Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron
        (https://www.fantasyfootballer.com/cgi-bin/theGridiron/YaBB.cgi)
      

        the Gridiron >> the Red Zone >>  Adrian Peterson
        
(Message started by: Cirrinone on May 23rd, 2003, 8:06pm)
Title: Adrian Peterson
Post by Cirrinone on May 23rd, 2003, 8:06pm
What you guys think of him? I keep hearing better and better things about this guy and his progress. A-Train isn't the answer, and I'm pretty sure Peterson will start this season. What do you all think of him as a late sleeper? It's like 7.06, I have picks 8.12, 9.05, and then 11.12. Think I can get him at 11.12 in a 16-team league?
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by BarnabyWilde on May 23rd, 2003, 8:08pm
If you can get him at 11.12, then do it. I have him as a late round sleeper as well.
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by DirkDiggler on May 23rd, 2003, 8:15pm

on 05/23/03 at 20:06:03, Cirrinone wrote:
What you guys think of him? I keep hearing better and better things about this guy and his progress. A-Train isn't the answer, and I'm pretty sure Peterson will start this season. What do you all think of him as a late sleeper? It's like 7.06, I have picks 8.12, 9.05, and then 11.12. Think I can get him at 11.12 in a 16-team league?



Pick his ass up at 11.12.  I am not sure he will be there though!!!
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by Daunte Williams on May 23rd, 2003, 8:45pm
He was a stud at Georgia Southern, so why can't he make a good pro. Plus, the Shit-Train won't be hard to beat out.
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by StegRock on May 23rd, 2003, 9:50pm
I would DEFINITELY take him with that pick.  BUT, I would not go penciling him in for anything yet.  The jury, at least my jury, is still VERY out on this guy, and I am not convinced A-Train is done!  The Bears sucked as a unit, as a team last year.  The only player worth a damn was Marty Booker, and even he wasn't tremendous.  They revert back to their 2001 form, I think it will probably be by taking the A-Train.  Synopsis:  take him, but temper your expectations.  That way you will be the most satisfied.  Start whippin' out that pencil too much and I think you will find yourself doin' a lot of erasin'!
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by PA Outlaws on May 23rd, 2003, 9:54pm
DIdn't he get a chance to play last year and didn't do shit either? Is their offensive line that bad in Chicago? I really don't like anything on the Bear offense to be quite honest with you!  [smiley=hellyeafunny.gif]
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by Keyshawn Johnson 76yards on May 24th, 2003, 12:21am
A-Train= Sophomore slump last season, I believe he'll bounce back this season and become a solid #2.
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by theWave on May 24th, 2003, 9:06am
Anthony Thomas (I refuse to call him the A-Train) was such a fraud his rookie season.  The only reason he did anything is because the Bears refused to stop running the ball late in games, even though sometimes losing by two scores.  He would eventually break off a 15 yard TD and save his stats for the game.  Last year, the Bears offensive line was one of the worst in the leauge and their QB play was no better.  Due to these factors, Thomas saw 8 men in the box a majority of the time.  Now, with Joe Camel at Quarterback and additions on the O-Line you'd think Thomas is bound for a bounce-back year, right?  Hell NO!  He's the slowest running back to hit the hole (if there is one) since William "the Refrigerator" Perry.  If he actually makes it to the whole before it closes up, he's suprisingly easy to bring down, often getting tripped up by arm tackles.  He may approach 1000 yards this season, but that will be because there is no one else capable of taking his job.  Adrian Peterson is a smaller, quicker (that's not saying much) back than Thomas and should get a chance to supplant him in the preseason.  Will he??  I doubt it.
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by Walker Boh on May 24th, 2003, 12:20pm
Living in the Chicago area, there were a few times last season when I got a chance to see Peterson play and I was impressed with him. I'm not sure if the numbers will agree with me, but it appeared that he was the better back. A-Train would have a hard time getting to the line of scrimmage (of course he'd have 2 guys on him before he even got the ball) and Peterson would come in and make Thomas look slow, very slow. Regardless of who starts at RB, the Bears are in for another long season.  
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by sporto on May 24th, 2003, 2:39pm

on 05/23/03 at 21:50:07, StegRock wrote:
I would DEFINITELY take him with that pick.  BUT, I would not go penciling him in for anything yet.  The jury, at least my jury, is still VERY out on this guy, and I am not convinced A-Train is done!  The Bears sucked as a unit, as a team last year.  The only player worth a damn was Marty Booker, and even he wasn't tremendous.  They revert back to their 2001 form, I think it will probably be by taking the A-Train.  Synopsis:  take him, but temper your expectations.  That way you will be the most satisfied.  Start whippin' out that pencil too much and I think you will find yourself doin' a lot of erasin'!




I think that WHOLE offense will be SHIT and I refuse to draft anybody from the Bears!!!   [smiley=thumbsdown.gif]
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by StegRock on May 24th, 2003, 5:47pm

on 05/24/03 at 14:39:21, sporto wrote:
I think that WHOLE offense will be SHIT and I refuse to draft anybody from the Bears!!![smiley=thumbsdown.gif]


Are you sure it was my post you wanted to be quotin'? [smiley=uh.gif] You do know that there is an implied "if" preceding "They revert back to their 2001 form...", right?  I said nothing to indicate that I believe Chicago's offense will improve this year!  Did you quote me for another reason?  I'm just confused! ??? Whatever, [smiley=whatever.gif] it's not that important!  I am just trying to understand. [smiley=lost.gif]
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by sporto on May 24th, 2003, 6:28pm

on 05/24/03 at 17:47:24, StegRock wrote:
Are you sure it was my post you wanted to be quotin'? [smiley=uh.gif] You do know that there is an implied "if" preceding "They revert back to their 2001 form...", right?  I said nothing to indicate that I believe Chicago's offense will improve this year!  Did you quote me for another reason?  I'm just confused! ??? Whatever, [smiley=whatever.gif] it's not that important!  I am just trying to understand. [smiley=lost.gif]


Steg, I was just adding my two cents on to your replied post. You posted that M. Booker was the only fantasy player with any value. I feel there are NO players on that team with any fantasy value( again just my 2 pennies!!) [smiley=onit.gif]
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by Daunte Williams on May 24th, 2003, 6:37pm
I know that this is going to sound like I am on something, but I think that Kordell Stewart will have a very good year. Start bashing away..... [smiley=gonecrazy.gif]
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by PA Outlaws on May 24th, 2003, 7:04pm
DW, it's almost too easy to bash that one! Honestly, I do see the Bears playing a lot of catch-up this year, so he WILL throw it a lot, completing it is another story, and he will be running for his life a lot as well. So to be honest with you, I think he could put uyp decent numbers, just not anything too special! [smiley=alcoholic.gif]
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by StegRock on May 24th, 2003, 7:27pm

on 05/24/03 at 18:28:59, sporto wrote:
Steg, I was just adding my two cents on to your replied post. You posted that M. Booker was the only fantasy player with any value. I feel there are NO players on that team with any fantasy value( again just my 2 pennies!!) [smiley=onit.gif]


I see what you're saying, sporto.  The Bears may not produce any players worth a shit this upcoming season.  Agreed!  However, Marty Booker did have decent value last season.  That's in the books.  Now, as for '03, [smiley=whatever.gif] !  My point is... you are understanding that my argument is not opposite or even comparable to the one you are making, right?  Anyway,... [smiley=shrug.gif]
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by sporto on May 24th, 2003, 8:27pm

on 05/24/03 at 18:37:01, Daunte Williams wrote:
I know that this is going to sound like I am on something, but I think that Kordell Stewart will have a very good year. Start bashing away..... [smiley=gonecrazy.gif]


[smiley=bonghit.gif] [smiley=laugh.gif] [smiley=laugh.gif] [smiley=hellyeafunny.gif] [smiley=hellyeafunny.gif]
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by Keyshawn Johnson 76yards on May 25th, 2003, 12:29am
I'm with DW on this one. Kordell is going to have a surprisngly good year.
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by theWave on May 25th, 2003, 9:08am
I agree that Kordell is going to have a pretty good year this year.  One of the main reasons is opportunities.  With the Bears D playing well, the O will have plenty of opportunities to move the ball.  Also, that will translate to yards for Booker who had a good season even with Jim "wet-noodle arm" Miller at quarterback.  
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by Daunte Williams on May 25th, 2003, 10:09am
Thanks Keyshawn & Wave for the support. I am glad that I'm not the only one who is not afraid to go out on a limb with some projections.
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by sporto on May 25th, 2003, 10:57am

on 05/25/03 at 10:09:49, Daunte Williams wrote:
Thanks Keyshawn & Wave for the support. I am glad that I'm not the only one who is not afraid to go out on a limb with some projections.


[smiley=gettinridden.gif] [smiley=gettinridden.gif]
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by ZAGS on May 25th, 2003, 11:05am

on 05/25/03 at 10:09:49, Daunte Williams wrote:
Thanks Keyshawn & Wave for the support. I am glad that I'm not the only one who is not afraid to go out on a limb with some projections.


I am not afraid to go out on a limb when it comes to my QB projections this year either, but I don't like Stewart this year! I think this is a great year to get QB's late, but I don't think Stewart is one of them.
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by Walker Boh on May 25th, 2003, 11:21am

on 05/25/03 at 09:08:24, theWave wrote:
I agree that Kordell is going to have a pretty good year this year.  One of the main reasons is opportunities.  With the Bears D playing well, the O will have plenty of opportunities to move the ball.  Also, that will translate to yards for Booker who had a good season even with Jim "wet-noodle arm" Miller at quarterback.  

I think you're confusing last year's team with the Chicago D of 2001. Last season, the Bears finished 25th in total defense and 29th in total offense. [smiley=thumbsdown.gif]

I just looked at the Bears' schedule to start next season: @ San Fran, @ Minnesota, BYE, Green Bay, Oakland, @ NO and @ Seattle... that's a bitch of a schedule! [smiley=nervous.gif] Chicago will be tested early and if they play anything like they did last year, the season will be over really quick. While playing from behind can sometimes generate big downfield plays for the QB, it also increases the likelihood of turnovers. IMO, the best thing about the Bears this season will be the new stadium.
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by StegRock on May 25th, 2003, 1:04pm

on 05/25/03 at 11:21:14, Walker Boh wrote:
I just looked at the Bears' schedule to start next season: @ San Fran, @ Minnesota, BYE, Green Bay, Oakland, @ NO and @ Seattle... that's a bitch of a schedule! [smiley=nervous.gif] Chicago will be tested early and if they play anything like they did last year, the season will be over really quick. While playing from behind can sometimes generate big downfield plays for the QB, it also increases the likelihood of turnovers.


...and the likelihood of a quarterback change.  I can already see Rex in the bullpen warming up by Week 9.  At best, Kordell will string together enough HOT games, a "notorious" pattern of his, to keep his job this season only to "wash up" in '04, his other "notorious" propensity, making him terrible for deep-keeper leaguers.  I go out on a limb all the time, but, like ZAGS, not on Kordell.
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by Keyshawn Johnson 76yards on May 26th, 2003, 3:49pm

on 05/25/03 at 11:21:14, Walker Boh wrote:
I think you're confusing last year's team with the Chicago D of 2001. Last season, the Bears finished 25th in total defense and 29th in total offense. [smiley=thumbsdown.gif]

I just looked at the Bears' schedule to start next season: @ San Fran, @ Minnesota, BYE, Green Bay, Oakland, @ NO and @ Seattle... that's a bitch of a schedule! [smiley=nervous.gif] Chicago will be tested early and if they play anything like they did last year, the season will be over really quick. While playing from behind can sometimes generate big downfield plays for the QB, it also increases the likelihood of turnovers. IMO, the best thing about the Bears this season will be the new stadium.


True, but the poor defense was due to injuries all over the defense.

The offense feeds off the defense, as was witnessed two seasons ago, when the defense doesn't produce, neither does the Chicago offense.

If they all come back healthy and stay healthy, they'll once again be tops in the league on D.
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by theWave on May 26th, 2003, 9:02pm
Their poor defense had to do with injuries to their fat run-stuffers and believe it or not, their offense.  Their D played well and got stops, only for their offense to turn around and go 3 and out.  You can't consistently stop teams when you're on the field the whole game.
Title: Re: Adrian Peterson
Post by DOLFAN on May 30th, 2003, 4:17pm
Booker was a top 14 WR last year. 1189 yds and 6 tds with NO running game, no DEF, NO QB, oh yeah and no solid #2 WR to take double teams off him and was healthy all 16 games. He is entering the prime of his career.  KOrdell worries me, but Booker will have similar stats IMO with a better running game.
Now to Peterson...the OL lost 2 or 3 starter, can't remember, plus the DEF lost i think 5 to 7 starters, and Terrel was lost for the year too. AT played poorly behind that OL. Peterson broke Walter Payton's all time rushing record for AAA schools. That may no say much, but says ALOT. He was still productive...albeit at a lower level. He hits the hole quicker than AT, and has better hands. He still didn't WOW many people but played well coming from a smaller program and held his own. He reminds me a bit of TD, I'm not comparing him to TD now, it's just that from a small school, late round pick. TD was faster and had a better OL and better moves, but i expect Peterson to beat out AT for the season starter, or take it over by week 3 at the lastest. The bad thing is Kordell. When je jas no pressure he does ok, but when you ask him to carry a team or step up he turns into a pussy and whimps out. Maybe Grossman will be ready to take over by mid-late season. They have a good offensive scheme and talent..Booker, Terrell, AT and Peterson. I have Peterson as one of my keepers in a 12 man keeper league. Picked him up off waivers last year along with Josh Reed and will keep him too.


Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.1!
YaBB © 2000-2002, Xnull. All Rights Reserved.