I don't think Perkins is going to be am instant success. I think his biggest struggle will be getting on the field early while he learns pass protection, where he's been described as a willing but not gifted blocker. I don't expect much return on investment until October/November and am ball parking thanksgiving as his coming out party. And there's a chance he never emerges.
But the juice is worth the squeeze. He's drawn comparisons to Jamaal Charles, but that's a bit ludicrous because he's nowhere near as fast. But he's also one of, if not the, most elusive backs in this rookie class. He gets yards after contact, he runs well outside, but he also has some very nice inside runs. He's a decent - not spectacular - receiver who will almost certainly cede time to vereen on third downs even if he earns the starting role. But I'm OK with that, because he should still catch some balls, and he's only got to beat out a 31 year old Jennings who was never really that good and an underperforming Andre Williams who isn't even suited for the big back role.
If Perkins - who performed very well against top competition but will still have a big learning curve - can win this job outright, he could be the primary runner, the touchdown guy, and still be the receptions guy, for a team that should score a boat load of points. And while he has to beat Jennings this year - and will likely deal with a new rookie next year - his limit is only his own talent in a nearly ideal situation, because of he hits one out of the park, the Giants would be a lot less likely to draft a guy this year with what would almost certainly also be a late round pick since a successful year by Perkins would likely mean a playoff season by the Giants.
And then again, he could be a turd who never does anything. It's a real concern. He could suck so bad at blocking it never happens. Williams could turn the corner. Mcadoo might not like his style. He might struggle running out of a pro set. There are no guarantees.
What bia and I have been talking about is whether Perkins should be drafted ahead of booker. And he makes a very good case. I'm wavering, because I like booker, too. This isn't about me vs. Bia. I have really enjoyed the discussion and learned from it.
But in the end I'm still slightly higher on Perkins. Because I want the next tiki barber. I want the next devonta freeman, and took a lot of grief for preferring freeman to Jeremy hill because I prefer that kind of guy in that kind of opportunity over a guy who is almost certainly more "talented". I get both sides, but I'm just trying to explain what I like about these guys
I want the guys who get receptions (which are among the most valuable touches), touchdowns (and who besides 31 year old Jennings and Andre Williams is going to compete for tds?) and volume (I don't expect Perkins to get 300 carries or even 250, but 200-250 touches seems reasonable if things go well)
For those same reasons, I prefer Dixon to Perkins - because I don't see buck Allen as as big a threat to carve out a long term third down role as vereen, and I see dixon as a better volume guy and better td guy than anyone else in Baltimore.
But I like booker. I'm just afraid that even if he clears the cj Anderson and hillman hurdles once, he may have to beat them again and again. I want my guy to establish himself as a stud early and remain the starter as the incumbent, which is my main knock on booker.
It's close, but give me dixon >Perkins >booker until I hear otherwise