Packers re-sign James Starks

[Jerellh528]

I scoffed at having a yet-to-be determined RB and Crockett as the backups to Lacy. That is not the same as scoffing at any alternative...although you decided it as so.

Proven means that we know what we have in those players. You interpreted me saying "proven" as meaning something else. I think that having a drafted rookie or raw talent at any position is rolling the dice. We know Barrington's limitations in coverage, we know that Thomas can cover but little else, and Palmer is pedestrian. A drafted rookie could be even worse. That's rolling the dice.

IMO you draft players to develop behind the starters that you already have on the roster, but hopefully not to be the primary backup their first season.

Okay, I've been a big tt supporter, but he seems a bit off this offseason. I'm really worried, I hope he has a plan.
More now because we have guion as our current starting nt and a suspended Pennel behind him, also our ilbs lack talent. That opens up the entire middle of our defense and now every deficiency is magnified, not only do our ilbs now have to cover better, they've got to work harder to stop the run without a proven block eater there.

I'm putting my faith in tt, but I would love if something happens, knighton on a 1 year deal with a rookie behind him. Shoot, I would've rather had Freeman on his contract and a backup rookie rb, over barrington and Starks.

Most don't like free agency because of the overpays, but it seems like tt is doing just that this offseason, but since we have seen them in green and gold, were fine with it.

I'm probably just being a worry wart, but we've never had this many holes all at once in one offseason that I can remember, and it feels like nothing is being done about it

 

[El Guapo]

If you view Starks as a backup player, yes, but he has been very much a big part of this offense since 2010. I wouldn't even call him situational but more change of pace. Maybe we could luck into another Jonathan Franklin (minus the neck) but that's a gamble if Lacy comes back fat and unable to string together successive runs without needing oxygen.

So what if TT has already decided that he doesn't see the right fit at ILB in the open market? We can agree or not agree with that assessment, but he might have already shifted those potential dollars to other positions thinking that if he can't get so-and-so for $xxxx at ILB, he'll spend it at K, RB, etc.

 

[adambr2]

Proven means that we know what we have in those players. You interpreted me saying "proven" as meaning something else. I think that having a drafted rookie or raw talent at any position is rolling the dice. We know Barrington's limitations in coverage, we know that Thomas can cover but little else, and Palmer is pedestrian. A drafted rookie could be even worse. That's rolling the dice.

IMO you draft players to develop behind the starters that you already have on the roster, but hopefully not to be the primary backup their first season.

I really disagree with this a lot. Proven crap is better than an unknown rookie, just because that unknown rookie *could* be worse?

Not saying any of the guys you listed are crap, but in most cases, you know you've got a mediocre guy with little upside.

I couldn't even begin to name all the guys in the TT era who were counted on to be primary backups or even starters as rookies.

 

[El Guapo]

Most don't like free agency because of the overpays, but it seems like tt is doing just that this offseason, but since we have seen them in green and gold, were fine with it.

A good point. One thing that I think the masses overlook as that free agency overpayment works both ways. TT shies away from paying big for the FAs. However, when he tries to keep his players he still is affected by market prices and demand.

Overpaying to all of us is based on past or current contract knowledge, not what teams are actively using to lure current FAs.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Okay, I've been a big tt supporter, but he seems a bit off this offseason. I'm really worried, I hope he has a plan.
More now because we have guion as our current starting nt and a suspended Pennel behind him, also our ilbs lack talent. That opens up the entire middle of our defense and now every deficiency is magnified, not only do our ilbs now have to cover better, they've got to work harder to stop the run without a proven block eater there.

I fully expect the Packers to draft a defensive lineman within the first three rounds. It seems to be a very talented draft class at the position.

 

[El Guapo]

I really disagree with this a lot. Proven crap is better than an unknown rookie, just because that unknown rookie *could* be worse?

Not saying any of the guys you listed are crap, but in most cases, you know you've got a mediocre guy with little upside.

I couldn't even begin to name all the guys in the TT era who were counted on to be primary backups or even starters as rookies.

