James Starks

[Kareighuis]

For those who missed it:

James Starks-RB- Packers Nov. 9 - 5:14 pm et

Packers activated RB James Starks (hamstring) from the PUP list.

Beat writer Rob Demovsky is "stunned" by the decision. Starks hasn't played football in two years, so he won't be incorporated into the offense any time soon. The Packers likely decided that they needed the depth at tailback over the long haul in case Brandon Jackson sustains a season-ending injury.

I disagree with the analysis. The important thing is, though, that he was activated.

[shawngee03]

For those who missed it:

James Starks-RB- Packers Nov. 9 - 5:14 pm et

Packers activated RB James Starks (hamstring) from the PUP list.

Beat writer Rob Demovsky is "stunned" by the decision. Starks hasn't played football in two years, so he won't be incorporated into the offense any time soon. The Packers likely decided that they needed the depth at tailback over the long haul in case Brandon Jackson sustains a season-ending injury.

I disagree with the analysis. The important thing is, though, that he was activated.

so what is your analysis? does he gets carries soon?

[Kareighuis]

For those who missed it:

James Starks-RB- Packers Nov. 9 - 5:14 pm et

Packers activated RB James Starks (hamstring) from the PUP list.

Beat writer Rob Demovsky is "stunned" by the decision. Starks hasn't played football in two years, so he won't be incorporated into the offense any time soon. The Packers likely decided that they needed the depth at tailback over the long haul in case Brandon Jackson sustains a season-ending injury.

I disagree with the analysis. The important thing is, though, that he was activated.

so what is your analysis? does he gets carries soon?

I don't like the phrase "he won't be incorporated into the offense any time soon"- is soon this week or so, or this year? What does "incorporate" mean? I don't think he'll be immediately installed as the primary back, but I think there's greater opportunity than this analysis suggests. The blurb makes it sound like he was only brought in to be a #3 back, but I think there will be opportunities to get at least some carries. How he performs (relative to the other backs) will dictate workload distribution. Given that management has a high opinion of him and the backfield lacks a bellcow, he has a chance to get a significant share of the carries over the next few weeks. At this stage of the season, all your looking for (heck, all you can really find) is that chance.

Alternately, Rob Demovsky theorizes that the reason he was activated was, "to allow Starks to practice."

I'm much more interested in him in my keeper and dynasty leagues, though. I'm far from certain he'll be useful this season- but I believe there is a chance.

[dgan]

Rob Demovsky theorizes that the reason he was activated was, "to allow Starks to practice."

Living in Wisconsin, this is what I'm hearing. Basically, they had to put him on IR or activate him. If he's on IR, he is not allowed to practice fully. They don't have anyone right now aside from Jackson that resembles a "normal" NFL RB, so they can't even run a real scout team out there for the defense to look at in practice.

By activating him, they allow him to start being part of the team now rather than waiting until offseason camps next year. Plus, they could use the body at that position. But he is not going to be put in a situation where he is asked to protect Aaron Rodgers. (See Gronkowski...) I think Nance has a chance to get a handful of touches late in the year here, but barring further injury in the backfield (God forbid!), Starks will see very little, if any, action this year. He probably won't even be active for game days. I think McCarthy would go empty backfield permanently before trusting a player this inexperienced.

[tom22406]

With his breakdown game during the playoffs where do you see him fitting into your dynasty RB rankings moving forward?

I made a huge reach of him late 1st in one of my dynasty rookie drafts and it is finally starting to pay off so what is your plan moving forward with him now?

Do the Pack bring back Grant and have a nice 1-2 combo?
Do they let Jackson walk?


Thoughts?

[Wenchtamer]

I think you mean "breakout" game. Last week certainly made him more interesting.

That said, I still see the Packers drafting an RB this year. Grant has not been that spectacular and Starks is injury prone. If I owned Starks I would be looking to sell him in the offseason while his value is piqued because I think it's a longshot that he's ever the feature back for any length of time without getting hurt. He's a tall guy with a high pad level and that's a recipe for injury.

[biju]

With his breakdown game during the playoffs where do you see him fitting into your dynasty RB rankings moving forward?

