Jack Watts

[Lordweaver 235]

all this talk about being a hardnut, was robbie flower a hard nut, steven stretch?

[Guest gidon]

I think the point that Neeld was making, is that Jack Watts as the ability to play any position on the ground just about. I'm thinking that Mark Neeld is possibly thinking that Jack Watts can play like a taller version of Scott Pendlebury. Both played basketball as juniors, both have elite skills and marking capabilities and both are good at ground level. Both will/have the capabiltiy to play forward/half-forward/ midfield as well.

I also personally think Watts should have played a siginifcant amount of game time in the middle this week in order to get him involved more, instead of being dropped to Casey, this approach seemed to work with Morton last week.

No need to worry about Watts everyone, he is one of the most skillfull players in our side. He will be a superstar of the competition, I just hope it is with the Demons.

I hope your right Adjudicator. I see his value as a forward and i'm starting to lose faith. I dont see the Pendlebury in him

[Range Rover 1,935]

all this talk about being a hardnut, was robbie flower a hard nut, steven stretch?

Robbie Flower was immensely courageous. Stretcher played true wing in an era when players with pace enjoyed much more space than they are afforded today..

[jumbo returns 6,741]

His position as an AFL footballer is untenable.

We are a long way from that stage.

Probably not as far as you think.

[Guest José Mourinho]

Sorry, don't respond to rudeness - i love talking about footy.

Let's have a debate if you want, or not.

Ok, you REALLY think Watts' position on the list is close to untenable?

Based on what exactly?

[olisik 4,060]

So what would u guys think is a fair trade for Watts? just want to see peoples thoughts on something 'fair'

I know it won't happen but i am curious on where people would think he would rate at the trade tables

Mid teens pick in this years draft?

Could we get a player like Betts from a trade?

Keen on peoples thoughts on a realistic Watts trade (Even though it won't happen)

[The Chazz 4,077]

So what would u guys think is a fair trade for Watts? just want to see peoples thoughts on something 'fair'

I know it won't happen but i am curious on where people would think he would rate at the trade tables

Mid teens pick in this years draft?

Could we get a player like Betts from a trade?

Keen on peoples thoughts on a realistic Watts trade (Even though it won't happen)

Really olisik, do you want to go ther? Brace yourself for another 30+ pages where 95% of what is written is crap. (My post probably fits in that 95% too before anyone asks!).

[Bonkers 994]

Why is it stupid? If an offer comes in from another club and we could possibly turn it to our advantage, we'd be silly not to look at it. List management.

I'm not writing Watts off but if there's a deal to be done that benefits the MFC then that becomes more important.

The club may have to make a hard call on what type of player Jack will become and whether or not we really need that type of player in preference for someone else.

There is more value in educating Jack Watts, supporting his development & giving him an understanding of what finals football is about than putting him up for trade. He is 5 games into a career under a new coach, the season ahead is a big learning curve. He has all the natural ability. All he needs is to do is start doing the 1%ers & to develop a desire to hunt the ball & his opponent. He needs to develop some mongrel. I think he can do it. I also believe the coaches can bring it out of him. If by the end of the season nothing's changed see what is on the table.

[jumbo returns 6,741]

Ok, you REALLY think Watts' position on the list is close to untenable?

Based on what exactly?

Every club, every coach, is talking about 'hardness' at the ball, work around stoppages, the spread, man-on-man pressure - something that you and I both know is not Jack's forte.

How much time will Neeld give Jack (and others) to develop this trait?

[Hannibal 5,814]

Garbage post. Absolutely moronic, thoughtless, blind, emotional piffle.

Nobody's making excuses. It's simple football. We say it ALL the time, and sooking knowitalls like you get on and make the same rubbish up. You can go through dozens of forwards who started off with talent and height but don't put weight on until 25+. Goddard, at 5 years, was considered a joke and a waste. Hawkins the same. It's RARE that the J. Browns and Riewoldts pop up and dominate within their first 2-3 years. These aren't excuses, this is just normal rational explanation of aspects of players' careers in a league that allows them to basically be drafted at 17, instead of 21, when they SHOULD be. This is HOW IT WORKS. Jack was ALWAYS going to more likely take five years to develop than 3. I think 2014 is when we start marking him like an adult, because he'll actually BE one then.

I would be ropable if the club traded Watts for Cameron because he kicked a few goals and you have a crush on him.

Your verbiage only exposes how little you understand Australian Rules football.

I have a man crush on Cameron because he attacks aerial contests like his life depends on it, despite him being a skinny 19 year old in his first year. The reason I give Jack Watts a hard time (and have for years) is because he only likes to play the game on his terms. He's happy being third man up, he's happy getting into space, but when he has to stand under a pack he'll stick one arm in the air and close his eyes. Aerial contests are the hardest things to do in footy. They take the most courage. Key forwards have to compete hard in the air or they're about as useful as a cold pie. Watts' trepidation in putting his body on the line is a devastating flaw, especially for someone that harbours ambitions of being a key forward.

Clearly I know that tall key forwards take time to reach their peak. I don't expect Watts to necessarily be dominating games and kicking bags of goals, I've never said I do, but I do expect him to compete at acceptable levels. He doesn't. Jack Trengove is having a terrible year. The reason that I don't get stuck into Trengove is that I've never doubted his capacity to compete. I've never doubted his intensity. Already, after just 4 games, I don't doubt 19 year old Jeremy Cameron's appetite to compete. I don't doubt his intensity. You and others can cry foul every time someone like me seems to lack empathy, or understanding, but in reality, it's dolts like you that don't understand what's required to play this game. It's dolts like you that don't understand that there are non negotiables in footy. Jeremy Cameron will be a far better footballer than Watts. He'll be a star by his 4th year. GWS supporters won't spend their life making excuses for him. They won't need to.

I've wanted Watts out of the team due to his lack of effort and have posted as much. I then read a poster saying in so many words, "well Neeld clearly isn't happy with Watts' effort, so I'll have to listen to what the coach is saying". Really ? Why doesn't that same poster just use their own eyes ? What do you people watch when you're at the footy ? I've come to the conclusion that many of you either didn't play the game, or just don't have a great capacity to analyse it. I've been critical of Watts for his effort and low and behold he gets dropped. I'm not suggesting that I'm a genius, but I am suggesting that some supporters have ridiculous bias, or just no clue. Many supporters know that he's not as physical as they'd like, but believe it will improve in time, so they cut him slack. I believe that his intensity is truly woeful and won't cut him slack. Certainly not when one considers that it's his 4th year.

Finally, I must disagree with your assertion that it's RARE for key forwards to dominate in their first 2-3 years. Although I wouldn't have used the word dominate, and I wouldn't have used the period 2-3, but instead 3-4. I don't expect Watts to dominate yet and have never argued such, I just expect him to have a crack. The following players showed how good they were going to be after 3 years and were borderline stars in their 4th: Dunstall, Lockett, Brereton, Lloyd, Riewoldt, Richardson, Salmon, Franklin, Brown, Tredrea, Carey, and Sav Rocca. Then there are others: David Neitz made AA as a 20 year old in his third year. Jack Riewoldt kicked 78 goals in his 4th year. Barry Hall kicked over 40 goals in his 4th year. Josh Kennedy at West Coast had a quiet start, but was showing good signs in his 4th year. Chris Grant 50 goals at 17. Travis Cloke won a B&F at 20. Stephen Kernahan was a star in S.A at 21 and a star the next year at Carlton. David Schwarz kicked 60 goals in his 4th year. Peter Sumich kicked 45 at 21 and 90 at 22. Do you want me to go back to the Wade, McKenna and Hudson days too ? Wade over 50 goals at 19 (his first year), Hudson over 50 at 21 (his first year), McKenna over 60 at 21. Do I keep going ?

Hawkins and Fevola are more the exceptions to the rule. I won't include Goddard for two reasons. Firstly, he's not a key tall and secondly he came of age in his 4th year. I'm yet to see anyone that has started their career with Watts' complete lack of physicality go on and be a star of the game. He may eke out a reasonable career, but it's a pipedream to think he'll be able to regularly impose his will on games of footy. He has the natural talent that's required, but I've never seen anyone with his lack of conviction become a star. I hope he proves me wrong. But you have to stop thinking that it's RARE for key forwards to do much in their early years. Just about ever key forward star in history has been fantastic by their 4th year and the age of 21. Learn your history.

Edited May 5, 2012 by Ben-Hur

[mauriesy 7,287]

If you get over the idea that Watts will be an elite key forward, and start to think that he may just be a good, ordinary but still reasonably valuable footballer, then I think it puts any trade thoughts into a better perspective.

It seems to me that those entertaining a somewhat 'rash' trade are basing their notions on him being a 'failed #1' and reacting to that, rather than his present value.

OK, so we didn't get a star with our #1 pick. That doesn't necessarily mean we just throw him out for a bargain price.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

If you get over the idea that Watts will be an elite key forward, and start to think that he may just be a good, ordinary but still reasonably valuable footballer, then I think it puts any trade thoughts into a better perspective.

It seems to me that those entertaining a somewhat 'rash' trade are basing their notions on him being a 'failed #1' and reacting to that, rather than his present value.

OK, so we didn't get a star with our #1 pick. That doesn't necessarily mean we just throw him out for a bargain price.

Very well put Maurie. Nailed it perfectly

[Hannibal 5,814]

If you get over the idea that Watts will be an elite key forward, and start to think that he may just be a good, ordinary but still reasonably valuable footballer, then I think it puts any trade thoughts into a better perspective.

It seems to me that those entertaining a somewhat 'rash' trade are basing their notions on him being a 'failed #1' and reacting to that, rather than his present value.

OK, so we didn't get a star with our #1 pick. That doesn't necessarily mean we just throw him out for a bargain price.

And isn't it terribly disappointing that a number 1 draft pick, which was so important to the club at the time, has left you downgrading your expectations ?

There's only one reason that Watts won't be very good, or even a star, and it's his mind. Physically he's just about the perfect specimen. And for that reason I have a smidgen of hope that he'll turn it around. But only a smidgen.

[Guest José Mourinho]

And isn't it terribly disappointing that a number 1 draft pick, which was so important to the club at the time, has left you downgrading your expectations ?

There's only one reason that Watts won't be very good, or even a star, and it's his mind. Physically he's just about the perfect specimen. And for that reason I have a smidgen of hope that he'll turn it around. But only a smidgen.

You're so negative BH.

It's not like we haven't seen plenty of monumental turnarounds before.

And he's not quite the physical specimen - he could definitely use a bit more muscle.

[Range Rover 1,935]

If you get over the idea that Watts will be an elite key forward, and start to think that he may just be a good, ordinary but still reasonably valuable footballer, then I think it puts any trade thoughts into a better perspective.

It seems to me that those entertaining a somewhat 'rash' trade are basing their notions on him being a 'failed #1' and reacting to that, rather than his present value.

OK, so we didn't get a star with our #1 pick. That doesn't necessarily mean we just throw him out for a bargain price.

It seems to me that you're wrong because I for one based my so-called "rash" trade discussion on rational consideration of what we might be able to procure in return for him vis-a-vis our list. Nothing about him being a 'failed #1' pick in my post at all. Classic case of seeing what you want see rather than addressing the facts of a post.

What's more, if indeed the footy department think - as you posit - that he may amount to nothing more than a "good, ordinary but still valuable footballer", then that would surely if anything bring him further into trade calculations.

I think it's widely accepted that we need a bona-fide midfield gun in our team at the present time. Patrick Dangerfield comes to mind. I started a post on him recently on the main forum and it seemed to garner a lot of support. But in all likelihood we'll have to give something to get something to land a player of that ilk. That may come in the form purely of draft picks or may require a makeweight player to get a deal the done.

If Sylvia, Moloney and others can have their names bandied about in this regard, why not Watts?

Address the context and facts of the question this time. If you can.

Very well put Maurie. Nailed it perfectly

So no, not very well put Maurie at all.

[Hannibal 5,814]

You're so negative BH.

It's not like we haven't seen plenty of monumental turnarounds before.

And he's not quite the physical specimen - he could definitely use a bit more muscle.

1. I'm not negative, just a realist.

2. He could use more muscle, but so could Robbie Flower, and countless others that put their body on the line. You're just making excuses.

Edited May 5, 2012 by Ben-Hur

[Guest gidon]

Nah Ben Hur, youre negative.

[Guest strawberry_gumdrops]

Brilliant post Ben Hur. Unfortunately it is on the money.

I hope the kid can get his mind right- he has every desirable physical attribute a player of today's game needs to thrive, just needs the heart. Like tin man.

All those knocking BH or calling him negative; the truth hurts. Get over it!

[timD 994]

Jordie McKensie does a damn sight more with a damn sight less. Ben is right on the money. What is the difference between Morton and Watts - Morton is showing a capacity to change; Watts is yet to.

[mauriesy 7,287]

What's more, if indeed the footy department think - as you posit - that he may amount to nothing more than a "good, ordinary but still valuable footballer", then that would surely if anything bring him further into trade calculations.

I think it's widely accepted that we need a bona-fide midfield gun in our team at the present time. Patrick Dangerfield comes to mind. I started a post on him recently on the main forum and it seemed to garner a lot of support. But in all likelihood we'll have to give something to get something to land a player of that ilk. That may come in the form purely of draft picks or may require a makeweight player to get a deal the done.

If Sylvia, Moloney and others can have their names bandied about in this regard, why not Watts?

Suggesting a trade for a player is just standard fare for Melbourne supporters when they want to criticise a player. Just because they've suggested Sylvia and Moloney, among others, in the past doesn't make a Watts trade any more sensible.

What makes you think Adelaide would be interested in a soft Watts in a trade exchange for a hard nut like Dangerfield?

Teams are full of "good, ordinary but still valuable footballers", a rung below the elite. If you traded every one on a whim, you'd be turning your list over ever three years.

[mauriesy 7,287]

And isn't it terribly disappointing that a number 1 draft pick, which was so important to the club at the time, has left you downgrading your expectations?

There's only one reason that Watts won't be very good, or even a star, and it's his mind. Physically he's just about the perfect specimen. And for that reason I have a smidgen of hope that he'll turn it around. But only a smidgen.

I agree, and I share the same hope. Perhaps slightly more than a smidgen, hopefully more when he gets older.

[Adam The God 30,239]

Provided he's given the chance, Watts will be a gun wingman, floating forward, with an ability to hit the scoreboard. Writing him off already? Jesus Christ. When you consider the time we've given someone like Sylvia...sheesh.

[mrtwister 652]

Provided he's given the chance, Watts will be a gun wingman, floating forward, with an ability to hit the scoreboard. Writing him off already? Jesus Christ. When you consider the time we've given someone like Sylvia...sheesh.

Of the highlights of Jack Watts' limited career I think it's fair to say that most of them are between the 50m arcs. Let him thrive in space on the wing, pinch hitter in the forward 50 at times, sweep into defence as an extra defender when needed. He will show glimpses of class but will also have many scratching heads as well.

Main point. He is not a 'power forward'. he is an athletic utility really.

Edited May 5, 2012 by mrtwister

[Guest José Mourinho]

1. I'm not negative, just a realist.

2. He could use more muscle, but so could Robbie Flower, and countless others that put their body on the line. You're just making excuses.

You're negative when you say you have a smidgen of hope that he'll turn it around.

Before the season, I reckon you'd have said the same about Cale making any progress, and he definitely has.

It's all about people, and I reckon instead of reducing it down to "he plays like this and I see no sign of his gamestyle changing", if you look at them as a person, it's obvious the change will come.

[Hannibal 5,814]

You're negative when you say you have a smidgen of hope that he'll turn it around.

Before the season, I reckon you'd have said the same about Cale making any progress, and he definitely has.

It's all about people, and I reckon instead of reducing it down to "he plays like this and I see no sign of his gamestyle changing", if you look at them as a person, it's obvious the change will come.

The type of intensity that Watts needs to find exceeds what Morton needs to find. Watts needs to compete hard aerially, which is the most challenging aspect in football. It would be nice for Morton to improve that aspect of his game too, but it's not as vital.

One is being groomed as a key forward and the other isn't. This is a key issue and I can't stress that enough. If Watts improved his intensity to just Morton's recent offerings it won't be nearly enough for the position the club wants him to play. It's all about degrees and unfortunately for Jack he has to overcome the biggest physical hurdles of all to play the toughest role on the ground. It won't be easy. He's a small chance imo.

When you play as a tall in the back-line your courage is questioned, but it's not nearly as exposed as when you're a key forward. I hope you understand the distinction. It could well be that Watts ends up a tall defender and contributes in a premiership team. I reckon that is far more likely than Watts contributing in a premiership team as a CHF.

Edited May 6, 2012 by Ben-Hur