I wouldnt disagree with this. I also dont think Starks is playing at the level he is capable of yet.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
James Starks (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Go deep
- Start date
smackdaddies
Footballguy
If Starks hangs 120 plus yards on Chicago, like Grant did last year, then I will start believing in Starks.
blackbird001
Footballguy
1. John Kuhn's 'role' this year arose from losing Grant. If Grant or Starks play the full season next year, it's just as likely his role goes back to what a fullbacks should be, despite what the fans prefer.2. Ryan Grant is due 5.25 million next year (a contract year). I can see bringing him back for depth, but not giving him a new deal will be the writing on the wall. I can also see them not bringing him back or Grant not wanting to come back without a new deal.3. Brandon Jackson is a free agent after the playoffs. Green Bay has not said one word to him about bringing him back.4. Grant had 307 touches in '09, 340 touches in '08, and roughly 220 in 10 games in '07. In today's NFL, getting 20 touches for a RB/game is about that you can expect. Doesn't matter whether Grant returns as a lame duck in 2011 or not. Starks will have the job next year or take the job next year.If the pack re-sign Grant, then Starks value takes a big hit. But that will be difficult to do given his lost year in '10.
Last edited by a moderator:
blackbird001
Footballguy
I like all three of those guys, but their productivity in the NFL forces me to choose Starks.
Last edited by a moderator:
blackbird001
Footballguy
Fair, I just enjoyed flipping the script on ya. Seriously, though...I do like all those guys, but you can't just use talent as a barometer when discussing the worth of these guys. Jonathan Stewart had a huge amount of talent coming into the league and at best he's been an unreliable spot starter or flex option since he's been in the league due mostly to being behind Deangelo. Starks is in a great place and has talent. Right now, all those other guys have is potential. Now, whomever goes to Miami? Gold and I like them better than Starks. Although, I thought the same last year of Matthews and he largely disappointed. I was miffed that I missed out on Tate and Hardesty in this year's rookie draft. Boom, now there are serious question marks to their value due to the rise of Hillis and Foster. Would I deal Starks for a top 4 pick? Yeah, probably due to pedigree, but if those three you discussed all went behind top ten studs, maybe I wouldn't.Fair, I just enjoyed flipping the script on ya. Seriously, though...I do like all those guys, but you can't just use talent as a barometer when discussing the worth of these guys. Jonathan Stewart had a huge amount of talent coming into the league and at best he's been an unreliable spot starter or flex option since he's been in the league due mostly to being behind Deangelo. Starks is in a great place and has talent. Right now, all those other guys have is potential. Now, whomever goes to Miami? Gold and I like them better than Starks. Although, I thought the same last year of Matthews and he largely disappointed. I was miffed that I missed out on Tate and Hardesty in this year's rookie draft. Boom, now there are serious question marks to their value due to the rise of Hillis and Foster. Would I deal Starks for a top 4 pick? Yeah, probably due to pedigree, but if those three you discussed all went behind top ten studs, maybe I wouldn't.
....I agree with everything you said...and thx for having a sense of humor 
Football Jones
Footballguy
Starks is right up there with any RB but Ingram in this draft. Absolutely no question.
Football Jones
Footballguy
BTW, since Starks is already in an ideal situation, & has already passed the eyeball test in NFL action, yeah, I'd take Starks over Leshoure or any of them (again, except Ingram).
No doubts.
No doubts.
The Real Hipster Doofus
Footballguy
I would take Starks over all but 2 running backs in this draft.
Illegal Pants Downfield
Footballguy
Those 2 being...?
The Real Hipster Doofus
Footballguy
Ingram and another guy. Too many of my leaguemates are here for me to disclose too much about what I think of this draft class.
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
Excellent context to put Starks low ypc into proper perspective.Also wasn't Starks starting his fourth NFL game coming off of a 100+ playoff performance in his third start?
None of the other starting RBs who played in the post-season were rookies making their fourth NFL start but they all performed about the same as Starks.
From the other day's NFLP.
Pack GM Thompson was thinking ahead to the post-season for a place where Starks could help out the team: Starks took every scout team rep when they were evaluating him
The Packers might not have gotten past the Eagles in the wildcard round if not for James Starks’ 123 rushing yards. The sixth round pick was no surprise. He was on all the scouts’ list after a productive junior season at Buffalo, and he was a combine invitee (who worked out impressively) even after missing his senior season with a shoulder injury.
You couldn’t have blamed the Packers if they had given up on Starks after he pulled a hamstring in minicamp, and it took “an extraordinarily long time” for him to come back. Starks was put on the physically unable to perform list, and the team took a look at him when he was eligible to practice. “During the three week evaluation period, he took every rep on the scout team,” Thompson said. “You could see the talent there, and we felt we might be able to use him down the stretch.”
If Thompson was planning on using Starks in the playoffs then he is high on the rookie.
One legit criticism is that Starks is older for a rookie RB, true but he didn't get used for nearly two years so he has low mileage.
The only way I don't see Starks as the starter in GB next season is if their is a lockout and unfortunately I think we're heading in that direction.
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
Another story on Starks with some insight from Pack RB coach Edgar Bennett.
= Informative and in-depth background information so lots snipped, go to link for full read =
Starks story leading up to the NFC Championship game
Friday, January 21, 2011
Starks has grown into role of leading ball carrier
===============================================================================
... No. 1 goal is ball security," running backs coach Edgar Bennett said. "That's what these games are about. It's fundamentals and execution."
If you noticed that Bennett said nothing about Starks making sure he sees the hole in front of him, hits it quickly and drives his legs forward it's because he already knows Starks will do all those things.
He can hardly contain himself when he talks about Starks' natural ability.
"Athleticism? Oh yeah, you can see it," Bennett said. "There's certain things you look for: quickness, change of direction, explosiveness. But you're also talking about a natural instinctiveness. He's got very good vision.
"What helps a runner is his footwork, his course, his pace, understanding the blocking scheme. The kid has a tremendous feel for that."
... Starks developed into a well-sculpted power runner. His unusual height and NBA-type body (6-foot-2, 218 pounds) belie the power in his hips and legs. As coach Mike McCarthy has pointed out many times, Starks constantly falls forward for extra yards.
... how he came to spend those Sundays with the Packers requires some astronomical study because of the way the planets aligned to make it happen.
First, Starks eschewed offers to bigger Division I schools and stayed close to home at the University of Buffalo, where former Packers director of player development Turner Gill had just become head coach. (Gill gave the Packers a glowing recommendation of him.)
Second, Starks ended up rooming at Buffalo with the son of Packers scout Alonzo Highsmith, a running back as well.
Third, Starks missed his senior year with a shoulder injury, and not too many people n the NFL went back and studied his sophomore and junior tapes. (The Packers already were clued in.)
... The athletic bloodlines in the Starks family are rich. Jonny Flynn, a star basketball player at Syracuse and a 2009 first-round draft choice of the Minnesota Timberwolves, is a first cousin.
Flynn and Starks were on a state championship basketball team together - Starks, with his extraordinarily long arms,
... "The kid is so long," said Allen Mogridge, Stark's first running backs coach at Buffalo and now an assistant with North Carolina. "And he's powerful. He's lean and tall. I think it blew people away to see someone like that.
"His freshman year, before games when guys were walking around the field, I remember looking at people's faces and they'd start at his feet and go to his head and be amazed someone could be so long."
Starks came from a poverty-stricken area in Niagara Falls, but through the guidance and hard work of his mother, he developed an even-mannered disposition,
... Said Mogridge: "For him to come as far as he has is a testament to his dedication and focus. He knows where he came from. He takes pride in how far he has come but would never say that. He's as humble of a dude as there is."
... When Starks broke out against Philadelphia, one of the most noticeable things about him was his smile every time he had a good run. He broke one long run in the game, but the Packers think he has the ability to do it more often.
Some of his teammates could see that potential early on.
"He's strong," injured running back Ryan Grant said. "Physically, he can get it done. I told him he's in the best position to do that because he doesn't have the bumps and bruises of the season. He should be strong and fast. He's put in the work. He's hot right now."
