Doug Martin as #1 pick in PPR (1 Viewer)

[RushHour]

I would like to know why Doug Martin isn't getting more love as a potential #1 pick in PPR drafts. Peterson is seen as a lock at #1 (and everyone acts as if it's unthinkable that you could draft anyone else) but he only finished around 3 points per game ahead of Martin in PPR scoring, while having the second best rushing season in history, that he has little chance of repeating. People point to big games skewing Martin's stats, but he also didn't really get going until about week 5 or 6 last year, so you could say that it basically evened out over the course of the season. Plus it was his rookie year, Tampa's offensive line is improved and he has no competition for carries, so it's safe to assume he will show improvement in his second year.

We assume that Peterson will be as dominant as last year, but why couldn't it be that this year he performs closer to any number of other previous seasons when he was an excellent fantasy back, but not ranked first overall, and wasn't a consensus #1 in fantasy drafts. Also, because Peterson is such a freak, no one makes mention of his advancing age or injury history as a concern, when such things factor heavily into our assessment of other players.

Peterson is great and he looks like a very safe pick, but I think Martin has both the highest floor and highest ceiling of any back in PPR leagues this year, making him a strong candidate for the #1 pick. Why is it crazy to consider not picking Peterson at #1?

 

[Keith Lewis]

lol

 

[RushHour]

lol

Thanks for your contribution. This response is exactly why I'm asking the question.

 

[EBF]

I don't think it's crazy at all. Peterson is coming off an insane career year that will be almost impossible to replicate.

Some will say the same of Martin, but as you noted Martin is a weapon in the passing game whereas Peterson really isn't. That gives him a nice buffer in PPR. Even if the yards aren't there, you know he's going to catch a couple passes every week. With a healthy OL and a year of experience under his belt, I expect another strong season barring injury.

He might not be the most alluring upside pick and people are going to say that he's not an "elite" talent like Peterson or Calvin, but he should be a rock in your lineup IMO. A very safe bet to give you good RB1 numbers.

 

[Beerguzzler]

While I don't necessarily disagree, Martin only had 9 more receptions than AP last season. While he had a 9.6 ypr compared to AP's 5.4 ypr, in terms of PPR, it's only 9 more points in conventional leagues. It really isn't enough to make up for AP's 6 ypc last season vs. Martin's 4.6.

While I agree it will be very hard for AP to replicate his season, making an argument that Martin's passing game contributions put him over the top just don't hold up.

IMO the biggest argument for putting Martin at #1 In ANY format, is the addition of 2 probowl guards this season for that O line. I expect TB to have a much better offense than Minny and Martin can clearly improve on the 11 TD's on the ground if they get in the red zone as much as I expect.

It's really hard to make any argument though for not taking AP #1 overall in a redraft league. He's the clear cut #1 pick this season.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Why is it crazy to consider not picking Peterson at #1?

If for no other reason, because nearly everyone considers AD the number 1 pick, you wouldn't be getting value out of the number 1 pick. You could trade down to number 2 and still get Martin.

 

[ghostguy123]

lol

Thanks for your contribution. This response is exactly why I'm asking the question.

I think he said "lol" because people ARE taking Martin #1. Not everone, or even most, but a lot are.

In dynasty leagues Martin goes #1 a lot.

Or maybe he just thinks you are crazy for not taking peterson, who knows.

 

[RushHour]

I'm just talking redraft. I agree with the poster too who said you lose value if you don't trade down, that's a good point.

 

[Borden]

As Beerguzzler said, Martin only had nine more catches then AP did so I don't see how you can consider 0.5625 points per game that much of an advantage.

Also, with Martin you only have one season to base that off of. Peterson has been a top RB for years. Martin could be a flash in the pan that caught teams off guard his first year but they could adjust and shut him down this year. I don't think Martin is a flash in the pan but it's more likely that he is then AP is. Martin has way more bust potential then AP.

Peterson is only 28 and I think the number 2097 should silence anyone who thinks his injury history is an issue.

So, after one great season to say that Martin has the highest ceiling and highest floor is crazy.

 

[msudaisy26]

No one should kill you for taking Martin first in any league and there are a ton of reasons why you can justify it. Here are a few

The odds are stacked against Peterson repeating what he did last year, you could make the argument that when Peterson started his run at history that teams might have over looked him a little because he was coming off an ACL injury. No team will over look him this year.

Martin is the safest running back being taken in the first round this year, the other 8 or so running backs have some kind of question about injury history, talented back-ups, or new offenses.

Martin put up those stats as a rookie, it is reasonable to think he will improve his second year.

 

[ghostguy123]

No one should kill you for taking Martin first in any league and there are a ton of reasons why you can justify it. Here are a few

The odds are stacked against Peterson repeating what he did last year, you could make the argument that when Peterson started his run at history that teams might have over looked him a little because he was coming off an ACL injury. No team will over look him this year.

Martin is the safest running back being taken in the first round this year, the other 8 or so running backs have some kind of question about injury history, talented back-ups, or new offenses.

Martin put up those stats as a rookie, it is reasonable to think he will improve his second year.

The same logic that tells you it is reasonable for Martin to improve upon his rookie year is the same logic that SHOULD tell you that it is reasonable for Peterson to improve upon last year when he CLEARLY started the season at less than 100%.

Frankly, I don't think either guy will score as many points as they did last year though, just sayin. Both had great years. Always tough to duplicate. But if one can improve for whatever reason, the other can also.

