Due to an opponent dropping Adrian Peterson in my keeper league last year (I scooped him up and stashed him) and the fact that I took Jeremy Hill in the 4th I have too many great RB options this year. We can only keep 2 players and my 4 RBs are the 2 mentioned above, my long-time keeper Jamaal Charles, and new pickup last year CJ Anderson. So which 2 do you keep?

I don't know which 2 you keep, but I'll take your castaways!

Ouch. I'd keep Hill for sure and probably also Charles. Peterson has to wear down soon, right? And although Anderson is young and has some good upside, I can't justify keeping him over Charles or Peterson.

The only thing that doesn't make AP a no-brainer is that it is a keeper. I think he is going to explode this year.

(08-05-2015, 10:49 PM)bfine32 Wrote: The only thing that doesn't make AP a no-brainer is that it is a keeper. I think he is going to explode this year.

Agreed.  I think he'll have a huge year.  He's getting up there in age though, and he may not be playing well for very long.

Or you could just play for this year and keep him....

Short term, I'd keep him and Hill.  Long term, I'd keep Charles and Hill.

(08-05-2015, 10:39 PM)Johnny Cupcakes Wrote: Ouch.  I'd keep Hill for sure and probably also Charles.  Peterson has to wear down soon, right?  And although Anderson is young and has some good upside, I can't justify keeping him over Charles or Peterson.

Yeah, because Denver's starting RB's have scored at least 12 TD's every year now for umpteen years running.  Peterson with an entire year to rest, highly motivated after last years debacle, and playing for a larger contract and defensive minded coach with a young QB that will be dumping the ball down quite often...Then one must consider the possibility of Jerry working a deal somewhere down the road where Peterson could be running behind the Cowboys atrocious O-line. I would certainly cut those two for sure.

Tough one but I would go with Anderson because he is younger.

(08-06-2015, 02:04 AM)coachmcneil71 Wrote: Yeah, because Denver's starting RB's have scored at least 12 TD's every year now for umpteen years running.  Peterson with an entire year to rest, highly motivated after last years debacle, and playing for a larger contract and defensive minded coach with a young QB that will be dumping the ball down quite often...Then one must consider the possibility of Jerry working a deal somewhere down the road where Peterson could be running behind the Cowboys atrocious O-line. I would certainly cut those two for sure.

So you'd not keep Hill and Charles?

(08-06-2015, 11:41 AM)Johnny Cupcakes Wrote: So you'd not keep Hill and Charles?

Didn't say it was an easy decision. Just threw out a little more bubble gum to chew on. Charles probably not, for injury related reasons.
Hill is still young with a checkered past. Young folks often make rash decisions at a moments notice. Hill could find himself in Hue's doghouse at any time. Hill will probably see a 75-25 split in carries and Anderson may see about the same.
Peterson and Charles will get the rock 90% (Quick edit here after some thought; Knile Davis performed pretty well last season so Charles may see a 75-25% split this season as well.) of the time as long as they can stay healthy. Let us not forget what AP's numbers were just 2 years ago either. Whichever way he goes I would say Bfine's team is in good shape.

Do you guys not do the draft pick loss for your keepers?

Straight up with no penalties to keepers, I'd keep Peterson and Charles, reasoning is that both of them have already had multiple top 5 finishes, Hill and Anderson are not there yet.

Can you try to trade Hill and Anderson?

(08-06-2015, 03:32 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Straight up with no penalties to keepers, I'd keep Peterson and Charles, reasoning is that both of them have already had multiple top 5 finishes, Hill and Anderson are not there yet.

Can you try to trade Hill and Anderson?

Solid suggestion, I wouldn't want to trade either though...ha ha. I think I would trade Charles and go from there, but that's just me.

(08-06-2015, 03:32 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Straight up with no penalties to keepers, I'd keep Peterson and Charles, reasoning is that both of them have already had multiple top 5 finishes, Hill and Anderson are not there yet.

Can you try to trade Hill and Anderson?

No penalty for keepers. Everybody must keep 2 from the previous year. No trades. The issue I have with Charles is KC has already talking about reducing his load with Knile Davis.

