Fout and Derrick raced three times that year. Fout went 2-1 (won both the Footlocker races, but lost the mid-season Culver Invitational). So it is hard to say Derrick was on another level... and I disagree that Derrick improved by leaps and bounds going into track, because I think his NTN race was worth a 14:00-14:05 on the track (and funny you say that he improved by leaps and bounds between cross and track, since you also noted earlier that Derrick was "injured" (ill) during the spring and that's why he didn't run amazing times beyond his 5k). And again, Fout has never been healthy during track, so it's hard to put his track times into perspective - and some kids are just better in cross anyways. What we can look at is what he did in cross country, which still stacks up pretty well today.
As for Puskedra vs. Saarel, which is better? Running so hard so early that you die off before the end of the race, or running so saavy that you're closing much faster than you start? I'd say neither is ideal, but you seem to be implying that one means the times could have been even better while the other doesn't. If you really believe that, maybe you can go run a 5k and open up in 2:00 for the first half mile and see how well you do. Then try opening up in 2:40 and see how well you do.
As for being an All-Timer, are you referring to Finnerty or Puskedra? Since I never said that specifically for Puskedra, though now that you bring it up I would say he was an All-Timer in cross - just not based off what he did at Footlocker, but what he ran during the season. He's certainly an All-Timer when talking just about the Western US - how many have been better in cross? German, arguably, but I'd disagree (Puskedra's race at Firman was better, IMO, than German's at CA State or FLN)... Matt Davis perhaps, based off what he ran on the old WA State course, and likewise Adam Goucher possibly based off of FLN... but that's the only ones I can think of that would be in the same discussion so far (Hardy and Wilmot might join that discussion next year). I'd take Puskedra over Acosta or Hall or Matusak or Cormier or Kiptoo or Rupp or Dobson or Rohantinsky. Not sure about Davis - times on Balboa back then were much faster than they have been, despite runners having better marks on other courses, so I have to think the course was a bit different back then (either that or runners simply knew how to run the course for better times). And how many further east were better than Puskedra in cross? Ritz and Verzbicas and Cheserek and Fout and possibly Derrick and possibly Lowe, probably Solinsky and possibly Sage and Virgin... possibly Rosa or McDougal. But that's about it. Not a long list at all, whether talking about Western kids or national kids. When it came to track, sure, Puskedra wasn't an All-Timer. I'd agree with that completely. But as you've seen, he is and always was more of a 10k/HM runner than a miler or 2 miler.
As for how many years Puskedra would have had a shot at a national title, I'd say he had a shot almost every year. Ritz in 2000, Solinsky in 2002, Fout in 2007, Verzbicas in 2010 and Cheserek in 2011 (and possibly 2012?) were the only ones that I'd say were better by any notable measure in cross than Puskedra. That's only five or six in the last 19 years, and most of the last half of that time have been filled with some of the best in US history.
Look at it this way:
Chris Derrick / Ed Cheserek
German Fernandez / Bernie Montoya
Luke Puskedra / Ben Saarel
Colby Lowe / Sean McGorty
Michael Fout / Jake Leingang
Which five were better?
Fout > Leingang in cross, and can't really count track since Fout didn't run (and both are/were better in cross anyways).
Lowe ~ McGorty pretty close, I'd give a VERY slight edge to Lowe - his NTN > McGorty's FLN, track times a slight edge to Lowe (8:47.07y vs. 8:46.07m)
Puskedra > Saarel in both cross and track to date, but it's pretty close.
Fernandez > Montoya in both cross and track to date (8:34.40y and 4:00.29 versus 4:01.32y and 8:47.07 - Montoya's got a slight edge in the mile but Fernandez a huge edge in the deuce)
Derrick vs. Cheserek ... I'd lean towards Cheserek.
Beyond those five, yes this year is deeper. But at the top? The class of 2008 was stronger - to date.
As for other years that were as good?
2001 - yes. Ritz + Webb + Hall is a stronger front trio, and is enough to put them up there.
2004 - Rupp, Withrow, Kiptoo, McDougal... and who? True/Deak/Wagner/Eagon? I think that's pretty close to 2008 and 2013, only difference is Rupp (in track - great 5k, and has gone on to get much better).
2007 - Forys, Centro, Heath, Tebo, Jager, Borchers... solid group, and Centro and to an extent Jager have gone on to do well, but other than that? I don't think that class was any better than 2008 or 2013. 2008 wasn't as strong in track, but was much stronger in cross. 2013 is a bit more balanced of a class, and I don't see any good argument for how 2007 is better than 2013.
So, to rank the top 5 classes of the last 20 years?
1. 2001
2. 2008
3. 2013 - might pass up 2008 by the end of the year, but hasn't IMO shown to be better yet
4. 2004
5. 2007
... I think the one thing that gives the class of 2013 a good argument over 2008 is Arroyo, particularly if you don't include Greer (he was at his best in 2008, graduated in 2009 - are we talking about ONLY kids that graduated that year, or the field of competitors that year?).
With Arroyo but not Greer included, you have a better 800m stud in 2013 but a deeper field in 2008; you have a better miler (and second miler) in 2013 and deeper field in 2013; you have a better 2 miler but a deeper field in 2013; you have a better 5k runner in 2008 but deeper field in 2013; you have a better XC runner in 2013 IF you assume Cheserek is as good as he was in 2012, and a stronger field through five in 2008, but a stronger field beyond that in 2013.
Obviously, the two classes are close IMO. But cross country puts the class of 2007-2008 over the class of 2012-2013 for me, until 2013 is shows to be much stronger in track.