AJ Hawk

[Smidgeon]

I was looking through some of the Packer's combine numbers, and AJ Hawk's really stood out as being exceptionally athletic. But that athleticism never seemed to quite translate onto the field. I'm just curious if anyone has a reasonable explanation into why that happened, or if that's just the general mystery.

Some of the numbers:

4.59 40-yard dash (Burnett, James Jones, Nelson, and Tramontana were all in the 4.5-4.6 range)
1.56 10-yard split (Of 10-yard splits I could find, only Pat Lee, Matthews, Jordy Nelson, and Davon House are more than .02 faster)
1.87 last 20 (Of 20 yard splits I could find, Hawk is tied with Alex Green for the third best time after Collins and [Grant and Jennings]--who are tied for second)
24 Bench
40" vertical (Of verticals I could find, Hawk is tied for the best on the team with Nick Collins)
9' 7" broad
3.96 Shuttle (Of shuttles I could find, easily the best on the team by 0.10 seconds)
6.82 Cone (Of the 3 cones I could find, tied for fourth after House and Jennings and Peprah on the team)

*********
Other non-Hawk numbers that stood out to me:
- Pat Lee had pretty good numbers too, but it also didn't translate well (4.41 40, 1.46 10-yard split, 1.88 last 20, and a 10' broad, but had a 31" vertical and a 7.07 3 cone)
- Shields and Collins are the only Packers with sub-4.40 40 times
- Davon House has (of the times I found) the 6th best 40, the best 20-yard split, the 4th best 10-yard split, the 5th best shuttle, and the best 3 cone, but was average or worse in the vertical jump (33.5") and the broad (9' 1")
- Grant's long speed (last 20) was faster than anyone else's except Collins
- Only three players had a 10-yard split under 1.60 and a last 20 under 1.85: Grant, Jennings, and Alex Green
- Only three players had a shuttle under 4.10: Hawk, Woodson, and Spencer Havner
- There was a 0.10 second gap between [Davon House and Greg Jennings] and everyone else in the 3-cone

*********
Notes:
- I am now more excited to see House and Alex Green in action. They both have some impressive numbers.
- Hawk and Pat Lee confuse me a little bit as most others seem to have numbers with a relatively natural translation to the field
- I understand that the numbers are relatively subjective since the official ones are hardly available data
- Without the entire team's data (since some opt out and some splits aren't available), some of these conclusions are spotty at best. But I still find it interesting.

[red]

oh thank god, i thought this was gonna be another injury thread

[Patler]

oh thank god, i thought this was gonna be another injury thread

:lol: Funny how conditioned we become. I was thinking the same thing!

[Upnorth]

I though some one was going to call him a bust again.

[Upnorth]

I do not put much stock in combine numbers. They have bearing, but how you play should be the final say in draft decisions. If the humans timing you start .2 seconds late, you look super fast, .2 sec early, super slow. .2 difference in 40 yards equals 1/2 yard maybe, if uninterupted!
Al Davis cares alot about combine numbers, how does that work out?

[Smidgeon]

I do not put much stock in combine numbers. They have bearing, but how you play should be the final say in draft decisions. If the humans timing you start .2 seconds late, you look super fast, .2 sec early, super slow. .2 difference in 40 yards equals 1/2 yard maybe, if uninterupted!
Al Davis cares alot about combine numbers, how does that work out?

So does every other GM in the league.

[Lurker64]

Ted is actually much more of a numbers drafter than Packer fans like to think. Rarely does he draft a player who does not test well athletically for position-specific traits. Of course, if a guy has functional athleticism for his position, you hope that shows up on tape as well.

[Upnorth]

You really think every other GM put that much emphasis on combine results? Maybe I am ignorant of reality but I think that most GM's just use combine results to split hairs over competing players who are very similar in style and preformance, not using it as a major scouting / decision tool. Who else would have drafted Heyward-Bay that high? How about a 3rd for Pryor? That is greatly based of combine results. I am not saying they are worthless, just not worth very much.

[Fritz]

Ah, the three-cone drill let Thompson down!

I tell you, the three-cone and the shuttle are the secrets to Ted's drafting success.

