Jump to content

Pitt shopping Starks


GrizzlyBear
 Share

Recommended Posts

As they ponder their final roster cuts, the Pittsburgh Steelers reportedly are pondering the possibility of shipping one of their backup offensive linemen out of town via a trade.

 

Per the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, the Steelers are considering trading tackle Max Starks, center Sean Mahan, or tackle Trai Essex.

 

The mere fact that Starks would even be close to the trading block highlights the poor decision to use the transition tag on Starks, which gave him a guaranteed salary of nearly $7 million this year. For roughly $500,000 more, they could have forced Alan Faneca to stay for another year — or at least have gotten something for him in trade from a team like the Jets.

 

Mahan was the starting center in 2007, but lost his job to newcomer Justin Hartwig.

 

Meanwhile, the Steelers already have decided to release receiver Willie Reid and return specialist Eddie Drummond.

 

Bears could use this one . Would be a definate upgrade. But i still hesitate everytime I see its from PFT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fat, lazy, bad attitude... Yet, still probably better than St.Clair. He won't fit under the cap though, so no point in speculating

With 9.2 million under cap he would be easy to land, however where you get he is fat and lazy? I have only heard good things about him. Please put links to your source and info.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With 9.2 million under cap he would be easy to land, however where you get he is fat and lazy? I have only heard good things about him. Please put links to your source and info.

 

1. We're not 9.2mm under the cap. We're less than 1MM under the cap.

 

2. Max being an overweight underachiever with poor work ethic is a well-known, well-documented fact. Go check it out for yourself. Just check out how he came into TC and the PS this year, being completely outplayed at his position (lost his spot to Colon) and the lack of effort he has put forth every day in camp. That is fat, lazy, and indifference (bad attitude) right there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. We're not 9.2mm under the cap. We're less than 1MM under the cap.

 

2. Max being an overweight underachiever with poor work ethic is a well-known, well-documented fact. Go check it out for yourself. Just check out how he came into TC and the PS this year, being completely outplayed at his position (lost his spot to Colon) and the lack of effort he has put forth every day in camp. That is fat, lazy, and indifference (bad attitude) right there.

 

Well in all accounts I have read we are 9.2 million under cap. it also is documented on the net. less then one million? there is not a team with that kinda Cap mismangement . If anyting happened we would have no cash to do a dang thing. Give JA and Phillips hell for thier drafts but Cap? Well they know whats going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well in all accounts I have read we are 9.2 million under cap. it also is documented on the net. less then one million? there is not a team with that kinda Cap mismangement . If anyting happened we would have no cash to do a dang thing. Give JA and Phillips hell for tyhier drafts but Cap? Well they know whats going on.

Well, all accounts have some horrible math skills.

 

Here's mine...

 

linky

 

 

The guy is off here and there with some of his calculations, but he has it very close. Some put us at about 200k under, I have it at closer to 700k.

 

 

This one has us at 1.9

 

LINKY

Link to comment
Share on other sites

also note these reporters and lawyers are alot more privy to cap issues then any messageboard guy. So untill I see it on a source that is privy to those numbers I think it best to drop the number crunch and leave it to the pros.

 

The contract numbers are made widely available to the public, as are the CBA and NFLPA contract rules and guidelines. Like I said, it's not rocket science if you do a little reading and research. BTW, PFT blows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no way you trade for a backup OT making $7mil/yr. He would be our backup. What I've seen Pitt this preseason they can't run the ball at all (no blocking) and pass protection isn't great. If Starks isn't standing out against this competition it makes me think he's not all that good. If we're interesting just wait until he's cut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With 9.2 million under cap he would be easy to land, however where you get he is fat and lazy? I have only heard good things about him. Please put links to your source and info.

 

 

I also read that he showed up to camp overweight and got completely outplayed. I rather go for Willie Anderson who the Bengals cut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hoof Ill let it rest, appearantly your math is superior to that of PFT which got it from the nfl sources. BTW PFT was a rag But recent news from that site has proven they have a good source network. so much so, that they are now on ESPN and the NFL network for news and other stories. Ill take thier opinions. not anyones outside the loop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many people here, including me, wanted Starks if we couldn't land Faneca. This would be huge.

 

The only thing I fear is that they'd want a 1st round pick. If they didn't, we don't exactly have nice trade pieces.

 

 

Give them a first...lord knows we can't seem to pick anybody good in that round anyways..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hoof Ill let it rest, appearantly your math is superior to that of PFT which got it from the nfl sources. BTW PFT was a rag But recent news from that site has proven they have a good source network. so much so, that they are now on ESPN and the NFL network for news and other stories. Ill take thier opinions. not anyones outside the loop.

 

Guess what. I have the math worked out to prove it. All they have a single number that is very wrong. Again, it doesn't take a genius or someone "in the loop" (PFT in the loop, ahahahahahaha) to read the CBA, look at the contract numbers that are made available to anyone who wants them and is capable of doing a little 5th grade math. Apparently, you have to be an attorney, agent or even better, a media member (or glorified sports blog; congrats every decent one has broken some sort of news these days) to get it right though. So much for "seeing is believing," I guess we've moved onto "crappy sports sites with horrible contributors are verified media outlets, and I can't rely on widely available information to figure something out for myself."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and like I said, it's sad that some people can't think for themselves and do a little bit of research.

 

It is appearant you can not let it rest, lets just agree to disagree. And thinking for myself? Lets just say I have had make descsions of life and death. And you sir will not deter my thought that the people in the know are writing articles about this, not Blogging. But I will say this. If Iam wrong, I will acknowledge you as being right. But untill its in print, Lets just drop it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...