Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 65
  1. #41
    bsmithberkley is offline Pro-Bowler
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    333

    Re:A look at Peterson's production

    jmcdon00 wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    bsmithberkley wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    i_bleed_purple wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    Play calling.....
    Sore shoulder on Hutch......
    2nd year C.......
    Rookie RT........
    Tahi Sucks.......


    AD crotchsniffers might want to ignore this next part of my post......

    All of the above had a role in our OL's poor play last year, but AD didn't help any either. If he would learn to be just a bit more patient before he makes his first cut, I bet alot of those "Zero" gains would get yards.

    We saw it time and time again last year were AD would get stoned at the line for no loss and CT would come right in on the next play and get huge yards.

    OK, AD crotsniffers, I'm done hacking on your boy.

    interesting thoughts.

    I'm curious as to why CT had a higher percentages of runs for a loss than Peterson did though...

    Lots of the time, there's simply nothing there.
    I started tracking some stuff on what CT did vs what AD did when I was looking at RB's the Vikes might draft this year.

    A few eye opening numbers.....

    AD had 315 (1394 yards) rushing attemps, CT had 93 (332). Rough numbers, a bit under 1/3 the attempts..... If CT would have been the starting back I suspect he would have had another 1,000-1,200 yard season. Again, someone has to be doing something for AD to get almost 1,400 yards rushing and CT put up pretty decent numbers in a limited role. (Fault - No one. Someone is making holes and someone is hitting them).

    Now for all of you who are gonna come back with the cliche' "AD is a beast in breaking tackles and is getting all those yards on his own".....I throw the next little tidbit out there.....

    Yards after contact per attempt.....AD 2.9/CT 2.2 = Doesn't matter were they are hit, both of them don't fair well with respect to getting extra yards after getting hit.

    This also means that there are holes for them to hit if they are just patient and wait on them. (Fault - RB Coaching Staff, not OL)

    Profootballfocus - RB stats

    In the end, both AD and CT had a "Great" year running the rock, however, they (our RB's) could even do better if would wait just a bit and let some things develop in front of them.
    IMHO I think Taylor was a weak link last year. When looking at the 72 RBs who had more than 50 carries last year CT ranked...

    59/72 for Yard/carry
    60/72 for yard after contact

    The line did not help him, but, there are a lot of other much worse o-lines in the NFL.

    Best wishes for CT ,except for when he plays us every year...but...he really was on decline running the ball the last two years.
    Having the second best back in the league slated as the starter had something to do with it.

    Old cliche' I cotton to a bit.....

    Gotta give him the rock to get him going......I think if CT was the premier back, getting the reps/carries a starter normally gets, and his average would be right up there in the top 10, atleast.

    Truth of the matter is, the main reason he was so attractive to most teams is that he has had very little "Starter" wear and tear over his career as he has been a backup all but one year.

    I look to see CT being our nemisis this year.
    I disagree, being the back up to the best back in the league should only help. Peterson wears on the defense. Not to mention CT was playing mostly in passing situations. There were a bunch of guys right around 100 carries that had higher ypc.
    Not to say that CT declined, I think like Peterson it was largely the change in scheme that hurt production. I believe the number 1 priority changed to protecting the QB and giving the QB more weapons. Previously the number 1 priority was to pound the rock.
    CT will have success, and continue to be a hard nosed runner but I really don't see him being the focus of any offensive attack.
    I think Gerhart will get a similar number of carries and have a higher ypc, quite possibly a higher ypc than Peterson.
    Marrdro, CT as a Top 10 RB? I have to add that one to Favre has a "Noodle" arm? I see CT as the classic back whose production mirrors his blockers success. Nothing more, and nothing less. Not fast, not super shifty, but, smart and reliable.

    Sign me up as a Gerhart fan, but, I doubt his rushing average beats out AP. I think Gerhart will help AP more than AP will help Gerhart for a few reasons.

    1. As a second battering ram the defense should be softer in the second half, where Peterson will be better able to take advantage for long runs than Gerhart.

    2. In a 2 RB set, the defense will have to spread its focus allowing AP a higher percentage of long runs and fewer stuffs.

