PDA

View Full Version : Max Starks Interview



steelz09
03-05-2009, 12:18 AM
I posted a very interesting and well done Max Starks interview on the Planet Steelers homepage:

http://www.planetsteelers.com/2009/03/m ... iew-radio/ (http://www.planetsteelers.com/2009/03/max-starks-interview-radio/)

--

Pretty good interview overall. I wasn't very pleased with his response to a "long-term" deal with the Steelers. He should consider himself lucky that he's been able to suck out 16+ million dollars over the last 2 years from the Steelers.

blacknblue80s
03-05-2009, 01:12 AM
I am starting to wonder if franchising Max was a bad idea.

It sounds like he is going to take the 8 million and test freeagency next year.

RuthlessBurgher
03-05-2009, 01:38 AM
I am starting to wonder if franchising Max was a bad idea.

It sounds like he is going to take the 8 million and test freeagency next year.

All the better reason to trade up for a top tackle if one of the top prospects slips past the mid-point of round 1. Michael Oher, anyone? I'd happily give up a couple of prime draft picks to trade up for him, give us the following option for this season:

Starks-Kemoeatu-Hartwig-Colon-Oher

If Starks bolts after the season for free agency, Oher could move over to LT after breaking into the NFL as a RT (much like Marvel did back in the day). And he would be much less expensive over the next 5 years than Starks would be.

Oracle
03-05-2009, 05:21 AM
thank you ruthless

we will be trading up this year. no way do we keep all 9 picks. some people are saying 'let's stay put at 1.32 then trade up in the second'. that is a logical suggestion but it is not consistent with colbert's history. he's a first round guy.

i realize most people on this board disagree but i am all for trading up to get a legit left tackle. in past years we could get by with second and third round talent b/c we were pounding bettis up the middle all game. now we are built around big ben and we cannot continue to let him get sacked 814 times a year. ben's shoulder was sore for most of 2008 because of mario williams. maybe oher doesn't solve the problem but he stands a far better chance than starks or smith and doesn't cost 8 million.

for those who disagree, tell me this... what is your solution at left tackle?

you have no solution. your solution is to extend our current problem (starks) or hope to find value/developmental prospects in the 2-4 rounds. (ie- smith, starks, essex, hills) that doesn't work at this position. at left tackle you have to bite the bullet, and i say do it now in a year with a deep field where you have extra picks you can't possibly sign.

BURGH86STEEL
03-05-2009, 07:07 AM
thank you ruthless

we will be trading up this year. no way do we keep all 9 picks. some people are saying 'let's stay put at 1.32 then trade up in the second'. that is a logical suggestion but it is not consistent with colbert's history. he's a first round guy.

i realize most people on this board disagree but i am all for trading up to get a legit left tackle. in past years we could get by with second and third round talent b/c we were pounding bettis up the middle all game. now we are built around big ben and we cannot continue to let him get sacked 814 times a year. ben's shoulder was sore for most of 2008 because of mario williams. maybe oher doesn't solve the problem but he stands a far better chance than starks or smith and doesn't cost 8 million.

for those who disagree, tell me this... what is your solution at left tackle?

you have no solution. your solution is to extend our current problem (starks) or hope to find value/developmental prospects in the 2-4 rounds. (ie- smith, starks, essex, hills) that doesn't work at this position. at left tackle you have to bite the bullet, and i say do it now in a year with a deep field where you have extra picks you can't possibly sign.

What if the Steelers cannot find a trading partner? What if the other team wants to many picks to switch? What if all of the top tackles are gone? How much are they willing to give up to move up in the draft? There are no easy solutions.

Last year was deep at tackle but we saw what happened. Do they bite a bullet and trade a number one next season? I doubt that happens. Even if they bite the bullet, that player may not live up to his draft status. We've seen that over the years with some of the best tackles coming out of college.

