean over time.
1.) See FreeBaGeL's post.2.) If we cannot use the previous years data for the next year, then how do we project any player? By assuming every defense plays to a certain mean? That would eliminate the most error, but would always heed the lowest amount of accuracy. While focusing directly on precision.
1) I saw it. Sure, AP could bust off more long runs. So what? The FACT is that very, very few RBs who get 300 touches top 5 yards per carry, much less 5.7 yards per carry. 2) You can assume whatever you choose. NOWHERE do I say that you shouldn't use previous years' data PERIOD. RATHER what I said is "don't use last season's defensive rankings to project 2009 strength of schedule". I should have said "don't use last season's defensive fantasy rankings.....etc". You are free to do whatever you want --- but if you use prior year fantasy strength of schedule, you are fooling yourself. There is basically zero statistical predictive power. If you do a statistical study that says something different, I'd love to read it.

 
2) You can assume whatever you choose. NOWHERE do I say that you shouldn't use previous years' data PERIOD. RATHER what I said is "don't use last season's defensive rankings to project 2009 strength of schedule". I should have said "don't use last season's defensive fantasy rankings.....etc". You are free to do whatever you want --- but if you use prior year fantasy strength of schedule, you are fooling yourself. There is basically zero statistical predictive power. If you do a statistical study that says something different, I'd love to read it.
Why so condescending? I'm not using any "rankings". Merely deductive reasoning.IE: The Lions had a poor defense last season. Looking at their off-season moves, they did a few things to improve it. However I don't feel as if they've done enough to substantially improve from the year before. Therefore I can predict the Lions having a poor defense, and Adrian Peterson running over them.

 
I love the "last year = this year" people. it guarantees people will overpay for the top producers from LAST year. not saying he will fall off a cliff by any means but the odds of him approaching (never mind equalling or surpassing) last year's totals are slight. plus he also has an injury history (both pro and college) and esp is of weaker value in PPR.

if I had 1.01 I'd look to trade down. he's going to disappoint (at least somewhat) a LOT of people.

 
I love the "last year = this year" people. it guarantees people will overpay for the top producers from LAST year. not saying he will fall off a cliff by any means but the odds of him approaching (never mind equalling or surpassing) last year's totals are slight. plus he also has an injury history (both pro and college) and esp is of weaker value in PPR. if I had 1.01 I'd look to trade down. he's going to disappoint (at least somewhat) a LOT of people.
why trade? Whats the point? He isnt going to out perform his 1.01 ranking? lol ... who can?Drafting is about value, not performance. For example, if you knew ahead of time that Leon Washington was going to lead the league in fantasy points, do you take him with the 1.01?Maybe we need a 'Guppy Pool' ...
 
I love the "last year = this year" people. it guarantees people will overpay for the top producers from LAST year. not saying he will fall off a cliff by any means but the odds of him approaching (never mind equalling or surpassing) last year's totals are slight. plus he also has an injury history (both pro and college) and esp is of weaker value in PPR. if I had 1.01 I'd look to trade down. he's going to disappoint (at least somewhat) a LOT of people.
Top producer? He had 10 TDs and 9 fumbles... I still don't see why this makes him the "safest" pick for so many people.Birk gone? Favre throwing more in the red zone?Granted I might still take him at 1.01 and he is talented enough to score more, but I don't expect him to get 17 or 20 TDs this year.
 
