Would You Rather...

[B'sCeltsPatsSox]

You moved it into the comparisons forum. You're dead to me Micropenis.

It was me. Why should we make it a special occasion for you lol? This is a dumb who would you chose, it's AP.

[kubernetes]

Hmm, so you'd rather have 7-8 years of average play over 4-5 years of transcendent play? That's the kind of logic that would lead one to choose Tony Romo over Peyton Manning ("But Romo's got more years ahead of him!")

[Pinstripe power]

ap without a second thought

[UKBronco58]

AP. Easily.

Add in Gerhart who himself is decent and it really is no contest.

[c_reinert]

I was having a discussion with my buddy Lucas. He is a Vikings fan and I am a Saints fan.

DO NOT MOVE THIS TO THE COMPARISON FORUM.

Anyways. My friend and I were discussing Adrian Peterson and the Saints backs. I said I would rather have the following:

RB - Pierre Thomas (Age 27)
RB - Mark Ingram (Age 22)
RB - Darren Sproles (Age 29)
RB - Chris Ivory (Age 24)
RB/WR - Travaris Cadet (Age 23)

Or have

RB - Adrian Peterson (Age 27)

I basically told him the following:

-For our offense, having different dimensions from our backs is more important.

-Running backs shelf life isn't great. I'd much rather have these 5 backs in New Orleans then just one AP.

He obviously disagreed. Who is correct? Would you rather have JUST AP or all 5 of the Saints backs and then use them accordingly (you can trade them, you can line up Cadet at WR like we do, etc.)

AP. He can do all the things those other 5 do and can contribute in those ways in the Saints current scheme. More importantly, when you get a back like AP, you change your scheme to fit him. No reason the Saints couldnt actually utilize a running game

[UofAZ420]

AP 100 out of 100 times

[jray42]

So you want control of one back who's bound to break down in say 4-5 years over the value of 4 backs that are still going to give you value for the next 7-8 years. That's 21-24 years of back control between Ingram, Ivory and Cadet. Another good 2 years or so of Sproles (because he doesn't get the same wear and tear as AP or any other back), and another good 5 years of Pierre Thomas.

I don't get this reasoning.

So, just because you have Adrian Peterson, you aren't allowed to have any other Running Backs? Pierre Thomas and Cadet are a dime a dozen backs. Ingram has yet to prove anything at the NFL level, and Sproles is valuable as pass catching back, but he can't carry a full NFL workload.


You can't say: Hey! Your going to get 5 years out of AP, while I'm going to get 20 combined years out of my 4 Running backs combined! Well, yeah, if you add in the Minnesota backup running backs Gerhart and whomever else, that will also amount to nearly 20 years, correct?

And even after AP breaks down, it wouldn't be that hard to find another Pierre Thomas

[Ebbs]

Lol you are stuck in dellusional fan zone.

AP all day

Tell him sis!

[PocketKings]

Ap 1,000,000 out of 1,000,000.

It's not even close.

I laughed.

[neovenator250]

Sorry, T.O. I'll take Adrian Peterson as well. After his shelf life was over I'd have faith that the Saints could find other backs to pick it up. AP is going to end his career as one of the best ever to play RB.

[bosox3431]

[bosox3431]

This is like asking someone going into war if they would rather take 5 9mm or one 50 cal machine gun with them.

[Greedy22]

Lulz, this deserved a bump.

[j11430]

I understand what the OP is saying, that having a lot of depth is better than just one guy. But this is Adrian Peterson we're talking about. The guy is head and shoulders better than any running back in the league right now. You take him every time

[j11430]

Wow, didn't realize how old this is haha