The Pittsburgh Steelers have announced that tackle Max Starks, the team’s transition player in 2008 and its franchise player in 2009, has signed a long-term deal.
Per the release, it’s a four-year contract.
Starks replaced Marvel Smith as left tackle last season, due to Smith’s chronic back problems. Though Starks’ play had been largely disappointing for most of his career, he improved during last year’s Super Bowl run. (Smith has since signed with the 49ers.)
Starks had been scheduled to earn a guaranteed salary of $8.45 million in 2009.
Presumably, his new deal averages at least $8 million per year.
Steelers Go Long-Term With Max Starks
Posted by Mike Florio on June 23, 2009, 12:36 PM EST
18 Responses to “Steelers Go Long-Term With Max Starks”
so they lock up an underachiever at around $8M/year in a market when no one else would pay him that much, mainly because Marvel might have an injury? after they’ve already paid him $15M for the last two years?
good plan.
Good move on Starks’ part. He just guaranteed himself one (probably at least two) more Super Bowl rings.
Any negative comment = Steelers jealously.
No matter how legit the comment is.
Because the Steelers are a dynasty, even if they only won 2 SB in the last 4 years.
Forgot which road scholar Steeler fan suggested that but I remember it was right after they ‘;punched out’ Arizona.
Just another bum for Jen to complain about when she is on her back all season…
Good deal for the Steelers, and as always, Florio assumes wrong again. Starks deal is a $26.3 million, four-year contract, including $10 million in guaranteed money.
Less than $7 million per year for a young franchise LT. Fair for both sides and reduces Starks cap number this year.
I have a hard time understanding how Florio calls Starks “mostly disappointing” so far in his career. He was a 3rd round draft choice who started as a rookie, started in two SB’s at LT and RT by his 5th year in the league. He had one ‘down’ year when he was benched because the team tried to shift to more of a zone blocking scheme which he isn’t suited for, nor was the rest of their O-line. Last year Starks was very good once he got the starting LT spot back.
Starks has always been a dominant run blocker and is a much better pass blocker now that he is back at his natural LT spot as he is a left handed player. He got fair market value for a solid young LT.
@texasPHINSfan
The Steelers definitely overpaid for Starks but your reasoning if a bit off.
The Steelers haven’t already paid Starks $15 Mil for two seasons. He was paid last season the tag number and would have been paid again this season IF a long term deal wasn’t done.
Secondly, Marvel Smith is no longer with the team.
Lastly, Starks probably wouldn’t have gotten as much in the open market but he would have still been paid nicely. It overall contract wouldn’t have been much of a dropoff.
texasPhinsfan you’re a moron, the franchise tag went away since they signed him to a new deal.
It’s a deal the Steelers had to make, and it’s a deal that Starks needed because his value elsewhere wasn’t going to be as high as it is in Pittsburgh. That said, Starks is still a very average tackle, even on the blindside side. Within the next year or two, they have to find someone to start grooming to take over long term.
Correction. If what JPezzy has said is true:
“Starks deal is a $26.3 million, four-year contract, including $10 million in guaranteed money.”
Then I stand corrected on the Steelers overpaid comment. Hard to believe that Starks would do that deal, knowing that there really isn’t anyone on the roster to challenge him for the LT position.
Good deal for the Steelers, bad deal for Starks.
I don’t know why anyone would think Starks is a young franchise LT.
According this website, which I think does a good job evaluating NFL talent, he is the 57th best tackle in the game.
http://profootballfocus.com/by_position.php?tab=by_position&season=2008&pos=T&stype=r&runpass=&teamid=-1&numgames=1
I personally thought the Steelers strategy of tagging him last year was stupid because i thought it removed any leverage Steelers had in locking him to a long term fair market deal. Why sign an extension for reasonalbe money when the Steelers were overpaying him.
Then, when they franchised him this year, I was pissed, but I wasn’t as pissed because he did have a good year and increased his free market value. So the Steelers weren’t overpaying him by too much in case they failed to lock him up.
But this 4 year 26M contract is a damn good deal for the Steelers considering they already guaranteed him 8.5M in case he did not sign long term. Well done , both sides. If fatass Kemo can get 5M a year, then a veteran like Starks is certainly worth is at less than 7M.
As a diehard Steelers fan and someone who rarely second guesses what I think is an outstanding front office, im less than thrilled about this deal.
From a big picture perspective, I think they were in a sense forced to do this deal as there has been some neglect of the OL position in the draft and free agency in recent years IMO. All teams in a salary cap system have to prioritize and the PS front office has put the OL lower in the pecking order. We won the SB last yr, largely on the basis of a great defense, so its hard to second-guess their decision making.
Still, its hard not to look at this and say we overpaid a bit for what is a pretty average OT. Starks isnt terrible, but hes not outstanding, either. The guy has been around for awhile and hes not going to get any better. Again….not terrible….call him “servicable”. Im just not sure servicable warrants that type of contract.
Meh….it is what it is, I guess.
A disappointing career??? WT……… He was bad in 2006 along with a host of other players as well as the coaching staff. Starx isn’t an all-pro but he certainly hasn’t be disappointing. This is a good signing by the Steelers.
UMD87, your geeky link is crap. It has Jordan Gross rated 85th, Tony Ugoh rated 102, and a bunch of backups who played only a handful of snaps all year rated in the top 30. Useless list, try again. Hell, they even have Willie Colon at #13.
umd78: That website is AWFUL.
Ben Roethlisberger is the 24th ranked QB? Below Tarvaris Jackson?
Shaun Hill ranks above Tony Romo?
I’m not a fan of any of those, but I am a Jaguars fan, and David Garrard is ranked 9th. I think Garrard will rebound this year, but he was NOT the 9th best QB in the NFL last year, not anywhere close.
hey umd78….they also have BigBen ranked 24th, Heath Miller 60th and Ike Taylor 139th…I don t know how much stock I d put in that website!
TheVillain112 says:
June 23rd, 2009 at 1:06 pm
@texasPHINSfan
The Steelers definitely overpaid for Starks but your reasoning if a bit off.
The Steelers haven’t already paid Starks $15 Mil for two seasons. He was paid last season the tag number and would have been paid again this season IF a long term deal wasn’t done.
Secondly, Marvel Smith is no longer with the team.
Lastly, Starks probably wouldn’t have gotten as much in the open market but he would have still been paid nicely. It overall contract wouldn’t have been much of a dropoff.
————————————————————————————————
understood, and appreciated.
Obviously my knowledge of the steelers is nowhere near yours, i was just going off the information in the article Florio posted. And no, Alabama Leprechaun, it has nothing to do with jealousy. I don’t “hate” the steelers at all, and very much respect that franchise’s accomplishments. I was making an observation off the article, that’s all. :beer: