keggerz Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/128290998.html Green Bay - If Green Bay Packers general manager Ted Thompson decides to keep just three halfbacks, he's going to have a tough call to make. Does he stick with what he knows he has or with what he hopes he has? That is the difference between Ryan Grant and Dimitri Nance, two backs as different as night is from day, but possibly competitors for one roster position. It might seem like heresy to even consider the Packers letting Grant go, but the truth is about two weeks before the season opener the only certainties at the position for the 53-man roster are James Starks, Alex Green and John Kuhn. Grant is healthy again after spending 19 games on injured reserve with a damaged ankle, and the coaches have been doing what they can to see him in live action. He started against the Arizona Cardinals on Friday night and played in the first three series, finishing with 23 yards on five carries. This preseason, Grant has just eight carries, which is hardly enough to cast judgment. Then again, Starks has only two carries and Green six. "We're trying to get Ryan and James - and, now Alex is back - we're trying to get those guys a certain number of carries each game," coach Mike McCarthy said. "I definitely would like to start off getting Ryan going this week." It's impossible to read McCarthy's mind, but the decision to see more of Grant means either he isn't sure whether Grant still has it or he's sure of it and just wants to get him back to form after a year layoff. Grant has missed some running opportunities this summer, including a poor decision on a draw play against the Cardinals, but he's also the kind of player who gets better with carries. The coaches might be seeing things others don't in the way Grant has run. "We're looking at specific things in a certain play and sometimes they don't pan out," Grant said of the preseason. "There may be penetration, but we're still about maintaining our course. "How the play plays out may not have anything to do with the particulars of your fundamentals." Nance, nonetheless, might have complicated things Friday with a solid performance, carrying four times for 28 yards (7.0 average). Most of his yards came on the game-winning drive when he was playing with third-stringers. Nance, 5 feet 10 inches and 212 pounds to Grant's 6-1 and 222, has the potential to be an effective third-down back and replace the departed Brandon Jackson. In practice, he has been a physical blocker and in games has kept the quarterback clean. "His understanding of the offense and scheme is very good," running backs coach Jerry Fontenot said. "He's a guy whenever we're reviewing pass game check-downs with the running backs he's always on point. He knows where he needs to be." That is a big requirement in McCarthy's offense. Green, the team's third-round pick, blew an assignment Friday and let quarterback Matt Flynn get hit in the back. That might limit his chances as a third-down back, but he'll make the roster because of his explosive running style, which he showed on a 25-yard screen play. Starks stands to be the No. 1 back after his outstanding postseason last year and his natural running instincts. He's coming off an ankle injury but probably will play against Indianapolis on Friday. He's such a natural at his position, he needs less work in preseason games than anyone else. As long as he's practicing, he's ready for games. "I'm always ready," Starks said. "The start of the game, I'm ready. Throw me in there, I'm ready." The coaches already know what Kuhn can do and they would not cut him after signing the fullback to a three-year, $7.5 million contract. Fullback Quinn Johnson has a lot of ground to make up after reporting to camp overweight and might not make it. That leaves Grant and Nance. The obvious pick would be Grant, the two-time 1,200-yard rusher. But there are other issues to consider such as Grant's $5.65 million salary cap number. If he is on the roster the first day of the season, he is guaranteed his $3.5 million base salary, which would lift his 2011 compensation thus far to around $4.75 million. Do the Packers want to pay that or the $525,000 it would cost to keep Nance? Grant always has been the type of runner who wears a team down and gets harder to tackle as the game goes on, so the eight carries he has this preseason don't present a fair assessment of where he stands. By the time Friday is over there will be more information from which to judge Grant and the others. At this point, Grant thinks he's rounding into shape. "I feel like we're in a rhythm, that I'm good with what I'm seeing," he said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 13ers Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 He's making it. Nance may only make $550,000 or so, but he is no Ryan Grant. I'd be shocked if they traded him (I cannot see them just cutting him). I guess you never know, however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 And Grant received a $1.75M roster bonus last month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted August 24, 2011 Author Share Posted August 24, 2011 And Grant received a $1.75M roster bonus last month. I read a tweet that pointed out that TT pd Sherman then fired him...not sure if true or what circumstances were Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearBroncos Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 I read a tweet that pointed out that TT pd Sherman then fired him...not sure if true or what circumstances were But wouldn't cutting Grant be a HUGE hit against their cap? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 But wouldn't cutting Grant be a HUGE hit against their cap? This is the last year of his contract, so the salary-cap hit would not be too high except for that bonus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Never mind Nance, everything I've seen so far has Grant projected as the starter and now Starks is the definite #1? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 He's making it. Nance may only make $550,000 or so, but he is no Ryan Grant. I'd be shocked if they traded him (I cannot see them just cutting him). I guess you never know, however. Nance doesn't have to outplay Grant. If Starks is outplaying Grant and Green is playing well, and since Grant likely will not play special teams, GB can save $3M by cutting him and keep Nance, who will play special teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Grant traded to Arizona for a 3rd round pick. Get it done TT!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearBroncos Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Grant traded to Arizona for a 3rd round pick. Get it done TT!!! They already mortgaged the farm on Kolb. I don't think they would be willing to pay that kind of money when they are still high on Wells and not sure about the other injured back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Nance doesn't have to outplay Grant. If Starks is outplaying Grant and Green is playing well, and since Grant likely will not play special teams, GB can save $3M by cutting him and keep Nance, who will play special teams. That's what I'm saying. Starks could be a steal in drafts right now to those who aren't in the know yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Nance doesn't have to outplay Grant. If Starks is outplaying Grant and Green is playing well, and since Grant likely will not play special teams, GB can save $3M by cutting him and keep Nance, who will play special teams. And Saine looked better than Nance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Never mind Nance, everything I've seen so far has Grant projected as the starter and now Starks is the definite #1? that's what i'm wondering about as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Man, it's my pick right now & there is Starks right at the top of the ADP & there is Mike Thomas as well with 16 picks before my next. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinkris Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 This isn't good, I just drafted grant!! So even if he makes the team, is it already decided starks is the #1? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearBroncos Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Man, it's my pick right now & there is Starks right at the top of the ADP & there is Mike Thomas as well with 16 picks before my next. You could pull a Taz and just go with the safe bet and take Stewart : Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearBroncos Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 This isn't good, I just drafted grant!! So even if he makes the team, is it already decided starks is the #1? I have Grant but was able to snag Stark for a decent price. Whoa.... Thank goodness I moved when I did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flemingd Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Grant would go well in Miami or Arizona. I don't see them cutting him when someone would likely give up at least a late pick. No one will give a 3rd for him but a 5th/6th is better for GB than cutting him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 I just took him at 8.9 in my local 16 team. If he is in fact the #1 without having to share with Grant that could very well win this league for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Grant NOT making Green Bay is probably the best option for those who drafted him - instead of a 1/1A situation with Starks, Grant would most likely catch on somewhere that is dying for a good RB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Grant NOT making Green Bay is probably the best option for those who drafted him - instead of a 1/1A situation with Starks, Grant would most likely catch on somewhere that is dying for a good RB. I'm already considering trading for Grant and getting him cheap once this news settles in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLAYER Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Digging in the dirt. I have no idea if Silverstein has a good pulse on the Pack or not. First he says there is no way to read McCarthy and then he says that Starks should be #1 based on his post season. well that sounds like his thinking and not the Pack's. I think you are following a red herring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 If Starks was the #1 , then why has Grant received all the 1st string work in training camp and Starks with the 2nd.....this story will have lost it's legs in a few days Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Digging in the dirt. I have no idea if Silverstein has a good pulse on the Pack or not. First he says there is no way to read McCarthy and then he says that Starks should be #1 based on his post season. well that sounds like his thinking and not the Pack's. I think you are following a red herring. One thing I don't get about the Starks love is everyone talks about how productive and tough he is - um, his career #s INCLUDING postseason are 110-416-1. It doesn't mean he CAN'T be a good RB, but basing it on what he's done, uh, not so much. I'd think the most likely situation is similar to Edgar Bennett/Dorsey Levens in '96 - dependable vet splits time with more explosive youngster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lawofmurphy Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 I think you're even being nice to him here...he was a 3.5 ypc back in the regular season and 3.8 ypc back in the postseason. I think Grant's average. I think Starks is below average. One thing I don't get about the Starks love is everyone talks about how productive and tough he is - um, his career #s INCLUDING postseason are 110-416-1. It doesn't mean he CAN'T be a good RB, but basing it on what he's done, uh, not so much. I'd think the most likely situation is similar to Edgar Bennett/Dorsey Levens in '96 - dependable vet splits time with more explosive youngster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.