===============================================================================
I don't know how his story will eventually play-out down the road and I highly doubt if he will tear up the Bears Sunday but I like the raw potential and the back-story on this kid. Also the prolonged patience that the Pack had with Starks begins to make sense to me afer hearing how they had the inside scoop on Starks with the connections to the Buffalo program.
The big protracted wait made for a lot of stories and hype by the fantasy community but the kid has performed in big games so the wait paid off.
The patience that that the Pack displayed wasn't based of of blind faith, they knew what they had with Starks.
It looks to me like Green Bay placed a bet and has won so far with Starks and that they will are going all-in and are grooming Starks to take over as the starter for next year.
= Informative and in-depth background information so lots snipped, go to link for full read =
Starks story leading up to the NFC Championship game
Friday, January 21, 2011
Starks has grown into role of leading ball carrier
===============================================================================
... No. 1 goal is ball security," running backs coach Edgar Bennett said. "That's what these games are about. It's fundamentals and execution."
If you noticed that Bennett said nothing about Starks making sure he sees the hole in front of him, hits it quickly and drives his legs forward it's because he already knows Starks will do all those things.
He can hardly contain himself when he talks about Starks' natural ability.
"Athleticism? Oh yeah, you can see it," Bennett said. "There's certain things you look for: quickness, change of direction, explosiveness. But you're also talking about a natural instinctiveness. He's got very good vision.
"What helps a runner is his footwork, his course, his pace, understanding the blocking scheme. The kid has a tremendous feel for that."
... Starks developed into a well-sculpted power runner. His unusual height and NBA-type body (6-foot-2, 218 pounds) belie the power in his hips and legs. As coach Mike McCarthy has pointed out many times, Starks constantly falls forward for extra yards.
... how he came to spend those Sundays with the Packers requires some astronomical study because of the way the planets aligned to make it happen.
First, Starks eschewed offers to bigger Division I schools and stayed close to home at the University of Buffalo, where former Packers director of player development Turner Gill had just become head coach. (Gill gave the Packers a glowing recommendation of him.)
Second, Starks ended up rooming at Buffalo with the son of Packers scout Alonzo Highsmith, a running back as well.
Third, Starks missed his senior year with a shoulder injury, and not too many people n the NFL went back and studied his sophomore and junior tapes. (The Packers already were clued in.)
... The athletic bloodlines in the Starks family are rich. Jonny Flynn, a star basketball player at Syracuse and a 2009 first-round draft choice of the Minnesota Timberwolves, is a first cousin.
Flynn and Starks were on a state championship basketball team together - Starks, with his extraordinarily long arms,
... "The kid is so long," said Allen Mogridge, Stark's first running backs coach at Buffalo and now an assistant with North Carolina. "And he's powerful. He's lean and tall. I think it blew people away to see someone like that.
"His freshman year, before games when guys were walking around the field, I remember looking at people's faces and they'd start at his feet and go to his head and be amazed someone could be so long."
Starks came from a poverty-stricken area in Niagara Falls, but through the guidance and hard work of his mother, he developed an even-mannered disposition,
... Said Mogridge: "For him to come as far as he has is a testament to his dedication and focus. He knows where he came from. He takes pride in how far he has come but would never say that. He's as humble of a dude as there is."
... When Starks broke out against Philadelphia, one of the most noticeable things about him was his smile every time he had a good run. He broke one long run in the game, but the Packers think he has the ability to do it more often.
Some of his teammates could see that potential early on.
"He's strong," injured running back Ryan Grant said. "Physically, he can get it done. I told him he's in the best position to do that because he doesn't have the bumps and bruises of the season. He should be strong and fast. He's put in the work. He's hot right now."
===============================================================================
I don't know how his story will eventually play-out down the road and I highly doubt if he will tear up the Bears Sunday but I like the raw potential and the back-story on this kid. Also the prolonged patience that the Pack had with Starks begins to make sense to me afer hearing how they had the inside scoop on Starks with the connections to the Buffalo program.
The big protracted wait made for a lot of stories and hype by the fantasy community but the kid has performed in big games so the wait paid off.
