Thread: Why Vikings Should Decrease RBs (AD) Workload

There is an obvious drop-off when Gerhart is running the ball, but it is a fair trade-off when you look at the big picture. While Gerhart got off to a slow start, sputtering for 22 yards on seven carries, his yards per carry increased each month as his attempts increased.

Septerber: 7 carries, 22 yards (3.1 ypc)
October: 10 carries, 35 yards (3.5 ypc)
November: 29 carries, 106 yards (3.6 ypc)
December/January: 35 carries, 160 yards (4.6 ypc)

If you limit Peterson’s carries, perhaps he finishes stronger. Look at his monthly averages:

Septerber: 110.9 yards per game, 5.4 ypc
October: 95.4 ypg, 4.5 ypc
November: 107.0 ypg, 5.3 ypc
December/January: 71.7 ypg, 4.1 ypc

Adrian Peterson: Why Vikings Should Decrease Running Back's Workload

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1093923

There is an obvious drop-off when Gerhart is running the ball, but it is a fair trade-off when you look at the big picture. While Gerhart got off to a slow start, sputtering for 22 yards on seven carries, his yards per carry increased each month as his attempts increased.

Septerber: 7 carries, 22 yards (3.1 ypc)
October: 10 carries, 35 yards (3.5 ypc)
November: 29 carries, 106 yards (3.6 ypc)
December/January: 35 carries, 160 yards (4.6 ypc)

All I take from this, is as the rookie was in the system a bit more, he got more comfortable.

If you limit Peterson’s carries, perhaps he finishes stronger. Look at his monthly averages:

Septerber: 110.9 yards per game, 5.4 ypc
October: 95.4 ypg, 4.5 ypc
November: 107.0 ypg, 5.3 ypc
December/January: 71.7 ypg, 4.1 ypc

Are these based on his career, or just last season?

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1093926

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1093923

There is an obvious drop-off when Gerhart is running the ball, but it is a fair trade-off when you look at the big picture. While Gerhart got off to a slow start, sputtering for 22 yards on seven carries, his yards per carry increased each month as his attempts increased.

Septerber: 7 carries, 22 yards (3.1 ypc)
October: 10 carries, 35 yards (3.5 ypc)
November: 29 carries, 106 yards (3.6 ypc)
December/January: 35 carries, 160 yards (4.6 ypc)

All I take from this, is as the rookie was in the system a bit more, he got more comfortable.

If you limit Peterson’s carries, perhaps he finishes stronger. Look at his monthly averages:

Septerber: 110.9 yards per game, 5.4 ypc
October: 95.4 ypg, 4.5 ypc
November: 107.0 ypg, 5.3 ypc
December/January: 71.7 ypg, 4.1 ypc

Are these based on his career, or just last season?

You don't read the articles do you?

As I quoted, it says monthly avg's, doesn't say if it was for the year or for the career.

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1093930

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1093926

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1093923

There is an obvious drop-off when Gerhart is running the ball, but it is a fair trade-off when you look at the big picture. While Gerhart got off to a slow start, sputtering for 22 yards on seven carries, his yards per carry increased each month as his attempts increased.

Septerber: 7 carries, 22 yards (3.1 ypc)
October: 10 carries, 35 yards (3.5 ypc)
November: 29 carries, 106 yards (3.6 ypc)
December/January: 35 carries, 160 yards (4.6 ypc)

All I take from this, is as the rookie was in the system a bit more, he got more comfortable.

If you limit Peterson’s carries, perhaps he finishes stronger. Look at his monthly averages:

Septerber: 110.9 yards per game, 5.4 ypc
October: 95.4 ypg, 4.5 ypc
November: 107.0 ypg, 5.3 ypc
December/January: 71.7 ypg, 4.1 ypc

Are these based on his career, or just last season?

You don't read the articles do you?

As I quoted, it says monthly avg's, doesn't say if it was for the year or for the career.

