1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

DJ Smith > AJ Hawk ?

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by bozz_2006, Jun 12, 2012.

  1. MARCOPO

    MARCOPO Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    10
    Ratings:
    +0
    As I understand the numbers, if the Packers cut A.J. Hawk this season, they'll take a 1.2 hit on their cap. If they cut him next year, the cap will decrease by 200K. He won't be cut this year. What you probably will see is more and more use of "packages", involving Smith in and Hawk out.
     
  2. 7thFloorRA

    7thFloorRA Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    1,918
    Ratings:
    +840
    I think they will probably keep Hawk around because 1 injury to Smith and you are screwed if Hawk is gone. I hope they start Smith though and use Hawk in running/short yardage/goal line situations only.
     
  3. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,991
    Ratings:
    +1,013
    Exactly my thought's...the loss of Jenkings hurt us bad and the numbers proved it.
     
  4. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,571
    Ratings:
    +650
    You want AJ "I'll let you drag me ten yards before you go down" Hawk in on short yard/goal line situations? Not me!
     
  5. DevilDon

    DevilDon Inclement Weather Fan

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,392
    Ratings:
    +445
    The Hate Hawk Talk has gone on forever. I think he's a serviceable starter. He'd probably start for most teams. That's not a bust. Are there better ILBs? Lots of 'em but you can't have superstars at every position. I think the Packers got enough out of him and continue to get enough out of him to justify their faith in him.
    I do however think that we will be talking another story next near with Manning. I think he's a high motor, high effort player who has to have time to learn the NFL game. I think that is what the Packers saw in him to cause them to move up in the draft to pick him. You have to believe if the Packers thought DJ was the answer they would have had no reason to draft Manning except depth but would TT move up in the draft for depth?
     
  6. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,571
    Ratings:
    +650
    I'm not saying he's a bust. I'm saying that the money spent on him could be spent far more effectively on guys like Sitton and Jennings, who are in need of new contracts. It's not that I don't want Hawk on the team at all. What I don't want is his salary on the books.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. PackMan13x

    PackMan13x Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Messages:
    307
    Ratings:
    +132
    OK, as a Buckeye fan, I watched EVERY college game of AJ's career. The physical attributes were there, the stats were there, the production was there. BUT it seemed like in college he always had the knack of being in the right place at the right time, like always. I chalked it up to instinct, and was pumped when we took him at #5. But as I watched him play for the Packers, I felt he was solid but never had the impact he did watching him at OSU. Every year I was expecting the breakout year, it sorta came in 2010, but went last year. I honestly feel he has what it takes, I saw it first hand, it just isn't happening. If it weren't for the salary, I would want him to play out his contract.
     
  8. PackMan13x

    PackMan13x Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Messages:
    307
    Ratings:
    +132
    I hear all this Jennings/Sitton contract talk and I'd like to throw it out there that #12 is also about due for a new huge contract. I didn't look it up but I think he makes less than Sanchez and Bradford for crying out loud!

    EDIT: more than Sanchez, but 9th highest QB base salary...
     
  9. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,571
    Ratings:
    +650
    I mention Sitton and Jennings because they're in the final year of their contracts, and the $5-6M devoted to Hawk this season could be utilized as signing bonus money for those guys. I'm not forgetting about Rodgers; I'm just assuming his new contract is likely a year away. Just my guess.
     
  10. 60six

    60six DIE HARD

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    250
    Ratings:
    +65
    Sitton just signed a new 6 year deal last year, so hes all set.

    Jennings, Lang, Masthay and Brad Jones are the top 2013 F/As. Jones not so much, but the other 3 need addressing.

    EDIT : Masthay is a restricted F/A, so he not going anywhere

    Rodger needs to wait his turn so we dont screw up the cap number.
     
  11. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,571
    Ratings:
    +650
    Huh. I wonder who the hell I was thinking of then... :confused:
     
  12. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    So he can tackle the RB in the middle of his touchdown dance? I hope the exact opposite, Put Hawk in to play minimal coverage when the team is likely to take a shot way downfield. Put his brain to work in a situation where it pays to be smart when you're not fast enough
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  13. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    Hawk has great "intangibles", he never touches anybody.
    production production production.
     
  14. ExpatPacker

    ExpatPacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Messages:
    1,324
    Ratings:
    +519
    Why must the Packers coaching staff insist that Hawk "didn't have an off year"? Why are they bending over backwards for this guy?

    It's one thing not to openly criticize your player, but comon.
     
