Dynasty RB rank of A. Peterson (Oklahoma) right now (1 Viewer)

[EBF]

I think he warrants a top 10-15 ranking. The reality is that there are really only 5-6 elite backs in the NFL right now. After Tomlinson, LJ, Portis, Westbrook, Jackson, and probably Gore (who really looked great last year), things get pretty cloudy.

I would certainly take Peterson over Ronnie Brown and Shaun Alexander. Brown is an overrated talent on a bad team. Alexander's best days are behind him.

I would almost certainly take Peterson over Cadillac, Maroney, Rudi, MJD, Addai, and Parker. I might prefer Maroney because I think he's in a fail-proof situation, but I think Peterson is the better talent.

People tend to rank the top rookies a little low. The irony is that once these rookies have a few good games, people tend to rank them too high.

I personally think Peterson has the talent to make an immediate impact and be a top 10 RB. However, there's no ignoring the importance of system. Guys like Cadillac Williams and Kevin Jones could quite conceivably put up Larry Johnson-like stats if they had the good fortune to play for the Chiefs.

If Peterson gets stuck on a loser then he may struggle ala Caddy and KJ.

We really won't know much until draft day. I suspect that he'll land in a spot like Cleveland or Houston, where his long term value will be murky. Those teams don't have established options at QB and could be facing years of mediocrity.

 

[ffgiant]

His talent is up there. My concern is whether he can be healthy all season at NFL level. I don't know why, he always reminds me of Chris Perry.

 

[x260bm]

15th sounds pretty good to me. I probably won't have him on any of my teams though. I tend to avoid expensive rookies on my teams.

 

[jurb26]

AD is somewhere in the 10-15 range at RB now.

AD is somewhere in the 10-15 range at RB now.

:(

So you guys both think he should be lower? The guys in the 16-20 range of my ranks are Chester, Deuce, and RBs of that quality. Are you saying you wouldnt trade then straight up for AD. I sure would!

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...howtopic=300150

These are consensus dynasty rankings for year 2007 standard FBGs scoring no PPR

If you vote other, please specify.

Also, please comment on your vote, and list any player that should be nominated for the next round.

I like the chatter going on so lets keep that going as we vote. Discussion about why you prefer one of these players compared to the others is useful to everyone involved and offers insight into how people in your leagues may view these players compared to others.

gheemony made a great point about one way to consider dynasty value for players in rankings by giving 50% value to 2007, 33% to 2008, and 17% to 2009. I know there are many ways to look at this and how hard it is to project for players even for one year. But I think it is significant enough that its worth mentioning. I am sure everyone has a different formula that they might use. But this one to me has some good balance and makes a lot of sense. And now has become a topic of discussion in this thread: http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...howtopic=296123 I welcome you all to read this and offer your perspectives on methods you use in determining where to rank players in dynasty leagues.

Results so far:

1. Ladainian Tomlinson 6/23/1979

2. Larry Johnson 11/19/1979

3. Steven Jackson 7/22/1983

4. Shaun Alexander 8/30/1977

5. Clinton Portis 9/1/1981

6. Frank Gore 5/14/1983

7. Ronnie Brown 12/12/1981

8. Brian Westbrook 9/2/1979

9t. Kevin Jones 8/21/1982

9t. Reggie Bush 3/2/1985

11. Willie Parker 11/11/1980

12. Laurence Maroney 2/5/1985

13. Joseph Addai 5/3/1983

14. Rudi Johnson 10/1/1979

15. Willis McGahee 10/20/1981

16. Maurice Jones-Drew 3/23/1985

17. Adrian Peterson 3/21/1985

18. Carnell Williams 4/21/1982

19. Chester Taylor 9/22/1979

20. DeAngelo Williams 4/25/1983

21. Cedric Benson 12/28/1982

22. Marion BarberIII 6/10/1983

23. Deuce McAllister 12/27/1978

AD is no younger than several of rookies who have had no injury history and already proven themselves at the NFL level last year. Not too mention guys who were all great prospects in their own right. Drew was only dropped to the 2nd round because of his size. Other wise there were only 2 players in the country as explosive or more last year. Bush and Hester.

 

[Q-Bert]

To the original question: Was A. Peterson worth a second round pick in 2006? Absolutely not. I can't imagine any scenario where it would be worthwile to spend such a high pick on a guy who was garaunteed to score you zero points in year one. Some posters called this gutsy or ballsy. I call it stupid.

As to the more relevant question: What is Peterson's rank right now in January of 2007? It's hard to say without knowing where he gets drafted.

If Denver trades up and picks him (extremely unlikely) he is a top ten player. If Oakland takes him, maybe somewhere in the RB 20's. I think the board consensus quoted above (#17 RB) seems reasonable.