Yes, I read it, and it's a garbage article form the Bleacher. Nothing mentioned is new or unique, or really even relevent.

Yes, there's a dropoff when Gerhart comes on the field.

Did you notice he combined December and January into one stat? Methinks perhaps either one of those months alone doesn't go with what he's trying to say, or he's only using last year's stats, in which case Peterson was hurt.

The thing is, Peterson isn't a guy you can only run 15 times. He might have a 120+ yard day, or he might get 30. He's the guy that gets 2, 3, 1, 40, yard gains. You NEED to feed him the ball for him to be effective. He's the best athlete on the field, and to take the ball out of his hands takes away a serious threat.

What's the use of having a healthy Peterson going into the playoffs if we don't make it in? Peterson will eventually wear out, it's inevitable since he's a runningback. in 4 years time, we'll replace him, but for now, he's still strong, and can outrun guys well into the fourth quarter.

As well, this article doesn't take into account the fact that as the season wears on, our line gets more and more hurt. Our quarterback was a 6th round raw rookie, who didn't scare anybody. Teams focused on Peterson more and more, because with no blocking or threat to pass, they could.

Even hurt, Favre can at least put up some yards and make some throws. Webb doesn't scare anybody that way. With Favre, yes they did pack the box, but they were keeping the pass in mind. I have absolutely no doubt when teams were playing against Webb, the run was their #1 priority. They're willing to take the chance on Webb torching them through the air if it means they keep Peterson in check.

I'm also curious how they think we should split up the time.

Who's our third down back? Peterson is much better suited for the job than Gerhart. I wouldn't mind seeing Booker out there splitting time as the #3 back. Mix in a bit of Gerhart every now and then as a change of pace. But with the game on the line in key situations, we need our most talented player out there.

One thing that I found interesting:

"All Day" has averaged nearly 300 carries per season. He has also caught nearly 30 passes per year. While he has been relatively injury-free since coming into the league, all of those touches begin to take a toll on a physical runner like Peterson.

300 carries isn't very much. that's only 18.75 carries a game. IMO Peterson NEEDS to touch the ball at least that many times.

Some of the other great RB's of the decade:
LT: 309.9 carries per season over 10 seasons( including the past two seasons where he was a backup and hurt)
Chris JOhnson: 308.3 c/s oever 3 seasons
Edgerrin James: 316 c/s over 9 seasons(not including his last year in Seattle or Arizona as a backup/hurt)
Shaun Alexander: 301.7 c/s as a starter over 7 seasons (didn't include rookie or year with redskins as a backup)
Curtis Martin: 319.8 c/s over 11 seasons
Jamal Lewis: 299.8 c/s over 8 seasons (injured for a full year and didn't include his half-season with the Browns in 09)
I could go on, but I think I'v emade my point. All of these backs have at some point been regarded at some point as some of the best in the game. They all NEED to get the ball to succeed. Some lasted longer than others, part of it's luck, running style and physical build. But taking carries away from AP isn't the way to win games. The whole addition through subtraction method has proven to not work in the NFL.

I think the dropoff in play in December and beyond is due to the ability of some of our o-linemen to play a full season, not Peterson's.

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1093935

Yes, I read it, and it's a garbage article form the Bleacher. Nothing mentioned is new or unique, or really even relevent.

Yes, there's a dropoff when Gerhart comes on the field.

Did you notice he combined December and January into one stat? Methinks perhaps either one of those months alone doesn't go with what he's trying to say, or he's only using last year's stats, in which case Peterson was hurt.

Why does everyone consider bleacher report stuff garbage and believe their stuff on here is superior?

The thing is, Peterson isn't a guy you can only run 15 times. He might have a 120+ yard day, or he might get 30. He's the guy that gets 2, 3, 1, 40, yard gains. You NEED to feed him the ball for him to be effective. He's the best athlete on the field, and to take the ball out of his hands takes away a serious threat.