Oh, and no, teams did NOT overlook Peterson. I mean, watch the games. It's not like teams were playing nickel and dime packages against them. Defenses definitely TRIED to stop the run.

 

[msudaisy26]

No one should kill you for taking Martin first in any league and there are a ton of reasons why you can justify it. Here are a few

The odds are stacked against Peterson repeating what he did last year, you could make the argument that when Peterson started his run at history that teams might have over looked him a little because he was coming off an ACL injury. No team will over look him this year.

Martin is the safest running back being taken in the first round this year, the other 8 or so running backs have some kind of question about injury history, talented back-ups, or new offenses.

Martin put up those stats as a rookie, it is reasonable to think he will improve his second year.

The same logic that tells you it is reasonable for Martin to improve upon his rookie year is the same logic that SHOULD tell you that it is reasonable for Peterson to improve upon last year when he CLEARLY started the season at less than 100%.

Frankly, I don't think either guy will score as many points as they did last year though, just sayin. Both had great years. Always tough to duplicate. But if one can improve for whatever reason, the other can also.

Oh, and no, teams did NOT overlook Peterson. I mean, watch the games. It's not like teams were playing nickel and dime packages against them. Defenses definitely TRIED to stop the run.

At the end of the year yes they did,and we could never prove it but I am sure teams where just as worried about Harvin as they were Peterson the first half of the year because Harvin was healthy and Peterson didn't look the part yet

From a statics stand point it is much easier for Doug Martin to repeat or improve on last years performance then it is for Peterson.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I think Martin has both the highest floor and highest ceiling of any back in PPR leagues this year,

I don't think it's crazy at all to take Martin No. 1 overall if you like him the best. The reason why Peterson is consensus No. 1 is that he's a virtual lock to finish top 5, which is all you can ask for. I don't think anyone feels that he's going to match last season's numbers.

I do disagree that Martin has the highest floor or highest ceiling of any other RB - especially the ceiling part. He does have a heavy workload going for him, and his line will be improved with health - but why is his ceiling any higher than Peterson's, Foster's, Charles', Spillers' or McCoy's (All but Spiller - who is potential plus opportunity right now) have had better seasons than Martin's 2012. I just don't think he's dynamic enough to talk "highest ceiling". That's not to disparage him, as I see him as a Curtis Martin type - which is a high compliment - a savvy, steady, smart, and powerful runner that produces.

 

[kutta]

36% of Martin's points last year came in his top three games.

27% of AP's points came in his top three games.

I HATE it when people do this, but I'm going to do it anyway to make the point - if you take away Martin's top three games, he scored 15.9 points per game which puts him in the DeMarco Murray/Darren Sproles category at about RB 12.

If you take away AP's top three games last year he scored 20.14 points per game, which still makes him the #1 RB overall, basically tied with Martin, including all of Martin's games.

AP is amazingly consistent in his scoring. Not taking him #1 is a big mistake, IMO.

 

[Grahamburn]

Martin is my #1 RB for 2013.

 

[meyerj31]

36% of Martin's points last year came in his top three games.

27% of AP's points came in his top three games.

I HATE it when people do this, but I'm going to do it anyway to make the point - if you take away Martin's top three games, he scored 15.9 points per game which puts him in the DeMarco Murray/Darren Sproles category at about RB 12.

If you take away AP's top three games last year he scored 20.14 points per game, which still makes him the #1 RB overall, basically tied with Martin, including all of Martin's games.

AP is amazingly consistent in his scoring. Not taking him #1 is a big mistake, IMO.

I normally don't do this either but this is a really great point. AP was way more consistent last year than Martin. Martin should be more consistent in his 2nd year, with the boost to the o-line as noted.

AP, however, is far and away the best re-draft pick this year. I think anyone with the 1.01-1.03 has a large advantage this year with two great backs and picks around the second turn.

 

[Frank Black]

In my PPR keeper league, the team who has the #1 pick is no doubt going to keep Martin. He will have both AP and Martin as his starters!

 

[Concept Coop]

AP, however, is far and away the best re-draft pick this year. I think anyone with the 1.01-1.03 has a large advantage this year with two great backs and picks around the second turn.

I disagree with this, and think he is going to let a lot of people down. I think he has as good a shot as anyone, but I don't think he is any more likely than, say, Arian Foster. I'd much rather have Foster at 3-4 than Peterson at 1. I'd take Charles at 7 over Peterson at 1. McCoy at... you get the idea.

Wouldn't feel great about the #1 this year, and am not certain I'd take AP.

 

[T with T]

lol

Thanks for your contribution. This response is exactly why I'm asking the question.

well it's pretty funny imo. If you want to pick a guy other then AP in ppr take Charles 1.1

 

[T with T]

No one should kill you for taking Martin first in any league and there are a ton of reasons why you can justify it. Here are a few

The odds are stacked against Peterson repeating what he did last year, you could make the argument that when Peterson started his run at history that teams might have over looked him a little because he was coming off an ACL injury. No team will over look him this year.

Martin is the safest running back being taken in the first round this year, the other 8 or so running backs have some kind of question about injury history, talented back-ups, or new offenses.

Martin put up those stats as a rookie, it is reasonable to think he will improve his second year.

The same logic that tells you it is reasonable for Martin to improve upon his rookie year is the same logic that SHOULD tell you that it is reasonable for Peterson to improve upon last year when he CLEARLY started the season at less than 100%.