I made a huge reach of him late 1st in one of my dynasty rookie drafts and it is finally starting to pay off so what is your plan moving forward with him now?

Do the Pack bring back Grant and have a nice 1-2 combo?
Do they let Jackson walk?

Thoughts?

I'm not sure what to think yet. I'm sure the Packers are not interested in having Brandon Jackson be their long term (or any term after 2010) answer back there. I'm not so sure you bring back Grant either to be honest since he's slated to be an FA this offseason and RBs are becoming more and more a committee situation where you want 2 or 3 cheap options and spend on the O-line instead.

I can also see the Packers drafting someone late again in the draft and try to match him up with Starks. But for right now, I think he's at least got a good shot at becoming an early down back, which probably translates into a RB2 or RB3 at the very least. And if he can pick up blitzes and start catching balls, look out.

Of course with dynasty you have to look at what someone is willing to deal to acquire him and he might be a good sell right now.

[tom22406]

I feel that in this system he could be a top 10 RB with his skill set.They haven't really used him much in the passing game and that was one of his strengths at UB.His vlocking needs work which is why he is not trusted on 3rd down but with some coaching and hard work he could also help in that role.

People tend to forget how productive he was before his injury at UB and was being considered as a late 1st to early 2nd round talent.The biggest key for his success next year is how they handle Grant and even if he returns is suspect Starks will still have a good sized role.

The thing is I was blasted for taking a chance on him in the late 1st of my rookie draft and looking back at last years class it seems as though over half of the 1st round got either very little production to no production and most of them are still looking like that their roles are up in the air.Ben Tate and Montario Hardesty are great examples,both are stuck behind very productive RB's and are coming off major injuries,couple that with suspect talent levels and their stay might be a short one in the league.

[Dr. Octopus]

The thing is I was blasted for taking a chance on him in the late 1st of my rookie draft and looking back at last years class it seems as though over half of the 1st round got either very little production to no production and most of them are still looking like that their roles are up in the air.Ben Tate and Montario Hardesty are great examples,both are stuck behind very productive RB's and are coming off major injuries,couple that with suspect talent levels and their stay might be a short one in the league.

I remember reading on some other message board where some guy was totally blasting some other member for making a hige reach and drafting Starks in the first round of a rookie draft? Maybe that was you.

What I said then was that I really don't beleive there's any such thing as a "reach" in a dynasty rookie draft. Sure you wouldn't want to take some project TE like an Ed Dickson in round 1 when you could clearly get him in a later round, but I see no problem getting a player you really like that could be on other people's radar where you fell "safe" grabbing him.

In a redraft I totally get ADP, since these players are "known" quantities and have a track record and ADP is much more clear. But in a rookie draft there are so many busts, I think you have to rely on you evaluations and grab your guy when you can.

I'm sure if you were that guy, and you did say that you did "reach" for Starks in round 1, you're pretty glad that you didn't take the concensus picks like Golden Tate, Arrelius Benn, Ben Tate or Toby Gerhart. Sometimes people get blinders on and just draft per some list or some so-called expert draft. I think its more fun if you think for yourself.

[Loose Circuits]

For the record, Grant is signed for 3.5 mil in 2011, however, he is also due a 1.75 mil roster bonus in march and 250k in workout bonus and an additional 250k in other bonuses. 4.75 mil is a lot to pay for him if the Packers have confidence that Starks can get the job done.

Brandon Jackson is a free agent in 2011 and shouldn't be expensive to re-sign if they elect to go that route with Starks getting the early work.

Dmitri Nance also plays into the equation a little bit. I think he's a similar type of player as Grant and guys like Benjarvus. They will get their 4 yards, but won't break any long runs.

Should be interesting as the Packers don't seem to have very many needs. I imagine just depends on what kind of value will be available to them in the draft and what they decide to do with Jackson & Grant. Sure seems like Starks has earned at least a large chunk of playing time in the future.

Of course he's still playing this week, so maybe he could show us even more. Should be fun to watch

In redrafts, I expect Starks to be a solid sleeper. Unfortunately for me, I'm only going to be in one redraft next season and I seriously doubt he's going to sleep past anyone in that league