Content
X

Create Account

Or log in with Facebook

X

Log in

Or log in with Facebook

James Starks Receives $3.2 Million Over Two Years

By Category

James Starks Receives $3.2 Million Over Two Years

From Bob McGinn of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Starks, who agreed to re-sign late Monday despite interest from other teams, received $3,165,626 over the two years of his contract, or an average of $1.583 million.

An unrestricted free agent, Starks' deal contained a $725,000 signing bonus, base salaries of $750,000 this season and $1.175 million in 2015, per-game roster bonuses of $182,813 each year (paid at the rate of $11,426 for each game on the 46-game active roster) and $75,000 workout bonuses each year.

He will count $1.37 million against the salary cap this year and $1.795 million in 2015.

 

  • Like Like
  • -9 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (25) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

ben's picture

Good Value.

The Path to the Draft

(1) FA signing, Sam Shields, - check
(2) FA signing, Neal or Melton, - check
(3) FA signing, Quarless, - check
(4) FA signing, Raji, (< 4.1 million) - check
f ---TB--- EDS (2 year, 8.5 million) - FAIL
(5) RFA signing, Lattimore, - check
(6) FA signing, DE/OLB: Julius Peppers
-?- S: Chris Clemons (2 year, 8.25 million) *optional*
(7) FA signing, Starks (2 year, 3.1 million) *optional* - Check
-?- S: Jim Leonhard *optional*
-?- QB: Matt Flynn (< Tolzien) *optional*
-?- DL: Johnny Jolly *not optional*
f ---GB--- DL: Letroy Guion (1 million) - FAIL

(how about now?)

Paul Ott Carruth's picture

Not signing Jared Allen was the best thing Thompson could have done. He does not fit the 3-4 scheme and his versatility is limited. He is a 4-3 edge rusher. He cannot play a 5 tech DE vs. a 3 man surface because he is too light at 270 lbs. He's too big to play a 3-4 OLB. He will be a great fit for Seattle and I predict he'll be productive but this is by far from a fail as you suggest. The Packers base out of a 3-4 and Allen is a 4-3 DE. Peppers, on the other hand, is stout enough to play the 5 tech vs. a 3 man surface at almost 290 lbs. He's also athletic and big enough to play a 3 tech in any nickel sub packages. Peppers is by far a better fit also taking to account the fact that he's played in both a 3-4 and 4-3. Signing Allen to play either DE or OLB would have been disastrous. Square peg round hole. Never forget the Aaron Kampman experiment.

Stroh's picture

Thank You POC! I've been trying to preach that for a long time. Allen would have been a TERRIBLE fit for the Packers and a complete waste of cap space. He has no scheme versatility whatsoever.

I know they've been talking about Peppers as an OLB/elephant position, but IMO that would be a mistake. Packers need to use him as a 34 DE and 3 tech pass rusher for the most part IMO. Matthews, Perry and Neal can all be used as the Elephant position, but lets slide Peppers inside a lot. He would be a devastating pass rusher inside IMO. They need to move Peppers around along the DL to find the mismatches. Maybe get him some snaps at elephant end but the best use would be inside pass rush. Just my opinion...

Peppers length and athleticism would be a huge advantage over the OG and C he would face. His advantages outside would be less than inside.

Clay Zombo's picture

You can not sit there and tell me with a straight face that having Jared Allen at RDE and Julius Peppers on the same line would be anything but awesome. The good thing about having guys like Matthews and Peppers already is they can play and move anywhere in the front 7 just about.

Allen is a 4-3 RDE, I know that you know that. When he is on the field that is what he will play. Forget 3-4, 4-3 whatever, play to the players strengths that should be the concept, Whether its here or Seattle hes gonna be playing as part of a rotation, certainly more than hes used to. Don't see why we can't make it work with a player like him.

Stroh's picture

If you played a 43 D it might be... Might be. But the Packers don't play a 43 D so Allen would do terrible. I have a better idea... How about if we get Peppers and put him next to Clay Matthews! Now that guy would look great next to Peppers, or you could put one on either side and spread the OL out so neither can be double teamed. Just imagine the possibilities! Hell you could even put Matthews behind Peppers and have him chose a hole, depending on how the OT blocks Peppers.

I can say w/ absolute certainty that having Allen playing in a 34 D does NOT interest me in the least! None at all... I personally don't give a damn where he goes, as long as its not GB!

4thand1's picture

Safety, Richardson/Hyde+ draft pick = safety.
Sign Flynn , Tolzien to practice squad.
Pick up O Daniels.
BOP for 6 rounds after signing Mosley in the 1st.

53rtmus's picture

Don't think Tolzien is practice squad eligible-but I could be wrong.

Stroh's picture

No he was active for too many games to qualify for the PS. If he is on the Packers, or any team next year, he has to be on the roster. IMO the Packers won't carry 3 QB's on the roster, so either Flynn or Tolzien, not both, and a rookie on the PS.

L's picture

Agreed.

I think the team will wait on signing Flynn because he's a known quantity.

There's no reason to overpay him and they don't even "need" to sign him early in order to have him as part of MM's off-season QBing school because he's been through all of that many times before. The team is in an ideal position where they can risk being incredibly patient with him in regards to resigning him.

I think that they'll end-up drafting a QB in the later-mid rounds if not late rounds to develop and keep on the Practice Squad and bank on the development and improvement of Scott Tolzien during MM's QBing school and training camp. If Matt Flynn accepts a contract around the vets minimum w/ nothing guaranteed then they won't hesitate to sign him before training camp, but if he wants multiple years, more money than they want to spend, or any guaranteed cash I think they'll exercise that patience to see if Scott Tolzien is demonstrating the improvement and development they are hoping for; however, if he's coming around slowly or isn't showing signs of improvement then I can see the team bringing back Matt Flynn during training camp if he hasn't found another job in order to raise the competition level. I'm betting the Pack are willing to risk that he (Flynn) won't find another back-up job at a pay beyond what they're already willing to pay, aka little to no investment risk, and because he fits the Packers system best he's probably best off rejoining the Pack verses anywhere else at a similar paycheck.

Jordan's picture

After the draft, some teams are going to cut QB's. Might be able to find somebody better than Tolzien or Flynn.

MarkinMadison's picture

I'd strongly prefer Clemons over a rookie who has to adjust to a difficult position like safety, at least if you are counting on any actual contribution this year at the position. The Packers can still afford him. Load up on BPA at LB/DL/TE in the draft. My two cents.

Paul Ott Carruth's picture

I don't necessarily disagree with getting a solid veteran at the safety position but if Dix is available Thompson will be hard pressed to pass him up in my opinion. Pryor will be fine but Dix is ready to go from day 1. He's played the middle field safety in college in a pro style defense. The Packers love to play a lot of single high when afforded the opportunity. The problem the last 2 years has been the loss of Collins and the personnel to replace him. Jennings is not a box safety and thus is forced to play the middle field role while Burnett gets put in to the box. The safeties have not been able to interchange roles because Jennings provided nothing in turns of secondary run support or alley play....he was simply too light and not physical. Dix nor Pryor will have this problem. I give Dix the edge due to his ability to play the deep middle as well. Pryor is not quite as good in this regard in my opinion.

ben's picture

I really hope we don't draft CJ Mosely in the 1st Round. But I'll take him over Dix or Pryor.

Stroh's picture

I agree completely POC. Dix is ready to go at Safety, tho Burnett would still carry the burden of being the playcaller in the backend. I don't think any rookie would be able to help much w/ that responsibility. That's why I would like to see a FA brought in. A vet safety would help Burnett w/ calling the coverage's much more than a rookie.

I've kinda gone back and forth between Dix and Pryor earlier, but now am sold on Dix being the best of the Safeties. He and Burnett would be very complimentary and allow Capers to disguise coverages a lot more than would be the case w/ Pryor. Pryor would be more the box Safety and not as good in the deep single high looks.

Just curious... Who do you like between Mosley and Shazier? I've been on the Mosley bandwagon all along, but I'm worried about his injury concerns. Shazier getting his wt up to 237 help his stock a lot IMO. Little leary of him due to the last Ohio St LB the Packers chose being less than advertised, not that I'm down on Hawk, just hasn't lived up to the #5 overall billing. Probably unfair to Shazier a little, but that's kinda stuck w/ my thinking. I've started to come around on him lately.

Jordan's picture

With all these 1 and 2 year contracts, it's looking more and more like TT is going to retire after the 2015 season.

Probably just a coincidence, but Favre is set to go in to HOF in 2016. Thompson will be 62 years old and probably retired and out of the way.

After all the TT bashing some fans have done, they sure owe TT an apology.

If I'm right, whoever takes over for TT in 2016 will pretty much have a clear salary cap with very little dead money (as it stands now).

ottscay's picture

The trend this year across the league has been to sign non-core players to 1-2 year contracts to aid in cap management. While I can't rule out a TT retirement in the near term, I don't think the signings add anything to that (unless you think most GMs will retire in the next 18 months).

Stroh's picture

Thompson doesn't give contracts based on when he's going to retire! He signs players to contracts based on what he thinks is in the best interests of the Packers! Thompson will retire when he's good and ready, not before. My guess is he is the GM as long as Rodgers is the QB. That gives him another 7 yrs... Favre will have to put up w/ Thompson still being the GM when he goes into the Packers HOF and has his number retired. More than likely the number will be retired at some point this year or next at the latest. That's up to Favre mostly and Murphy to a lesser extent.

HankScorpio's picture

The contracts for Shields and Peppers struck me as odd since the Packers didn't use roster bonus in combination with signing bonus for upfront money. That serves to take a bigger cap hit this year, leaving lesser ones for future years.

That would be another possible signal that TT is winding things down in GB. If someone else is going to be dealing with those later years, why not leave more room in the short term?

I could be over-thinking that. Maybe it is as simple as a reaction to the expected cap increases that are coming.

Jordan's picture

Yeah, shields contract is essentially a two year deal when you factor everything in. And they offered Raji a two year deal, although he took 1 year.

My gut feeling says he retires (from GB as GM) after 2015 season. Maybe they'll try to keep him on in an advisory role.

I dug up this article which speculates that TT was extended through 2015......which lines up with my theory.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/116018299.html?ipad=y

Ibleedgreenmore's picture

To me TT has done a great job with the contracts this year. They get paid and have to perform, look how Crosby contract went last year. I love the resigning of Starks and to be honest all the new contracts and signings.

HankScorpio's picture

I can't work myself up too much about the money when it is this small. But I still don't like the idea of 4 RBs. And of the 4, the one I'd jettison is Starks.,

4thand1's picture

After last year, you can't have to many of anyone at any position. Here's to a healthy season.

ballark's picture

Starks was incredible last year. Led the league with 5.5/yards per carry (on 90 attempts, but still). But you'd choose Harris coming off injury and unproven Franklin? I don't get that.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

I would love to hear POC's opinion between Mosley and Shazier, and for that matter, about sliding CM into the ILB position for a few snaps a game in appropriate situations.

The TKster's picture

Good value.

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook

Packers Tickets

Must Read

Quote

"The Bears still suck!"
"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "