BeaverCleaver
Footballguy
You seem obsessed with Gopher StateWhy...your team has Peterson.Hoping Grant is good to go for us next year
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
sho nuff
Footballguy
Because I twice questioned how he switched from being a packer bashing Viking fan to now claiming the Packers?You seem obsessed with worrying about so much of what I post.Why is that?You seem obsessed with Gopher StateWhy...your team has Peterson.Hoping Grant is good to go for us next year
BeaverCleaver
Footballguy
Because you always take the bait.Because I twice questioned how he switched from being a packer bashing Viking fan to now claiming the Packers?You seem obsessed with worrying about so much of what I post.Why is that?You seem obsessed with Gopher StateWhy...your team has Peterson.Hoping Grant is good to go for us next year
sho nuff
Footballguy
Yawn...grow up.Quit your obsession and try actually discussing football a bit more.Because you always take the bait.Because I twice questioned how he switched from being a packer bashing Viking fan to now claiming the Packers?You seem obsessed with worrying about so much of what I post.Why is that?You seem obsessed with Gopher StateWhy...your team has Peterson.Hoping Grant is good to go for us next year
sho nuff
Footballguy
Did he? Did he say more than just wondering why everyone was writing him off...and that if Gado could do it...he could.I don't think he ever said he thought he would have the impact though...but I could be wrong.Phase of The Game did.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Somewhat...though, my non-football posts (like this one) are generally in response to the crap I take from a few here.
SieteCinco
Footballguy
Here's my question I'd like to see others thoughts on:
Who would you rather have for weeks 14-16, James Starks or Brandon Jackson?
I know its mostly a guess at this point, and somewhat of an AC question, but it could paint a clearer picture on how much value people see in Starks going forward this year.
I didn't get to watch the whole game live, but followed the plays on NFLdotCOM and saw a few plays on RedZon. The guy has some talent and seemed to almost always come away with positive yards.
Who would you rather have for weeks 14-16, James Starks or Brandon Jackson?
I know its mostly a guess at this point, and somewhat of an AC question, but it could paint a clearer picture on how much value people see in Starks going forward this year.
I didn't get to watch the whole game live, but followed the plays on NFLdotCOM and saw a few plays on RedZon. The guy has some talent and seemed to almost always come away with positive yards.
smackdaddies
Footballguy
neither.If I was really stuck, bj in a ppr league, Kuhns in a td only league, starks in a non ppr, but points for rushing yards leagueSieteCinco said:
Stinger Ray
Footballguy
at this argument.
Dude 1: I think ____ might happen.
Dude 2: Highly unlikely because of ____.
...two months pass...
Dude 1: It happened! You were so wrong! Let's argue!
It was an improbable comeback, and one game doesn't make it a success.
I love what I saw tho
He said it was improbable he'd have an impact, that Starks would go on IR and that if Starks did play it would be a few carries to ease him back.That doesn't seem right to me.
sho nuff
Footballguy
The improbable part was right.The other two you mentioned...were wrong.
Dude 1: I think ____ might happen.
Dude 2: Highly unlikely because of ____.
...two months pass...
Dude 1: It happened! You were so wrong! Let's argue!
It was an improbable comeback, and one game doesn't make it a success.
I love what I saw tho
sho nuff
Footballguy
Ok...time for some to put up or shut up.
No need for old threads being bumped in hind sight...put you money where your mouth/icons are.
What are your thoughts on Starks going forward?
Will he continue to be featured or play 2nd fiddle to Jackson?
My thoughts...as long as he stays healthy and doesn't put the ball on the ground, he will get the chance in games to be the 1st and 2nd down back. I don't think he will be a 20 carry a game guy...I think 15 per game would be about right (the 18 is an outlier IMO). Jackson back on 3rd downs to block and catch passes. Kuhn for short yardage and goalline.
While some saw those comments as a 3 headed monster...I don't think so as much. I think it becomes those more defined roles. With some changes here and there so defenses can't just key in and see Starks in there as a tip that they will run the ball.
No need for old threads being bumped in hind sight...put you money where your mouth/icons are.
