Grant and Peterson Compared

[Badgerinmaine]

Boy am I getting bashed for making this post over at FootballsFuture's General Forum...

http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB...462743#3462743

Considering that one of the Queen fans over there has "TJack is the next Brett Favre" in his sig, I wouldn't worry too much about what is said over there.

Hey, it's football. We are all entitled to our delusions.

[b bulldog]

GB, did you do some sleddin between the holidays?? Conditions were just awsome although the lakes got a bit slushy. All the locals were walking around with grins from ear to ear because of all the money the snow has made them. Northern WI is a wonderful place to be in the winter when their is ample snow on the ground.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Peterson was averaging 6.5 yards/carry before the last four games. Ridiculous! Then, teams stacked the box like no other RB sees often. He didn't just go up against 8 men in a box--like a normal great RB. He went up against 4-4 defenses. Normally, the 8th man in the box would be a safety. He went up against 4 DL and 4 LBs. Grant went mostly against 7 men in the box. Peterson is a Hall of Fame talent, and to compare Grant to him is a bit much. Production, my ass. You have to look at the talent around you. When Favre had Walker and Driver, he put up MVP type numbers. When he had Bill Schroeder as a starting WR, he didn't. Also, I think Minnesota's OL is overrated. Hutch is very good. Maybe not great. Birk is good, but not great. McKinnie is overrated. Hicks is average. Cook is below average.

[Partial]

Peterson was averaging 6.5 yards/carry before the last four games. Ridiculous! Then, teams stacked the box like no other RB sees often. He didn't just go up against 8 men in a box--like a normal great RB. He went up against 4-4 defenses. Normally, the 8th man in the box would be a safety. He went up against 4 DL and 4 LBs. Grant went mostly against 7 men in the box. Peterson is a Hall of Fame talent, and to compare Grant to him is a bit much. Production, my ass. You have to look at the talent around you. When Favre had Walker and Driver, he put up MVP type numbers. When he had Bill Schroeder as a starting WR, he didn't. Also, I think Minnesota's OL is overrated. Hutch is very good. Maybe not great. Birk is good, but not great. McKinnie is overrated. Hicks is average. Cook is below average.

This is pretty much the answer right here.

[Lurker64]

Production, my ass.

This is the part that I really disagree with. Production wins games, championships, and gets you into the hall of fame. Potential is just the potential for production and talent just aids production (a more talented player will produce more than a less talented player ceteris paribus). Production is the only thing that matters.

[Patler]

Also, I think Minnesota's OL is overrated. Hutch is very good. Maybe not great. Birk is good, but not great. McKinnie is overrated. Hicks is average. Cook is below average.

People seem so emotional about this discussion that I find it necessary to preface everything by saying I do not believe Grant has anywhere near the physical talent of Peterson. That having been said, I don't think Minnesota's line is so overrated in the running game. Chester Taylor averaged 5.4/carry and gained over 800 yards too. He is not a Hall of Fame talent, and I doubt he benefited from defenses geared to stop the MN passing attack.

I think Minnesota's running game was pretty darn solid. I also think Peterson saw the same defenses Taylor did until later in the season when the defenses were designed specifically to stop him, and may have relaxed a little when he was not in the game.

I would still like to know how healthy Peterson was after returning from his injury. His last four games were nothing memorable.

[b bulldog]

Agree, their Oline like the badgers Oline can dominate in the running game but when they need to protect, they can have problems.

[Rastak]

Also, I think Minnesota's OL is overrated. Hutch is very good. Maybe not great. Birk is good, but not great. McKinnie is overrated. Hicks is average. Cook is below average.

People seem so emotional about this discussion that I find it necessary to preface everything by saying I do not believe Grant has anywhere near the physical talent of Peterson. That having been said, I don't think Minnesota's line is so overrated in the running game. Chester Taylor averaged 5.4/carry and gained over 800 yards too. He is not a Hall of Fame talent, and I doubt he benefited from defenses geared to stop the MN passing attack.