Frankly, I don't think either guy will score as many points as they did last year though, just sayin. Both had great years. Always tough to duplicate. But if one can improve for whatever reason, the other can also.

Oh, and no, teams did NOT overlook Peterson. I mean, watch the games. It's not like teams were playing nickel and dime packages against them. Defenses definitely TRIED to stop the run.

At the end of the year yes they did,and we could never prove it but I am sure teams where just as worried about Harvin as they were Peterson the first half of the year because Harvin was healthy and Peterson didn't look the part yet

From a statics stand point it is much easier for Doug Martin to repeat or improve on last years performance then it is for Peterson.

what about the sophmore slump.. It wouldn't be the first time a stud in the making bombed out in his second year aka Michael Clayton... he was all well the next michael irvin after his 80 catch 1200 yard rookie season... it's to early to tell but not taking AP is dumb... if u don't take AP it better be Charles or Calvin.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

AP, however, is far and away the best re-draft pick this year. I think anyone with the 1.01-1.03 has a large advantage this year with two great backs and picks around the second turn.

I disagree with this, and think he is going to let a lot of people down. I think he has as good a shot as anyone, but I don't think he is any more likely than, say, Arian Foster. I'd much rather have Foster at 3-4 than Peterson at 1. I'd take Charles at 7 over Peterson at 1. McCoy at... you get the idea.

Wouldn't feel great about the #1 this year, and am not certain I'd take AP.

As great as Peterson is, he was never close to a lap the field top RB until last year in PPR. I think it's far more likely that he regresses to his career norms in 2013 vs having another season for the ages. IMO the top group is clustered very tightly this year -- I'd be happy with Peterson, Foster, Martin, Charles, etc. It's a fantastic year for trading down from the top to the middle of the 1st IMO.

 

[Keith Lewis]

lol

Thanks for your contribution. This response is exactly why I'm asking the question.

I think he said "lol" because people ARE taking Martin #1. Not everone, or even most, but a lot are.

In dynasty leagues Martin goes #1 a lot.

Or maybe he just thinks you are crazy for not taking peterson, who knows.

You are right. He just went first in my only draft so far. I don't agree with it but that wasn't why it was funny.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

36% of Martin's points last year came in his top three games.

27% of AP's points came in his top three games.

I HATE it when people do this, but I'm going to do it anyway to make the point - if you take away Martin's top three games, he scored 15.9 points per game which puts him in the DeMarco Murray/Darren Sproles category at about RB 12.

If you take away AP's top three games last year he scored 20.14 points per game, which still makes him the #1 RB overall, basically tied with Martin, including all of Martin's games.

AP is amazingly consistent in his scoring. Not taking him #1 is a big mistake, IMO.

I hate when people do that too as a way to say Player X is better than Player Y, but doing it the way you did, to illustrate consistency, is perfectly valid. Some people might prefer a little more volatility, some might prefer metronomic consistency.

 

[CentralPA]

Don't think it's crazy at all. We could be speaking about him in the same breathe as Peterson, LT, Westbrook, Faulk etc after this year. He's going to be the No. 1 pick in PPR redrafts for years to come eventually.

 

[Leonidas]

I recall at least one previous thread where the monster games Martin put up were used against him. And I see the validity of it as Martin's performances were less consistent week to week than any other elite RB being taken in the top of the first round. But really...as a rookie if you take away the 3 big games (where he may have won that week for you single handedly!) he "only" averaged about 16 points per game in the rest. So even if you take away his massive weeks where you won games outright, he still averaged 16 points per game, which was still RB1 (12 team leagues) output. How bad is that, exactly? Doesn't seem so bad to me!

However, as as also been pointed out...he was a rookie. And his guards have improved this year. I see no reason not to expect more of the same, if not MORE of the same, from Martin this year. He now has a year of NFL experience and an improved run blocking line. His team's defense should also have improved a little bit. And icing on the cake is that Blount got shipped to New England and who did TB bring in to replace him? Nobody.

I'm not in any PPR leagues, but I have Martin #1, behind AP, on my list for standard redraft. In PPR I think I'd keep him right there. Between AP, Martin, Charles, and Rice (in PPR) I don't think anybody would tell you taht you are wrong for taking them #1 overall.

 

[ahartig]

Take away Martins insane game against the Raiders last year where he everaged over 10 YPC (which I think we can all agree will never be duplicated and is an EXTREME outlier), Martins average YPC for the season was 3.98

http://www.nfl.com/player/dougmartin/2532899/gamelogs

Take away Petersons two games where he averaged over 10 YPC (which i don't think were as EXTREME outliers as Martins game), Peterson's average YPC for the season was 5.5

http://www.nfl.com/player/adrianpeterson/2507164/gamelogs

A full 1.5 YPC more. As someone also said before, Martin did not get that many more receptions then Peterson either.

Peterson is a BEAST. I'm sitting at pick #3 in a PPR and based on the above analyses I am considering taking Jamaal or Shady (revamped O-line and Chip Kelly could be huge) over Martin.

 

[Concept Coop]

36% of Martin's points last year came in his top three games.

27% of AP's points came in his top three games.

I HATE it when people do this, but I'm going to do it anyway to make the point - if you take away Martin's top three games, he scored 15.9 points per game which puts him in the DeMarco Murray/Darren Sproles category at about RB 12.

If you take away AP's top three games last year he scored 20.14 points per game, which still makes him the #1 RB overall, basically tied with Martin, including all of Martin's games.

Above and beyond this - at one point, late in the seson - it was 3 carries. I want to say around week 14, Martin had a 4.6 YPC. Removing his top 3 carries, which all came on busted plays by the Raiders, it was 4.0.

I'm not in the "Peterson is clear #1" camp. But there is something to pointing out that a lot of Martin's production came on a few games, and a few plays within those games, even.

 

[EBF]

Every player's stats will suffer if you take out his best games/best plays. It's not a good way to look at the numbers.

As for Peterson, I'll go out on a small limb and say that he won't average 6 YPC again. He might be on the best HGH and juice money can buy, but even so he'll have a tough time sustaining a level of performance that's so much higher than his career averages. His YPC averages in the four years from 2008-2011 were 4.8, 4.4, 4.6, and 4.7. Very good, but not the godly stuff we saw last year. He's an overrated player based on his name brand recognition and the fact that he's coming off such a monster season.

I can't argue against him as a top 5 candidate in redraft, but he might not be the slam dunk you think you're getting and there are many guys with a chance to outscore him.

 

[LususV]

Martin is my #1 RB in all formats

 

[FF Wiseguy]

The problem is that fantasy analysts have to be conservative in their rankings, and the closer you get to the top, the more conservative they are going to be. In turn, the majority of fantasy players are rankings slaves, so you end up with AP as a consensus #1, and anyone that deviates from that in rankings or drafts is seen as "out of their mind".

This is by no means a bold statement, but if fantasy analysts could take a straight up bet of AP vs. the field for #1 RB by the end of the season, the vast majority would take the field. It's not why he's ranked #1. It's because he's the biggest lock to maintain his tier of production. Yes, any of those guys below him could overtake him, and it's a good bet that one will, but to pick just one and ride it is much riskier. And analysts/players make their money on minimizing risk.

There is a compelling argument for any of the top 5 (maybe even 6-7) RBs to end up as the top RB, and just as many that they will "bust."

I'm investing pretty heavily in Martin this year, as I think he will improve as a runner, and if not, his receptions will continue to balance out the deficiencies on the ground. I'd take him as high as 3 in snake, and will go after him in many auctions, and probably pay more than is appropriate in some cases.

 

[Khy]

I'm just going to quote a post I made in another thread here a few months ago on why I think taking Martin at all this year is a mistake unless he falls past 1.05. I've never seen someone so inconsistent be so hyped. This season I'm taking Charles, AP, CJ Spiller, Rice, Foster over him in PPR. In Non-PPR add Morris and Lynch to that list over him. I'm a big proponent of consistency and he put up over 30% of his overall production in two games last year and was a mediocre back the rest of the season. People seem to be ignoring this and I don't understand how.

RB1: Adrian Peterson (329.40): 20.58ppg, when taking away his two monster games (Weeks 9 & 17) and then redoing his average we come to 18.85ppg. So almost less than a 2 point drop in average. His overall points also drop from 329.40 thru 16 games to 264.00 thru 14 games. His top 2 games of the season were about 20% of his overall points throughout 2012.

RB2: Doug Martin (288.10): 18ppg, when taking away his two monster games (Weeks 8 & 9) and then redoing his average we come to 14.28ppg. So almost a 4 point drop in average. His overall points also drop from 288.10 thru 16 games to 200.00 thru 14 games. His top 2 games of the season were about 30.7% of his overall points throughout 2012.

RB3: Arian Foster (284.5): 17.78ppg, when taking away his two best games of the season (Weeks 2 and 12) and then redoing his average we come to 16.75ppg less than a 1 point drop in average. His overall points also drop from 284.50 thru 16 games to 234.60 thru 14 games. His top 2 games of the season were about 17.5% of his overall points throughout 2012.

RB4: Marshawn Lynch (260.10): 16.25ppg, when taking away his two best games of the season (Weeks 4 and 14) and then redoing his average we come to 14.7ppg about a 1.5 point drop in average. His overall points also drop from 260.10 thru 16 games to 205.80 thru 14 games. His top 2 games of the season were about 21% of his overall points throughout 2012.

RB5: Ray Rice (252.60): 15.78ppg, when taking away his two best games of the season (Weeks 3 and 16) and then redoing his average we come to 14.59ppg or slightly higher than a 1 point drop in average. His overall points also drop from 252.60 thru 16 games to 204.30 thru 14 games. His top 2 games of the season were about 19.2% of his overall points throughout 2012.

RB6: Alfred Morris (249.6): 15.56ppg, when taking away his two best games of the season (Weeks 17 and 15) and then redoing his average we come to 13.36ppg or slightly higher than a 2 ppg drop in average. His overall points also drop from 249.60 thru 16 games to 187.10 thru 14 games. His top 2 games of the season were about 25% of his overall points throughout 2012.

So ranking these by the % of their season encompassed by these two games games? This is a pretty solid baseline for consistency in my opinion.

Arian Foster: 16.75%

Ray Rice: 19.20%

Adrian Peterson: 20.00%

Marshawn Lynch: 21.00%

Alfred Morris: 25.00%

Doug Martin: 30.70%

If you would prefer their average PPG afterwards then it comes out like so:

Adrian Peterson: 18.85ppg

Arian Foster: 16.75ppg

Marshawn Lynch: 14.70ppg

Ray Rice: 14.59ppg

Doug Martin: 14.28ppg

Alfred Morris: 13.36ppg

Also realize that both AP and Alfred Morris had one of their top games in Week 17 if you refactor it out and instead take their 3rd highest game (2nd fantasy relevant) you get different numbers. So here you have it, I was 100% fair to all the other running backs that we are talking about in the same league as Martin and gave them the same exact treatment as Martin. These points are all used from my standard scoring ppr league. In a non-ppr league Alfred Morris would have a higher PPG average after the equation than Doug Martin.

My main point is that for people who put a lot of weight in the consistency of their #1 picks in a redraft, Doug Martin appears a lot riskier than the #2 overall RB he seemed to be last season because of the two monster games he had against two of the worst run defenses in football. There is more or less no way I'm drafting him over any of the guys mentioned here or CJ Spiller, McCoy or Charles this season because of it. You cannot ignore that it's scary that 2 games or 1/8 of the NFL season equated for nearly 1/3rd of his overall production last year. While a lot of people won just because they had him starting in 8 & 9 a lot of people lost way more games from having him on staff in other weeks where he performed more like Vick Ballard than any of the other guys on this list who were far more consistent and put up significantly less duds.

 

[ghostguy123]

At the end of the year yes they did,and we could never prove it but I am sure teams where just as worried about Harvin as they were Peterson the first half of the year because Harvin was healthy and Peterson didn't look the part yetFrom a statics stand point it is much easier for Doug Martin to repeat or improve on last years performance then it is for Peterson.

No idea what you are trying to say here.

If anything, you help prove why Peterson realistically can improve on his stats this year. He started the year at less than 100%, plus Harvin was there to take away touches.

With Harvin hurt, Peterson back at 100% (maybe, could easily be better this year), and defenses having nothing to stop but Peterson..............dude had an absolutely ridiculous 2nd half of the year.

And the simple reason for me that I think peterson is just as likely (if not more) than martin to improve on his 2012 numbers, is because he is FARRRRR and away a better RB than Martin.

I am not saying he WILL improve on his numbers, but it would not surprise me one bit. AP is not human. And hell, even a 50 point regression and he will outscore Martin IMO.

 

[Leonidas]

I see some people putting Charles ahead of Martin due to game-game consistency.

Using standard FBG scoring, Martin's three lowest scoring games were: 3.5, 4.2, 7.4

Charle's lowest three were: 1.0, 2.2, 2.8

That Oakland defense that was one of the softest in the league against the run...that Martin tore apart...two of Charle's bottom-3 performances were against Oakland. What gives?

 

[Khy]

I see some people putting Charles ahead of Martin due to game-game consistency.

Using standard FBG scoring, Martin's three lowest scoring games were: 3.5, 4.2, 7.4

Charle's lowest three were: 1.0, 2.2, 2.8

That Oakland defense that was one of the softest in the league against the run...that Martin tore apart...two of Charle's bottom-3 performances were against Oakland. What gives?

That's ALL coaching on Charles end though... in those 2 OAK games he had 14 attempts COMBINED. 14 Rushing Attempts... who gives one of the best RB talents in the NFL 9 and 5 rushing attempts against the worst rushing D in football? That will not happen with Andy there. Charles will be fed early and often the whole offense will revolve around him.

 

[Leonidas]

I see some people putting Charles ahead of Martin due to game-game consistency.

Using standard FBG scoring, Martin's three lowest scoring games were: 3.5, 4.2, 7.4

Charle's lowest three were: 1.0, 2.2, 2.8

That Oakland defense that was one of the softest in the league against the run...that Martin tore apart...two of Charle's bottom-3 performances were against Oakland. What gives?

That's ALL coaching on Charles end though... in those 2 OAK games he had 5 attempts COMBINED. 5 Rushing Attempts... who gives one of the best RB talents in the NFL 5 rushing attempts against the worst rushing D in football? That will not happen with Andy there. Charles will be fed early and often the whole offense will revolve around him.

Not according to FBG. Their stats say Charles had 8 touches (5 carries, 3 receptions) in week 8 and then 12 touches (9 carries, 3 receptions on 4 targets) in week 15. I didn't own Charles last year, but I'd hate to see him go 9 carries for 10 yards against Oakland in week 15. Ouch.

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/players/CharJa00-3.php#gl-2012

 

[Khy]

I see some people putting Charles ahead of Martin due to game-game consistency.

Using standard FBG scoring, Martin's three lowest scoring games were: 3.5, 4.2, 7.4

Charle's lowest three were: 1.0, 2.2, 2.8

That Oakland defense that was one of the softest in the league against the run...that Martin tore apart...two of Charle's bottom-3 performances were against Oakland. What gives?

That's ALL coaching on Charles end though... in those 2 OAK games he had 5 attempts COMBINED. 5 Rushing Attempts... who gives one of the best RB talents in the NFL 5 rushing attempts against the worst rushing D in football? That will not happen with Andy there. Charles will be fed early and often the whole offense will revolve around him.

Not according to FBG. Their stats say Charles had 8 touches (5 carries, 3 receptions) in week 8 and then 12 touches (9 carries, 3 receptions on 4 targets) in week 15. I didn't own Charles last year, but I'd hate to see him go 9 carries for 10 yards against Oakland in week 15. Ouch.

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/players/CharJa00-3.php#gl-2012

Yeah that was my bad I accidentally read the wrong year. But edited it. Still 14 rushing attempts in two games. It won't happen with Andy Reid. Looking at his carries from last year means nothing because he has a completely new coaching system now. A coaching system that will make him the focal point of the offense.