 

[EBF]

I disagree with the idea that last year's rookies have "proven" themselves at the NFL level. Having a few good games proves very little. Ron Dayne had a few good games last year. Why isn't he a top 20 dynasty RB? William Green proved himself as a rookie. Ditto Cadillac Williams and Anthony Thomas. What happened to them?

The reality is that guys like Addai, Drew, Norwood, Maroney, Bush, and DeAngelo are still largely unknown quantities. The same goes for LenDale White and Brian Calhoun, who have been unjustly written off. One season just isn't enough to draw any accurate long-term conclusions about a guy's productivity. Cadillac Williams' rookie season is an almost perfect mirror of LT's. They were both chosen at 1.05 in the NFL draft. They had radically different second seasons. On the other hand, players like Brian Westbrook and Ladell Betts emerged after unspectacular rookie years. The bottom line? It's only one year.

I won't knock anyone for ranking Addai ahead of Peterson (although I disagree), but I think the argument that Addai should be ranked ahead of Peterson because he has proven himself at the NFL level is flimsy. What has Addai really proven? That he can have 50% good games playing on an offense that includes Peyton Manning, Reggie Wayne, and Marvin Harrison? I sure hope Peterson could do the same. For that matter, I sure hope any RB chosen on the first day of the NFL draft could do the same. If he can't, then he doesn't belong in the league.

Talent is talent. Just because a beastly college player hasn't put up a few good games at the NFL doesn't mean he won't ultimately become a professional star. Likewise, just because a guy puts up a few good games at the NFL level doesn't mean he is a star. Lots of players put up a few good games. Few of them go on to become the Torry Holts and LaDainian Tomlinsons of the NFL.

We see this mistake every year. Guys gave way too much credit to the likes of A-Train, Michael Bennett, William Green, Ronnie Brown, Kevin Jones, and Cadillac Williams. This year they're doing it with Addai, Drew, Bush, Maroney, Norwood, and DeAngelo. My guess is that this class will fall in line with historical averages and that only 2-4 of the 2006 rookie RBs will ultimately have sustained success at the professional level.

 

[Banger]

We see this mistake every year. Guys gave way too much credit to the likes of A-Train, Michael Bennett, William Green, Ronnie Brown, Kevin Jones, and Cadillac Williams. This year they're doing it with Addai, Drew, Bush, Maroney, Norwood, and DeAngelo. My guess is that this class will fall in line with historical averages and that only 2-4 of the 2006 rookie RBs will ultimately have sustained success at the professional level.

Couldn't agree more.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

For anybody wondering where this is coming from, I'm presently involved in an initial Dynasty Draft where we're able to draft college players and I recently drafted Adrian Peterson as the RB#14. After the pick there were a lot of "Wow's" and doubters (which is what I expected) but wanted to get others thoughts outside of the draft.

Here's how the draft went for RB's so far....Let's leave the evaluation of the actual picks out of this thread if possible and talk about the question at hand.

1) LJ

2) LT2

3) Portis

4) S. Alex.

5) Caddy

6) Tiki

7) R. Brown

8) LaMont

9) Bush

10) SJax

11) Rudi

12) Edge

13) D. Davis

14) Adrian Peterson

15) McGahee

16) Maroney

17) Westbrook

Personally, I had AD ranked as the #9 RB and felt getting him at #14 was good value, but others in the league obviously felt differently which is why I'm curious what others think.

over McGahee? McGahee was more dominant in college than Peterson.I like Peterson, a lot. I think he'll have a nice career, but I wouldn't take him before Benson, who is my #20.

If I'm not mistaken, it was I who traded upand took McGahee just after CO took Peterson.

I was shocked to see McGahee sitting at 18 so I scooped him up.

I have no regrets as I am sitting with Bush, Gore and McGahee

in our 14 team PHENOMZ league.

I tip my hat to CO for the gutsy move,

but truth be told, he could have had him a few rounds later.

Peterson was taken with the 17th pick in the draft,

while the next college player, Marshawn Lynch was taken with

the 71st pick, that pick was the value pick.

Unfortunately, I was targetting Lynch at #74,

and I had to settle for Michael Bush.

.... ahhhh the good old days.

