Rookie Pick 1.01 - ADP or CJ? (1 Viewer)

[JAK Straw]

If you have the 1.01 pick and like me are deciding whether to select Adrian Peterson or Calvin Johnson...I thought it might make sense to list the advantages of both strategies for folks to consider, and perhaps debate.

Reasons to take Peterson

ADP is a rare talent, with size/speed and power, who should excel in the NFL.

Running behind a talented O-Line with McKinnie, Hutch, etc.

The stud RB theory - a star running back is the hardest guy to find in fantasy football.

Higher bust potential for WRs (i.e. the drugrunner theory of drafting RBs and QBs while avoiding WRs).

Johnson has Kitna throwing him the ball - how will he put up good stats?

Most owners with 1.01 also have 2.01 - the WRs who figure to be available at the start of the 2nd round are better than the RBs in the same spot.

Reasons to take Johnson

An almost unheard of combination of skills - size, speed, leaping ability. Grades out higher than almost any other WR coming to the NFL.

Injury concerns about Peterson - will his collarbone injury linger? will he miss time in training camp? Is his "upright" running style going to lead to more injuries?

Longer expected life for a WR vs. a RB

Has Roy Williams on the other side and so can't get double coverage.

Vikings have no passing game, teams will stuff the box vs. the run

CJ did great in college even with a lousy QB, even a mediocre NFL QB will be a big improvement

Could outscore ADP in PPR leagues

What else should we add?

 

[Kit Fisto]

You nailed it with this one:

The stud RB theory - a star running back is the hardest guy to find in fantasy football.

 

[JAK Straw]

You nailed it with this one:

The stud RB theory - a star running back is the hardest guy to find in fantasy football.

If its that simple we wouldn't see lots of folks thinking about taking CJ. A number of FBG staff writers are giving real consideration to it. So something must be different this time.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

CJ in start 3 WR PPR leagues, but AD in every other format I can think of, and I won't argue if you take AD first in start 3 WR PPR leagues - he is a true workhorse, and Russ Lande told me that Oklahoma coaches said AD was the best single character kid theyve had in the Stoops era.

 

[Kit Fisto]

You nailed it with this one:

The stud RB theory - a star running back is the hardest guy to find in fantasy football.

If its that simple we wouldn't see lots of folks thinking about taking CJ. A number of FBG staff writers are giving real consideration to it. So something must be different this time.

I think what we're seeing is guys poking holes in Peterson's game that just aren't there. That attitude will change come August.I don't disagree with Calvin being rated higher than Lynch, but not Peterson.

Not comparing the rooks to either of these guys, but in hindsight who would you rather have... Randy Moss or LT2? Terrell Owens or Larry Johnson? Chad Johnson or Steven Jackson?

 

[EBF]

I'd argue that Peterson has a higher ceiling, but that Johnson has a lower floor. Johnson is the safer pick and the right guy to take if you're rebuilding a PPR team from scratch. But Peterson is a top talent at a position where true stars are rare. He has more upside and is more likely to give you the kind of monster season needed to win you a championship.

But I have the 1.01 in a flexible PPR league and I'm having a whale of time narrowing it down between these two. They're both great prospects.

 

[Buckna]

Has Roy Williams on the other side and so can't get double coverage.

The flip side of this is that Roy is top flight WR and there are only so many catchable balls going around. Some teams can sustain 2 top fantasy WR's, but not many and how long can they keep it up?

 

[WhoDat]

Has Roy Williams on the other side and so can't get double coverage.

The flip side of this is that Roy is top flight WR and there are only so many catchable balls going around. Some teams can sustain 2 top fantasy WR's, but not many and how long can they keep it up?

Or...The Lions are poor to below average on defense, while having done little to address that in the draft. They run a pass early and often offense. They will be down K. Jones for at least 8 games and M. Furrey...yes, converted DB M. Furrey...hauled in 90 plus and 1k. Most importantly, my beloved Lions will be playing from behind early and often with no real way to control the clock, as T. Bell is not the answer. That is a quick recipe for 4,000 via the air. Despite being a turnover machine parts of last year Kitna had no problem putting up yards. They'll be more than enough football to go around this year. I do not see the passing offense regressing especially with the new additions at the WR position. Bump Furrey WAY down...WAY, WAY down... and feel good about C. Johnson getting his touches. I am not sure you can wrong with either pick but, like EBF said, Johnson is the safer play and this is coming from a HUGE Peterson fan. I just see Peterson being a player that burns fiery bright for 3-4 years and...wham...being done. Johnson, if he is really the second coming of Fitzgerald or R. Moss with character, playing for a very, very long time at a very, very high level.