What's the use of having a healthy Peterson going into the playoffs if we don't make it in? Peterson will eventually wear out, it's inevitable since he's a runningback. in 4 years time, we'll replace him, but for now, he's still strong, and can outrun guys well into the fourth quarter.

So your the type of guy that will run a horse till it dies and then just go get another one.

Do you really think 5-10 Reps a game are going to make it so AD isn't effective cause he isn't going to get the ball enough.

Gimme a break. Thats like saying AD won't break a long one on his first touch of the game cause he hasn't had enough touches.

As well, this article doesn't take into account the fact that as the season wears on, our line gets more and more hurt. Our quarterback was a 6th round raw rookie, who didn't scare anybody. Teams focused on Peterson more and more, because with no blocking or threat to pass, they could.

Even hurt, Favre can at least put up some yards and make some throws. Webb doesn't scare anybody that way. With Favre, yes they did pack the box, but they were keeping the pass in mind. I have absolutely no doubt when teams were playing against Webb, the run was their #1 priority. They're willing to take the chance on Webb torching them through the air if it means they keep Peterson in check.

Heres a fact, not a cliche'......They have been stacking the box long before AD came and will continue to stack the box with AD around and it doesn't matter who is under QB.

Go back and watch the games with the Noodle in them. Even when things clicked in 2009 they were still stacking the box my friend.

I'm also curious how they think we should split up the time.

Who's our third down back? Peterson is much better suited for the job than Gerhart. I wouldn't mind seeing Booker out there splitting time as the #3 back. Mix in a bit of Gerhart every now and then as a change of pace. But with the game on the line in key situations, we need our most talented player out there.

Exactly like they did each and every year AD has been here. Go back and look at his first year when he set all the records. People were beyyyyatching cause CT was taking to many reps.

One thing that I found interesting:

"All Day" has averaged nearly 300 carries per season. He has also caught nearly 30 passes per year. While he has been relatively injury-free since coming into the league, all of those touches begin to take a toll on a physical runner like Peterson.

300 carries isn't very much. that's only 18.75 carries a game. IMO Peterson NEEDS to touch the ball at least that many times.

Makes no sense. He's been damn productive with 18.75 carries a game so now you want to add more?

Some of the other great RB's of the decade:
LT: 309.9 carries per season over 10 seasons( including the past two seasons where he was a backup and hurt)
Chris JOhnson: 308.3 c/s oever 3 seasons
Edgerrin James: 316 c/s over 9 seasons(not including his last year in Seattle or Arizona as a backup/hurt)
Shaun Alexander: 301.7 c/s as a starter over 7 seasons (didn't include rookie or year with redskins as a backup)
Curtis Martin: 319.8 c/s over 11 seasons
Jamal Lewis: 299.8 c/s over 8 seasons (injured for a full year and didn't include his half-season with the Browns in 09)
I could go on, but I think I'v emade my point. All of these backs have at some point been regarded at some point as some of the best in the game. They all NEED to get the ball to succeed. Some lasted longer than others, part of it's luck, running style and physical build. But taking carries away from AP isn't the way to win games. The whole addition through subtraction method has proven to not work in the NFL.

Quick question, If the addition by subtraction method doesn't work, how come so many teams are now moving/using 2 back sets in an effort to extend their RB's career?

Maybe this yutz on Bleacher report knows something you don't.......hmy: :whistle:

On a side note, why in the hell do you get so nasty when it comes to Toby? Its like the kid violated your whole family or something. What did he do to you other than get drafted by a staff that you think screwed the pooch how they drafted him.

Blame the staff my friend, not the kid.

Thought I would do some research for my good friend bleed....

Considered a true banger.

Missed 10 starts over his short career. Most of those were because CT started those games in 2007 and has really only missed one start each year there after.