 

[jurb26]

I disagree with the idea that last year's rookies have "proven" themselves at the NFL level. Having a few good games proves very little. Ron Dayne had a few good games last year. Why isn't he a top 20 dynasty RB? William Green proved himself as a rookie. Ditto Cadillac Williams and Anthony Thomas. What happened to them?The reality is that guys like Addai, Drew, Norwood, Maroney, Bush, and DeAngelo are still largely unknown quantities. The same goes for LenDale White and Brian Calhoun, who have been unjustly written off. I won't knock anyone for ranking Addai ahead of Peterson (although I disagree), but I think the argument that Addai should be ranked ahead of Peterson because he has proven himself at the NFL level is flimsy. What has Addai really proven? That he can have 50% good games playing on an offense that includes Peyton Manning, Reggie Wayne, and Marvin Harrison? I sure hope Peterson could do the same. For that matter, I sure hope any RB chosen on the first day of the NFL draft could do the same. If he can't, then he doesn't belong in the league. Talent is talent. Just because a beastly college player hasn't put up a few good games at the NFL doesn't mean he won't ultimately become a professional star. Likewise, just because a guy puts up a few good games at the NFL level doesn't mean he is a star. Lots of players put up a few good games. Few of them go on to become the Torry Holts and LaDainian Tomlinsons of the NFL. We see this mistake every year. Guys gave way too much credit to the likes of A-Train, Michael Bennett, William Green, Ronnie Brown, Kevin Jones, and Cadillac Williams. This year they're doing it with Addai, Drew, Bush, Maroney, Norwood, and DeAngelo. My guess is that this class will fall in line with historical averages and that only 2-4 of the 2006 rookie RBs will ultimately have sustained success at the professional level.

The differnece with guys like Addia, MJD, Bush and Maroney is that not only are they great talents and have shown something in the NFL. They are also all in very nice situations that we KNOW to be true right now. Peterson could end up in Oak for crying out loud. Your arguement also swings both ways. You are saying talent is talent. Then saying several players were jumped on too much for having it. Aren't you doing that very thing now with Peterson? Jones, Caddy and Brown all fall into this bunch. Now you are saying that you are willing to ditch these highly regarded talents for the new fresh meat? So what if AD struggles his 1st year or 2nd year? Will you still say talent is talent or will you say it's time to test ride the new sports car and trade in Peterson? Did everyone elses' talent suddenly disappear because Peterson came along?

 

[EBF]

The differnece with guys like Addia, MJD, Bush and Maroney is that not only are they great talents and have shown something in the NFL. They are also all in very nice situations that we KNOW to be true right now. Peterson could end up in Oak for crying out loud.

I disagree that they're all "great" talents. Having 3-4 good games as a rookie doesn't cement your status as a great talent. Are they in good situations? Maybe.

You know who else was in a good situation? Michael Bennett, William Green, Anthony Thomas, Ronnie Brown, and countless other sophomore flops.

I have no doubt that a few of the 2006 RBs will become stars. However, I disagree with the notion that they are stars. It takes more than one good season to earn star status. Just ask LaMont Jordan.

Your arguement also swings both ways. You are saying talent is talent. Then saying several players were jumped on too much for having it.

I think you missed my point. My argument is that one season of stats isn't enough evidence to use the "proven talent" argument when debating the merits of a second year RB vs. an unproven rookie. Joseph Addai and Maurice Drew are not proven talents just because they had strong rookie seasons.

Aren't you doing that very thing now with Peterson? Jones, Caddy and Brown all fall into this bunch. Now you are saying that you are willing to ditch these highly regarded talents for the new fresh meat? So what if AD struggles his 1st year or 2nd year? Will you still say talent is talent or will you say it's time to test ride the new sports car and trade in Peterson? Did everyone elses' talent suddenly disappear because Peterson came along?

I never said Peterson is the next LT. All I'm saying is that he appears to offer similar long-term value to a number of these allegedly more proven options. When weighing his merits, I think it's important to consider talent and situation instead of getting hung up on his lack of NFL experience. Prior NFL experience is not a pre-requisite for eventual NFL success. I took Reggie Bush at 1.03 in PPR dynasty draft last year because I believed in his talent. I took him over a proven star like Clinton Portis because I thought his talent was so immense that there was simply no chance of him failing.

However, I'm not going to sit here and act like Reggie Bush has proven himself as the next Marshall Faulk. As of now, he's still just a good prospect who has shown promise. That's exactly what Adrian Peterson and Laurence Maroney are, too. None of these three are proven stars.

 

[EBF]

To clarify my point, imagine the following scenario.

Let's pretend that in February of 2006, I said you could choose any of the following RBs for your dynasty squad:

Laurence Maroney

Maurice Drew

Joseph Addai

Adrian Peterson

Who would've won that poll?

I think Adrian Peterson would've won in a walk. Why? Because everyone had seen him play in college and everyone was familiar with his name and with his impressive skills.

Now, less than a year later, Peterson might finish last in the exact same poll.