    3. I expect Gerhart to get more short yardage calls and lower his average disproportionately in comparison.

    As for run splits, AP and CT combined for 19+7=26 carries a game last year. I see AP getting more touches in the passing game this year and the RB split should be nearer to 16AP 10TG, if not in week 1, by week 12 they should see a split like that after Toby shows he has a complete handle on picking up blitzes.

    I do expect both of these guys to be very effective, and, if the Offensive line comes back around they should be the hands-down best running back duo in the NFL (effectivenes). Williams and Stewart will probably win out for total yards.
    None

  2. #42
    12purplepride28's Avatar
    12purplepride28 is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    1,852
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re:A look at Peterson's production

    I don't think marrdro was saying that ct is a top 10 back, but if he were given the carries he could have an average in the top 10. Doesn't necessarily mean he is a top 10 back, he could have less yards, tds, etc., and I don't think teams would gameplan around him like he was a top 10 back.
    I am NOT here to provide good football insight or rational observations. I am an emotional 19 year old Viking fan and I expect you to adjust your expectations from my posts.

  3. #43
    marshallvike's Avatar
    marshallvike is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Posts
    2,469

    Re:A look at Peterson's production

    Marrdro wrote:
    The loss of pro bowl center Matt Birk.....
    Play calling.....
    Sore shoulder on Hutch......
    2nd year C.......
    Rookie RT........
    Tahi Sucks.......


    AD crotchsniffers might want to ignore this next part of my post......

    All of the above had a role in our OL's poor play last year, but AD didn't help any either. If he would learn to be just a bit more patient before he makes his first cut, I bet alot of those "Zero" gains would get yards.

    We saw it time and time again last year were AD would get stoned at the line for no loss and CT would come right in on the next play and get huge yards.

    OK, AD crotsniffers, I'm done hacking on your boy.
    at least you didn't blame this on my boy Winfield.
    Why must you defend everything this FO does....to the point of making your self look like a yes man.

  4. #44
    i_bleed_purple's Avatar
    i_bleed_purple is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canadialand
    Posts
    16,777
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re:A look at Peterson's production

    marshallvike wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    The loss of pro bowl center Matt Birk.....
    Play calling.....
    Sore shoulder on Hutch......
    2nd year C.......
    Rookie RT........
    Tahi Sucks.......


    AD crotchsniffers might want to ignore this next part of my post......

    All of the above had a role in our OL's poor play last year, but AD didn't help any either. If he would learn to be just a bit more patient before he makes his first cut, I bet alot of those "Zero" gains would get yards.

    We saw it time and time again last year were AD would get stoned at the line for no loss and CT would come right in on the next play and get huge yards.

    OK, AD crotsniffers, I'm done hacking on your boy.
    at least you didn't blame this on my boy Winfield.
    LMAO!!!!

    In this post, Marrdro uses the loss of a 'pro bowl Center' Matt Birk as a reason, but in any other thread he'll be the first to say getting rid of him was a good move.

    Flip-Flopping at its finest.

  5. #45
    marshallvike's Avatar
    marshallvike is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Posts
    2,469

    Re:A look at Peterson's production

    i_bleed_purple wrote:
    marshallvike wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    The loss of pro bowl center Matt Birk.....
    Play calling.....
    Sore shoulder on Hutch......
    2nd year C.......
    Rookie RT........
    Tahi Sucks.......


    AD crotchsniffers might want to ignore this next part of my post......

    All of the above had a role in our OL's poor play last year, but AD didn't help any either. If he would learn to be just a bit more patient before he makes his first cut, I bet alot of those "Zero" gains would get yards.

    We saw it time and time again last year were AD would get stoned at the line for no loss and CT would come right in on the next play and get huge yards.

    OK, AD crotsniffers, I'm done hacking on your boy.
    at least you didn't blame this on my boy Winfield.
    LMAO!!!!

    In this post, Marrdro uses the loss of a 'pro bowl Center' Matt Birk as a reason, but in any other thread he'll be the first to say getting rid of him was a good move.

    Flip-Flopping at its finest.
    that was my doing. I wanted to see what kind of reaction I get from him in the morning.
    Why must you defend everything this FO does....to the point of making your self look like a yes man.