Best year was when he had the least amount of touches.
2010
Adrian Peterson 283 1298 4.6
Toby Gerhart 81 322
2009
Adrian Peterson 314 1383 4.4
Chester Taylor 94 338
2008
Adrian Peterson 363 1760 4.8
Chester Taylor 101 399
2007
Adrian Peterson 238 1341 5.6
Chester Taylor 157 844

Has had a very productive career already even though the staff has worked hard since he was drafted to limit his touches.

LT: A true workhorse and a banger. Missed 4 games over 10 seasons but was down and out for the post season the last 2 years in SD when his team needed him most.

Edgerrin James: A banger. Missed 25 games over 9 seasons

Shaun Alexander: A banger. Missed 48 starts over 7 seasons

Curtis Martin: Finese runner, not a true banger. Missed 10 starts over 11 seasons

Jamal Lewis: A banger. Missed 17 starts over 8 seasons

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1093986

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1093935

Yes, I read it, and it's a garbage article form the Bleacher. Nothing mentioned is new or unique, or really even relevent.

Yes, there's a dropoff when Gerhart comes on the field.

Did you notice he combined December and January into one stat? Methinks perhaps either one of those months alone doesn't go with what he's trying to say, or he's only using last year's stats, in which case Peterson was hurt.

Why does everyone consider bleacher report stuff garbage and believe their stuff on here is superior?

Because it's written by idiots like you and me. More often than not, they really don't say anything. Like this article. He says AP's average per game goes down towards the end of the season, not taking into account a number of other factors then comes to a conclusion.

The thing is, Peterson isn't a guy you can only run 15 times. He might have a 120+ yard day, or he might get 30. He's the guy that gets 2, 3, 1, 40, yard gains. You NEED to feed him the ball for him to be effective. He's the best athlete on the field, and to take the ball out of his hands takes away a serious threat.

What's the use of having a healthy Peterson going into the playoffs if we don't make it in? Peterson will eventually wear out, it's inevitable since he's a runningback. in 4 years time, we'll replace him, but for now, he's still strong, and can outrun guys well into the fourth quarter.

So your the type of guy that will run a horse till it dies and then just go get another one.

This is the NFL. If they don't like it, they can become an accountant. AP Wants the ball, he WANTS to lead the team. He WANTS to be the guy that has that gamechanging play. He said before in an interview, if he could have 50 carries a game that would be ideal, but he knows its not possible.

Do you really think 5-10 Reps a game are going to make it so AD isn't effective cause he isn't going to get the ball enough.

Yes

Gimme a break. Thats like saying AD won't break a long one on his first touch of the game cause he hasn't had enough touches.

Ok, 15 carries, 52 yards in on a close game and the fourth quarter starts, do we stop giving him the ball? Yes he can break a long one early, or he can brak a long one late like in that Packer game a couple years ago. (the one where he had that little condom hat thing on)

As well, this article doesn't take into account the fact that as the season wears on, our line gets more and more hurt. Our quarterback was a 6th round raw rookie, who didn't scare anybody. Teams focused on Peterson more and more, because with no blocking or threat to pass, they could.

Even hurt, Favre can at least put up some yards and make some throws. Webb doesn't scare anybody that way. With Favre, yes they did pack the box, but they were keeping the pass in mind. I have absolutely no doubt when teams were playing against Webb, the run was their #1 priority. They're willing to take the chance on Webb torching them through the air if it means they keep Peterson in check.

Heres a fact, not a cliche'......They have been stacking the box long before AD came and will continue to stack the box with AD around and it doesn't matter who is under QB.

So..... are you telling me teams don't specifically try to shut down Peterson? You don't notice Manning or Brady going up against stacked boxes do you? No. THey have no run game, and they are a threat to destroy you. Philip Rivers went against alot of stacked boxes early on because of LT.

Go back and watch the games with the Noodle in them. Even when things clicked in 2009 they were still stacking the box my friend.

It's almost like you didn't read what I wrote.....

I'm also curious how they think we should split up the time.