(08-06-2015, 08:04 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No penalty for keepers. Everybody must keep 2 from the previous year. No trades. The issue I have with Charles is KC has already talking about reducing his load with Knile Davis.

1. Hill - Young and should put up great numbers
2a. Peterson - Got something to prove but is hitting 30. 
2b. Charles - Will get plenty of touches even with Davis, If I wasn't concerned with Davis vulturing TD's he would probably be ahead of Peterson.
4. CJ Anderson - Honestly not sold anyway but even if you are gotta think Manning at 40 might retire and that offense won't be the same. 

(08-06-2015, 08:04 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No penalty for keepers. Everybody must keep 2 from the previous year. No trades. The issue I have with Charles is KC has already talking about reducing his load with Knile Davis.

Don't fall for the Annual "Knile Davis will spell Jamaal Charles", every team says/does this, but when it's game time, the one that gives a team the best chance to win is the one that's on the field. 

A down year for JC was still 5 ypc. Kniles best so far has been 3.5 ypc. Go check Game Logs, when JC is healthy, KD rarely ever sees the field. JC is a better pass blocker and catcher out of the backfield (translation: he plays all 3 downs). With the addition of Jeremy Maclin, that could help JC have an even better year than he's had previously.

An 80% JC is still better than 90% of the backs in the league.

Charles and Peterson would be my suggestion. Anderson might be great ... but not as good as those two, imo.

The Bengals and Broncos have better RB committees than the Chiefs and Vikings, so Hill and Anderson won't get the same workload as Charles and Peterson.

(08-07-2015, 04:25 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Charles and Peterson would be my suggestion. Anderson might be great ... but not as good as those two, imo.

The Bengals and Broncos have better RB committees than the Chiefs and Vikings, so Hill and Anderson won't get the same workload as Charles and Peterson.

I don't know about that, Hill finished with more carries than Charles and he didn't even start the season as the top RB. Charles also only finished with 13 more receptions. 

I'd say Hill will get plenty of touches. I'm also not a huge fan of Anderson but he was only 27 touches less than Charles and he barely played the first 7 games of the season and was only 6 receptions behind Charles. 

I still think if your going Keeper and you have to factor in more than this year you go with Hill #1 then the rest are up for debate. He will get plenty of touches and should be in a stable offense the next couple years which is more than you can say for a guy like Anderson who will likely see Manning leaving sooner rather than later.

(08-07-2015, 07:16 PM)BobJones4980 Wrote: I don't know about that, Hill finished with more carries than Charles and he didn't even start the season as the top RB. Charles also only finished with 13 more receptions. 

I'd say Hill will get plenty of touches. I'm also not a huge fan of Anderson but he was only 27 touches less than Charles and he barely played the first 7 games of the season and was only 6 receptions behind Charles. 

I still think if your going Keeper and you have to factor in more than this year you go with Hill #1 then the rest are up for debate. He will get plenty of touches and should be in a stable offense the next couple years which is more than you can say for a guy like Anderson who will likely see Manning leaving sooner rather than later.

This. Hill is a clear #1. Charles and Peterson are on the downside of their careers and Anderson is too unknown. He will probably benefit from Manning this year but beyond, you just don't know. Flip a coin between the other 3. I'd probably lean towards Charles though.

I did a mock in Yahoo earlier today and the 1st and 2nd rated players are AP and Charles (Hill is 11) so that is who I'll most likely go with. Then I'll most likely offer a trade for Hill and get a extra in return.

(08-06-2015, 02:22 PM)coachmcneil71 Wrote: Didn't say it was an easy decision. Just threw out a little more bubble gum to chew on. Charles probably not, for injury related reasons.
Hill is still young with a checkered past. Young folks often make rash decisions at a moments notice. Hill could find himself in Hue's doghouse at any time. Hill will probably see a 75-25 split in carries and Anderson may see about the same.
Peterson and Charles will get the rock 90% (Quick edit here after some thought; Knile Davis performed pretty well last season so Charles may see a 75-25% split this season as well.) of the time as long as they can stay healthy. Let us not forget what AP's numbers were just 2 years ago either. Whichever way he goes I would say Bfine's team is in good shape.

Big fat nugget of wisdom right there in the middle for someone. Mic Drop!!