  6. #46
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,909

    Re:A look at Peterson's production

    Prophet wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    ...I look to see CT being our nemisis this year.
    Yes, RBs always have such an easy time putting up yards against the Vikings in recent years.
    Most won't admit it, or simply choose to ignore it, but our team looked damn silly a few times last year when it came to stopping the run.

    The Ravens fiasco comes immediately to mind for me.

    I bet we have big issues in that area this year.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  7. #47
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,909

    Re:A look at Peterson's production

    jmcdon00 wrote:
    I disagree, being the back up to the best back in the league should only help. Peterson wears on the defense. Not to mention CT was playing mostly in passing situations. There were a bunch of guys right around 100 carries that had higher ypc.
    You disagree that he is the best back when I said the second best?.....or do you mean that AD softens them up for CT?

    I agree with the second, but that isn't really what I meant. My discussion point was more along the lines of how many reps CT gets which really doesn't allow for him to get going the way a typical back gets going (Lots of reps early and often).

    If CT was the starter for the Vikes and got the majority of the reps, he would have pushed the 1,000 yard mark, kindof rationale was my point.

    Not to say that CT declined, I think like Peterson it was largely the change in scheme that hurt production. I believe the number 1 priority changed to protecting the QB and giving the QB more weapons. Previously the number 1 priority was to pound the rock.
    Hmmmm, you might be on to something with that idea. I was pointing out to a couple of cats what impact a "Pass Heavy" team does to the run blocking of the OL.

    I need to go dig those articles, up, but most were on the Steelers and how they declined in that area as Big Ben became more of a Pass first kindof QB.

    CT will have success, and continue to be a hard nosed runner but I really don't see him being the focus of any offensive attack.
    You might be right my friend, however, the Bores paid him starter money. For me that is a clear indicator that he will get alot of reps especially if you look at what thier starter did last season.
    258 Carries/929 yards (Ranked 18th in the league)/3.6 ypc/4 TD's

    Profootballfocus RB Stats

    I think Gerhart will get a similar number of carries and have a higher ypc, quite possibly a higher ypc than Peterson.
    I have myself almost convinced (as I break down our RB's) that Toby will see the rock alot more than CT, especially when the team gets inside the redzone.

    I am almost willing to go out on a limb and believe he might actually get more TD's this year that AD.

    Regardless of who gets the carries, I am also convinced we are going to revert back to alot more runs that we saw last year in an effort to protect our defense, especially early on.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  8. #48
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,909

    Re:A look at Peterson's production

    i_bleed_purple wrote:
    I'm curious how you came up with this proof:
    Proof????? You been hanging around Z again? I offer up no proof. I offer up a stat that I used to come up what an idea/thought/concept/discussion point.

    basically you say, since they have a low average after contact, that there must be holes?

    You know as well as all of us here, those stats cannot possibly tell the story.
    Of course it doesn't tell the whole story. As with all stats, one can interpret them the way one wants.

    In this case, I don't think I am that far off with my analysis. Heck you even alude to it with your following comment.....

    We all know peterson is a guy who has a bunch of short gains, and then a few monster ones.

    On those short ones, he'll break a tackle and gain a yard, or get smacked for a loss, then he'll break a tackle and gain 50 yards.
    Exactly.

    Can you imagine what his yards per carry after contact would be like without those big runs.

    All I'm saying is that if he waits on the OL a bit longer to develop the hole, he might get a few more of the big ones.

    If there were holes, then he could break an arm tackle and ACTUALLY HAVE SPACE TO MOVE instead of being immediately tackled by someone else.
    Are you trying to tell me that all of his runs, especially his big ones, come from his effort and his effort alone.

    Not sure I am ready to buy into that my friend. Look I like his efforts and really find him to be an exciting player, but he doesn't do it all alone.

    Again, go back and read into the stat just a little bit, mix that with the 1400 yards and you can see that the OL is making him holes.

    On a side note, please don't think that I believe our OL doesn't have issues here. It does, both in run blocking as well as pass blocking.