Who's our third down back? Peterson is much better suited for the job than Gerhart. I wouldn't mind seeing Booker out there splitting time as the #3 back. Mix in a bit of Gerhart every now and then as a change of pace. But with the game on the line in key situations, we need our most talented player out there.

Exactly like they did each and every year AD has been here. Go back and look at his first year when he set all the records. People were beyyyyatching cause CT was taking to many reps.

So pull him out of the game on third down? that makes sense.....

One thing that I found interesting:

"All Day" has averaged nearly 300 carries per season. He has also caught nearly 30 passes per year. While he has been relatively injury-free since coming into the league, all of those touches begin to take a toll on a physical runner like Peterson.

300 carries isn't very much. that's only 18.75 carries a game. IMO Peterson NEEDS to touch the ball at least that many times.

Makes no sense. He's been damn productive with 18.75 carries a game so now you want to add more?

No, he's been productive while averaging almost 22 touches per game. I'm not necessarily saying add more, but don't reduce his workload unless he really shows he needs it.

Some of the other great RB's of the decade:
LT: 309.9 carries per season over 10 seasons( including the past two seasons where he was a backup and hurt)
Chris JOhnson: 308.3 c/s oever 3 seasons
Edgerrin James: 316 c/s over 9 seasons(not including his last year in Seattle or Arizona as a backup/hurt)
Shaun Alexander: 301.7 c/s as a starter over 7 seasons (didn't include rookie or year with redskins as a backup)
Curtis Martin: 319.8 c/s over 11 seasons
Jamal Lewis: 299.8 c/s over 8 seasons (injured for a full year and didn't include his half-season with the Browns in 09)
I could go on, but I think I'v emade my point. All of these backs have at some point been regarded at some point as some of the best in the game. They all NEED to get the ball to succeed. Some lasted longer than others, part of it's luck, running style and physical build. But taking carries away from AP isn't the way to win games. The whole addition through subtraction method has proven to not work in the NFL.

Quick question, If the addition by subtraction method doesn't work, how come so many teams are now moving/using 2 back sets in an effort to extend their RB's career?

Is it an effort to extend the career, or to stay strong throughout the game?

Yes, there are alot of teams using the two-back method, and I think it's a good idea. I don't think we need to pull our top weapon out of the game on crucial downs when the alternative is a significant drop-off.

On a side note, why in the hell do you get so nasty when it comes to Toby? Its like the kid violated your whole family or something. What did he do to you other than get drafted by a staff that you think screwed the pooch how they drafted him.

Blame the staff my friend, not the kid.

I never once blamed the guy, I just don't think he's that great, and we had far more pressing needs than to trade up for a mediocre back. I"m willing to go out on a limb and say Toby will NEVER be regarded as a top back in the league. And be real, if we didn't draft TOby, and opted for Best instead, you could care less about Toby (unless he went to your Bengals of course)

The biggest issue with AD now is is he #1 or #2 in the league?

Question; How many 40-50 yd plus TD's has Adrian had the past couple of years?
It may be my old mind, but since he decided to build up his body and/ or the cheap shot by the puker at his knee I do not remember many. I only recall one last year and do not recall any in 2009. His first couple of years, it seemed as if he did it every other game.

Why not?

I don't think you can generalize on a theory about reducing or increasing a RB's workload will make them more or less productive based on what your rationale brain tells you.

AD's carries should be predicated on his production and how his body responds to the given workload. Not how some other RB does in a similar situation. As IBP points out, many RB's have shown to be very productive with similar workloads. Would they have been more productive with less carries? Hard to say, but I think many would actually go down in YPC as a lot of the great backs did most of their damage in the 4th quarter when carries got high.

Personally, I don't think AD is the type of back that you want to put in a tandem backfield situation and his workload seems to be on target for what he should get.

The stats as always are very contextual. I believe you should use your eyes and believe what they tell you over what a stat sheet may seem to imply.