 

[duaneok66]

ADP is hurt and you are not sure that he's healthy; meanwhile CJ is heralded as "Randy Moss without the baggage" . . .

easy call . . .

 

[EBF]

What about Marshawn?

 

[fruity pebbles]

What about Marshawn?

Level below. Nice situation but not on the same talent level as the other two.

 

[EBF]

What about Marshawn?

Level below. Nice situation but not on the same talent level as the other two.

Probably true, but let's look closer. When you consider the top FF RBs from the past 4-5 years combined, I think you get a group like this:LaDainian TomlinsonAhman GreenPriest HolmesRicky WilliamsLarry JohnsonTiki BarberEdgerrin JamesShaun Alexander Clinton PortisMarshall FaulkSix out of the above ten were chosen in the first round. But only four of them were top ten picks (James, Williams, Faulk, and Tomlinson) and only three of them were the top RB taken in their class (Faulk, Tomlinson, and James). Superstars Larry Johnson and Shaun Alexander were taken in the bottom half of the first round. Portis and Barber were second round picks. Ahman was a third round pick. Take a closer look at the above nine guys. LaDainian Tomlinson - Played with Brees, Rivers, and a good O-line. Prior to San Diego's development as a complete football team, he was merely great (instead of insane). Ahman Green - Played with arguably one of the best QBs in football history.Priest Holmes - Played with a solid veteran QB behind a great offensive line. Ricky Williams - Played mostly on bad teams and, perhaps not coincidentally, had one of the weaker careers of the players on this list. Larry Johnson - Played with a solid veteran QB behind a great offensive line. Tiki Barber - Admittedly played with some suspect supporting casts, but still had Toomer and Shockey during his best years. And although Kerry Collins isn't Peyton Manning, he wasn't completely inept. Edgerrin James - Played with Peyton Manning. Shaun Alexander - Played with a solid veteran QB and one of the best offensive lines in the NFL.Clinton Portis - Played in a system known for turning journeymen into 1,200 yard backs. Still solid, but hasn't been able to duplicate that success in Washington. Marshall Faulk - Warner, Bulger, Holt, and Bruce. Almost all of these guys played with good supporting talent. Meanwhile early draft picks like Thomas Jones, Cadillac Williams, Ronnie Brown, Jamal Lewis, William Green, Willis McGahee, and Kevin Jones have had inconsistent careers at best. Is this a pure function of talent? I don't think so. If you look at the group of disappointing backs, you'll note that very few of them have played with good supporting casts. I think sustained RB production is usually a combination of talent and system. I maintain that guys like LJ and Jackson wouldn't have those gaudy numbers if they were stuck on the Browns or Buccaneers.So while Peterson may very well have the most talent of any RB in this draft, I don't think that fact alone cements his status as RB1. I have more faith in Buffalo's front office than I do in Minnesota's (check their recent drafts). I have more faith in JP Losman/Trent Edwards + Lee Evans than I do in Tarvaris Jackson + Sidney Rice/Troy Williamson. Also, Lynch has a much better build than Peterson and is a more accomplished receiver. If you look at the list of elite RBs over the past 4-5 years, I think Lynch is closer to those guys in terms of running style, build, and playing style. I think he warrants heavy consideration as the 1.01 pick this year even though I agree that he's not the most talented player in the draft (Johnson and Peterson are more impressive).

 

[Colin Dowling]

Peterson. Not to be crass, but why is this even open for discussion?

 

[duaneok66]

What about Marshawn?

Level below. Nice situation but not on the same talent level as the other two.

Probably true, but let's look closer. When you consider the top FF RBs from the past 4-5 years combined, I think you get a group like this:

LaDainian Tomlinson

Ahman Green

Priest Holmes

Ricky Williams

Larry Johnson

Tiki Barber

Edgerrin James

Shaun Alexander

Clinton Portis

Marshall Faulk

Six out of the above ten were chosen in the first round. But only four of them were top ten picks (James, Williams, Faulk, and Tomlinson) and only three of them were the top RB taken in their class (Faulk, Tomlinson, and James). Superstars Larry Johnson and Shaun Alexander were taken in the bottom half of the first round. Portis and Barber were second round picks. Ahman was a third round pick.

Take a closer look at the above nine guys.

LaDainian Tomlinson - Played with Brees, Rivers, and a good O-line. Prior to San Diego's development as a complete football team, he was merely great (instead of insane).

Ahman Green - Played with arguably one of the best QBs in football history.

Priest Holmes - Played with a solid veteran QB behind a great offensive line.

Ricky Williams - Played mostly on bad teams and, perhaps not coincidentally, had one of the weaker careers of the players on this list.

