Brett Favre revenge: Would Packers be interested in Adrian Peterson?

Continue Reading @ ESPN 

ESPN wrote:

Lacy or Peterson on a one year deal? This comes down to more of a who I would want less scenario as I would prefer someone else to both of those guys.

If I had to, I would go with Eddie. At 32 Peterson appears done.

It is interesting that we keep getting connected to RB stories. Everyone knows we need one.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 

Both running backs seem to have injurie issues. Peterson is a bit more versatile as he can help in the pass game but has a fumbling issue

Originally Posted by: shield4life 

Both running backs seem to have injurie issues. Peterson is a bit more versatile as he can help in the pass game but has a fumbling issue, where Lacy secures the ball good & runs hard but is slow.

Peterson is faster which his speed in the backfield could help this offense. Lacy is younger!

Lacy is the safer pick if I had to go with the future of this team. If I'm going all in this season then I get 'em both if price is reasonable.

Originally Posted by: shield4life 

I'm not sure why you think Peterson is more helpful in the passing game. Peterson's high in receptions was 43 in his third year, Lacy's was 42 in his second year. Not counting each players very shortened seasons (Lacy 1 and Peterson 2) Lacy is averaging about 33 catches a year and Peterson 29 and I think Lacy's weight issues severely hampered his receiving efforts in 2015 where he only had 28 targets and 20 receptions.

I think Lacy has been at least as effective as Peterson in the passing game and I think Lacy, when healthy and fit would be a much bigger potential threat than Peterson ever was. I don't know if that was a limitation of APs talent or just indicative of the way he was used. IMO if you have a guy with his talent when he has the ball you use him in the passing game unless he just can't catch the ball.

If I had to pick one I'd take Lacy.

Originally Posted by: sschind