| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
HyponGrey
Joined: 23 Jun 2012
Posts: 1849
Location: Mount Laurel, NJ
|
 Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 8:32 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| Dubyajay wrote: | | Dunderhead wrote: | Just can not understand any hate of AJ Hawk... None at all. His position is never gonna be a splash play position. Just not going to happen. This year he's been great. Yeah, I said it, great - just like 2010 maybe better.
This is a league of Money Ball. It has a hard cap, and every game production is what drives good teams, not some of these guys that hardly play 10 games. Hawk plays all the time and that's a premium you pay for - it is equal to splash plays.
The money Hawk is payed is right where Chad Greenway gets paid. He's probably the guy that Hawk best resembles as a player, and Hawk has put in more time than he has. Greenway got Franchised a few years back by the Vikes. Wanna blame someone for how much you pay a guy like Hawk? Blame the Vikings, they set the price!
Football, as a whole (cap, production, injuries...) isn't a vacuum science. You have hits and misses. I'll agree that Hawk plays to his salary and he doesn't give more than his salary. That's not a bad thing, it's normal. Most teams don't have the best QB making half price. Most teams don't have OLBers making 1/4 what they should for what they've produced. This is why I think GB fans act like spoiled babies cause the production overall for this team for what is paid out is ridiculous. This team, for production should cost 500 million, not the 200 we pay.
And as far as Winston Moss' quote, so what? Its an old tactic. Ron Wolf said the same thing about LeRoy Butler. Leadership calls out players to try and get more out of them... And since Moss did that we've gotten more outta Hawk, he's lost weight, gained speed, and seems stronger. |
Just to clarify that point as well. The team asked him to add weight (mass- think Mac) so that he could better take on blockers. Only when we saw that it affected him negatively did he drop the weight. |
We'll start from the bottom and work our way up.
Hawk didn't add weight, he played in college at 250. his weight has only gone down since.
First, your comments on the QB and Olb are ridiculous. They signed the contract, and will be signing a much bigger one in the near future. Since you made them however, lets bring up the concept of salary appropriateness. We're paying Lang more than Nelson, we believe Clay and AR are underpaid, and it is believed Hawk is overpaid, hence about half of the argument.
I do blame the Vikings, and the 49ers, and a few other teams for overpaying their players and inflation position value. It makes it so much harder on responsible teams like ours.
There are players at that position who are splash players, however these are the exception, not the rule. And lets admit it, Hawk had alot of help from Capers in 2010, this year he's been hung out to dry: he's been better this year. Still think his rookie year was his best year, though that is IMO a result of him playing his natural position.
_________________
| Kal-El wrote: | | Going by that list, it seems pedophilia is very "in" right now. |
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
RG25
Joined: 10 Dec 2012
Posts: 240
Location: Italy
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 9:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| I'm not real familiar with contracts and things of that sort of stuff so I won't get into that but I think Hawk has been a solid linebacker for us since he has gotten here. Is there linebackers better then him, obviously there is but he's no slouch either. I'm glad the Packers drafted him and I hope he retires as a Packer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CentralFC
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 2143
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| RG25 wrote: | | I'm not real familiar with contracts and things of that sort of stuff so I won't get into that but I think Hawk has been a solid linebacker for us since he has gotten here. Is there linebackers better then him, obviously there is but he's no slouch either. I'm glad the Packers drafted him and I hope he retires as a Packer. |
What I like about Hawk and value above all else is his availability.
With that being said, dropping that weight in the offseason has made a big difference in both facets of his game.
The issue that I have is his pay for play. Those numbers don't match up with his impact level and that can't be argued.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RG25
Joined: 10 Dec 2012
Posts: 240
Location: Italy
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 10:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| CentralFC wrote: | | RG25 wrote: | | I'm not real familiar with contracts and things of that sort of stuff so I won't get into that but I think Hawk has been a solid linebacker for us since he has gotten here. Is there linebackers better then him, obviously there is but he's no slouch either. I'm glad the Packers drafted him and I hope he retires as a Packer. |
What I like about Hawk and value above all else is his availability.
With that being said, dropping that weight in the offseason has made a big difference in both facets of his game.
The issue that I have is his pay for play. Those numbers don't match up with his impact level and that can't be argued. |
Ok I understand now, he hasn't played up to the value of his contract. I never really looked at the contracts before. I think I'm just biased cause he is one of my favorite players. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pugger
Joined: 01 May 2010
Posts: 4311
Location: N. Fort Myers, FL
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 12:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| CentralFC wrote: | | RG25 wrote: | | I'm not real familiar with contracts and things of that sort of stuff so I won't get into that but I think Hawk has been a solid linebacker for us since he has gotten here. Is there linebackers better then him, obviously there is but he's no slouch either. I'm glad the Packers drafted him and I hope he retires as a Packer. |
What I like about Hawk and value above all else is his availability.
With that being said, dropping that weight in the offseason has made a big difference in both facets of his game.
The issue that I have is his pay for play. Those numbers don't match up with his impact level and that can't be argued. |
Yes, we've had other LBers out for games/seasons and Hawk is always there - steady Eddy. 
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dunderhead
Joined: 13 Nov 2009
Posts: 1652
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 3:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| HyponGrey wrote: |
We'll start from the bottom and work our way up.
Hawk didn't add weight, he played in college at 250. his weight has only gone down since.
First, your comments on the QB and Olb are ridiculous. They signed the contract, and will be signing a much bigger one in the near future. Since you made them however, lets bring up the concept of salary appropriateness. We're paying Lang more than Nelson, we believe Clay and AR are underpaid, and it is believed Hawk is overpaid, hence about half of the argument.
Ridiculous? Huh? How so? Cause you says so? And you can talk the future all you want, when Rodgers signed his last contract it was Romo money. He's far out played Romo. That was a smart GM who built through the draft. We got lucky with the timing, but it was a risk for the Pack. Rodgers took less for a guarantee. That's how that worked out.
Lang is getting 5.2 million ave for 5 yrs, but almost no guarantees... Jody is getting 4.5 mil, but it's only for 3 years, meaning he's going to be free in his prime. Also 5 mil is guaranteed for Jordy. You need to understand contracts a lot more before you compare these two... The Lang one is very team friendly, even long term. Jordy? Good in the very short, but not so much latter and it puts Jordy in the driver seat, but it came more than a season before his contract came up so. But these aren't real comparable and anyone that knows anything wouldn't do it.
Clay is still working on his rookie deal so that was slotted at #16... Rodgers, was a resign that was just amazing for the Pack, but there was risk and many here were not the happiest at the time. 5 starts and making mid/high starter money? But it was 2 or 3 years before his rookie contract was going to expire.
But the biggest difference is that AJ Hawk was going to become an URFA, actually was because he was technically cut. When that happens, you pay market. Hawk took a risk and it paid off. None of the others did that (so we paid less), but you don't seem to know much about contracts, market value, going rate, FA designations, how to gamble, why to gamble... Anything really.
Just a lot of anger and opinion. I'm thankful everyday for the FO we have and that these decisions aren't made politically like in the past under Parins "the Idiot". Cause Parins would probably give your drivel consideration.
I do blame the Vikings, and the 49ers, and a few other teams for overpaying their players and inflation position value. It makes it so much harder on responsible teams like ours.
And that is the sole place your anger should lie. Hawk is getting the same coin as players that got to FA. You can bet TT and Ball tossed a lucrative contract at Hawk that was lower than the one AJ signed midseason. AJ just choose to gamble and that he wouldn't get an injury and that his play would continue to be above average to good. It paid off. That was risk, he got rewarded. End of story.
There are players at that position who are splash players, however these are the exception, not the rule. And lets admit it, Hawk had alot of help from Capers in 2010, this year he's been hung out to dry: he's been better this year. Still think his rookie year was his best year, though that is IMO a result of him playing his natural position. |
What? Hawk got benched in 2010?!?! By Capers! No, Mr. Hawk changed his attitude, worked harder, and patiently waited for his opportunity. When he got it he never let go, never held a grudge, always showed up for meetings and did everything he could to be a leader. Hawk wasn't given anything, he took what he got and gambled with what he had and believed in himself. Great story really. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HyponGrey
Joined: 23 Jun 2012
Posts: 1849
Location: Mount Laurel, NJ
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Dunderhead wrote: |
Ridiculous? Huh? How so? Cause you says so? And you can talk the future all you want, when Rodgers signed his last contract it was Romo money. He's far out played Romo. That was a smart GM who built through the draft. We got lucky with the timing, but it was a risk for the Pack. Rodgers took less for a guarantee. That's how that worked out.
Lang is getting 5.2 million ave for 5 yrs, but almost no guarantees... Jody is getting 4.5 mil, but it's only for 3 years, meaning he's going to be free in his prime. Also 5 mil is guaranteed for Jordy. You need to understand contracts a lot more before you compare these two... The Lang one is very team friendly, even long term. Jordy? Good in the very short, but not so much latter and it puts Jordy in the driver seat, but it came more than a season before his contract came up so. But these aren't real comparable and anyone that knows anything wouldn't do it.
Just a lot of anger and opinion. I'm thankful everyday for the FO we have and that these decisions aren't made politically like in the past under Parins "the Idiot". Cause Parins would probably give your drivel consideration
What? Hawk got benched in 2010?!?! By Capers! No, Mr. Hawk changed his attitude, worked harder, and patiently waited for his opportunity. When he got it he never let go, never held a grudge, always showed up for meetings and did everything he could to be a leader. Hawk wasn't given anything, he took what he got and gambled with what he had and believed in himself. Great story really. |
Perhaps it's that I feel being underpaid and under contract are mutually exclusive. Double standard? Absolutely. Still a firm believer that you should be willing to honor the full extent of your contract or just not sign it. Thank God we have nobody like Umeniora, Jones-Drew, or Revis on our team, or if so at least not many.
Just going of a reported Sitton quote, didn't bother looking up the numbers. I do love how you shame me for pointing out the future contracts with Clay and AR, then do the exact same looking at Nelson.
Amen to that. Is it any wonder why teams keep stealing (read: giving advancement opportunities to) our personnel?
Capers gave him help schematically (read: hid him) when in coverage when Hawk was on the field. As a good DC will do. That was my sole point there. Some hasty anger and opinion there.
_________________
| Kal-El wrote: | | Going by that list, it seems pedophilia is very "in" right now. |
Last edited by HyponGrey on Tue Dec 25, 2012 3:49 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
smetana34
Joined: 14 Feb 2007
Posts: 2756
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 3:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ^^^ Hawk entered the league weighing 240. He's now 247 after cutting weight this past offseason. So umm..what? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HyponGrey
Joined: 23 Jun 2012
Posts: 1849
Location: Mount Laurel, NJ
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
smetana34
Joined: 14 Feb 2007
Posts: 2756
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
smetana34
Joined: 14 Feb 2007
Posts: 2756
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| I'm pretty sure it was reported and tweeted that Hawk put on weight to MLB for us |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HyponGrey
Joined: 23 Jun 2012
Posts: 1849
Location: Mount Laurel, NJ
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| smetana34 wrote: | | I'm pretty sure it was reported and tweeted that Hawk put on weight to MLB for us |
He may have dropped it after moving to 3-4. He was around 247 back in January.
_________________
| Kal-El wrote: | | Going by that list, it seems pedophilia is very "in" right now. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dubyajay
Joined: 23 Mar 2010
Posts: 1349
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| smetana34 wrote: | | I'm pretty sure it was reported and tweeted that Hawk put on weight to MLB for us |
He definitely put weight on for us, then dropped it again. I'm far too lazy a person to look such a thing up, and wouldn't know where to start either, but I remember him coming into camp a year or two ago looking huge. It was the same year he was getting crapped on by some fans for looking too slow. So the next year he dropped the weight again and looked more comfortable and agile.
_________________
| McThreadski wrote: |
Fear of re-injuring is a real thing. Years ago, I messed up my left leg in a freak break dancing incident... I never recovered mentally from it and I no longer "own" the dance floor at weddings and bar mitzvahs. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gregoreo22
Joined: 20 Dec 2005
Posts: 2459
Location: GB
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
But you all digress...
If I'm a team picking 5-10 in the draft, I want a guy who's going to be a starter for me for many years. When you're picking that high, you have some holes. When you're picking at #1 or #2, you better draft a pro bowler, otherwise you've overpaid. At #5, Hawk was the smart pick. It was between him, Huff, and Davis, if I remember correctly. I fell in love with Huff, but knew Hawk was the safer pick. You go with the solid choice if you're not falling all over someone else.
_________________
"My style is impetuous. My defense is impregnable." Yours truly on the sig...
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ayt
Joined: 27 Apr 2009
Posts: 762
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 11:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I don't care where he was picked. It is irrelevant where any player was picked, or not picked, as is often the case with our team.
He simply isn't that good and is, at best, a backup. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