  15. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,991
    Ratings:
    +1,013
    Hawk will never be the Patrick Willis/ Ray Lewis type of MLB but for his salary number i do agree that he should be more of an impact player. I also agree that our d-line was garbage last year and did not do what they needed to do taking on blockers.
     
  16. GreenBlood

    GreenBlood Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,705
    Ratings:
    +652
    Respectfully, Thompson is NOT a guy who has a record of over-paying players. I think he's in a far better position to evaluate Hawk's value to the team than we are.
     
  17. Darth Garfunkel

    Darth Garfunkel Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2010
    Messages:
    522
    Ratings:
    +495
    Maybe they just meant it wasn't an off year since he's mediocre every year.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  18. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,571
    Ratings:
    +650
    True, but Hawk still doesn't pass the eye test.
     
  19. 757Niner

    757Niner Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2012
    Messages:
    44
    Ratings:
    +13
    Interesting reading all the banter in this thread. I was never enamored with Hawk as a draft prospect. Everyone loved him but it was something about his instincts that I thought wouldn't carry over to the next level. That and I thought Carpenter actually didnt get enough credit for the impact he had on Hawk's play and not vice versa. I thought he would be good. I didnt see the greatness everyone else was expecting. That being said, I agree with the most everyone here. As a outsider watching the Packers, I always thought he was good ILB but wasn't a playmaker that you want your MIKE to be. A more athletically version of Derek Smith, former Niner and Redskin MLB. Makes a ton of tackles, but very little impact down to down. I always came away more impressed by Bishop, especially his stoutness in the run game. Didnt see enough of DJ Smith last year to draw a conclusion so I'll be sure to keep a eye out for him this year. Quick question, are the ILBs in Capers scheme interchangable? Or do they play more traditionally 3-4 roles, with the TED more of the thumper and the MIKE more of the playmaker?
     
  20. 60six

    60six DIE HARD

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    250
    Ratings:
    +65
    He did with Hawk, but great GMs do make mistakes. This was after a SB win and a #1 defensive ranking that year. Also the contract when down to the final hour to get it done before the lockout.
     
  21. GreenBlood

    GreenBlood Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,705
    Ratings:
    +652
    Now you're making the claim that you know Hawk's value to the team better than Ted does.
     
  22. TJV

    TJV Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,255
    Ratings:
    +3,295
    And you are inferring Thompson doesn’t make mistakes. Using hindsight of course we can identify those mistakes. The reason Thompson is one of the best GMs in the league is not that he is perfect and makes no mistakes; it’s that he makes fewer mistakes than others and far fewer than most. For example, not pursuing Cullen Jenkins in free agency was a mistake. Who doesn’t agree he would have been worth more to the Packers’ defense than Philly paid him? Thompson, like every other GM in the history of the NFL, has also made mistakes in the draft (Justin Harrell and Brian Brohm are two obvious examples). And only a fool would say if he could go back to the 2006 draft, knowing what he knows today, Thompson would select Hawk at #5.

    Regarding Hawk’s extension (actually he was a UFA for a few minutes before signing his new deal) we can compare Hawk’s compensation and performance to other ILBs in the league and even to Packers like Bishop who outperform him at a lower compensation. It may be argued that Hawk’s play was negatively affected by the poor play of the DL, but it can’t reasonably be argued that Bishop didn’t face the same situation.

    Beyond that if the prevailing view on this board is ‘Thompson made a decision, therefore it must be correct’, it would no longer fully be a discussion board. Thompson deserves the benefit of the doubt but no human being should be immune from criticism. And this is coming from an adamant Thompson fan: http://www.packerforum.com/threads/thompsons-way.29622/
     
  23. GreenBlood

    GreenBlood Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,705
    Ratings:
    +652
    No, I'm not. I'm saying there isn't a clear consensus that it was a mistake to begin with. It is your opinion that he made a mistake, but that in itself does not mean that it was, in fact, a mistake at all. Some guys are on the defense because they are super athletic. Some because they are aggressive. Some are outstanding tacklers. Hawk happens to be a smart guy who is outstanding at making adjustments on the fly. That's why Capers wanted him back and Thompson paid him what the market dictated. Plain and simple.
     
  24. TJV

    TJV Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,255
    Ratings:
    +3,295
    Obviously everyone here is offering their opinions but just because Thompson did something doesn’t mean it was the correct decision, which is precisely what you inferred. And at this point we don’t know if Thompson could go back in time whether or not he’d make the same decision on Hawk.
     
  25. DoddPower

    DoddPower Nick Perry is watching you, NFL QB's!

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2007
    Messages:
    817
    Ratings:
    +54
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page