 

[Grahamburn]

Kind of funny to label the #2 RB from 2012 as inconsistent after one freaking season in the NFL.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

The fact that Peterson is unlikely to equal his 2012 season is not a reason to draft Martin over Peterson unless you think that Martin is likely to equal Peterson's 2012 season.

 

[Ghost Rider]

36% of Martin's points last year came in his top three games.

27% of AP's points came in his top three games.

I HATE it when people do this, but I'm going to do it anyway to make the point - if you take away Martin's top three games, he scored 15.9 points per game which puts him in the DeMarco Murray/Darren Sproles category at about RB 12.

If you take away AP's top three games last year he scored 20.14 points per game, which still makes him the #1 RB overall, basically tied with Martin, including all of Martin's games.

AP is amazingly consistent in his scoring. Not taking him #1 is a big mistake, IMO.

That's a good breakdown, but the ability to have big games is why a guy like Martin is so good.

But if we take away that game against Oakland last year (which I agree is a major outlier), he still had 1,654 combined yards, 8 touchdowns and 45 catches, so if his 16th game becomes of an average of those, instead of the monster game against Oakland, that still gives him 1,764 total combined yards, 9 touchdowns and 48 catches, which is still pretty damn good. Maybe not number 1 overall good, but pretty damn good.

And let's not forget that he had a 12-touch only game against the Saints in a game the Bucs lost by 41, and unless you think TB will lose a game again this year by 40+, we can throw that game out, too. So, if we take his 2nd-15th best games from last year, that would give him 1,850 total combined yards, 9 touchdowns and 48 catches. And he also had a 10-touch game against Washington (that netted more yards than the NO game, which is why I discounted the other one).

Either way, Martin should be looking at big numbers again this year. The biggest drawback I can find for him is that he plays SF week 15 (prime playoff week for most leagues).

 

[kutta]

Kind of funny to label the #2 RB from 2012 as inconsistent after one freaking season in the NFL.

I think everyone agrees that Martin is a top 5 RB this year, and most might agree that he is top 3. But when we are comparing him to AP, we have to look at all factors and consistency is where AP is best and where Martin, in his one season, is worst.

So yes, I agree it is a bit strange to nit pick a rookie's numbers, but that's pretty much what you have to do if you are considering drafting him over one of the best RB's in the history of the game.

 

[Eminence]

Sure, Peterson likely "won't" replicate. But he's more likely than anyone else to post a statline like he did last year simply for the fact he's done it once already. I wouldn't bank on guys breaking 2,000 that haven't done it once already.

The guy was league MVP for Christ sakes.

 

[rocketsauce]

In my #1 pick (especially in top 5ish) I want consistency and lack of bustability. There is absolutely nothing wrong with taking Martin if you feel he will be the #1 RB in 2013. But I feel comfortable saying he has a better chance of finishing outside the top 10 than Adrian Peterson does.

I am a PPR diehard, entering my 13th year in my home league, and every year I seem to come up with a reason to NOT take Adrian Peterson #1. I'm done with that. I'm taking Adrian Peterson #1 without hesitation.

 

[Adam Harstad]

lol

Thanks for your contribution. This response is exactly why I'm asking the question.

well it's pretty funny imo. If you want to pick a guy other then AP in ppr take Charles 1.1

I'm down with this. Andy Reid's RBs averaged nearly 5 receptions a game in Philly. Charles could wind up doubling up on Martin's reception total.

 

[Biabreakable]

No one should kill you for taking Martin first in any league and there are a ton of reasons why you can justify it. Here are a few

The odds are stacked against Peterson repeating what he did last year, you could make the argument that when Peterson started his run at history that teams might have over looked him a little because he was coming off an ACL injury. No team will over look him this year.

Martin is the safest running back being taken in the first round this year, the other 8 or so running backs have some kind of question about injury history, talented back-ups, or new offenses.

Martin put up those stats as a rookie, it is reasonable to think he will improve his second year.

The same logic that tells you it is reasonable for Martin to improve upon his rookie year is the same logic that SHOULD tell you that it is reasonable for Peterson to improve upon last year when he CLEARLY started the season at less than 100%.

Frankly, I don't think either guy will score as many points as they did last year though, just sayin. Both had great years. Always tough to duplicate. But if one can improve for whatever reason, the other can also.

Oh, and no, teams did NOT overlook Peterson. I mean, watch the games. It's not like teams were playing nickel and dime packages against them. Defenses definitely TRIED to stop the run.

Yes they did try didn't they?

 

[Adam Harstad]

AP, however, is far and away the best re-draft pick this year. I think anyone with the 1.01-1.03 has a large advantage this year with two great backs and picks around the second turn.

I disagree with this, and think he is going to let a lot of people down. I think he has as good a shot as anyone, but I don't think he is any more likely than, say, Arian Foster. I'd much rather have Foster at 3-4 than Peterson at 1. I'd take Charles at 7 over Peterson at 1. McCoy at... you get the idea.

Wouldn't feel great about the #1 this year, and am not certain I'd take AP.

As great as Peterson is, he was never close to a lap the field top RB until last year in PPR. I think it's far more likely that he regresses to his career norms in 2013 vs having another season for the ages. IMO the top group is clustered very tightly this year -- I'd be happy with Peterson, Foster, Martin, Charles, etc. It's a fantastic year for trading down from the top to the middle of the 1st IMO.

RB3 (8th in total VBD) in 14 games

RB3 (4th in total VBD)

RB2 (2nd in total VBD)

RB3 (3rd in total VBD) in 15 games

RB8 (32nd in total VBD) in 12 games

RB1 (1st in total VBD)

These are Adrian Peterson's career norms. His head coaches for those seasons were Brad Childress and Leslie Frazier. His leading passers were Tarvaris Jackson, Gus Frerotte, Brett Favre, and Christian Ponder. His starting offensive linemen at the beginning of his career were Matt Birk (went to Baltimore in 2009, now retired), Ryan Cook (lost his starting job in 2009, then went to Miami and Dallas), Anthony Herrera (started until 2011, now out of the league), Steve Hutchinson (in Tennessee last year), and Bryant McKinney (in Baltimore since 2011), meaning Peterson has seen every single position on his offensive line turn over at least once. His team's leading receiver has gone from Bobby Wade to Bernard Berrian to Sidney Rice to Percy Harvin. He's starred on teams that finished 12-4 and in the NFCCG, and he's starred on teams that finished 3-13. Through pretty much every change humanly imaginable, the one constant has been Adrian Peterson putting up top-3 season after top-3 season.

Arian Foster has had a huge 3-year run, but how much adversity has he faced? He's had the same starting QB, who's been throwing to his same top two targets, who've been coached by the same coach and coordinator, who've been running the same offensive scheme. His line still remains mostly intact, and what changes have occurred have coincided with massive declines in Foster's efficiency. Foster has never dealt with a serious injury. A typical Arian Foster season is pretty comparable to a typical Adrian Peterson season, but Foster doesn't have the massive track record of overcoming every single conceivable obstacle and continuing to put up typical seasons like nothing at all happened.

This is why Peterson is the #1 pick. I agree that Charles and Foster and Martin and company will likely score pretty comparably to Peterson when all is said and done, but Peterson comes with double added security. If one of those RBs is going to bust this year, I'm extremely confident it's not going to be Peterson. That's why he commands a premium- you pay a higher pick for him because he offers all of the reward with just half of the risk.

My love for Jamaal Charles is no secret, but if I wind up with the #1 pick, I'm not sweating it for a second. Peterson costs more than Charles, but it's absolutely justifiable.

 

[Biabreakable]

Despite all the people saying Peterson cannot repeat last years performance I like his chances to be the 1st ever back to back 2k rushing as he goes on to beat Eric Dickerson's record in 2013. I heard the same conviction in his voice responding to Pam Oliver as I heard when he talked about coming back and starting last season, and not only coming back but coming back better than he was before, which he did.

So with this kind of upside combined with his consistency I just would not consider any other player 1st overall. Calvin Johnson is about the only other player I see at Peterson's level right now. Those 2 are in their own tiers. I kind of thought everyone else already knew this.

PPR of course muddies the waters but this is an aspect of Peterson's game that he has been working hard to improve on. I would not be surprised to see him targeted more in the passing game this season.

If you are seeing things from a PPR point of view moreso than raw yardage you are missing how much better Peterson is than other RB who are already benefiting from easier reception yardage on a higher number of catches.

When Peterson had a competent QB his reception yardage totals were about double what they have been so far with Ponder. If the Vikings passing game does improve this may lead to Peterson being open more often and get better yardage on his receptions. If Ponder stinks it up Cassell might end up screening more to AD when Ponder gets the hook. I think there is potential for Peterson to improve on his receiving numbers from last season. Peterson seems less likely to be spelled in these COP type situations as he has been previously in his career. Peterson still misses some blocks on pass protection. This is part of why the Vikings have spelled him in obvious passing situations in the past with Chester Taylor and then Toby Gerhardt. I expected Gerhardt to have a bigger role in the offense last season than he did. Peterson was just playing too well to take off the field and sort of pushed Gerhardt out of sharing with him much at all, Gerhardt may be moving on to a new team so I could see him being phased out of some more of the 3rd down role in favor of Peterson if Gerhardt is not in the long term plans. Peterson's reception yardage was terrible last season as evidence of how much attention he gets from the defense.

 

[Leonidas]

RB3 (8th in total VBD) in 14 games

RB3 (4th in total VBD)

RB2 (2nd in total VBD)

RB3 (3rd in total VBD) in 15 games

RB8 (32nd in total VBD) in 12 games

RB1 (1st in total VBD)

These are Adrian Peterson's career norms. His head coaches for those seasons were Brad Childress and Leslie Frazier. His leading passers were Tarvaris Jackson, Gus Frerotte, Brett Favre, and Christian Ponder. His starting offensive linemen at the beginning of his career were Matt Birk (went to Baltimore in 2009, now retired), Ryan Cook (lost his starting job in 2009, then went to Miami and Dallas), Anthony Herrera (started until 2011, now out of the league), Steve Hutchinson (in Tennessee last year), and Bryant McKinney (in Baltimore since 2011), meaning Peterson has seen every single position on his offensive line turn over at least once. His team's leading receiver has gone from Bobby Wade to Bernard Berrian to Sidney Rice to Percy Harvin. He's starred on teams that finished 12-4 and in the NFCCG, and he's starred on teams that finished 3-13. Through pretty much every change humanly imaginable, the one constant has been Adrian Peterson putting up top-3 season after top-3 season.