Larry Johnson - Played with a solid veteran QB behind a great offensive line.

Tiki Barber - Admittedly played with some suspect supporting casts, but still had Toomer and Shockey during his best years. And although Kerry Collins isn't Peyton Manning, he wasn't completely inept.

Edgerrin James - Played with Peyton Manning.

Shaun Alexander - Played with a solid veteran QB and one of the best offensive lines in the NFL.

Clinton Portis - Played in a system known for turning journeymen into 1,200 yard backs. Still solid, but hasn't been able to duplicate that success in Washington.

Marshall Faulk - Warner, Bulger, Holt, and Bruce.

Almost all of these guys played with good supporting talent.

Meanwhile early draft picks like Thomas Jones, Cadillac Williams, Ronnie Brown, Jamal Lewis, William Green, Willis McGahee, and Kevin Jones have had inconsistent careers at best.

Is this a pure function of talent? I don't think so. If you look at the group of disappointing backs, you'll note that very few of them have played with good supporting casts.

I think sustained RB production is usually a combination of talent and system. I maintain that guys like LJ and Jackson wouldn't have those gaudy numbers if they were stuck on the Browns or Buccaneers.

So while Peterson may very well have the most talent of any RB in this draft, I don't think that fact alone cements his status as RB1.

I have more faith in Buffalo's front office than I do in Minnesota's (check their recent drafts). I have more faith in JP Losman/Trent Edwards + Lee Evans than I do in Tarvaris Jackson + Sidney Rice/Troy Williamson. Also, Lynch has a much better build than Peterson and is a more accomplished receiver. If you look at the list of elite RBs over the past 4-5 years, I think Lynch is closer to those guys in terms of running style, build, and playing style. I think he warrants heavy consideration as the 1.01 pick this year even though I agree that he's not the most talented player in the draft (Johnson and Peterson are more impressive).

if a holder of 1.01 feels that way then he/she should trade down to 1.3 . . .as to the substance of your argument, I think that Marshawn is a bad egg and he will rot all over Northern New York; no way to I take him before CJ . . .

 

[EBF]

What about Marshawn?

Level below. Nice situation but not on the same talent level as the other two.

Probably true, but let's look closer. When you consider the top FF RBs from the past 4-5 years combined, I think you get a group like this:

LaDainian Tomlinson

Ahman Green

Priest Holmes

Ricky Williams

Larry Johnson

Tiki Barber

Edgerrin James

Shaun Alexander

Clinton Portis

Marshall Faulk

Six out of the above ten were chosen in the first round. But only four of them were top ten picks (James, Williams, Faulk, and Tomlinson) and only three of them were the top RB taken in their class (Faulk, Tomlinson, and James). Superstars Larry Johnson and Shaun Alexander were taken in the bottom half of the first round. Portis and Barber were second round picks. Ahman was a third round pick.

Take a closer look at the above nine guys.

LaDainian Tomlinson - Played with Brees, Rivers, and a good O-line. Prior to San Diego's development as a complete football team, he was merely great (instead of insane).

Ahman Green - Played with arguably one of the best QBs in football history.

Priest Holmes - Played with a solid veteran QB behind a great offensive line.

Ricky Williams - Played mostly on bad teams and, perhaps not coincidentally, had one of the weaker careers of the players on this list.

Larry Johnson - Played with a solid veteran QB behind a great offensive line.

Tiki Barber - Admittedly played with some suspect supporting casts, but still had Toomer and Shockey during his best years. And although Kerry Collins isn't Peyton Manning, he wasn't completely inept.

Edgerrin James - Played with Peyton Manning.

Shaun Alexander - Played with a solid veteran QB and one of the best offensive lines in the NFL.

Clinton Portis - Played in a system known for turning journeymen into 1,200 yard backs. Still solid, but hasn't been able to duplicate that success in Washington.

Marshall Faulk - Warner, Bulger, Holt, and Bruce.

Almost all of these guys played with good supporting talent.

Meanwhile early draft picks like Thomas Jones, Cadillac Williams, Ronnie Brown, Jamal Lewis, William Green, Willis McGahee, and Kevin Jones have had inconsistent careers at best.

Is this a pure function of talent? I don't think so. If you look at the group of disappointing backs, you'll note that very few of them have played with good supporting casts.

I think sustained RB production is usually a combination of talent and system. I maintain that guys like LJ and Jackson wouldn't have those gaudy numbers if they were stuck on the Browns or Buccaneers.

So while Peterson may very well have the most talent of any RB in this draft, I don't think that fact alone cements his status as RB1.