2) You can assume whatever you choose. NOWHERE do I say that you shouldn't use previous years' data PERIOD. RATHER what I said is "don't use last season's defensive rankings to project 2009 strength of schedule". I should have said "don't use last season's defensive fantasy rankings.....etc". You are free to do whatever you want --- but if you use prior year fantasy strength of schedule, you are fooling yourself. There is basically zero statistical predictive power. If you do a statistical study that says something different, I'd love to read it.
Why so condescending? I'm not using any "rankings". Merely deductive reasoning.IE: The Lions had a poor defense last season. Looking at their off-season moves, they did a few things to improve it. However I don't feel as if they've done enough to substantially improve from the year before. Therefore I can predict the Lions having a poor defense, and Adrian Peterson running over them.
I completely agree. I always hear people saying how you can't use last year's defensive performance as a tool to project this year's defenses. Really, over the course of one preseason, how often has a poor defense improved to a great defense, without the addition of very good players? I think it's pretty darn safe to assume that if the players don't change much, coaching changes alone will not improve a defense a great deal over just one offseason...thus, I just can't imagine how it couldn't be at least a good point of reference.How is it OK to base offensive projections off year prior's statistics (i.e. this team rushed 400 times last year, player X should get about 75% of those, so he's expected this amount of carries), but it's "crazy" to do so with defensive stats?

 
2) You can assume whatever you choose. NOWHERE do I say that you shouldn't use previous years' data PERIOD. RATHER what I said is "don't use last season's defensive rankings to project 2009 strength of schedule". I should have said "don't use last season's defensive fantasy rankings.....etc". You are free to do whatever you want --- but if you use prior year fantasy strength of schedule, you are fooling yourself. There is basically zero statistical predictive power. If you do a statistical study that says something different, I'd love to read it.
Why so condescending? I'm not using any "rankings". Merely deductive reasoning.IE: The Lions had a poor defense last season. Looking at their off-season moves, they did a few things to improve it. However I don't feel as if they've done enough to substantially improve from the year before. Therefore I can predict the Lions having a poor defense, and Adrian Peterson running over them.
I completely agree. I always hear people saying how you can't use last year's defensive performance as a tool to project this year's defenses. Really, over the course of one preseason, how often has a poor defense improved to a great defense, without the addition of very good players? I think it's pretty darn safe to assume that if the players don't change much, coaching changes alone will not improve a defense a great deal over just one offseason...thus, I just can't imagine how it couldn't be at least a good point of reference.How is it OK to base offensive projections off year prior's statistics (i.e. this team rushed 400 times last year, player X should get about 75% of those, so he's expected this amount of carries), but it's "crazy" to do so with defensive stats?
It's not crazy to look at individual defenses, look at changes in coaching staff & personnel, and then make an independent assessment. That makes good sense to me.What does not make sense, and isn't backed up by statistical analysis, is doing the simple Strength of Schedule (SOS) assessment. (e.g., based on last year's defensive rankings, Minnesota has the 3rd easiest schedule) There is too much turnover in annual defensive rankings for prior season SOS to have meaningful predictive power.

 
2) You can assume whatever you choose. NOWHERE do I say that you shouldn't use previous years' data PERIOD. RATHER what I said is "don't use last season's defensive rankings to project 2009 strength of schedule". I should have said "don't use last season's defensive fantasy rankings.....etc". You are free to do whatever you want --- but if you use prior year fantasy strength of schedule, you are fooling yourself. There is basically zero statistical predictive power. If you do a statistical study that says something different, I'd love to read it.
Why so condescending? I'm not using any "rankings". Merely deductive reasoning.IE: The Lions had a poor defense last season. Looking at their off-season moves, they did a few things to improve it. However I don't feel as if they've done enough to substantially improve from the year before. Therefore I can predict the Lions having a poor defense, and Adrian Peterson running over them.
I completely agree. I always hear people saying how you can't use last year's defensive performance as a tool to project this year's defenses. Really, over the course of one preseason, how often has a poor defense improved to a great defense, without the addition of very good players? I think it's pretty darn safe to assume that if the players don't change much, coaching changes alone will not improve a defense a great deal over just one offseason...thus, I just can't imagine how it couldn't be at least a good point of reference.How is it OK to base offensive projections off year prior's statistics (i.e. this team rushed 400 times last year, player X should get about 75% of those, so he's expected this amount of carries), but it's "crazy" to do so with defensive stats?
It's not crazy to look at individual defenses, look at changes in coaching staff & personnel, and then make an independent assessment. That makes good sense to me.What does not make sense, and isn't backed up by statistical analysis, is doing the simple Strength of Schedule (SOS) assessment. (e.g., based on last year's defensive rankings, Minnesota has the 3rd easiest schedule) There is too much turnover in annual defensive rankings for prior season SOS to have meaningful predictive power.
I think I misunderstood what you were saying then...sorry about that. I can agree with you on just using SOS straight. Just a number doesn't do any good. But, if you look at the complete schedule team by team, and analyze that depending on the offseason moves, I think you can get a more accurate idea of how difficult the schedule may be than just completely ignoring it.
 