[Joemailman]

Ted is actually much more of a numbers drafter than Packer fans like to think. Rarely does he draft a player who does not test well athletically for position-specific traits. Of course, if a guy has functional athleticism for his position, you hope that shows up on tape as well.

My sense is that Ted uses the combine to eliminate those players who lack the athleticism needed to play the position. He won't draft a guy because he ran a 4.2 40, but he might eliminate a guy because he ran a 4.7.

[Upnorth]

My sense is that Ted uses the combine to eliminate those players who lack the athleticism needed to play the position. He won't draft a guy because he ran a 4.2 40, but he might eliminate a guy because he ran a 4.7.

Exactly.

[3irty1]

3.96 Shuttle (Of shuttles I could find, easily the best on the team by 0.10 seconds)
...
- Only three players had a shuttle under 4.10: Hawk, Woodson, and Spencer Havner


Morgan Burnett says hi.
20 Yrd Shuttle: 3.92

There was a reason Hawk went top 5 and I think you found it. He was a LB prospect the likes of which haven't been seen since. Between Hawk's 2nd and 3rd year it seemed like he bulked up an awful lot and a guy who's only knock was that he was stiff became totally rigid. In truth the guy is still an outrageous athlete, but being a fluid athlete is the other half of the equation especially for those bigger guys--just ask Jermichael Finley.

[Lurker64]

My sense is that Ted uses the combine to eliminate those players who lack the athleticism needed to play the position. He won't draft a guy because he ran a 4.2 40, but he might eliminate a guy because he ran a 4.7.

The only "40 or Bust" team in the NFL is the Raiders, and we all know how that works out. I think that Ted has size and athleticism requirements to put a draftable grade on a guy (no RBs under 5'10", no DBs under 5'11" for example) and will only deviate them a bit (Brandon Jackson was 1/8" short of 5'10" and Bryan Bulaga's 3-cone wasn't what you'd hope.) But the thing is, you don't see Ted drafting a lot of guys who were super-productive college players despite their athletic limitations, but you do see Ted drafting a lot of guys who are outrageously athletic in relevant categories for their size/body type (Raji, Matthews, Burnett, Green, House, Quarless, etc.)

I think that "it doesn't really matter how guys do running around in their underwear" is just a media fabrication (since it nicely ties into the myths that the football media likes to promote). But then again the media focuses a ton on the 40-yard dash, which doesn't really matter, and they put virtually no attention on everything else and what it means.

[bobblehead]

Ah, the three-cone drill let Thompson down!

I tell you, the three-cone and the shuttle are the secrets to Ted's drafting success.

Of course. They show change of direction and short acceleration. More important than who runs a fast 40. That shows ability to get out of the blocks fast and speed in the last 20....after you have been tackled on any football field.

[Bretsky]

Here is my take; year one Hawk looked pretty good. I think they wanted him to bulk up and focus on his strength ; a lot of the radio heads thought that as well. I think Hawk lost some speed year two and was less effective. He seems to be a natural leader and for the first time last year he was put in a leader role. I think he's focused and pays more attention to detail in his spot now so now he's just flowing naturally again.

[Deputy Nutz]

Honestly, I think the NFL game is a bit to fast for Hawk. I have always been a fan of AJ Hawk, he is athletic, but more of a workout warrior than a true athlete. He is a hard worker in the weight room, and in the film room, and it is because of those reasons that he stays on the field, it isn't his athletic ability or his feel for the game, which aren't bad, but not great either. I probably watch Hawk more than any other defensive player for the Packers, and he just doesn't get into the flow of the game, ever, if he has natural instincts he doesn't ever use them.

[rbaloha1]

Honestly, I think the NFL game is a bit to fast for Hawk. I have always been a fan of AJ Hawk, he is athletic, but more of a workout warrior than a true athlete. He is a hard worker in the weight room, and in the film room, and it is because of those reasons that he stays on the field, it isn't his athletic ability or his feel for the game, which aren't bad, but not great either. I probably watch Hawk more than any other defensive player for the Packers, and he just doesn't get into the flow of the game, ever, if he has natural instincts he doesn't ever use them.

Nice assessment.

[Guiness]

Here is my take; year one Hawk looked pretty good. I think they wanted him to bulk up and focus on his strength ; a lot of the radio heads thought that as well. I think Hawk lost some speed year two and was less effective. He seems to be a natural leader and for the first time last year he was put in a leader role. I think he's focused and pays more attention to detail in his spot now so now he's just flowing naturally again.

I tend to think this way as well. I remember it being mentioned after Barnett went down that he would be communicating the defensive alignments and plays on the field...and it was much improved. I think the work in the film room that Nutz mentions is part of this.

[Yoop]

would the NFL continue to pay out gobs of money each year for a combine GM's payed little attention to? I think the combine serves to confirm thoughts GM's have already garnered about players or to expose weakness they have not seen.
obviously Hawk looks like a much better fit in Capers 34 than he ever looked in the Bates/Sanders 43, Hawk looks best in tight quarters, much better than he looks in space, he had a 130+ tackles last year, to go along with Bishops 100+, thats 230+ tackles from your inside backers, who would argue with that kind of production? we got DB's to take care of the space work, I want Hawk thumping the LOS, for 150 tackles this year lol.

[gbgary]

Honestly, I think the NFL game is a bit to fast for Hawk. I have always been a fan of AJ Hawk, he is athletic, but more of a workout warrior than a true athlete. He is a hard worker in the weight room, and in the film room, and it is because of those reasons that he stays on the field, it isn't his athletic ability or his feel for the game, which aren't bad, but not great either. I probably watch Hawk more than any other defensive player for the Packers, and he just doesn't get into the flow of the game, ever, if he has natural instincts he doesn't ever use them.


Nice assessment.

just thinking too much. he's bounced around a bit since he got here. o/s, i/s, part-time, full-time. maybe now, with consistent play, he'll be better/quicker/faster.

[Smidgeon]

Morgan Burnett says hi.
20 Yrd Shuttle: 3.92

There was a reason Hawk went top 5 and I think you found it. He was a LB prospect the likes of which haven't been seen since. Between Hawk's 2nd and 3rd year it seemed like he bulked up an awful lot and a guy who's only knock was that he was stiff became totally rigid. In truth the guy is still an outrageous athlete, but being a fluid athlete is the other half of the equation especially for those bigger guys--just ask Jermichael Finley.

Thanks. Couldn't find Burnett's numbers past his 40.

[MadScientist]

would the NFL continue to pay out gobs of money each year for a combine GM's payed little attention to? I think the combine serves to confirm thoughts GM's have already garnered about players or to expose weakness they have not seen.

We always get reports on the numbers, especially the over-rated 40 times, but there are two other critical aspects of the combine, the interview and the medical check. It is cost effective for NFL teams to support the combine instead of flying in various prospects or going to pro days all over the place. It also means that a team won't get a stud player burned out from traveling to various teams and interviewing poorly and then wind up drafting a crappy player instead (see Ronnie Lott vs Rich Campbell).

The numbers game is useful for normalizing players, since the competition they faced is so different. Although you can still get burned by a player with good numbers and production who succeeded only because his talent was so much better than the competition.

[Pugger]

If memory serves the draft class that Hawk came from wasn't very deep. He might not be the player we all hoped but he is a leader and seems to be well respected in the lockerroom. These traits have served him well.

[Deputy Nutz]

Linebacker was pretty deep in this class but that shouldn't matter all that much, it should be graded 3 to 4 years after. I think Chad Greenway is far and away the better player between him and AJ Hawk, and Greenway went like ten picks lower. Hawk was a great college player, had the size, and the combine numbers to back up his play at Ohio St, he just wasn't able to transition his dominance of the college game to the NFL game like you would hope a 5th overall pick would make.

[Fritz]

Morgan Burnett says hi.
20 Yrd Shuttle: 3.92

There was a reason Hawk went top 5 and I think you found it. He was a LB prospect the likes of which haven't been seen since. Between Hawk's 2nd and 3rd year it seemed like he bulked up an awful lot and a guy who's only knock was that he was stiff became totally rigid. In truth the guy is still an outrageous athlete, but being a fluid athlete is the other half of the equation especially for those bigger guys--just ask Jermichael Finley.

One of the few times that a guy being stiff is seen as a bad thing.

And I just realized that in the NFL there somcetimes is a difference between being stiff and being a stiff.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'd agree that Greenway is better than Hawk, but Hawk is solid and I also think Greenway is a bit overrated. He's good, but not great. Watch the Packers-Vikings games last year and watch how often Brandon Jackson made Greenway look like a fool on the outside.

[Lurker64]

If memory serves the draft class that Hawk came from wasn't very deep. He might not be the player we all hoped but he is a leader and seems to be well respected in the lockerroom. These traits have served him well.

It was a ridiculously overhyped draft class, we were projecting like 3-4 hall of famers on draft weekend, but ended up being the most disappointing draft (first round at least) in recent memory. There are about 4 players drafted behind Hawk in the first round that are clearly better players (at their position) than Hawk is: Ngata (best player in the draft), Hali, Holmes, and Mangold. There are two players drafted ahead of Hawk that are better players than he is (Mario Williams and Ferguson). Hawk's about the seventh best player in the first round and he was drafted fifth. Not that big a disappointment. Hawk is a push with guys like Greenway, I would say. Greenway's been pretty overrated for a long time.

Guys like Reggie Bush, Vince Young, Donte Whitner, Matt Leinart, Ernie Sims, Kamerion Wimbley, Brodrick Bunkley, Bobby Carpenter, and Lawrence Maroney... now those are disappointments, that draft was a minefield.

[vince]

It was a ridiculously overhyped draft class, we were projecting like 3-4 hall of famers on draft weekend, but ended up being the most disappointing draft (first round at least) in recent memory. There are about 4 players drafted behind Hawk in the first round that are clearly better players (at their position) than Hawk is: Ngata (best player in the draft), Hali, Holmes, and Mangold. There are two players drafted ahead of Hawk that are better players than he is (Mario Williams and Ferguson). Hawk's about the seventh best player in the first round and he was drafted fifth. Not that big a disappointment. Hawk is a push with guys like Greenway, I would say. Greenway's been pretty overrated for a long time.

Guys like Reggie Bush, Vince Young, Donte Whitner, Matt Leinart, Ernie Sims, Kamerion Wimbley, Brodrick Bunkley, Bobby Carpenter, and Lawrence Maroney... now those are disappointments, that draft was a minefield.
I'm pretty sure Tramon Williams went undrafted that year. In retrospect he should have been a high first-round pick.

[Guiness]

I'm pretty sure Tramon Williams went undrafted that year. In retrospect he should have been a high first-round pick.

With the benefit of hindsight, maybe, but his development surely couldn't have been forseen. It wasn't like he was a finished product that was overlooked, he was cut from Houston, and spent a year on the practice squad here. He probably should have been drafted, but to say someone should have taken him in the first is a reach!

[Guiness]

There are certainly not a lot of first round players from that draft you would take over Hawk, even now.

Mangold is good, but who ever heard of taking a center with the 5th pick of the draft? Holmes? We got Jennings a round and a half later.

The only slam dunks would be Ngata, Hali and DeAngelo Williams. Vernon Davis I'm not sure about. His first couple of seasons were mediocre, but he's come on strong.

[Brandon494]

It was a ridiculously overhyped draft class, we were projecting like 3-4 hall of famers on draft weekend, but ended up being the most disappointing draft (first round at least) in recent memory. There are about 4 players drafted behind Hawk in the first round that are clearly better players (at their position) than Hawk is: Ngata (best player in the draft), Hali, Holmes, and Mangold. There are two players drafted ahead of Hawk that are better players than he is (Mario Williams and Ferguson). Hawk's about the seventh best player in the first round and he was drafted fifth. Not that big a disappointment. Hawk is a push with guys like Greenway, I would say. Greenway's been pretty overrated for a long time.

Guys like Reggie Bush, Vince Young, Donte Whitner, Matt Leinart, Ernie Sims, Kamerion Wimbley, Brodrick Bunkley, Bobby Carpenter, and Lawrence Maroney... now those are disappointments, that draft was a minefield.

Only bringing up Whitner because he went to Ohio St with Hawk but hes done as much for the Bills as Hawk has done for the Packers.

[KYPack]

Lurk is right on with Ngata being the best player in that draft. Greenway vs Hawk? flip a coin. They are a wash. The best Mike in the draft? Demeco Ryans, who is better than either player. But that's with hindsight.

The comments about Hawk stiff and not athletically competant at the NFL level? Bullshit. The guy wasn't just given 10 million by us for nothing. He's not the star we hoped for, but he is right behind Ryans with Greeway as a solid NFL Mike.

[Brandon494]

There are certainly not a lot of first round players from that draft you would take over Hawk, even now.

Mangold is good, but who ever heard of taking a center with the 5th pick of the draft? Holmes? We got Jennings a round and a half later.

The only slam dunks would be Ngata, Hali and DeAngelo Williams. Vernon Davis I'm not sure about. His first couple of seasons were mediocre, but he's come on strong.

I so pissed at TT for not getting Davis for Favre that day.

[Brandon494]

Is Hawk even a top 20 MLB?

[Bossman641]

Hawk was decent as rookie and then bulked up too much. It looked like he could barely move his upper body. I hope he continues to become more fluid and instinctual with his increased responsibilities. I think he still has room to improve.

[Joemailman]

Is Hawk even a top 20 MLB?

No. He's not a MLB. He's a LILB. At that he is certainly above average. He does not make a lot of highlight reels, but he does things that enable others to make highlight reels.

[Lurker64]

Is Hawk even a top 20 MLB?

ESPN.com's Scouts Inc. has him rated as the #33 LB in the league (Bishop is #34), and there are 12 3-4 OLBs listed ahead of him: (Harrison, Ware, Matthews, Suggs, Hali, Wake, Woodley, Dumervil, Orakpo, Farrior, Shaun Phillips, Karlos Dansby).

Guys who are MLBs/ILBs rated ahead of Hawk: Willis, Timmons, Mayo, Lewis, Beason, Urlacher, D.J. Williams, Curtis Lofton, London Fletcher, James Farrior, Paul Posluzny, Jonathan Vilma (who Pro Football Focus graded as the single worst LB in the league last year), DeMeco Ryans, Derrick Johnson, and David Harris. So Hawk is a top 16 or so ILB/MLB.

But again, we're comparing a lot of different guys who play different positions for different defenses. So there's a lot of guesswork going on here. Ray Lewis would be terrible in the Bears defense, for example.

With Clay Matthews being #4, Hawk being #33, and Bishop being #34, there being 32 teams in the league about half of which start 3 LBs and about half of which start 4, that's a reasonably good group of LBs.

[Bretsky]

Linebacker was pretty deep in this class but that shouldn't matter all that much, it should be graded 3 to 4 years after. I think Chad Greenway is far and away the better player between him and AJ Hawk, and Greenway went like ten picks lower. Hawk was a great college player, had the size, and the combine numbers to back up his play at Ohio St, he just wasn't able to transition his dominance of the college game to the NFL game like you would hope a 5th overall pick would make.


I remember that LB class; the LB most had rated next behind Hawk was Ernie Simms.......thank goodness we didn't take him. Greenway is a better player than Hawk but I don't think he's that much better. DeMarco Ryans has been the best LB in that class so far and he went behind Sims and Greenway. I think Kirk Morrison was in that class as well.

[Lurker64]

The thing about comparing Greenway and Hawk is... how do you do it? Hawk is playing Buck ILB in a Capers-Lebeau 3-4. Greenway is playing WLB in a 4-3 in a variant of the Tampa 2. They're not really comparable.

It's possible that neither player could perform the other player's responsibilities quite as well. Hawk is the quarterback of the linebackers in Green Bay, but Greenway is not the QB of the LBs in Minnesota (that's E.J. Henderson). Maybe Greenway has made hay from playing behind an excellent defensive line, and he couldn't match Hawk in terms of leadership qualities. Who on earth knows?

[Smidgeon]

Is Hawk even a top 20 MLB?

I think he's somewhere between 10 and 20.

[Smidgeon]

Hawk was decent as rookie and then bulked up too much. It looked like he could barely move his upper body. I hope he continues to become more fluid and instinctual with his increased responsibilities. I think he still has room to improve.

He weighed 248 at the combine, a single pound heavier than he's identified as on Packers.com.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I think saying Hawk is a bit stiff is fair (and I agree with the assessment that he bulked up too much after his rookie year), but I think we are underselling his athleticism a bit. He's not the elite athlete we thought he'd be with his combine measurables, but he's a decent athlete. Seriously, I think people just watch him closer because he's a big name that was a top pick, and he gets nitpicked. I do it myself, but when I go back and watch the games and I focus on Hawk and Bishop, they are pretty similar players in a lot of ways. Hawk is steady, durable and good QB'ing the defense. Bishop has more physicality in his tackles and is more dynamic, but they are both pretty good. Both are solid players that aren't going to get you beat a lot (Hawk moreso) and who also make their fair share of plays (Bishop moreso). Both just started on a Super Bowl winning team--with both being a big part of a defense that really improved after they started playing together. I think they work well together. They compliment each other well, and I think Hawk's steadiness allows Bishop and Matthews to freelance more and make plays. Kind of like how Tramon and Sam's steadiness allows Woodson to freelance more.

[swede]

...I think people just watch him closer because he's a big name that was a top pick, and he gets nitpicked. I do it myself, but when I go back and watch the games and I focus on Hawk and Bishop, they are pretty similar players in a lot of ways. Hawk is steady, durable and good QB'ing the defense. Bishop has more physicality in his tackles and is more dynamic, but they are both pretty good. Both are solid players that aren't going to get you beat a lot (Hawk moreso) and who also make their fair share of plays (Bishop moreso). Both just started on a Super Bowl winning team--with both being a big part of a defense that really improved after they started playing together. I think they work well together. They compliment each other well, and I think Hawk's steadiness allows Bishop and Matthews to freelance more and make plays. Kind of like how Tramon and Sam's steadiness allows Woodson to freelance more.

You make it sound like a team game. Maybe you're on to something, Harv.

[vince]

I think saying Hawk is a bit stiff is fair (and I agree with the assessment that he bulked up too much after his rookie year), but I think we are underselling his athleticism a bit. He's not the elite athlete we thought he'd be with his combine measurables, but he's a decent athlete. Seriously, I think people just watch him closer because he's a big name that was a top pick, and he gets nitpicked. I do it myself, but when I go back and watch the games and I focus on Hawk and Bishop, they are pretty similar players in a lot of ways. Hawk is steady, durable and good QB'ing the defense. Bishop has more physicality in his tackles and is more dynamic, but they are both pretty good. Both are solid players that aren't going to get you beat a lot (Hawk moreso) and who also make their fair share of plays (Bishop moreso). Both just started on a Super Bowl winning team--with both being a big part of a defense that really improved after they started playing together. I think they work well together. They compliment each other well, and I think Hawk's steadiness allows Bishop and Matthews to freelance more and make plays. Kind of like how Tramon and Sam's steadiness allows Woodson to freelance more.
I agree with just about every word of that, so that obviously means it's good posting.

[Deputy Nutz]

The thing about comparing Greenway and Hawk is... how do you do it? Hawk is playing Buck ILB in a Capers-Lebeau 3-4. Greenway is playing WLB in a 4-3 in a variant of the Tampa 2. They're not really comparable.

It's possible that neither player could perform the other player's responsibilities quite as well. Hawk is the quarterback of the linebackers in Green Bay, but Greenway is not the QB of the LBs in Minnesota (that's E.J. Henderson). Maybe Greenway has made hay from playing behind an excellent defensive line, and he couldn't match Hawk in terms of leadership qualities. Who on earth knows?


Greenway and Hawk played the same position their first 3 years in the league, wlb in the 4-3. Hawk was better their rookie year because Greenway blew out his knee on special teams, after that I would have probably said Greenway was a more dynamic player. Hawk is probably a more consistent player then Greenway, but Greenway makes more plays. I guess I went a little far in saying that Greenway is way better than Hawk. At their respected draft positions Greenway provided more value.