The patience that that the Pack displayed wasn't based of of blind faith, they knew what they had with Starks.
It looks to me like Green Bay placed a bet and has won so far with Starks and that they will are going all-in and are grooming Starks to take over as the starter for next year.
Matt Waldman
Footballguy
(Feeling a little less optimistic about that bet perhaps?) :Cool as a cucumber:
BigJim®
Footballguy
Do you really expect his coaches to start him at RB when the playoffs begin, over RBs who got them there, if they are just blowing sunshine? Sometimes cynicism doesn't make a lot of sense.
I dont really care what coaches say, i care what they do. When you are given 25 carries in back to back playoff games after barely playing football over the last two years, the coaches like you.I will also say this now, before the game actually happens. I dont think any less of Starks because he only ran for 50 yards on 20 carries against the Bears. They are one of the best defenses in the league, at home in a playoff game. I would be slightly concerned if he didnt lead the team in touches though. I dont suspect that will happen however.
cr8f
Footballguy
He had 4 carries for 20 yards against the Bears. Against Atlanta he had 25 carries for 66. Is that what you meant?
cr8f
Footballguy
Brandon Jackson thinks next year it will be Grant and Starks, they'll let Jackson go. I don't see it because Jackson is good on 3rd down and blocking blitzers.
blackbird001
Footballguy
Nope, he meant what he said. It's a pre-emptive strike towards the nay-sayers when he puts up sub 4 yds/ carry this weekend.He had 4 carries for 20 yards against the Bears. Against Atlanta he had 25 carries for 66. Is that what you meant?
That's fine, but I was talking to the guys posting the quotes from his coaches. I'm not saying I don't like the guy, just that some coach-speak fluff is meaningless.
I dont think it means alot, but it does go on the positive side of the scale.That's fine, but I was talking to the guys posting the quotes from his coaches. I'm not saying I don't like the guy, just that some coach-speak fluff is meaningless.
I dont really care what coaches say, i care what they do. When you are given 25 carries in back to back playoff games after barely playing football over the last two years, the coaches like you.
I will also say this now, before the game actually happens. I dont think any less of Starks because he only ran for 50 yards on 20 carries against the Bears. They are one of the best defenses in the league, at home in a playoff game. I would be slightly concerned if he didnt lead the team in touches though. I dont suspect that will happen however.
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
Edgar Bennett on Brandon Jackson:
Gonna be a lot of disappointed people here when the wheels come off the hype train.
I really don't factor it in at all since it's almost always positive. In the rare event it's not, it's usually just a motivational ploy. Doesn't mean anything to me.
Last edited by a moderator:
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
not at all. He basically had 1 nice game, other that than he looks worse than average.WK TM OPP RSH YD TD TARG REC YD TD FPT 13 GB SF 18 73 0 0 0 0 0 7.3 [play-by-play] 14 GB DET 6 8 0 1 0 0 0 0.8 [play-by-play] 17 GB CHI 5 20 0 3 2 15 0 3.5 [play-by-play] 18 GB PHI 23 123 0 2 2 9 0 13.2 [play-by-play] 19 GB ATL 25 66 0 0 0 0 0 6.6 [play-by-play](Feeling a little less optimistic about that bet perhaps?) :Cool as a cucumber:
Last edited by a moderator:
Dont you mean his numbers are worse than average?not at all. He basically had 1 nice game, other that than he looks worse than average.WK TM OPP RSH YD TD TARG REC YD TD FPT(Feeling a little less optimistic about that bet perhaps?) :Cool as a cucumber:
13 GB SF 18 73 0 0 0 0 0 7.3 [play-by-play]
14 GB DET 6 8 0 1 0 0 0 0.8 [play-by-play]
17 GB CHI 5 20 0 3 2 15 0 3.5 [play-by-play]
18 GB PHI 23 123 0 2 2 9 0 13.2 [play-by-play]
19 GB ATL 25 66 0 0 0 0 0 6.6 [play-by-play]
Only one "nice" game? In his first game in two years against a tough 49ers run defense he carried the ball 18 times for 73 yards. Thats almost 1200 yards over a full season. Even if you only count his game against the Eagles as his only "nice" game, how many bad games did he have?
i expect the coaches to play the best players and those who give the team the best chance to win. all this playoff run shows is that the coaches feel he is better than brandon jackson and dmitri nance. anything else is conjecture.