You're missing the point and confusing topics. Jerell was talking about rolling the dice at RB being the same as our ILB situation. I disagree. We have players there that are known quantities - that was my point. Not that we should stick with them.

I absolutely want TT to draft an ILB next month and would have also liked a Tier 2 FA ILB. We all want the position upgraded. Don't make this isn't an argument. It's not

 

[Vrill]

Rolling with Ryan and Barrington as starters is as dire as it gets IMO. It's the equivalent of going into 2013 with MD Jennings and Jerron McMillian at safety.

Without seeing them play together on the field at same time? Talk about shooting first and asking questions later.

 

[adambr2]

Without seeing them play together on the field at same time? Talk about shooting first and asking questions later.

Are they magically going to morph into better players than they are by being on the field at the same time? If not, I'd like at least one better ILB. It's kind of too late for that if you're going to say, 'Well, we'll see if you guys are good enough first. ' Not going to find an upgrade during the season.

Some people are remembering Sam Barrington in a way more favorable light than they should. He's a below average run defender and marginally decent in pass coverage. His ceiling is an average ILB. This is all IF he comes back 100%. He's a guy you look to upgrade on D.

It's also puzzling that the same people here that are too afraid to allow a 4th round RB to be a backup RB to Lacy are totally fine with letting a second year 4th round ILB who has had a cup of coffee at the NFL level take the reins on defense and start.

 

[Vrill]

Are they magically going to morph into better players than they are by being on the field at the same time? If not, I'd like at least one better ILB. It's kind of too late for that if you're going to say, 'Well, we'll see if you guys are good enough first. ' Not going to find an upgrade during the season.

Some people are remembering Sam Barrington in a way more favorable light than they should. He's a below average run defender and marginally decent in pass coverage. His ceiling is an average ILB. This is all IF he comes back 100%. He's a guy you look to upgrade on D.

It's also puzzling that the same people here that are too afraid to allow a 4th round RB to be a backup RB to Lacy are totally fine with letting a second year 4th round ILB who has had a cup of coffee at the NFL level take the reins on defense and start.

So players don't progress and get better throughout their career? You're basing your opinions around a small sample of body of work.

It's also puzzling that the same people here that are too afraid to allow a 4th round RB to be a backup RB to Lacy are totally fine with letting a second year 4th round ILB who has had a cup of coffee at the NFL level take the reins on defense and start.

You're acting like the fans re-signed Starks. Like our opinion really matters or something. TT thought well enough to re-sign Starks to the contract in which he did.

You're on a parade trying to persuade peoples opinions to match your own. Well, we all have opinions as fans and none of them are right or wrong (unless you're just the argumentative type) - In the end, this is all TT/MM and what THEY think. Not what we think. All we have are opinions that mean very little.

 

[El Guapo]

Nick Barnett wasn't looking good in coverage at the end of his rookie season when the 4th & 26th debacle occurred, but he improved. It is possible.

My draft perspective remains the same. Draft a DL, ILB, and TE all in the first three rounds if possible. They all need new blood.

 

[adambr2]

So players don't progress and get better throughout their career? You're basing your opinions around a small sample of body of work.



You're acting like the fans re-signed Starks. Like our opinion really matters or something. TT thought well enough to re-sign Starks to the contract in which he did.

You're on a parade trying to persuade peoples opinions to match your own. Well, we all have opinions as fans and none of them are right or wrong (unless you're just the argumentative type) - In the end, this is all TT/MM and what THEY think. Not what we think.

So Ryan and Barrington are okay as ILB starters because they could develop. Can't go with a rookie backup RB because. ..why exactly?



Literally every person who posts an opinion is trying to get the other poster's opinion to match their own. You act like you're not doing the same exact thing and have many times.

I don't need you to share my opinion, though I think it's kind of pointless to even discuss things if we're just going to say 'Well, our opinions don't matter anyway, just TT and MM.'

You're obviously welcome to your opinion same as anyone else. In the first place I was just pointing out how silly it is for someone who had Stark's value pegged at 1M this morning to be totally fine with paying him triple that literally later the same day.

 

[Vrill]

You're obviously welcome to your opinion same as anyone else. In the first place I was just pointing out how silly it is for someone who had Stark's value pegged at 1M this morning to be totally fine with paying him triple that literally later the same day.