[Lurker64]

Greenway and Hawk played the same position their first 3 years in the league, wlb in the 4-3. Hawk was better their rookie year because Greenway blew out his knee on special teams, after that I would have probably said Greenway was a more dynamic player. Hawk is probably a more consistent player then Greenway, but Greenway makes more plays. I guess I went a little far in saying that Greenway is way better than Hawk. At their respected draft positions Greenway provided more value.

But in terms of comparing the players, I really don't care what position Hawk played four years ago in a completely different defense. Guys do better at different positions in different schemes. Neither Malcom Jenkins nor Antrell Rolle are bad players because they couldn't play CB, since both those guys are pretty good safeties. As I said before, Ray Lewis would be awful in the Bears defense. In terms of Hawk and Greenway now, which is what's actually relevant, they're not really comparable. There are other 3-4 ILBs who I would rather have than Hawk, but there aren't a ton of them, and most of them play the Jack/Mike position instead of the Buck.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Greenway and Hawk played the same position their first 3 years in the league, wlb in the 4-3. Hawk was better their rookie year because Greenway blew out his knee on special teams, after that I would have probably said Greenway was a more dynamic player. Hawk is probably a more consistent player then Greenway, but Greenway makes more plays. I guess I went a little far in saying that Greenway is way better than Hawk. At their respected draft positions Greenway provided more value.

I think that's fair. Greenway is pretty good. Some people make him out to be an All-Pro. He's not yet. The thing about Greenway is that I think he can still get better. I think Hawk is what he is.

[ThunderDan]

But in terms of comparing the players, I really don't care what position Hawk played four years ago in a completely different defense. Guys do better at different positions in different schemes. Neither Malcom Jenkins nor Antrell Rolle are bad players because they couldn't play CB, since both those guys are pretty good safeties. As I said before, Ray Lewis would be awful in the Bears defense. In terms of Hawk and Greenway now, which is what's actually relevant, they're not really comparable. There are other 3-4 ILBs who I would rather have than Hawk, but there aren't a ton of them, and most of them play the Jack/Mike position instead of the Buck.

Look at Brian Urlacher of the Bears while Ted Washington was on the team and post-Washington. It sure makes the MLB (or any LB) job easier when you have a DL that takes up 2 blockers. Urlacher was all-world when Washington was in front of him. His numbers have dropped off since. Urlacher had a 151 tackles in 2002, he has only come close to that number once in 10 other years in the NFL.

I completely agree with your post.

[ND72]

Hawk hasnt reached the level that I know I had thought of him coming out, but he does a lot of things very well that don't show up on stat sheets. When capers calls his mike twist, hawk is always the lead guy taking out at least 1 if not 2 blocks which allows Bishop to come around for the blitz. He is usually the one taking on lead blocks, again opening the tackle chance to the next guy. He is a bit stiff, but I've thought that the end of last year and so far this year he looks more comfy and loose, allowing himself the confidence to go make plays instead of always trying to be assignment sure, which I think stunted his growth his first couple of seasons...which is also scheme. In the 3-4, MLB usually has more ability to flow because of the big boys up front.

[KYPack]

ND should probably have the last word on AJ, but I did have a thought, too. Hawk is average at best on blitzes. He's in the right spot, but he rarely gets home. Those fire X's that Capers likes to run, AJ just doesn't get there. But, he has compensated. They have Hawk clear, like ND said, and Bishop is given the slot to make the sack. That's an adjustment, Hawk knows he has a weakness and has made the move to fix it. We are solid, but not spectacular at the ILB spots. AJ didn't pan out to be a difference maker, but he's a good, solid hand in that defense.

[Brandon494]

ND should probably have the last word on AJ, but I did have a thought, too. Hawk is average at best on blitzes. He's in the right spot, but he rarely gets home. Those fire X's that Capers likes to run, AJ just doesn't get there. But, he has compensated. They have Hawk clear, like ND said, and Bishop is given the slot to make the sack. That's an adjustment, Hawk knows he has a weakness and has made the move to fix it. We are solid, but not spectacular at the ILB spots. AJ didn't pan out to be a difference maker, but he's a good, solid hand in that defense.

THIS!