What are your thoughts on Starks going forward?
Will he continue to be featured or play 2nd fiddle to Jackson?
My thoughts...as long as he stays healthy and doesn't put the ball on the ground, he will get the chance in games to be the 1st and 2nd down back. I don't think he will be a 20 carry a game guy...I think 15 per game would be about right (the 18 is an outlier IMO). Jackson back on 3rd downs to block and catch passes. Kuhn for short yardage and goalline.
While some saw those comments as a 3 headed monster...I don't think so as much. I think it becomes those more defined roles. With some changes here and there so defenses can't just key in and see Starks in there as a tip that they will run the ball.
LittlePhatty
Footballguy
Week 14 v.s DET - I think he's a decent RB2 play this week. 70 yards and a TD.Week 15 vs. NE - probably not a good game for Starks even if he plays well against Detroit. Rodgers will be throwing a lot.Week 16 vs. NYG - don't see this as being a good matchup for Starks either.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Don't overthink it.Matchups are one thing...but Bradshaw is just a better player on a better team who is running the ball much better.Note:...im sure if Starks has a good game and Bradshaw struggles, some will bump this to rub my face in it...fine...do what you wish...but its interesting that its often from those who never posted an opinion on something in the first place.
Last edited by a moderator:
nlgb1
Footballguy
start starks
sho nuff
Footballguy
Care to post any reasons why?
njherdfan
Footballguy
Question to the Packers homers out there regarding Starks' future:
Do you consider Ryan Grant to be worthy of a 5 million dollar salary next season/how highly do you think the coaching staff values Grant.
If Starks starts these last four games and does a reasonably good job of replacing Grant's numbers (15-20 carries, picks up lots of yards against Detroit, doesn't embarrass himself in blitz pickup etc.) would you feel comfortable having Starks start next year as part of a committee with Jackson and Kuhn or Nance, or do you think Grant (as a player, not fantasy player) is above the "decent" level and he is not easily replaceable?
Also, is money a factor with the Packers FO? Obviously this season is uncapped but if there is a cap next year, how are the Packers situated with it? I know Tramon Williams just got a new deal, but are there other players in line for a big pay-day that could affect the Packers decision making?
Do you consider Ryan Grant to be worthy of a 5 million dollar salary next season/how highly do you think the coaching staff values Grant.
If Starks starts these last four games and does a reasonably good job of replacing Grant's numbers (15-20 carries, picks up lots of yards against Detroit, doesn't embarrass himself in blitz pickup etc.) would you feel comfortable having Starks start next year as part of a committee with Jackson and Kuhn or Nance, or do you think Grant (as a player, not fantasy player) is above the "decent" level and he is not easily replaceable?
Also, is money a factor with the Packers FO? Obviously this season is uncapped but if there is a cap next year, how are the Packers situated with it? I know Tramon Williams just got a new deal, but are there other players in line for a big pay-day that could affect the Packers decision making?
Eric Stratton
Footballguy
I will not be suprised if Grant isn't with the Packers next year due to the salary and coming off the injury. I hope TT realizes the team needs some decent young depth at the RB spot and will draft a RB again.Question to the Packers homers out there regarding Starks' future
sho nuff
Footballguy
Im not sure on what their "cap" number would be next year.They got the big one locked up in Tramon.Cullen Jenkins I believe will be a free agent. He has been having a very good year when he is not missing time with the injury. That injury, plus having Jolly coming back, the young Neal back, and Raji and Pickett may have him gone.Hawk is not a free agent, but his contract has a pretty high bonus this next year I think. Based on how he has played I hope they rework the deal to be more friendly to them and extend him.James Jones I believe is a free agent next year. With Driver not always looking like his usual self, he could become more of a priority.Im just unsure how much they want to go into the season with Starks, Jackson, Nance, and a rookie going for the starting gig.I think this year has shown how important Grant was to them.Question to the Packers homers out there regarding Starks' future
nlgb1
Footballguy
sure. MIN run def is 4th. DET is 23rd. starks goes 18/73 in very first game action in 2 years. mccarthy will want to establish run game so it can be a perceived threat against later more dangerous opponents (NE, NYG, CHI) in order to open up the play action. sure bradshaw is always likely to break one, but benching backs against MIN has always been a good strategy in the past, and i dont think that has changed. also, i think starks ceiling against detroit is far higher, while their floors are very similar. oh, and bradshaw is currently #2 on depth chart
sho nuff
Footballguy
While I think in theory this is sound.Im not sure how much McCarthy cares in showing they can establish a run game. Not to the point of giving him more than 15 or so carries.I temper this because of trusting this logic the first time they played Detroit and started Brandon Jackson.I think its as likely McCarthy sees its in a dome and they matchup well spreading them out and the go pass heavy early on.I agree that the ceiling against Detroit is higher...but I think the floor for Starks is lower.As for the depth chart...he was #2 last week too. Then he had 25 carries to Jacobs 8.I think Starks is the more risk/reward play than Bradshaw.But good post.
Chance Starks plays even on passing downs. He might see the field alot more this week if he pass blocks well.
From Fantasy Insider
James Starks should continue being the majority carrier for the Green Bay Packers, with Brandon Jackson in on most third downs. Don't put too much stock in the coaches' spoken desire to use a three-man rotation with Starks, Jackson and Dimitri Nance or John Kuhn.
Last week, however, it was too obvious that nearly every time Starks was in the game, Green Bay was planning to run. They're working on his pass blocking and varying the play call in his offensive sets to avoid tipping their hand.
Read more: http://www.kffl.com/article.php/126308/39#ixzz17ojakeXC
From Fantasy Insider
James Starks should continue being the majority carrier for the Green Bay Packers, with Brandon Jackson in on most third downs. Don't put too much stock in the coaches' spoken desire to use a three-man rotation with Starks, Jackson and Dimitri Nance or John Kuhn.
Last week, however, it was too obvious that nearly every time Starks was in the game, Green Bay was planning to run. They're working on his pass blocking and varying the play call in his offensive sets to avoid tipping their hand.
Read more: http://www.kffl.com/article.php/126308/39#ixzz17ojakeXC
Last edited by a moderator:
bfarrell20
Footballguy
any word on Starks also doing kick returns this week?
Eviloutsider
Footballguy
I really hope not.
Man in the yellow hat
Footballguy
I'll say this. It's not simple to replace 1200+ yard rushers. This is not the type of injury that is going to rob Grant of his skills, and he's still a relatively young man. I also think it's pretty clear that he was just as much responsible for the running game success in Green Bay as anyone, despite the fact that folks continue to sell him short.I don't think his salary is out of line for next season, especially when it's pretty darn clear he's their best option at RB. I expect him to be back and start, with Jackson there for 3rd downs and Starks the 3.I will not be suprised if Grant isn't with the Packers next year due to the salary and coming off the injury. I hope TT realizes the team needs some decent young depth at the RB spot and will draft a RB again.Question to the Packers homers out there regarding Starks' future
bfarrell20
Footballguy
why do you hope not? im in a return yard fantasy league.. this little info is huge for me.
faulkfan
Footballguy
It's big news for those of us who don't get return yardage points as well because we don't want to see him get hurt doing something we won't get credit for.
In his first game action in two years Starks ran for 74 yards against a top 10 run defense. Sure its a small sample size, but that prorates to 1184 yards. Grant is an OK RB, but it think any decent RB that gets 250+ carries for thePackers could rush for 1200 yards. No, Brandon Jackson is not one of them.
Maybe im being biased because i was a huge Starks fan from his Buffalo days, and felt confident he was going to be a very good RB in the NFL. Either way, i think there is a reason the Packers gave him alot of carries last week, they want to see what they got not just for the playoffs, but for next season. Grants future as a starter is going to depend on Starks. If he doesnt play well, or gets hurt again, Grant will likely be back as the #1(although thats not even a sure thing, they might draft a RB).
Lash
Footballguy
ask the Dez owners and they will help you out with this answer
Maybe you're being biased??? You just prorated one game into an entire season....wow.
Starks has potential...but people need to settle down until the kid has a couple of GOOD games or great games.
In his one game that you prorated....he got half of his carries on one drive in the 4th quarter in a game which they dominated the TOP to the tune of 37:11. Think the SF defense was tired? On that drive Starks had just 3 runs of 4 yards or more(what a good RB should do on most plays). He also had 4 runs of 1 yard or less on that drive.
Lets see what happens the last month of the season before we think he can just pump out what Ryan Grant has done the past couple of seasons.
My point was isnt doesnt take a great back to run for 1200 yards.
Like i said, im not basing my liking of Starks on last weeks game, i watched almost every game he played in college, and thats why i feel good about saying he will be the Packers starting RB next season. If you read the original post in this thread, you will see that last weeks game had nothing to do with my optomism.
It does take a RB to stay healthy...something Starks hasn't been great at doing.I've watched Starks as well...which is why I posted he has potential. However, to get rid of Grant is the wrong move in GB.
I wont disagree with you here, but the same can be said about any RB.
Not top 10, but may be pretty close by the end of the season.
I had Starks in my dynasty and cut him in week 4 for a bye week kicker. Uggh. He is looking good in the wildcard game.
Steve Tasker
Footballguy
, self.He looks like he's added quite a bit of weight and ran between the tackles like a legit NFL RB tonight. That was really what he needed to work on the most....and he did it.
Mr.Pack
Footballguy
djmich
Footballguy
Are we really anointing Starks a top 10 back after one game?
No, i thought it was going to happen before any games from Starks.
nlgb1
Footballguy
if hes back with the team, he will get substantial carries. but i doubt he sticks around... hes due a roster bonus before next season and i doubt they want that money on the books when starks is younger and more skilled.
nlgb1
Footballguy
he would just be an expensive backup. i think he gets released prior to his bonus, and GB goes RB at some point in the upcoming draft. could be heavy skill player draft for the pack this year, i think they need to revamp at WR as well.
Boom Switch
Footballguy
Between Kuhn coming in on short yardage and BJax coming in on passing downs it will be a miracle if this guy ever scores a TD in the NFL...
nlgb1
Footballguy
kuhn never got GL carries until grant got hurt, and only started getting them because of BJax complete ineptness running in running situations. and BJax might be a FA, but id like to see him back. he seems to be a reliable blocker, and a great screen receiver, and wont be all that expensive. ideally, RBs next year will look like:RB1 starksRB2 mid/late rd draft pickRB3/FB1 kuhn3DRB BJax
Last edited by a moderator:
sho nuff
Footballguy
After this year, I hope they don't get rid of Grant. (and in no way is that depth chart above ideal)
And I don't think he is automatically the backup unless Starks keeps up this run.
If he goes for 50 yards at 4ypc next week, do you all really think they are kicking Grant to the curb?
Do you all forget what Grant has done the last 2 seasons with this weak Oline?
Id like to see it Grant/Starks in a nice 1-2 punch. Jackson kept for 3rd downs and depth there.
Get rid of Quinn Johnson and only keep Hall and Kuhn at FB.
I don't see the need for them to go RB early in the draft either. Maybe a later pick (3rd or 4th at the very highest) on a back with some speed (maybe even a guy who can be used in the return game).
And I don't think he is automatically the backup unless Starks keeps up this run.
If he goes for 50 yards at 4ypc next week, do you all really think they are kicking Grant to the curb?
Do you all forget what Grant has done the last 2 seasons with this weak Oline?
Id like to see it Grant/Starks in a nice 1-2 punch. Jackson kept for 3rd downs and depth there.
Get rid of Quinn Johnson and only keep Hall and Kuhn at FB.
I don't see the need for them to go RB early in the draft either. Maybe a later pick (3rd or 4th at the very highest) on a back with some speed (maybe even a guy who can be used in the return game).
Last edited by a moderator:
Cenobite
Footballguy
No, reference was made to a top 10 dynasty back not re-draft.Are we really anointing Starks a top 10 back after one game?
Similar threads
