Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

01 Sep 2010

Peterson or Rice?

I have the second pick in a standard 10 team league, expecting Chris Johnson to be the first pick. I'm torn on whether I should take Peterson or Rice. I feel like the Vikings offense is due to decline, especially up front. That plus, Favre being older and already dealing with the ankle injury and Sidnet Rice missing at least the first six games makes it seems like Peterson will get fewer scoring opportunities. On the other hand, it could mean he gets like 350 carries.

Rice seems to be on an improving offense. Flacco should improve. The offensive line looks good. Adding Boldin could mean fewer receptions, but by looking at the usage patterns of RBs in Cam Cameron's system, I see no reason to believe Rice won't get a minimum of 280 carries and 50 receptions. If he were to go up to like 310 carries and 65 or so catches he could have a crazy Priest Holmes in KC type of season.

Tough decision. I'm probably leaning Peterson slightly, but I really like Rice.

Posted by: bglass on 01 Sep 2010

2 replies , Last at 02 Sep 2010, 2:05pm by DrG

Re: Peterson or Rice?
by Zheng :: Thu, 09/02/2010 - 3:47am

Which one are you going to regret less if you wind up taking the lower-scoring player? These two players are so close you should probably take the player you'd rather watch on TV.

Pointswise, I have the vague feeling that we've seen AP's ceiling or close to it, while Rice still has untapped potential (such as if McGahee's role is reduced). I have no solid evidence to back any of this up, though.

Re: Peterson or Rice?
by DrG :: Thu, 09/02/2010 - 2:05pm

A nice predicament, like choosing which Victoria's Secret model to date.

If PPR, I'd probably go Rice, standard, Peterson. But all the news about Rice working out in the offseason and BALT in general has been good. Cannot say the same about MINN.

Login or register to post comments