Because I trust the process of my team. It wasn't massively overpaying, so I'm not too mad about it. Do I wish it were cheaper? Sure, but its not worth bleating over from the mountain tops in my opinion. Its already done, so its not like TT is going to do a Mae-culpa and go back and fix it. So no reason getting up in arms over something you cannot control personally.

I'm just glad to have Starks back from a continuity standpoint.

 

[adambr2]

Because I trust the process of my team. It wasn't massively overpaying, so I'm not too mad about it. Do I wish it were cheaper? Sure, but its not worth bleating over from the mountain tops in my opinion. Its already done, so its not like TT is going to do a Mae-culpa and go back and fix it. So no reason getting up in arms over something you cannot control personally.

I'm just glad to have Starks back from a continuity standpoint.

Continuity is all fine and good. We overrate and overpay for it, IMO.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I'll say only this.

For those who did not get what I've been talking about for the past year with respect to cap space going into 2017 free agency, the picture should be getting clearer now with the available carryover getting chopped in just signing the kicker and a few bench and rotational players.

And don't be surprised if a vet free agent signing or two come about after the draft.

 

[longtimefan]

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

James Starks Packers deal 6M, 1.5M bonus, salaries 1.1M, 2.6M, 18,750 per game annual active bonus, 600K Pro Bowl rush yards incentive ann.

 

[PackerDNA]

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

James Starks Packers deal 6M, 1.5M bonus, salaries 1.1M, 2.6M, 18,750 per game annual active bonus, 600K Pro Bowl rush yards incentive ann.

So we're talking a cap hit this year of at least $1.85M, as much as $2.75M.

 

[longtimefan]

So we're talking a cap hit this year of at least $1.85M, as much as $2.75M.

Even if it 2.75 and Forte is 4, that's not to horrible IMO

 

[PackerDNA]

Even if it 2.75 and Forte is 4, that's not to horrible IMO

Agreed. Hey , that's the market, and they get back a known quantity. I also agree that with the numbers you quoted. I'd prefer Starks over Forte.

 

[longtimefan]

There are no facts that can make this a good deal. Of course it's less than a 3M cap hit the first year. That's standard with 90% of NFL contracts to be loaded more heavily in the back. It's still going to cost us 6M in cash and cap if we are going to keep him for 2 years, and if we don't there will be some dead cap next year.

If less than 1.9 for 1st year, is that to much?

 

[HardRightEdge]

As hard as this may be to believe, Starks led all Packers in yards from scrimmage in 2015 with 993, bettering Lacy's 946, Jones' 890 and Cobb's 879.

For those carping about the deal, you're looking at a back who put up nearly 1,000 yards on fewer than 200 touches who can run some, catch some and block some. And for all the time he's missed and played backup, both in college and the pros, the mileage on his wheels are that of a younger player.

With the questions regarding Lacy's conditioning, the #2 may be seeing a fair amount of duty once again. As to the "who else ya got?" issue, you're talking about a draftee, and nobody wants to spend a high pick on a back given the other needs.

Given Starks 2015 season, and the "who else ya got" criterion, the pay is not out of line.

 

[adambr2]

If less than 1.9 for 1st year, is that to much?

The only way it can be less than 1.9 is literally if he ends up on IR and doesn't play a single game in which case it would definitely be too much.

 

[sschind]

Would you have rather paid Forte 4-5m a year? Because that is what he got.

I think people are prisoners of the moment and having the "Grass is Greener" syndrome, honestly.

That's what Forte got but that doesn't mean we could have gotten him for that. I'm sure the fact that he will still be the guy with the Jets was more attractive than playing second fiddle to Lacy which is what he would do if Lacy comes back like his first two years. I know he said a chance for a ring was important but the Jets have a chance to win it all in the next couple of seasons. Ok, back to reality.

I like starks, but I think forte is worth the extra $2m. Unfortunately he didnt want to come to Green Bay because Lacy is #1.

Agreed

So once again I ask, what would you guys have done differently in this situation?