I think Minnesota's running game was pretty darn solid. I also think Peterson saw the same defenses Taylor did until later in the season when the defenses were designed specifically to stop him, and may have relaxed a little when he was not in the game.

I would still like to know how healthy Peterson was after returning from his injury. His last four games were nothing memorable.

Not sure if it was his knee or that big brace he was wearing. That thing looked like the bulky ones lineman wear.

[vince]

From reports I've read, Grant ran a 4.45 40. Peterson might have clocked 4.40.

Just to straighten one thing up, here is the source for Ryan Grant's combine numbers. http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=701129

At 6 feet 1 inch and 224 pounds, Grant doesn't look like he's a speed burner, but he is. He tied for the second-fastest time among running backs at the 2005 combine, running the 40-yard dash in 4.43 seconds. He has shown his speed over the past month on touchdown runs of 66 and 62 yards against Chicago and Dallas, respectively.

"We knew he had speed," said running backs coach Edgar Bennett. "He's got a very good burst. He's a downhill runner. There's very little wasted motion. He gets on defenders in a hurry."

And here is the source for Peterson's combine numbers. http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings...php?pyid=58020

Unable to copy the text from this site.

And also to try to clear up another conclusion that seems to have been drawn by some, which I repeat from the initial post....

Neither I nor anyone else that I've seen post in this thread are suggesting that Ryan Grant is as physically gifted as Adrian Peterson. Those that are arguing that such a suggestion is misguided are right, but are missing the point entirely.

I agree wholeheartedly that Adrian Peterson has the POTENTIAL (if his team can become more multi-dimensional and he can stay healthy) to be nothing less than the greatest back of all time. He certainly has more potential than Emmitt Smith ever had, and look at what he accomplished.

[b bulldog]

Good work Vince!

[Bretsky]

Bump so we can have two side by side threads comparing Grant and Peterson

Who will win the race to 100 ?

[Scott Campbell]

The great thing about these threads is that they're only half crazy. We got Grant for a lousy 6th, and he's exceeded everyones wildest predictions.

[Bretsky]

It is nuts that we got Grant for a 6th; we robbed the Giants but on the other hand they still might choose to trade Grant over several of their running backs.

They have Brandon Jacobs
Derrick Ward looked outstaning
Ahmad Bradshaw looked exceptional at the end of the season
And they liked the vet in Ruben Droughans

I'm sure they wished they had kept Grant also, but only so much of the rock can be split out.

[HarveyWallbangers]

It is nuts that we got Grant for a 6th; we robbed the Giants but on the other hand they still might choose to trade Grant over several of their running backs.

They have Brandon Jacobs
Derrick Ward looked outstaning
Ahmad Bradshaw looked exceptional at the end of the season
And they liked the vet in Ruben Droughans

I'm sure they wished they had kept Grant also, but only so much of the rock can be split out.

They had a nice group, didn't they? To me, Jacobs, Ward, and Grant all look like potential Pro Bowl players. Bradshaw had a good game or two, but I didn't wow me like the others. Thye probably wish they had dumped Droughns and kept Grant.

[Rastak]

Peterson was averaging 6.5 yards/carry before the last four games. Ridiculous! Then, teams stacked the box like no other RB sees often. He didn't just go up against 8 men in a box--like a normal great RB. He went up against 4-4 defenses. Normally, the 8th man in the box would be a safety. He went up against 4 DL and 4 LBs. Grant went mostly against 7 men in the box. Peterson is a Hall of Fame talent, and to compare Grant to him is a bit much. Production, my ass. You have to look at the talent around you. When Favre had Walker and Driver, he put up MVP type numbers. When he had Bill Schroeder as a starting WR, he didn't. Also, I think Minnesota's OL is overrated. Hutch is very good. Maybe not great. Birk is good, but not great. McKinnie is overrated. Hicks is average. Cook is below average.

Actually Hicks didn't play much at all this year. Anthony Herrera won the job out of training camp and played really well all year. He got a 5 year extension out of the deal. I suspect he'll be the RG for a few years to come. Cook doesn't impress me too much. Birk is getting long in the tooth.