BigJim®
Footballguy
You don't seem to be following if that is a response to me. humpback asked if people expect the staff to trash Starks in the press, as if its fluffy quips after summer scrimmages, and there is no reason to believe the staff really likes him as much as they claim. IMHO it's absurd to discard coaching quotes about a RB who has been given 23 and 25 carries in the playoffs, as a rookie, after barely playing all year. Obviously they like him. Did I conjecture beyond that?
Sorry, but coaches comments mean so little IMO- see wdcrob's post above re Jackson. It's absurd to read too much into them. Again, I'm not saying he's bad, but I don't think those comments mean much at all. The playing time, etc., that's a different argument.I agree with cvnpoka- giving him carries means that they like him more than their other options right now. It doesn't mean they like him more than their other options in the future. We don't know that yet.
This is true, but one of those other options is passing more. So the fact the Packers feed the ball to Starks instead of passing more like they did in the regular season is a pretty good sign for Starks. Do you think if the Bucs made it to the playoffs Blount would be getting 25 carries a game? Point being, just because a guy in the best RB option on a team doesnt mean that team needs to give him a heavy workload.
Again, I'm not saying I don't like the guy or he's no good. I only responded because giving a couple of quotes from his coaches doesn't mean anything IMO.But yes, I think Blount would be getting a lot of carries if that's what the games dictated. GB has had the lead early in both of their playoff games so far, so they ran the ball a lot. I agree that it's a pretty good sign for Starks, but I don't think it means he's the unquestioned starter next year, that's all. With his injury history and limited resume, I think it's highly unlikely they just hand him the job. He'll most likely be given an opportunity to win it, and he very well may, but there will be competition IMO. There really isn't any competition right now.
Boom Switch
Footballguy
He cant seem to score a TD, EVER!!
I dont think our thoughts differ that much. Im not suggesting Starks is a future HOF'er, but the way he is being used in the playoffs is a pretty good sign that the coaches really like/trust him. I dont think it is just because he is the best back they have. I used the Bucs as an example because it was clear the coaching staff didnt like/trust Blount very much even though he was the best back on the team.
massraider
Footballguy
EVER?Like, not for his ENTIRE career??He cant seem to score a TD, EVER!!
He cant seem to score a TD, EVER!!
Boom Switch
Footballguy
its about damn time!!EVER?Like, not for his ENTIRE career??He cant seem to score a TD, EVER!!
cr8f
Footballguy
Saw this on Rotoworld earlierThe Bears reportedly informed James Starks they would draft him last April only to switch gears at the last minute and select Central Michigan QB Dan LeFevour instead.Greg Gabriel, who was the Bears' director of college scouting at the time, now writes a column on rookies for the National Football Post. He called GM Jerry Angelo's decision to go with LeFevour "the most embarrassing moment I had experienced while scouting." The Bears lost LeFevour on waivers last September, and they may end up squaring off against Starks next week.
dickey moe
Fingerpicker
Half way there and he is doing it against a better Chicago defense than Grant did it against.
Steve Tasker
Footballguy
Steve Tasker
Footballguy
Football Jones
Footballguy
What's so exciting is it looks like Starks is a natural receiver (as well as being a good pass-blocker). They couldn't get him integrated into all the packages with the missed time, but that will be fixed this offseason. Starks is the type of RB who'll be on the field a lot. This kid is an outstanding feature back prospect.
Starks could be a FF monster with his athletic ability & talent working in Green Bay's offense. Sick, sick potential. And he's going to get better. I look for him to be one of the better FF RBs by 2012.
Starks could be a FF monster with his athletic ability & talent working in Green Bay's offense. Sick, sick potential. And he's going to get better. I look for him to be one of the better FF RBs by 2012.
I like Starks, but this is just a stupid level of hype.....3.4 ypc again. He looks like a good rb, but one of the best??? He better do a little better job producing before I give him that level of credit