Let's start with the assumption that Starks was not available for $1M. I doubt that this was the market and Russ Ball just decided to give Starks an extra $2M just for fun. Knowing this, it sounds like most people here would have preferred to let Starks walk for $3M. Fine. So the plan was then to go into 2016 with Lacy starting, a rookie RB from the middle rounds, and Crockett on the roster? To me that sounds equally ridiculous. Lacy may or not be in shape. In shape or not, we are all realizing that he may have a motivation issue - ala BJ Raji.

So you've let Starks walk because $3M is too much, what is your GM move now?

Foster or one of the other FA RBS avaiable. Not saying they are good options but it wasn't necessarily Starks or a rookie.

I agree. The alternative would be to roll the dice and hope we don't end up with poor backup RB play. As we all know, rookies are not a for sure bet. Especially when you draft one in the middle/late rounds.

Did TT overpay for Starks? Probably. But in the NFL realm, is 2 million really that much in the grand scheme of things? We are talking about the difference between 1 mil and 3 mil. Or veteran minimum and 3 mil. To us, yeah that is a lot of money. But in the NFL realm, is it? I don't think so. So while Starks may have been overpaid, I don't think its worthy of throwing your arms into the air and bleating to the world that its some kind of end times scenario and how TT needs to be fired for it and this and that. If Starks was paid 5 mil a year, yeah, that would be crazy. But lets face it, Starks plays a lot in our system. In a way, Lacy and Starks are 1a and 1b.

Don't look at it as 3 million for a backup running back look at it as 4 million for a starting RB if Lacy and Starks split carries

As hard as this may be to believe, Starks led all Packers in yards from scrimmage in 2015 with 993, bettering Lacy's 946, Jones' 890 and Cobb's 879.

For those carping about the deal, you're looking at a back who put up nearly 1,000 yards on fewer than 200 touches who can run some, catch some and block some. And for all the time he's missed and played backup, both in college and the pros, the mileage on his wheels are that of a younger player.

With the questions regarding Lacy's conditioning, the #2 may be seeing a fair amount of duty once again. As to the "who else ya got?" issue, you're talking about a draftee, and nobody wants to spend a high pick on a back given the other needs.

Given Starks 2015 season, and the "who else ya got" criterion, the pay is not out of line.

That made me sad to read that HRE it really did. 993 yards from scrimmage was your leader. We're talking gory years stats here. Well not quite but still not good.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

James Starks Packers deal 6M, 1.5M bonus, salaries 1.1M, 2.6M, 18,750 per game annual active bonus, 600K Pro Bowl rush yards incentive ann.

Well, we can forget the pro bowl bonus, he ain't getting that and if he does it goes against next years cap (unlikely to be earned bonus is not capped this year right) and will probably have been worth it. looks like roughly a 2.15 million cap hit for this year. The per game active bonus will count against this years cap because he was active every game last year (likely to be earned) if he is not we will receive a credit for those games he is not active.

750,000 in dead money if we cut him after this year. Not bad IMO

 

[Sky King]

We're gettin the band back together!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Packerlover]

Very happy to see us sign Starks. Except for the fumbles, he had a good year and we keep another player that rodgers has chemistry with.. Top 5 offense this coming season

 

[Patriotplayer90]

As hard as this may be to believe, Starks led all Packers in yards from scrimmage in 2015 with 993, bettering Lacy's 946, Jones' 890 and Cobb's 879.

For those carping about the deal, you're looking at a back who put up nearly 1,000 yards on fewer than 200 touches who can run some, catch some and block some. And for all the time he's missed and played backup, both in college and the pros, the mileage on his wheels are that of a younger player.

With the questions regarding Lacy's conditioning, the #2 may be seeing a fair amount of duty once again. As to the "who else ya got?" issue, you're talking about a draftee, and nobody wants to spend a high pick on a back given the other needs.

Given Starks 2015 season, and the "who else ya got" criterion, the pay is not out of line.

That's just a testament to how pathetic the offensive talent is outside of Nelson and Rodgers. Not a single other playoff team had a guy with under 1,000 yards from scrimmage, and our 2nd string RB was the leader in that department.