I have more faith in Buffalo's front office than I do in Minnesota's (check their recent drafts). I have more faith in JP Losman/Trent Edwards + Lee Evans than I do in Tarvaris Jackson + Sidney Rice/Troy Williamson. Also, Lynch has a much better build than Peterson and is a more accomplished receiver. If you look at the list of elite RBs over the past 4-5 years, I think Lynch is closer to those guys in terms of running style, build, and playing style. I think he warrants heavy consideration as the 1.01 pick this year even though I agree that he's not the most talented player in the draft (Johnson and Peterson are more impressive).

if a holder of 1.01 feels that way then he/she should trade down to 1.3 . . .as to the substance of your argument, I think that Marshawn is a bad egg and he will rot all over Northern New York; no way to I take him before CJ . . .

He never had any serious character problems at Cal and is apparently a pretty good worker in the weight room.

 

[Stealthycat]

what do you need RIGHT NOW on your FF team ?

Peterson will not be a 1500 yard RB in 2007 - he simply won't be because of Chester Taylor and the nagging injuries he's had.

Calvin Johsnon might very well see 70-75 balls, he's not an injury bug, he's got the #1 WR slot already locked in DET I think

If you're loaded at RB, take Johnson

If you're loaded at WR, take Peterson

Me ? I've got the 1.1 in 2 leagues and might very well go Calvin Johnson in both

 

[Holy Schneikes]

You nailed it with this one:

The stud RB theory - a star running back is the hardest guy to find in fantasy football.

If its that simple we wouldn't see lots of folks thinking about taking CJ. A number of FBG staff writers are giving real consideration to it. So something must be different this time.

I think what we're seeing is guys poking holes in Peterson's game that just aren't there. That attitude will change come August.I don't disagree with Calvin being rated higher than Lynch, but not Peterson.

Not comparing the rooks to either of these guys, but in hindsight who would you rather have... Randy Moss or LT2? Terrell Owens or Larry Johnson? Chad Johnson or Steven Jackson?

How bout Jerry Rice? Can I have him in his prime?Sure, in MOST leagues, if two guys are each guaranteed to become elite fantasy performers, they'd rather have the RB. But the missing point is that most folks seem to be believe that as good a prospect as Peterson is, CJ is considerably more LIKELY to become that elite option and obviously it is better to get truly elite WR than a mediocre (say borderline RB1) RB.

At least according to general perception, CJ is the cliched "once in a lifteime" talent, and Peterson really isn't. Peterson is an elite prospect, but his "potential" doesn't seem any higher than say Bush, or even maybe guys like Ronnie Brown when they were coming out.

Again, all of this assumes you believe in the difference in talent, you probably don't. But many do.

 

[oukurt]

You nailed it with this one:

The stud RB theory - a star running back is the hardest guy to find in fantasy football.

If its that simple we wouldn't see lots of folks thinking about taking CJ. A number of FBG staff writers are giving real consideration to it. So something must be different this time.

PPR I go CJNo PPR I go AD

You hear all the deserved talk of CJ's freakish ablilities. I may be a ,but it is has been awhile since the league has seen a rookie RB with the size, speed, and power of Peterson.

I don't think you can go wrong either way. Put a gun to my head, you will have to pull the trigger.

 

[Buckna]

what do you need RIGHT NOW on your FF team ?

Peterson will not be a 1500 yard RB in 2007 - he simply won't be because of Chester Taylor and the nagging injuries he's had.

Calvin Johsnon might very well see 70-75 balls, he's not an injury bug, he's got the #1 WR slot already locked in DET I think

If you're loaded at RB, take Johnson

If you're loaded at WR, take Peterson

Me ? I've got the 1.1 in 2 leagues and might very well go Calvin Johnson in both

Roy Williams might disagree with you there.Fitz only caught 58 balls his rookie year. Andre Johnson was the only receiving threat on his team and caught 66. Braylon got injured, but was on pace to catch only around 50 balls his first season. If you expect a rookie WR to put up elite fantasy #'s in year 1, it's certainly possible, but the odds are against him.

 

[Stealthycat]

Buckna - thats what you have to decide ...... is Calvin Johnson THE anomoly, is he the Next Coming, or is he just another best WR in a draft ?

Ask the same of Peterson too, then make the decisions I guess huh ?

 

[Buckna]

Buckna - thats what you have to decide ...... is Calvin Johnson THE anomoly, is he the Next Coming, or is he just another best WR in a draft ?Ask the same of Peterson too, then make the decisions I guess huh ?

Yep, well said.You don't seem to be one who is easily blinded by hype and have thought things thru. This would be opposed to some of the drafts linked in the initial startup/rookie draft thread where Calvin is the first dynasty WR off the board in a startup. That's an awful big risk to take, too big for me.