Oviedo
03-05-2009, 08:41 AM
thank you ruthless

we will be trading up this year. no way do we keep all 9 picks. some people are saying 'let's stay put at 1.32 then trade up in the second'. that is a logical suggestion but it is not consistent with colbert's history. he's a first round guy.

i realize most people on this board disagree but i am all for trading up to get a legit left tackle. in past years we could get by with second and third round talent b/c we were pounding bettis up the middle all game. now we are built around big ben and we cannot continue to let him get sacked 814 times a year. ben's shoulder was sore for most of 2008 because of mario williams. maybe oher doesn't solve the problem but he stands a far better chance than starks or smith and doesn't cost 8 million.

for those who disagree, tell me this... what is your solution at left tackle?

you have no solution. your solution is to extend our current problem (starks) or hope to find value/developmental prospects in the 2-4 rounds. (ie- smith, starks, essex, hills) that doesn't work at this position. at left tackle you have to bite the bullet, and i say do it now in a year with a deep field where you have extra picks you can't possibly sign.

You really have to have a high priority target to make sense to trade up in Round 1 because it will likely cost your Round 1 pick and two others. I really can't see any of the quality Tackles falling low enough to make that a sound strategy. One would have to fall into the 20-25 range. There will be a run on Tackles this year just like last year and it will be the skill position players that will likely drop not the best OL. Perhaps we get lucky and Tyson Jackson or BJ Raji drop--that would be worth trading up for.

I think trading up in Round 2 just makes a whole lot more sense but as we have all said Colbert fools us every year.

phillyesq
03-05-2009, 08:55 AM
I am starting to wonder if franchising Max was a bad idea.

It sounds like he is going to take the 8 million and test freeagency next year.

I don't think it was a bad idea, but his agent was smart to sign the tender immediately. Starks is guaranteed his contract this year, and is now poised to hit free agency in an uncapped year. And after being benched for Willie Colon, I can see Starks wanting to move on.

Since his deal this year is guaranteed, it would take a ton of guaranteed money. I'd think Vernon Carey is a good barometer for the market on Starks. Another comparison for Starks -- Brandon Jacobs was franchised (at a lower tender, based on position), signed a 4 year, $25 million deal, $15 million in the first two years, and most people thought it was a bad deal -- for him.

So for Starks, figure about $7 million per year, with a signing bonus of $15 million at a minimum. He'd be foolish to take anything less. Otherwise, he just has to play out this year, and hit the market next year in an uncapped year.

From a business standpoint, Starks has a huge advantage over the Steelers. I'd love Mack, but if a good LT falls into the 20s, I'd love to see the Steelers go get him.

Oviedo
03-05-2009, 10:57 AM
I am starting to wonder if franchising Max was a bad idea.

It sounds like he is going to take the 8 million and test freeagency next year.

I don't think it was a bad idea, but his agent was smart to sign the tender immediately. Starks is guaranteed his contract this year, and is now poised to hit free agency in an uncapped year. And after being benched for Willie Colon, I can see Starks wanting to move on.

Since his deal this year is guaranteed, it would take a ton of guaranteed money. I'd think Vernon Carey is a good barometer for the market on Starks. Another comparison for Starks -- Brandon Jacobs was franchised (at a lower tender, based on position), signed a 4 year, $25 million deal, $15 million in the first two years, and most people thought it was a bad deal -- for him.

So for Starks, figure about $7 million per year, with a signing bonus of $15 million at a minimum. He'd be foolish to take anything less. Otherwise, he just has to play out this year, and hit the market next year in an uncapped year.

From a business standpoint, Starks has a huge advantage over the Steelers. I'd love Mack, but if a good LT falls into the 20s, I'd love to see the Steelers go get him.

They can just tag Starks again next year and working on year to year contracts is a huge risk if he would go Marvel Smith on us and have an injury. Long term security in this league is the key. When there is no CBA teams can actually use three tags each year.

No good LT is going to fall into the 20s. There will be a run just like last year.

pfelix73
03-05-2009, 12:02 PM
Starks can be franchised again next year if need be. I heard that Oher is projected to be only a RT in the NFL.

grotonsteel
03-05-2009, 12:14 PM
I would say this we are not going to get a LT in draft who will start immediately. I think the best way to go about is drafting a tackle in Rd 2 or Rd 3 and groom him to be a starter in year or two say like Jamon Meredith or Tupou.