Do you see why this is a bit ridiculous? Peterson would now be ranked behind these same guys simply because they each had a handful of impressive games at the NFL level while he languished in college.

The problem with this is that just about any RB with a pulse is capable of putting up a handful of good games if given the opportunity. Ladell Bettes, Wali Lundy, Leon Washington, Ron Dayne, and Justin Fargas proved as much this past season.

If Adrian Peterson had been in the NFL last season, I have no doubt that he too would've put up a handful of good games.

That's why I stress talent and situation as more important factors than prior NFL production when comparing players who have relatively limited NFL experience. Obviously it's a different story when you're comparing Edgerrin James to Ron Dayne.

 

[jurb26]

You disagree that those guys are great talents? Why, the NFL draft, scouting and even a years worth of NFL play all show that they are. All AD has is the 1st too yet you are 100% sold on him.

Nobody ever claimed that anyone was a star. Only that the guys mentioned have talent and an optimistic situation. It's seems that the Peterson crowd is are the ones proclaiming a star, not the other way around. I have no problem with thinking someone will be a star. I have felt that way about a few players coming into the draft as well. Most recently Bush. You seem to be twisting the arguement though.

True, 1 season does not prove everything in the NFL. You know what though, that is 1 more season then Peterson has proven at that level.

 

[jurb26]

To clarify my point, imagine the following scenario.

Let's pretend that in February of 2006, I said you could choose any of the following RBs for your dynasty squad:

Laurence Maroney

Maurice Drew

Joseph Addai

Adrian Peterson

Who would've won that poll?

I think Adrian Peterson would've won in a walk. Why? Because everyone had seen him play in college and everyone was familiar with his name and with his impressive skills.

Now, less than a year later, Peterson might finish last in the exact same poll.

Do you see why this is a bit ridiculous? Peterson would now be ranked behind these same guys simply because they each had a handful of impressive games at the NFL level while he languished in college.

The problem with this is that just about any RB with a pulse is capable of putting up a handful of good games if given the opportunity. Ladell Bettes, Wali Lundy, Leon Washington, Ron Dayne, and Justin Fargas proved as much this past season.

If Adrian Peterson had been in the NFL last season, I have no doubt that he too would've put up a handful of good games.

That's why I stress talent and situation as more important factors than prior NFL production when comparing players who have relatively limited NFL experience. Obviously it's a different story when you're comparing Edgerrin James to Ron Dayne.

So basically because Peterson was fortunate enough to have hype his freshman year and be on TV for all to see his talents in a media frenzied Oklahoma leading to name recognition while other talented RBs had to wait longer. This gives him more talent? This sounds rediculous to me. That becuase people saw Peterson play while not seeing the other play he has more talent. How is that accurate? If people did not see the other guys play how could they possibly compare the talents? It sounds like this is what you are expecting people to have done. I'm sure last year Peterson would have gone ahead of those guys mentioned. Guess what I'm also sure that Portis never would have lasted until the 2nd round, Moss never would had fallen to Minn and SD never would have drafted Leaf had they been given an extra years worth of data too.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

To clarify my point, imagine the following scenario. Let's pretend that in February of 2006, I said you could choose any of the following RBs for your dynasty squad:Laurence MaroneyMaurice DrewJoseph AddaiAdrian PetersonWho would've won that poll? I think Adrian Peterson would've won in a walk. Why? Because everyone had seen him play in college and everyone was familiar with his name and with his impressive skills.Now, less than a year later, Peterson might finish last in the exact same poll.Do you see why this is a bit ridiculous?

<_<

 

[EBF]

You disagree that those guys are great talents? Why, the NFL draft, scouting and even a years worth of NFL play all show that they are.

I guess we have a different definition of great. In my book, getting picked in the first few rounds of the NFL draft and having 2-3 100 yard rushing games doesn't qualify you as a great talent. A great talent is the kind of guy who can become a long-term star like Shaun Alexander, LaDainian Tomlinson, Fred Taylor, or Edgerrin James. I don't think all of this year's top rookie RBs will reach that level.

All AD has is the 1st too yet you are 100% sold on him.

Who says I'm 100% sold on him? All I said is that he warrants consideration in the same range as guys like Addai, Cadillac, Rudi, and Parker. That doesn't seem like a huge stretch. I would probably take him over a lot of guys with better track records. So what? That's my decision to make. When I make the pick, I won't argue that he hasn't proven as much as someone like Rudi Johnson. I'll just argue that he's a better player. That's what I did when I took Reggie Bush over Clinton Portis and Shaun Alexander. It's working out well so far.

True, 1 season does not prove everything in the NFL. You know what though, that is 1 more season then Peterson has proven at that level.

My point boils down to these things that we know to be true:- Just because a player has not played in the NFL does not mean he won't eventually become a star in the NFL. All of the best players in the NFL started out as untested draft prospects. - Just because a player has had a few good games doesn't mean he will eventually become a star in the NFL. I've already pointed out lots of examples of mediocre performers putting up several big games. Now, are the odds of a slightly proven NFL player succeeding higher than the odds of a completely unproven NFL player succeeding? Of course. On average. But we're not talking about averages. We're talking about a specific case. In the specific case of Adrian Peterson, I think it's reasonable to believe that he will eventually become a better pro than many of the guys who are currently ranked ahead of him. This brings me back to my original point. After the top 5-6 guys, you can make just as strong a case for AD as you can for the other backs slotted in the 6-20 range on most dynasty rankings.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

So basically because Peterson was fortunate enough to have hype his freshman year and be on TV for all to see his talents in a media frenzied Oklahoma leading to name recognition while other talented RBs had to wait longer. This gives him more talent? This sounds rediculous to me. That becuase people saw Peterson play while not seeing the other play he has more talent. How is that accurate? If people did not see the other guys play how could they possibly compare the talents? It sounds like this is what you are expecting people to have done. I'm sure last year Peterson would have gone ahead of those guys mentioned. Guess what I'm also sure that Portis never would have lasted until the 2nd round, Moss never would had fallen to Minn and SD never would have drafted Leaf had they been given an extra years worth of data too.

jurb, I think we can objectively say by looking at each player's body of work that Peterson has displayed the most talent (if you mean innate ability). I don't think this is a controversial view. Peterson is not considered the best talent because the most people saw him, he's considered the best talent because he has an extremely rare combination of size, power, and speed, and a demonstrated ability to be the workhorse and put his team on his back.

 

[EBF]

So basically because Peterson was fortunate enough to have hype his freshman year and be on TV for all to see his talents in a media frenzied Oklahoma leading to name recognition while other talented RBs had to wait longer. This gives him more talent? This sounds rediculous to me. That becuase people saw Peterson play while not seeing the other play he has more talent. How is that accurate? If people did not see the other guys play how could they possibly compare the talents? It sounds like this is what you are expecting people to have done. I'm sure last year Peterson would have gone ahead of those guys mentioned. Guess what I'm also sure that Portis never would have lasted until the 2nd round, Moss never would had fallen to Minn and SD never would have drafted Leaf had they been given an extra years worth of data too.

My point is that everyone agreed last year that Peterson was a phenomenal talent. Now people are ranking him behind guys who probably aren't considered phenomenal talents just because those guys have had a few good games in the NFL. The reason this is silly is because if Peterson is as good as we've always thought then he will almost certainly produce his own string of oustanding games during his rookie year. Then what? People will suddenly decide that he's better than Addai again? I'm saying if you thought he was better than Addai last year then there probably hasn't been enough contrary evidence to justify changing your mind. I expect any top rookie RB prospect to come in and impress when he's given opportunities. I'm not going to hype someone for fulfilling that expectation and I'm not going to punish someone for a lack of opportunities. It's why I won't be drafting Drew or Addai in any dynasties next year and also why I won't be trading away LenDale White. You have to look at a young player's value somewhat independently of how it rises and falls in the public perception. Where I would've taken Addai, Maroney, Bush, or DeAngelo in a dynasty draft last year is about where I would take them in a dynasty draft this year. That's because they're the exact same players that they were last year. You obviously have to bump up an out-of-nowhere guy like Drew, but I won't bump him up high enough to match his ADP, meaning I probably won't be drafting him. The gist of my argument is that a few games (good or bad) probably shouldn't sway you from your initial judgment.

 

[-OZ-]

Just one simple question.

How many of Peterson's critics actually saw him in more than 2 games in his career?

Follow up:

For those who saw him in at least a handful of games, what is your perception?

I'll answer my own follow up, and simply put, the kid dominates. He has the raw ability rarely shown. He is not Reggie Bush or LT, but probably a smaller, quicker Eddie George. He has better gamebreaking ability, but for his style, I think George is a decent comparison. Come to think of it, that's where I'd put his "moderate upside". It's too easy to call him the next Dickerson, but I'll take the next George.

 

[jurb26]

The gist of my argument is that a few games (good or bad) probably shouldn't sway you from your initial judgment.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you making your arguement against these other guys based off of "a few games?"How much did you watch Drew, Addai and Maroney in comparison to Peterson? I know I hadn't seen them nearly as much just due to geography and Oklahoma being on TV more as they got more exposure nationally. It seems as though you have already made your judgement and are not willing to change it no matter what. Is it not possible that maybe some of these other RBs talents were better than advertised? It seems like the whole arguement is based around the notion that Peterson was a beast coming out of High School and as a true freshman at OU. He had the exposure and we all got to see those talents so there is no way to question it. Sure I can agree with that. That does not dismiss the fact that other less trendy and exposed players have just as much talent and developed into it. Personally I'm not a huge fan of Addai. Maroney has grown on me and been nothing but impressive in the NFL and I can acknowledge that I underestimated his talent as many did. Drew I have always liked but worried about his size. It seems clear that is not a problem for him this past season. Basically every warning sign on these 3 prospects coming out of college last year seems to have been overcome.You keep harping on last year. We have a whole new year of data to break down this year though. Data that clearly has swayed the majority of the FBG poll to select these guys ahead of him. Why that is so hard to swallow is beyond me. Do you expect us to just forget and throw away this past year for the sake of Peterson's FF draft position? Should we do that for LJ or LT or Portis (who was hurt)? I'm sure if Peterson lands in a nice situation this April his will jump up that draft board and I have no problem with that. There is a lot that can happen between then and now.

 

[jurb26]

Just one simple question.How many of Peterson's critics actually saw him in more than 2 games in his career?Follow up:For those who saw him in at least a handful of games, what is your perception?I'll answer my own follow up, and simply put, the kid dominates. He has the raw ability rarely shown. He is not Reggie Bush or LT, but probably a smaller, quicker Eddie George. He has better gamebreaking ability, but for his style, I think George is a decent comparison. Come to think of it, that's where I'd put his "moderate upside". It's too easy to call him the next Dickerson, but I'll take the next George.

So Drew and Maroney didn't dominate in college too?

 

[Zigg]

So basically because Peterson was fortunate enough to have hype his freshman year and be on TV for all to see his talents in a media frenzied Oklahoma leading to name recognition while other talented RBs had to wait longer. This gives him more talent? This sounds rediculous to me. That becuase people saw Peterson play while not seeing the other play he has more talent. How is that accurate? If people did not see the other guys play how could they possibly compare the talents? It sounds like this is what you are expecting people to have done. I'm sure last year Peterson would have gone ahead of those guys mentioned. Guess what I'm also sure that Portis never would have lasted until the 2nd round, Moss never would had fallen to Minn and SD never would have drafted Leaf had they been given an extra years worth of data too.

jurb, I think we can objectively say by looking at each player's body of work that Peterson has displayed the most talent (if you mean innate ability). I don't think this is a controversial view. Peterson is not considered the best talent because the most people saw him, he's considered the best talent because he has an extremely rare combination of size, power, and speed, and a demonstrated ability to be the workhorse and put his team on his back.

My problem with Peterson is that he has zero elusivness. Give him a hole and a head of steam, the guys a train. Make him change direction in the backfield, he's useless. People see his measurables and drool, but those measurables alone aren't enough in the NFL the way they were in HS/College. I think he'll struggle in the NFL.

 

[cstu]

McGahee had in 2003:

282 carries, 1753 yds, 28 TDs, 6.2 avg, 27 rec, 355 yds, 0 Tds, 13.1 avg, total: 2108/28

Peterson had in 2004:

339 carries, 1925 yds, 15 TDs, 5.7 avg, 5 rec, 12 yds, 0 TDs, 2.4 avg, total: 1937/15

This is what bothers me about Peterson - he has a similar role in college to Kevin Jones - who took a few years to develop as a receiver and still drops too many passes. As a runner, I think Peterson will be a beast but it's going to be hard to take him early in a PPR if he doesn't go to the right team.

 

[Bob_Magaw]

i think one reason AD consensus dynasty ranking (so far) is #17, is the fact that his destination is unknown is being factored into that... if he goes to CLE or HOU, i could see it staying about there... if he goes to a better team somewhat unexpectedly (by dropping or a team trading up), i could see an uptick, & he might leapfrog some of the aforementioned 06 runners...

guys like addai & maroney ARE in good situations... EBF noted upthread that going to CLE or HOU could cloud ADs future... not sure if drew is in a great situation... they weren't necessarily great team this year, but he looked so explosive his talent seemed to transcend his situation (being among league leaders in TDs despite not being full time player nearly the whole season)... LT was able to do that when SD weren't a very good team... caddy was far from being able to this season...

as far as some of other RBs mentioned that were flash n the pans, you can look at players like a-train & williiam green & clearly see they don't have the explosiveness & speed of maroney & drew (not sure about addai, to me jury is still out, but it will be hard for him to be a complete failure in that offense... RBBC could blunt his value)... maybe they were a little bigger, but that didn't compensate for lack of talent in other areas... maroney & drew COULD fail, but in retrospect, it seems a-train & green had IDENTIFIABLE flaws when we do the post-mortem... ie - lack of speed & explosiveness (maybe many other things where they suffer in comparison - vision, instincts, burst, quickness, feet, elusiveness, etc)... that maroney & drew (& bush) DON'T lack...

so maroney & drew SHOULD be better based on "objective" (i hate that word & can't believe i used it, probably haven't in years, but you know what i mean... the consensual hallucination of the scouting community )... analysis of their respective skill sets... if they do fail, i could see it coming more for injury & durability reasons for maroney (& deangelo... drew seemed to emerge from the 06 season relatively unscathed in the injury dept)... but i don't think it will be for lack of talent, like it subsequently proved to be for thomas & green...

 

[-OZ-]

Just one simple question.How many of Peterson's critics actually saw him in more than 2 games in his career?Follow up:For those who saw him in at least a handful of games, what is your perception?I'll answer my own follow up, and simply put, the kid dominates. He has the raw ability rarely shown. He is not Reggie Bush or LT, but probably a smaller, quicker Eddie George. He has better gamebreaking ability, but for his style, I think George is a decent comparison. Come to think of it, that's where I'd put his "moderate upside". It's too easy to call him the next Dickerson, but I'll take the next George.

So Drew and Maroney didn't dominate in college too?

I don't recall saying that. I saw less games with Maroney and Drew than AD, but I was never "wowed" with Maroney. He's played very well for New England, which is among the best places to be a starting RB. Drew amazed me at times, but I did have questions about his ability to be a workhorse. Those questions still persist a little, but his obvious talent overrides that, for now.If drafting today, before we see where AD lands, I'd probably go Maroney, AD, Drew. In PPR, Drew could jump to the front. All I'm saying really, is AD has the ability to be darn close to a HOF back. I'm wondering how much his critics have seen of him. On the question of elusiveness, IIRC, Larry Johnson wasn't considered elusive either.

 

[jurb26]

Just one simple question.How many of Peterson's critics actually saw him in more than 2 games in his career?Follow up:For those who saw him in at least a handful of games, what is your perception?I'll answer my own follow up, and simply put, the kid dominates. He has the raw ability rarely shown. He is not Reggie Bush or LT, but probably a smaller, quicker Eddie George. He has better gamebreaking ability, but for his style, I think George is a decent comparison. Come to think of it, that's where I'd put his "moderate upside". It's too easy to call him the next Dickerson, but I'll take the next George.

So Drew and Maroney didn't dominate in college too?

I don't recall saying that. I saw less games with Maroney and Drew than AD, but I was never "wowed" with Maroney. He's played very well for New England, which is among the best places to be a starting RB. Drew amazed me at times, but I did have questions about his ability to be a workhorse. Those questions still persist a little, but his obvious talent overrides that, for now.If drafting today, before we see where AD lands, I'd probably go Maroney, AD, Drew. In PPR, Drew could jump to the front. All I'm saying really, is AD has the ability to be darn close to a HOF back. I'm wondering how much his critics have seen of him. On the question of elusiveness, IIRC, Larry Johnson wasn't considered elusive either.

Fair enough. I'm not sure if you consider me one of Peterson's "critics" or not. I'll tell you that I've seen him play between 12 and 16 games over the course of his career. That is more than I actually got to see any of Maroney, Drew or Addai play before the NFL.

 

[Otis]

Arguing with Bloom and EBF is statistically a losing proposition.

 

[Bob_Magaw]

as to ADs checkered medical history, at least the worst leg injury he has is probably sprained ankle... the broken collarbone not as bad as if he had blown out his ACL like mcgahee...

just hope AD doesn't turn out in pros to stand for ANOTHER DING...

as to his lack of elusiveness, if you look at highlights, he can make small, quick DBs miss in open field... it looked like he is so fast he just explodes past defenders & is running away from them a lot... hard to fake people out if they are behind you... seriously, he looks to have such freakish speed that he may not be in a position where he has to juke as much as a player slower to the corner & into the second level... even with far greater overall speed & talent at next level, he WILL get to the corner as a pro... he does remind me of dickerson, not only in his afterburners & raw top end speed for a big man & upright running style, but also in his patience, vision, instincts & innate sense of angles, which enables him to explode through the hole at right time & place...

he won't be arm tackled or tripped up easily, either, which could add hundreds of extra yards & many more potential rushing TDs each season...

 

[FreeBaGeL]

So long as ADP dodges Oakland he's a top 15 back immediately. I'm hoping he ends up in Houston where I think he'd flourish.

EBF is right on the money with dismissing the "done something in the NFL" argument for last year's rookies. The most overrated thing in fantasy football is not rookie RBs, it is second year RBs coming off a strong second half.

William Green blows up the second half of year one, how did year two go?

Caddy blows up year one, how did year two go?

Ronnie Brown finishes strong year one, how did year two go?

Kevin Jones blows up the second half of year one, how did year two go?

I don't care to run the numbers again, but I made a post last offseason that showed that second year RBs coming off a big 2nd half are MORE likely to bust than rookie RBs. I would imagine that trend continued easily with Brown and Caddy struggling this year.

 

[jurb26]

I don't care to run the numbers again, but I made a post last offseason that showed that second year RBs coming off a big 2nd half are MORE likely to bust than rookie RBs. I would imagine that trend continued easily with Brown and Caddy struggling this year.

Not exactly going out on a limb here are we? Both Brown and Caddy were injured this past year. Jones was also injured his 2nd year. He DID blow up when healthy this past year. So basically RBs in year 2 who get hurt bust. I'm sure rookie RBs who get hurt bust their rookie season as well.

 

[EBF]

I don't care to run the numbers again, but I made a post last offseason that showed that second year RBs coming off a big 2nd half are MORE likely to bust than rookie RBs. I would imagine that trend continued easily with Brown and Caddy struggling this year.

Not exactly going out on a limb here are we? Both Brown and Caddy were injured this past year. Jones was also injured his 2nd year. He DID blow up when healthy this past year. So basically RBs in year 2 who get hurt bust. I'm sure rookie RBs who get hurt bust their rookie season as well.

William Green? Anthony Thomas? Dominic Rhodes?

 

[Bob_Magaw]

So long as ADP dodges Oakland he's a top 15 back immediately. I'm hoping he ends up in Houston where I think he'd flourish.EBF is right on the money with dismissing the "done something in the NFL" argument for last year's rookies. The most overrated thing in fantasy football is not rookie RBs, it is second year RBs coming off a strong second half.William Green blows up the second half of year one, how did year two go?Caddy blows up year one, how did year two go?Ronnie Brown finishes strong year one, how did year two go?Kevin Jones blows up the second half of year one, how did year two go?I don't care to run the numbers again, but I made a post last offseason that showed that second year RBs coming off a big 2nd half are MORE likely to bust than rookie RBs. I would imagine that trend continued easily with Brown and Caddy struggling this year.

it always best to try & get an apples to apples comparison... green played in CLE, which turned out to not have a very good offense... tim couch is out of the league, kelly holcomb is (or was) a reserve behind losman... kevin johnson is out of the league, andre davis is a reserve in BUF, morgan as a reserve in PIT...TB didn't look like they had a very good offense this season... maybe it was OL struggles, but simms couldn't get passing attack started & it went downhill from there...MIA also didn't set the world on fire on offense in 06... c-pepp was shell of his former self, & they had to go with DET reject harrington, who isn't expected back (couldn't get the ball to chambers at all)...DET has been one of the worst teams in the league for a while, with harrington, charles rogers already busting & mike williams possibly about to join themso as to addai & maroney, unless we want to argue we expect IND & NE offenses to inexplicably plummet down to level of above teams in 07, at least IN THAT RESPECT... these aren't really comparable situations...BTW, i'm not disagreeing about peterson being a great prospect... just maybe with the way the point is being made in some instances...& again, the fact that AD could go to murky situation like CLE is priced into his seemingly low (to some people) ranking... if he goes to a team like DEN, we would no doubt see his value rocket up...

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I don't care to run the numbers again, but I made a post last offseason that showed that second year RBs coming off a big 2nd half are MORE likely to bust than rookie RBs. I would imagine that trend continued easily with Brown and Caddy struggling this year.

Not exactly going out on a limb here are we? Both Brown and Caddy were injured this past year. Jones was also injured his 2nd year. He DID blow up when healthy this past year. So basically RBs in year 2 who get hurt bust. I'm sure rookie RBs who get hurt bust their rookie season as well.

KJ was awful long before he got hurt in year 2, and Caddy was even worse (again long before the injury). Ronnie Brown wasn't exactly lighting the league on fire either with two 100 yard rushing efforts and four games in which he scored in his first 11 starts before he got hurt. KJ had 14 starts his rookie year, 13 his second year. Caddy had 14 starts his rookie year, 14 his second year. Ronnie Brown had 14 starts his rookie year and 12 his sophomore. It's not like these guys tore their ACL week 1, they underperformed prior to the injury and the injuries only made things even worse.Again, that's also leaving off A-train, Willie Green, and Julius Jones among others.