Arian Foster has had a huge 3-year run, but how much adversity has he faced? He's had the same starting QB, who's been throwing to his same top two targets, who've been coached by the same coach and coordinator, who've been running the same offensive scheme. His line still remains mostly intact, and what changes have occurred have coincided with massive declines in Foster's efficiency. Foster has never dealt with a serious injury. A typical Arian Foster season is pretty comparable to a typical Adrian Peterson season, but Foster doesn't have the massive track record of overcoming every single conceivable obstacle and continuing to put up typical seasons like nothing at all happened.

This is why Peterson is the #1 pick. I agree that Charles and Foster and Martin and company will likely score pretty comparably to Peterson when all is said and done, but Peterson comes with double added security. If one of those RBs is going to bust this year, I'm extremely confident it's not going to be Peterson. That's why he commands a premium- you pay a higher pick for him because he offers all of the reward with just half of the risk.

My love for Jamaal Charles is no secret, but if I wind up with the #1 pick, I'm not sweating it for a second. Peterson costs more than Charles, but it's absolutely justifiable.

This ^

Even before his knee injury this was the argument for taking Peterson #1. And now that he's had a season for the ages so quickly after that knee injury, when clearly less than 100% in the beginning of the season (frankly I watched him week 1 and thought his knee looked like ####) this is more true than ever.

 

[EBF]

Martin had the most total yards of any rookie RB since Edgerrin James. More than Tomlinson. More than Portis. More than Peterson. More than Chris Johnson.

Those guys all had great rookie seasons, but what stands out to me is that every one of them was better in year two. Sometimes by a wide margin. So while there's always a chance that Martin could go the A-Train/Slaton route and flop in year two, if you believe he's a great back then it's likely that we haven't seen his best season yet. You can go down the list of the NFL's top runners and you won't find anyone who peaked as a rookie. Most of those guys got better with experience. That bodes well for Martin's outlook. Ditto for Trent Richardson. Even though both of those guys had very good FF seasons in year one, I think there's still some upside with both of them. A slight ppg bump and they'll be in the mix for the RB1 spot.

As far as Peterson goes, I definitely have trouble buying his "miraculous" comeback. It reminds me a lot of when Barry Bonds started juicing and his stats exploded. He had always been a great HoF caliber player, but with certain "enhancements" he became the best hitter the game had ever seen. Peterson's 2012 season has a similar feel to the steroids Bonds era. An established great player suddenly and inexplicably putting up ridiculous numbers that are way above his career averages. Career years happen to lots of players and they aren't always proof of cheating. What makes Peterson's 2012 season especially suspect is the knee injury. A guy shreds his knee in catastrophic fashion, heals incredibly quickly, and not only returns at his best, but WAY ABOVE any level he'd shown before? I think there's a real chance that this wasn't totally natural. It won't matter if he never gets caught, but it's an interesting angle that hasn't gotten a lot of play.

Ultimately, I feel the same way about Peterson that I do about Calvin Johnson. Both players are extremely unlikely to match their yardage totals from 2012, but if you're on the clock with the 1.01 pick you have to take somebody. So even though those guys are likely to drop back into the pack to some extent, you can still make as good a case for them as anyone. In dynasty it's a different story, as I think Peterson's value is hugely inflated ala Tomlinson after his monster 2006 year. I don't even have Peterson in my top tier of untouchable players. In redraft there's a lot less downside with just the one year window.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Can we stop with the completely baseless steroid accusations? An all time great player had an all time great season, no more, no less. You used to be better than this.

 

[EBF]

Can we stop with the completely baseless steroid accusations? An all time great player had an all time great season, no more, no less. You used to be better than this.

I wouldn't say he definitely cheated, but I would definitely say it's possible.

Any time you have a competition with slim margins of victory and high stakes for the winners and losers, there will always be people looking to skirt the rules in order to gain an edge. Look at cycling, track and field, and baseball. If it can happen in those sports then of course it can happen in football. These guys work their whole lives to reach the highest level. If taking a few pills can make the difference between anonymity and a Pro Bowl career, many will choose the latter. I'm sure there are lots of players in the NFL on various drugs and treatments to gain whatever edge they can. Just because Peterson was already a great player doesn't mean he couldn't make that decision. Barry Bonds would've been a HoF player without juice, but his ego and competitive nature drove him to make that choice when he saw what inferior talents like McGwire, Sosa, and Giambi were doing on the stuff.

I don't know Adrian Peterson and I don't know if he's clean, but you would have to be naive to think it isn't possible. If someone came to him 16 months ago when he was staring at the backslope of his injury-threatened career and promised him that they could find a way to help him heal faster and maybe even come back better than he was before, perhaps he would've listened. I can guarantee you that if he had missed half of the 2012 season and come back to rush for 800 yards at 4.4 YPC, there would be no MVP, no Pro Bowl, and no almost-Madden cover. Millions in endorsement opportunities would have been lost. He would no longer be considered the best RB in football, which would grind on him just like it must have grinded on Bonds to watch McGwire/Sosa break records.

None of this means he definitely cheated, but when someone suffers such a severe injury and returns so quickly to play way above and beyond his career averages, it definitely raises some suspicion. That might be unfair to Peterson, but the history of sports is littered with enough cheaters that any spectacular feat is bound to draw some skepticism. Once upon a time Marion Jones, Mark McGwire, and Lance Armstrong were great stories too.