I would prefer Steelers get a top 3-4 DE or NT or OC/OG.

I would prefer Steelers get Duke Robinson or Alex MAck if T Jackson is not available.

BradshawsHairdresser
03-05-2009, 12:32 PM
Starks can be franchised again next year if need be. I heard that Oher is projected to be only a RT in the NFL.

I might be wrong, but I don't think Starks can be franchised again next season.

blacknblue80s
03-05-2009, 12:49 PM
I think we should have let Starks test the market. Then he would realize that he isn't worth nearly as much as he thinks he is.

He has shown flashes but is one of the slowest LTs in the NFL.

phillyesq
03-05-2009, 02:15 PM
The Steelers can tag Starks again next year, but he would get at least a 20% raise, which would put him over $10 million. Continually franchising Starks cannot be the plan. The team either needs to work out a long term deal with him, or find a replacement.

Oracle
03-05-2009, 07:48 PM
oveido-

i understand what you're saying. you and both know we're not trading up into the top ten to get a left tackle and probably not the top 15 either. but i predict we're not leaving the first round without oher, britton, or beatty. and it will probably take a trade up to do it.

i might be wrong, i'm not guarenteeing anything, but that's my prediction. that's what colbert does when we have a substantial need and i believe the FO now views that position as a substantial need. we can't keep tagging max. we MUST get our new left tackle this draft because he's not coming out free agency or our depth chart. agreed?

i believe oher, britton, or beatty will be as good as starks within one year. starks is very, very slow of foot. and very, very expensive for his skill level. it's just not a position you can draft in later rounds and develop. the left tackle competes against the opponents best athlete. we've got to be realistic here. spend two or three picks now while we have extras and get a long term solution.

Oracle
03-05-2009, 07:54 PM
burgh86-

i agree there are a lot of variables and uncertainties, but what is your solution? what is the better option you are suggesting?

someone suggested waiting til the 2nd round and getting meredith or topuo. is that what you're suggesting? i'm just curious.

Oviedo
03-06-2009, 09:17 AM
oveido-

i understand what you're saying. you and both know we're not trading up into the top ten to get a left tackle and probably not the top 15 either. but i predict we're not leaving the first round without oher, britton, or beatty. and it will probably take a trade up to do it.

i might be wrong, i'm not guarenteeing anything, but that's my prediction. that's what colbert does when we have a substantial need and i believe the FO now views that position as a substantial need. we can't keep tagging max. we MUST get our new left tackle this draft because he's not coming out free agency or our depth chart. agreed?

i believe oher, britton, or beatty will be as good as starks within one year. starks is very, very slow of foot. and very, very expensive for his skill level. it's just not a position you can draft in later rounds and develop. the left tackle competes against the opponents best athlete. we've got to be realistic here. spend two or three picks now while we have extras and get a long term solution.

I'm just concerned that Britton and Beatty are one year wonders and possibly no better than Hills. From everything I read Oher is projected to be a RT.

We clearly need a solution for LT long term but I just don't see it there when we pick at 1.32.

buckeyehoppy
03-10-2009, 12:04 AM
The Steelers have two choices:

Keep franchising Max and over pay him as a Top 5 players at his position...clearly, he is not one of the 5 best LTs in the league. Or...

Find his replacement and do what you must to make that happen.



I am starting to wonder if franchising Max was a bad idea.

It sounds like he is going to take the 8 million and test free agency next year.

All the better reason to trade up for a top tackle if one of the top prospects slips past the mid-point of round 1. Michael Oher, anyone? I'd happily give up a couple of prime draft picks to trade up for him, give us the following option for this season:

Starks-Kemoeatu-Hartwig-Colon-Oher

If Starks bolts after the season for free agency, Oher could move over to LT after breaking into the NFL as a RT (much like Marvel did back in the day). And he would be much less expensive over the next 5 years than Starks would be.

If you replace him with a player who will be less expensive and, quite possibly, in the same ball park talent-wise. Smart organizations do this all the time in the Free Agent culture. It's what keeps them in the championship equation.