    On a side note next to that side note, AD can help in that area if he would allow things to develop a bit mostly because of the ZB scheme. Remember, the OLmen start out to double the guy at the point of attack with one of them disengaging and shifting to the next layer so they can get the LB/S out of the play.

    If AD doesn't allow that to happen, well, he is then responsible for not only making the LB'r miss, but the S that is crashing down as well.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  9. #49
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,909

    Re:A look at Peterson's production

    12purplepride28 wrote:
    I don't think marrdro was saying that ct is a top 10 back, but if he were given the carries he could have an average in the top 10. Doesn't necessarily mean he is a top 10 back, he could have less yards, tds, etc., and I don't think teams would gameplan around him like he was a top 10 back.
    My good friend 12pp28 hit it on the head, atleast with his first statement.

    Lets not forget my friends that CT doesn't have alot of wear and tear on those legs. Lets also remember that he had a 1,200 yard season the only season he was a starter.

    In the end, I bet ole CT wears on us a bit this year.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  10. #50
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,909

    Re:A look at Peterson's production

    bsmithberkley wrote:
    Marrdro, CT as a Top 10 RB? I have to add that one to Favre has a "Noodle" arm? I see CT as the classic back whose production mirrors his blockers success. Nothing more, and nothing less. Not fast, not super shifty, but, smart and reliable.
    I'm not going to address the Top Ten comment. 12pp28 did a fine job for me.

    Sign me up as a Gerhart fan, but, I doubt his rushing average beats out AP.
    I agree, not sure if you thought that was what I was saying.

    I think Gerhart will help AP more than AP will help Gerhart for a few reasons.

    1. As a second battering ram the defense should be softer in the second half, where Peterson will be better able to take advantage for long runs than Gerhart.
    I don't think the staff will wait to use Toby until the second half. Infact I think we might even find that they use him to soften the defense up a bit for AD early on.

    That doesn't mean he will be the starter, but rather a short yardage guy that is allowed to pound the middle (were AD seems to struggle with maintaining possesion of the rock at times) on 3rd and shorts.

    2. In a 2 RB set, the defense will have to spread its focus allowing AP a higher percentage of long runs and fewer stuffs.
    I am not sure what everyones fascination is with 2 RB's in the backfield. To what end I say? So you can put one in motion and move him out as a WR? Why not just put in a WR?

    3. I expect Gerhart to get more short yardage calls and lower his average disproportionately in comparison.
    Agree, see my earlier comments.

    As for run splits, AP and CT combined for 19+7=26 carries a game last year. I see AP getting more touches in the passing game this year and the RB split should be nearer to 16AP 10TG, if not in week 1, by week 12 they should see a split like that after Toby shows he has a complete handle on picking up blitzes.
    I am inclinded to be more along the lines of a few less reps for AD and a few more for Toby.

    Rationale goes along the lines of the staff trying to lengthen AD's career a bit. When one looks at how long RB's last in this league who get close to 300 reps a season, it gets ugly.

    With AD coming up on a contract extension (probably end of this year, early next year) the staff is going to want to help in that area a bit is my guess.

    I do expect both of these guys to be very effective, and, if the Offensive line comes back around they should be the hands-down best running back duo in the NFL (effectivenes). Williams and Stewart will probably win out for total yards.
    Again, I agree. Truth of the matter is, I think we are going to see the staff showcasing the run again this year, atleast early on.

    The Noodle CSA'rs won't like to hear that and I think the Noodle and Chiller will get into it again (probably twice) this year if the Chiller thinks the Noodle is audibling out of runs to much this year.

    For me, I believe it is a smart thing. If the OL does gel (again) this year, and our running game is better (than 1400 yards), then they will be able to chew up alot of clock, which will keep our D off the field/protected as we weather the loss of the Wall for four games.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Peterson's gameplay
    By VikesFan787 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-16-2007, 11:39 AM
  2. Vikings need more production from TEs in '07
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-09-2007, 11:34 AM
  3. Air-Car Ready for Mass Production
    By COJOMAY in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-31-2007, 11:46 AM
  4. Vikes look for production from $100M line
    By cajunvike in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-15-2006, 05:35 PM
  5. Rookie Production
    By viks_fan21 in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 11-19-2005, 08:24 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •