Jack Watts

[robbiefrom13 887]

Agree, it happens time and again, lucky he has a better temperament than Fev or Richo. With Sam I think the trouble is he often backs his kicking skills a bit too much and tries to be a bit pretty. I'm sure that will come out of his game with experience and with the coaches beating up on him. Strauss is another who can kick long low and accurately and we need to get more games into him.

In the TAC, Strauss was brilliant at spotting up Watts and putting it in his hands. You have to wonder why other Melbourne players can't see to do it. When we were considering drafting him from junior footy, with teammates using him as they did, I'll bet crash-and-bash never came into consideration.

Edited March 25, 2012 by robbiefrom13

[bing181 9,218]

I refuted that silly misconception...

Good for you.

[Roost It 1,434]

To be the best in this comp you need to have an unwavering appetite for the contest. I have seen that in Hurley. I haven't seen that in Watts. I won't be satisfied before I see it on a regular basis. To those glowing about his BOG at Casey, stop applauding mediocrity.

[Bingo 303]

I see Watts taking the role that many are hoping Morton could fill- that is a tall utility. Nothing about him is "crash and bash," not now as a still skinny kid and probably not in the future either when he fills out a bit more. Crash and bash isn't everything these days, the game has evolved past the days of needing hulking FF's.

I think you're on the money...

I like to think of this as the Adam Goodes (or even a Goddard quarterback style) role....the tall utility/mid with excelent vision, aerobic capacity, great skills.

If people think we've missed out on our KPF then surely you can't be disappointed with a Goodes/Goddard clone?

I seem to remenber Goddard looking like a spud for the first few years unitl it just clicked and began to dominate.

I think it'd be pretty tough matching up on Watts if he started on a wing and pushed forward to create a mismatch in the forward line?

If Martin/Clarke/Jurrah/Howe/Green were already set up as the permanent forwards then who would play on Watts? You'd need someone with height/speed and endurance to follow him.

Just thinking about it Matty Richardson played some of his best footy on the wing...as long as Watts is influencing the match i don't really care where he plays.

Edited March 25, 2012 by Bingo

[rpfc 28,380]

To be the best in this comp you need to have an unwavering appetite for the contest. I have seen that in Hurley. I haven't seen that in Watts. I won't be satisfied before I see it on a regular basis. To those glowing about his BOG at Casey, stop applauding mediocrity.

I'm glad we have now progressed from 'accepting mediocrity' to 'applauding mediocrity'...

[The Chazz 4,077]

Have you been drinking ? I won't quote it all (for your sake).

And ... you hoped for a "crash and bash type" when it came to Watts, which he never was even as a junior ?

Why am I arguing with a lightweight ?

In 2008, we thought we needed a carsh and bash key forward. We picked Watts because he was the best in the draft, and was in actual fact a key forward. A lot assumed that he would be that crash and bash type, he isn't, and as a result, the club got Clark to play that role. Jack has the skills and potential to make a significant mark on the game, and I'm hoping that it is still a key forward role. I'm not going to be disappointed with the bloke because he isn't playing the role that we needed.

As a matter of fact, from when we picked up Watts, I had been calling for Stef Martin to be that bash/crash forward, because I knew it wasnt the role for Jack. I always saw Jack as the N Riewoldt-type that would run opponents in to the ground, and be that main target going forward, especially in a one-on-one situation. We needed our "Kosi" as that other target, Martin was my call, now it's Clark.

Benny, so what if I'm a lightweight? So what if I don't proof-read my posts before putting them up for the world to see? What are you trying to achieve by personal insults? Your constant personal attacks are boring, immature and to be honest, downright disrespectful. You wouldn't speak to me like that face-to-face, so why do it over the internet?

[Hannibal 5,814]

In 2008, we thought we needed a carsh and bash key forward. We picked Watts because he was the best in the draft, and was in actual fact a key forward. A lot assumed that he would be that crash and bash type, he isn't, and as a result, the club got Clark to play that role. Jack has the skills and potential to make a significant mark on the game, and I'm hoping that it is still a key forward role. I'm not going to be disappointed with the bloke because he isn't playing the role that we needed.