Max can believe his own hype all he wants. He better be prepared to get his act together, his @$$ in gear and he better show everyone that the last half of this season wasn't a mirage. After the Steelers provide him some competition for his job, he is practically guaranteed to buckle under the pressure.

jrobitaille23
03-12-2009, 03:51 AM
I tell you what. He is a very articulate young man. He obviously feels slighted and he may have a reason to be. He was forced to play RT and I really don't feel that is his best position. He is actually a better LT. Considering how little he has actually played there he has been pretty serviceable. We have a championship afterall. He will NOT be here after next year. That much is apparent. That's okay by me. I feel he will never be a great LT and I would not want the Steelers to pay him as such. Hills is supposed to be what many of you are calling for from this draft. A young project drafted in later rounds to develop for future starting position. The jury is still out on him. People need to realize that this draft is a weak one at every position but WR. There are MAYBE 4 tackles better than what we all believe Hills can be. Not one of them will still be on the board. As much as it pains me to be in the same position next year with this o line as we are now...our bread and butter is on the D side of the ball. We HAVE to draft a CB in round one. If Alonzo Smith is there we take him. End of discussion. And no...he isn't too short. Same height as Townsend who has proven to be a pretty good player throughout his career. He is much better though. We have to prepare for losing Deshea and provide depth and competition behind and for Gay. We can still get a top RG or RT in the second round and I hope that is the route we take. I wouldn't be surprised if two of our three top picks go OL depending on who is available in first.

Discipline of Steel
03-12-2009, 07:17 AM
I tell you what. He is a very articulate young man. He obviously feels slighted and he may have a reason to be. He was forced to play RT and I really don't feel that is his best position. He is actually a better LT. Considering how little he has actually played there he has been pretty serviceable. We have a championship afterall. He will NOT be here after next year. That much is apparent. That's okay by me. I feel he will never be a great LT and I would not want the Steelers to pay him as such. Hills is supposed to be what many of you are calling for from this draft. A young project drafted in later rounds to develop for future starting position. The jury is still out on him. People need to realize that this draft is a weak one at every position but WR. There are MAYBE 4 tackles better than what we all believe Hills can be. Not one of them will still be on the board. As much as it pains me to be in the same position next year with this o line as we are now...our bread and butter is on the D side of the ball. We HAVE to draft a CB in round one. If Alonzo Smith is there we take him. End of discussion. And no...he isn't too short. Same height as Townsend who has proven to be a pretty good player throughout his career. He is much better though. We have to prepare for losing Deshea and provide depth and competition behind and for Gay. We can still get a top RG or RT in the second round and I hope that is the route we take. I wouldn't be surprised if two of our three top picks go OL depending on who is available in first.

I agree, I think we really need a top CB to come in and be fairly productive immediately. It is our only position of immediate and long term need. Second on the list in my mind is the DL which is a position of serious long term need. OL definately needs depth so it looks like our third priority. This does not mean we draft in that order but I expect those 3 positions to dominate our early picks.

frankthetank1
03-12-2009, 07:26 AM
i disagree with taking smith or a cb in the first. gay, taylor, townsend are solid. why draft in the first for depth? id rather take brace or an o-lineman. the focus should be o-line and d-line. besides with this pass rush you dont need shut down corners

buckeyehoppy
03-12-2009, 11:38 PM
i disagree with taking smith or a cb in the first. gay, taylor, townsend are solid. why draft in the first for depth? id rather take brace or an o-lineman. the focus should be o-line and d-line. besides with this pass rush you dont need shut down corners

And don't forget Roy Lewis. I think this guy steps up and grabs a backup CB spot next year. Take care of Ike and let Willie Gay and Lewis play themselves into the picture and Deshea is still money as long as he is here.

If you are going to draft a project, start at the OL. If the guy doesn't start right away, so be it. No unit in football relies more on unit cohesion than the OL. That's why it makes sense to draft OL players high from time to time.

The CB class for this year is mediocre past Mal Jenkins. I'd rather reach for a OL prospect who can be groomed to start. At least the talent base at OL positions has more promise. And, I guarantee it...if the Steelers have a chance to select Alex Mack...he will, at least, start at RG next season. Will a CB start in a similar circumstance? Not likely for what we'll get.