James Starks

[trojanfight]

Does this guy have any value? With Eddie lacy continuing to struggle do they ever give Starks the job? Sure lacy scored but 17 carries for 48 yards something like that isn't much.

 

[TREFF]

Does this guy have any value? With Eddie lacy continuing to struggle do they ever give Starks the job? Sure lacy scored but 17 carries for 48 yards something like that isn't much.

He carries value if Lacy goes down. . Little else. Sure there might be a few instances. . Like week 1, where he looks better than Lacy, but overall if Lacy can't run it behind that line, neither will Starks. He's fine very well in sporadic appearances, but the few times he's been given a real shot as the starter, he's flopped. Lacy owners probably want him, others the only reason to have him is if your just waiting for Lacy to get hurt.

 

[averagejoe]

Not sure what Lacy's problem is? He looked great in preseason. I went all in on Lacy. (Gives me another reason to hate the Pack.)

I'd be leery of James Starks though. I heard a few weeks ago that DuJuan Harris was challenging for the RB2 spot on the Packers depth chart. And according to Rotoworld, that's still the case. Especially since the Pack already know what Starks can do.

 

[averagejoe]

To answer your question, I don't think they "give" the job to another RB anyway. Lacy had over 1100 yards last season. I think part of Lacy's struggles have more to do with the tougher defenses he faced in games 1-3, not to mention that the Packers have one of the worst O-lines in the league - so Lacy basically has to make his own holes to run through.

Starks or Harris may not be any better at it than Lacy. And its not like the Pack will just throw in the towel on him.

 

[Trudem]

Not sure what Lacy's problem is? He looked great in preseason. I went all in on Lacy. (Gives me another reason to hate the Pack.)

I'd be leery of James Starks though. I heard a few weeks ago that DuJuan Harris was challenging for the RB2 spot on the Packers depth chart. And according to Rotoworld, that's still the case. Especially since the Pack already know what Starks can do.

As a Pack fan I don't think Harris is close to Starks. Starks is much better and I don't think Harris would be returning kicks if he was going to see the field that much.

 

[Sportsdude101]

Green Bay kept Starks on the sideline against the bears so he would be fresh for the Vikings thursday night. Probably a good fantasy choice. The Pack will have success on the ground vs the Vikes at lambeau

 

[Sportsdude101]

To answer your question, I don't think they "give" the job to another RB anyway. Lacy had over 1100 yards last season. I think part of Lacy's struggles have more to do with the tougher defenses he faced in games 1-3, not to mention that the Packers have one of the worst O-lines in the league - so Lacy basically has to make his own holes to run through.

Starks or Harris may not be any better at it than Lacy. And its not like the Pack will just throw in the towel on him.

The Packers terrible O'line protected Rodgers enough to put up 38 points on the Bears

 

[Texas Jefe]

Starks is really good for that one or two games when he explodes. The tough part is figuring out when that game will be...

 

[averagejoe]

The Packers terrible O'line protected Rodgers enough to put up 38 points on the Bears

While the 38 points is embarrassing, it still doesn't take away from the fact that the Pack have one of the worst O-lines. Football Outsiders ranks the GB O-line 23rd in run-blocking and 22nd in pass-blocking.

Rodgers has been sacked 10 times already in 4 games. In his career, Rodgers is sacked on 7.27% of pass playshttp://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/pass_sacked_perc_active.htm. Only 2 active starting QB have a worse rating. And that doesn't even account for knock-downs or hits.

So to bring this back to the Starks/Lacy question. Stick with Lacy.