As a matter of fact, from when we picked up Watts, I had been calling for Stef Martin to be that bash/crash forward, because I knew it wasnt the role for Jack. I always saw Jack as the N Riewoldt-type that would run opponents in to the ground, and be that main target going forward, especially in a one-on-one situation. We needed our "Kosi" as that other target, Martin was my call, now it's Clark.

Benny, so what if I'm a lightweight? So what if I don't proof-read my posts before putting them up for the world to see? What are you trying to achieve by personal insults? Your constant personal attacks are boring, immature and to be honest, downright disrespectful. You wouldn't speak to me like that face-to-face, so why do it over the internet?

I'm happy to call a truce on the disrespectful stuff and apologise for any condescending remarks, although I'm not certain I've been the only participant in that regard.

But I must say that those that were familiar with Watts as a junior knew he was never going to be a crash and bash forward. He's never played that way - even as a juinior.

[Biffen 12,940]

Isn't it time to start bagging Morton again?

We've flogged that horse beyond death .

He's just "poor Cale " now .

[binman 42,875]

I'm glad we have now progressed from 'accepting mediocrity' to 'applauding mediocrity'...

Next step is celebrating mediocrity. I have a lot of experience in that department having followed the dees for 40 years. But seriously i predict we'll be celebrating Watts unique skill set for years to come and the early knocks on him will be seen as a weird anachronism.

My prediction is that he will end up being a better player than Hurley and Natanui. Both those boys are near their best already i reckon, certainly in terms of how big they will get. Watts has more upside (though i suppose Natanui will improve his reading of the game) and will continue to get a fair bit bigger. He won't fully fill out 'till he's 24-25 and when he does he will vindicate his number 1 draft selection

Edited March 26, 2012 by binman

[dpositive 1,663]

Royce Hart anyone??????

[olisik 4,060]

Alot of people here are saying 'His only had 40 games', well how many games does he need?

If his going to be a 200 game player then thats already 1/5th of that 200 gone. What return in terms of % of games played is an acceptable amount to be developing? Another season and thats almost 1/3rd of his 200 game career gone to 'developing'

What is the acceptable % which a player can be in the 'developing' mode for.

No point having a 200 game player if 100 of those are spent developing. If that were the case then half our team would always be developing and we would never win a flag.

Edited March 26, 2012 by olisik

[old55 23,539]

He didn't have to be a Neitz clone, in fact I hoped for a better forward than Neitz. I envisaged a forward in the Riewoldt mould, or a tall James Hird. Hird's canny sense and instincts reminded me of Watts - still do. Hird, however, was great at winning contested footy and Jack is lightyears from how Hird played.

Yeah I agree with that - a combination of the best attributes of Riewoldt and Hird - but he doesn't attack the contest like they do. I think it's still possible that he will significantly improve this area as his experience and confidence grow. It's a mindset - it's very possible the switch will be flicked at some stage. If this happens he will be the best thing going. I think Neeld and co see his optimal value to the team as a KPF so they're prepared to persevere. Playing him as a key back could help him progress but they're trying to progress the backline too. He may end up playing something like Kouta.

[rpfc 28,380]

Alot of people here are saying 'His only had 40 games', well how many games does he need?

What is the acceptable % which a player can be in the 'developing' mode for?

Excellent questions.

The answers are:

1) It is a subjective question based on what an individual thinks is an acceptable level of consistent performance.

2) This is another subjective question based on when said player is 'developed' and the percentage of 'time spent developed' can't be known until the said player's career is finished.

I hope this helps your search for answers on The Jack Watts Question ©.

[Mac7 309]

No point having a 200 game player if 100 of those are spent developing.

I would take 100 development games if it was followed by 100 as the best player in the league.

[H_T 3,043]

Happy Birthday Jack !

21 years of age today.

[binman 42,875]

Happy Birthday Jack !

21 years of age today.

21! Is that all? From the tone of some of the Jack Watts related posts i thought he was 26 and played 120 plus games. He may well quite a player at 26 and with 120 games under his belt

[olisik 4,060]

21! Is that all? From the tone of some of the Jack Watts related posts i thought he was 26 and played 120 plus games. He may well quite a player at 26 and with 120 games under his belt

Nup, he is just into his 4th year and yet to deliver

[binman 42,875]

Nup, he is just into his 4th year and yet to deliver

Just out of interest where do he finish in last year B&F? For my money, in a year where our so called "senior" players were inconsistent and showed little in the way of leadership, JW was one of our most consistent contributors and one of the few players pencilled in week after week. Not bad for a 20 year old lad with 30-40 games under his belt.

As most would acknowledge he made a huge improvement from 2010 which is exactly what you're looking for in a developing player.

What does yet to deliver actually mean? If it means become a A grade star well he is 2-3 years away from that unless he is the first big fella not covered by the maxim that big players always take time. If it measn tracking towards that goal at an acceptable rate i reckon on the evidence thus far he has well and truly delivered

[rpfc 28,380]

Nup, he is just into his 4th year and yet to deliver

Groan.

Can we just pipe down and let the kid fail already? 2012 hasn't even started yet.

[Dinosaur Rover 197]

He was picked because of what he showed he could become. On output alone in 2008 he wasn't the best footballer and I doubt any recruiter in the land would have said he was. Just like Naitanui was picked on what he could become at AFL level with development. It's the reason Steven Hill was a surprise at 3. Do you think on output Naitanui was the second best junior in the land, or Hill third ? There's speculation involved. Rich was the best junior in 2008, but slid because of how it was perceived his weaknesses would be exposed at AFL level. What I find bizarre is so many supporters being satisfied with a key forward, former number one draft pick, playing off a wing in the VFL entering his 4th year. His intensity levels are below what's required to dominate at AFL level and there's a massive gulf between VFL and AFL. And you're talking Brownlows ? Jeez. Were you there ?

"Intensity levels" - I dont see then counted in the stats. I dont hear people saying "If he was only more histrionic that would make a difference". Displays of "intensity" - who cares? Results are the thing.

Edited March 26, 2012 by Dinosaur Rover

[Hannibal 5,814]

"Intensity levels" - I dont see then counted in the stats. I dont hear people saying "If he was only more histrionic that would make a difference". Displays of "intensity" - who cares? Results are the thing.

Ok, I'll dumb it down for you.

Ability to win contested footy.

[Axis of Bob 11,785]

Ok, I'll dumb it down for you.

Ability to win contested footy.

"Anybody who says that they're great at communicating but 'people are bad at listening' is confused about how communication works"

[Lil_red_fire_engine 11,165]

Watts might still be a star without being a key forward, but he better be to be ultimately useful to the team, because a star running half forward/wing type player isn't anywhere near as useful as a star key position forward. He doesn't draw the footy the way that other young key forwards like Hurley, Reid and Jones of his age group do.

I will just be happy if he turns into a star. We have lacked one for so long I dont care what position that means.

[Roost It 1,434]

I'm glad we have now progressed from 'accepting mediocrity' to 'applauding mediocrity'...

As Melbourne supporters we've had no choice but to applaud great performances from our many average teams, hence applauding mediocrity. (I quite liked it!) As far as raving on about your number 1 draft pick playing well in the 2's at the beginning of his 4th year, well that's just silly. He's a superb talent but if he he can't match that with the required intensity then he's just another good player in an average team.

[Guest KingDingAling]

Id throw Jack on the wing with a stint on the ball, play him like Fyfe, why not, he moves just aswell,

kicks just as well and can find the ball and kick goals.

I dont think Jack will ever be a KP player and the way the games going im not sure its the be all and end all

if he doesnt end up being a KP forward.

Realistically he was a very agile point guard as a basketballer, so its no surprise when drafted at 17 that he hasnt

set the world on fire as a crash and bash foward that some ppl think he should be.

I say play him like Fyfe, let the kid roam wherever he wants - so long as he is busting a nut.

Couldnt be any worse than playing that slow wet weak Bate in the midfield.