As it has been discussed here numerous times. The general football media has seems to have gotten overs it

love of Nic Nat.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/afl/a/23026241/naitanui-a-poor-player-lucas/

Been discussed a bit in Perth on the footy talk back and the general consensus of how over rated he is.

too bad Watts is struggling so badly, he could be sticking it up the critics right now considering how bad Nic Nat is playing

Not a good draft year for many teams.

took them six years to conclude what they concluded about watts from day one

they were talking about it on footy classified last night and Garry threw in the stat about Salem taking 3 marks which is more than what nic nat has taken over the past 4 weeks. people are starting to notice and its about bloody time.

Also scully got talked about on the weekend about he he tagged ablett and by now he shouldnt be a tagger he should be an elite midfielder and GWS should not have paid him that money.

Edited April 29, 201411 yr by dees189227

they were talking about it on footy classified last night and Garry threw in the stat about Salem taking 3 marks which is more than what nic nat has taken over the past 4 weeks. people are starting to notice and its about bloody time.

Also scully got talked about on the weekend about he he tagged ablett and by now he shouldnt be a tagger he should be an elite midfielder and GWS should not have paid him that money.

Add Trengove and it's a shocking return from back to back picks 1 and 2

took them six years to conclude what they concluded about watts from day one

Six years of a highlight per game blinded them I suppose.

Lucas says more or less the same I said about NikNat a few weeks ago. Maybe something in the injury angle but thats no excuse for his lack of football brains.

Edited April 29, 201411 yr by america de cali

Who?

Not a good draft year for many teams.

This is abundantly clear now. No real star has emerged from the top 10, and probably only 4 players who are genuine, regular starting 22 type players:

1 Melbourne Jack Watts

2 West Coast Nicholas Naitanui

3 Fremantle Stephen Hill

4 Port Adelaide Hamish Hartlett

5 Essendon Michael Hurley

6 Carlton Christopher Yarran

7 Brisbane Daniel Rich

8 Richmond Tyrone Vickery

9 North Melbourne Jack Ziebel

10 Adelaide Phil Davis

Sidebottom was a good get at 11 though.

I think if we had our time again and got a free pass to select anyone from that top 10, I'd go for Hartlett.

This is abundantly clear now. No real star has emerged from the top 10, and probably only 4 players who are genuine, regular starting 22 type players:

1 Melbourne Jack Watts

2 West Coast Nicholas Naitanui

3 Fremantle Stephen Hill

4 Port Adelaide Hamish Hartlett

5 Essendon Michael Hurley

6 Carlton Christopher Yarran

7 Brisbane Daniel Rich

8 Richmond Tyrone Vickery

9 North Melbourne Jack Ziebel

10 Adelaide Phil Davis

I wanted us to get Daniel Rich at the time, and six years later I'd still be happier with that pick than anything else.

Someone invite Range Rover back!

The Watts v Hurley debate has subsided as well....

Not a good draft year for many teams.

No it is all about development I am often told.

This is abundantly clear now. No real star has emerged from the top 10, and probably only 4 players who are genuine, regular starting 22 type players:

1 Melbourne Jack Watts

2 West Coast Nicholas Naitanui

3 Fremantle Stephen Hill

4 Port Adelaide Hamish Hartlett

5 Essendon Michael Hurley

6 Carlton Christopher Yarran

7 Brisbane Daniel Rich

8 Richmond Tyrone Vickery

9 North Melbourne Jack Ziebel

10 Adelaide Phil Davis

Stephen Hill is a beauty and Daniel Rich has been a proven performer.

The Watts v Hurley debate has subsided as well....

I wanted Hurley in that draft as he was big and loved the physical contest but to be fair he has struggled a bit too, not sure why.

How's Scully escaping the media wrath? Million a year, racking up 15 posses a game. Spud.

This is abundantly clear now. No real star has emerged from the top 10, and probably only 4 players who are genuine, regular starting 22 type players:

1 Melbourne Jack Watts

2 West Coast Nicholas Naitanui

3 Fremantle Stephen Hill

4 Port Adelaide Hamish Hartlett

5 Essendon Michael Hurley

6 Carlton Christopher Yarran

7 Brisbane Daniel Rich

8 Richmond Tyrone Vickery

9 North Melbourne Jack Ziebel

10 Adelaide Phil Davis

Gotta admit I love the way Ziebel goes about his footy. Tough, straight lines and no bull [censored]

Edited April 29, 201411 yr by The Flying Hellfish

In all honestly, its about time.

Didnt deserve his All Australian and finally deserving the heat.

damn straight

As it has been discussed here numerous times. The general football media has seems to have gotten overs it

love of Nic Nat.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/afl/a/23026241/naitanui-a-poor-player-lucas/

Been discussed a bit in Perth on the footy talk back and the general consensus of how over rated he is.

Overated. Hell yes.

But he has plenty to work with.

His ability to win contest is excellent and tap work is excellent.

He hasn't had a preseason cause of groin injury and looks to be struggling to get to contests.

Niknat over Watts any day.

This is abundantly clear now. No real star has emerged from the top 10, and probably only 4 players who are genuine, regular starting 22 type players:

1 Melbourne Jack Watts

2 West Coast Nicholas Naitanui

3 Fremantle Stephen Hill

4 Port Adelaide Hamish Hartlett

5 Essendon Michael Hurley

6 Carlton Christopher Yarran

7 Brisbane Daniel Rich

8 Richmond Tyrone Vickery

9 North Melbourne Jack Ziebel

10 Adelaide Phil Davis

The talk in this draft is Beam at 29, Hanners at 30 and Sloane at 44.

Sloane is the one that got away, apparently we'd promised him we'd take him - then picked Bennell.

I remember I was at work at the time, my cousin rang me and said you guys taken Bennell - I said, was Sloane gone? He said no, he went to Adel at 44.

I hung up on him when he said we also overlooked Shuey.

I would've taken Watts at no 1 though.

It was Rich Vs Watts for mine, Rich was the safe pick, I was in WA that year, he was killing WAFL.

But, I'd of still risked and taken Watts, it was a risk, it hasn't paid off, but I am not mad at the club for that pick.

It is the later picks that have killed us, it is overlooking leaders.. Leaders like Shuey, Parker and Sloane, that have killed us.

Strauss was an outside bit player when drafted, taken far too early... Blease was a speculative X factor type - taken ahead of a Vic Metro captain in Shuey, even a great ball user then.

It is not development that has killed Melbourne, it is the fact we drafted unproven, speculative players.

Gysberts, Cook, they weren't proven. They were ordinary picks and we have payed the price.

Back on the 2008 draft, I agree NO ONE in the top 10 has really killed it, but that isn't what has killed us either.

Watts isn't what has killed us, it overlooking our needs that have killed us. We needed leaders and ball getters - and we taken speculative stick figures.

No it is all about development I am often told.

Like Hurleys? He seems to have stalled as well.

Edited April 29, 201411 yr by Al's Demons

The talk in this draft is Beam at 29, Hanners at 30 and Sloane at 44.

Sloane is the one that got away, apparently we'd promised him we'd take him - then picked Bennell.

I remember I was at work at the time, my cousin rang me and said you guys taken Bennell - I said, was Sloane gone? He said no, he went to Adel at 44.

I hung up on him when he said we also overlooked Shuey.

I would've taken Watts at no 1 though.

It was Rich Vs Watts for mine, Rich was the safe pick, I was in WA that year, he was killing WAFL.

But, I'd of still risked and taken Watts, it was a risk, it hasn't paid off, but I am not mad at the club for that pick.

It is the later picks that have killed us, it is overlooking leaders.. Leaders like Shuey, Parker and Sloane, that have killed us.

Strauss was an outside bit player when drafted, taken far too early... Blease was a speculative X factor type - taken ahead of a Vic Metro captain in Shuey, even a great ball user then.

It is not development that has killed Melbourne, it is the fact we drafted unproven, speculative players.

Gysberts, Cook, they weren't proven. They were ordinary picks and we have payed the price.

Back on the 2008 draft, I agree NO ONE in the top 10 has really killed it, but that isn't what has killed us either.

Watts isn't what has killed us, it overlooking our needs that have killed us. We needed leaders and ball getters - and we taken speculative stick figures.

Very good summary of what has been driving me nuts. It is at best 20% development, it is mostly picking the right cattle in the draft if it is there. And we have made a mockery of the whole process. However you can only pick what's there and many of our drafts often didn't have a lot in the top 10. We and the AFL assumes pick one is better than pick 12 or pick 18 but history indicates this is not true. So the equalisers are not in place as much as Andrew might wish and Eddie never stops telling us otherwise.

Like Hurleys? He seems to have stalled as well.

Good point. Is it the supplements or the fact he had been thrown around a bit or is he just a limited talent? The jury is out.