Bears0492 said:
torn ACL...out for the year week 4
Hahahahahah Idk why but I laughed pretty hard at that. As a Bears fan, I can only pray this happens :D
One should never, ever wish an injury upon another player. Just downright wrong. It could happen to players on your favorite team just as well, NFL or fantasy. Karma doesn't discriminate.....As a fantasy player, you should be looking to obtain AD on your team and stop hatin' on him, regardless of your fandom. Smart money would own him like he owns your Bears...... :lmao:
 
I think I misunderstood what you were saying then...sorry about that. I can agree with you on just using SOS straight. Just a number doesn't do any good. But, if you look at the complete schedule team by team, and analyze that depending on the offseason moves, I think you can get a more accurate idea of how difficult the schedule may be than just completely ignoring it.
:scared: Sounds like we're on the same page.
 
Those of us with long memories know that headed into lastyear's draft we were concerned about AP's injury history. There's no question he's 1.01 this year - but I'm still taking at least one other RB in the 2nd or 3rd round. The Vikes used him very efficiently last year calling Chester Taylor's number when needed and having him vulture a few touchdowns. Percy Harvin will also draw 3-4 carries per game and TDs away, maybe 3 or so over the 16 game season. I think that there is a cap on AP's production in spite of his otherworldly talent; the Vikings and fantasy football owners have different needs. We would love to see 2,000 20 TD season but the Vikes want to keep him fresh for the playoffs. Therefore I see him getting:

1,400 yards rushing

250 yards receiving

11 TDs rushing

2 TDs receiving

If and when the Vikings make the playoffs they will have properly conserved AP for 25 carries per game. That sucks for us.

Just remember that he might miss a few games and get another stud RB with an early pick.

 
stuckinthemuck said:
Those of us with long memories know that headed into lastyear's draft we were concerned about AP's injury history. There's no question he's 1.01 this year - but I'm still taking at least one other RB in the 2nd or 3rd round. The Vikes used him very efficiently last year calling Chester Taylor's number when needed and having him vulture a few touchdowns. Percy Harvin will also draw 3-4 carries per game and TDs away, maybe 3 or so over the 16 game season. I think that there is a cap on AP's production in spite of his otherworldly talent; the Vikings and fantasy football owners have different needs. We would love to see 2,000 20 TD season but the Vikes want to keep him fresh for the playoffs. Therefore I see him getting:

1,400 yards rushing

250 yards receiving

11 TDs rushing

2 TDs receiving

If and when the Vikings make the playoffs they will have properly conserved AP for 25 carries per game. That sucks for us.

Just remember that he might miss a few games and get another stud RB with an early pick.
I will take him at 1.01 this year-at 2.12 I'm thinking if Ronnie Brown is there he's mine.... if not than maybe Kevin Smith

 
stuckinthemuck said:
Percy Harvin will also draw 3-4 carries per game and TDs away, maybe 3 or so over the 16 game season. I think that there is a cap on AP's production in spite of his otherworldly talent; the Vikings and fantasy football owners have different needs.
David Yudkin (I think) noted that no WR this decade has had 30 carries in a season.
 
stuckinthemuck said:
Percy Harvin will also draw 3-4 carries per game and TDs away, maybe 3 or so over the 16 game season. I think that there is a cap on AP's production in spite of his otherworldly talent; the Vikings and fantasy football owners have different needs.
David Yudkin (I think) noted that no WR this decade has had 30 carries in a season.
Reggie Bush? jk
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top