I was at the game today and Jack Watts was absolutely terrible he needs to be traded, dropped or given away. We are playing with 17 men on the ground, what a great example he sets for Gus and Jessie. He was totally crap today and it's no wonder his teammates don't look for him he is not competitive.

What makes anybody think Watts will be tradeable come year end?

Other sides see exactly what we see, and have been watching for 6 years now. He has no value.

to trade for another with issues of some nature, like a Kreuzer.

to trade for another with issues of some nature, like a Kreuzer.

You are a dead set peanut.

I was at the game today and Jack Watts was absolutely terrible he needs to be traded, dropped or given away. We are playing with 17 men on the ground, what a great example he sets for Gus and Jessie. He was totally crap today and it's no wonder his teammates don't look for him he is not competitive.

gee, that's a bit tough on jacky boy

have you ever tried to play basketball in those conditions?

and the crowd were just horrible to him

gee, that's a bit tough on jacky boy

have you ever tried to play basketball in those conditions?

and the crowd were just horrible to him

You are correct dc. We expected too much of Jack. Once we saw it was going to be wet and miserable we should have told him to stay snuggled up in the hotel and watch the game on telly.

The prophets of doom often have the satisfaction of being vindicated - most items in any category of things turn out to be average - it's the statistical bell curve. Isn't the average AFL career around 5 years? So that on the law of averages Watts has done ok so far. Number one draft pick? Everybody thought so at the time; surely time to let that one go. The real question surely is whether or not we will ever get a regular match-winner out of his mix of skills/deficiencies. the impatient anti-Watts crowd are making a lot of noise - but will history prove them right?

Here's my couple of thoughts:

1. Talk about Watts being tough and playing aggressively, even thumping someone, is "begging the question" in that it offers as grounds for dumping him the fact that he isn't the sort of player that he isn't. It amounts to the question "Is a soft player worth anything?" being answered with "no, because he's soft." Robbie Flower wasn't one to hit anyone. Lots of good players aren't. It is at least theoretically possible that a team can have a "soft" player who is still worth a game. Whether Watts is one of them - well, that's the question.

So, what criteria can we think of (other than hitting people, bashing and crashing) that might be grounds for valuing his contribution - when his value is not going to be in terms of "toughness"? What KPI's can we come up with for a player like Watts?

I'd suggest we could look at, for example, things like efficient disposals compared to possessions lost due to his alleged softness; or examples of possession retained through his exceptional skills where we might well have lost possession had a less silky player had the use of the ball - the sort of break-the-game-open things that a Robbie Flower did used to do. The impact of his involvements on momentum in the game. And maybe also we might consider excusing his failing to win or retain possession if tougher players left him unsupported... I'd suggest this is not special pleading, but really just like saying Jetta cannot be expected to outmark Buddy, and so criticising him for failing to do so is just ignoring a fact.

No doubt Roos has his ideas of what to factor into his assessment of Watts, weighing whether his skills outweigh his deficiencies. It seems to me that on Demonland we keep hearing frustrated voices shouting here that Watts has deficiencies - and from my point of view those ventings of frustration must not be taken as the whole of the story... Jetta (or anybody) can still be a good player despite there being things he cannot do. Ditto Watts.

2. We are clearly still trying to work out how to use Watts. Garry Lyon offered his thoughts, and Roos is apparently still trying to nut it out. We have a player with these wonderful skills, but cannot get them into play often enough. For many of us his shortcomings keep obscuring the picture of what he brings to the team. I say there is a need - on here, at Demonland - for a more carefully weighed evaluation of what Watts offers.

It reminds me of Churchill, the First Lord of the Admiralty who dreamed up that absolute lunacy the Allied attack on Gallipoli in 1915. In fact, everything he did in politics was a fiasco until he became Prime Minister, replacing the insipid Chamberlain in the desperate days of the Blitz, and then Churchill eventually astonished his critics by becoming unmistakably the greatest of all British Prime Ministers. They finally had him in the job where his excellences were exactly what was needed; and his undoubted peculiarities and poor judgment simply didn't matter. Or Abraham Lincoln - a loose cannon personally and no fiscal manager, took the country through a most destructive civil war, but he abolished slavery. Great things can be done by people with great talents, despite their very-evident failings - if you can put them into the position to use their skills. If the times call for those particular skills.

Remember Norm Smith taking his old mate's boy who couldn't quite cut it, and creating the new ruck-rover position for him. Barassi had some excellences and some shortcomings - but the right fit unleashed all his good points and he became a superstar. Until we really have worked out where Watts ought to be played to maximise his undoubted skills, and to minimise the effect of his weaknesses, we haven't made use of him properly; and we won't really know. While there is no clarity about his proper role - and I think it is clear enough that there isn't yet - I think we have to hold back from passing judgment.

It is fascinating watching. Tantalising, seeing his first game last year, his first game this year - and then having him not kick on. Of course we'd like to see him grow stronger, with a more obviously competitive nature. But meantime, there are star qualities in there! All the Watts-hating on here is disappointing, because it ignores the real issue. What I want to see is the right fit; then and only then will we be able to gauge his value.

Until Roos gives him a settled position, and then either lets him and his team-mates grow into his playing that position, or else discards him as a failure in that position - I'd prefer to wait. I think I trust Roos to get it right in the end. Meantime I'm disappointed repeatedly, but still live in hope. Loving it when Watts deservedly gets named in the best. I still think that on skill - vision, hands, kicking, coolness - he is an outstanding talent. Such an amiable and patient person too - I wish it was easier to have the same qualities when watching him play for us!

Edited April 19, 201510 yr by robbiefrom13

The prophets of doom often have the satisfaction of being vindicated - most items in any category of things turn out to be average - it's the statistical bell curve. Isn't the average AFL career around 5 years? So that on the law of averages Watts has done ok so far. Number one draft pick? Everybody thought so at the time; surely time to let that one go. The real question surely is whether or not we will ever get a regular match-winner out of his mix of skills/deficiencies. the impatient anti-Watts crowd are making a lot of noise - but will history prove them right?

Here's my couple of thoughts:

1. Talk about Watts being tough and playing aggressively, even thumping someone, is "begging the question" in that it offers as grounds for dumping him the fact that he isn't the sort of player that he isn't. It amounts to the question "Is a soft player worth anything?" being answered with "no, because he's soft." Robbie Flower wasn't one to hit anyone. Lots of good players aren't. It is at least theoretically possible that a team can have a "soft" player who is still worth a game. Whether Watts is one of them - well, that's the question.

So, what criteria can we think of (other than hitting people, bashing and crashing) that might be grounds for valuing his contribution - when his value is not going to be in terms of "toughness"? What KPI's can we come up with for a player like Watts?

I'd suggest we could look at, for example, things like efficient disposals compared to possessions lost due to his alleged softness; or examples of possession retained through his exceptional skills where we might well have lost possession had a less silky player had the use of the ball - the sort of break-the-game-open things that a Robbie Flower did used to do. The impact of his involvements on momentum in the game. And maybe also we might consider excusing his failing to win or retain possession if tougher players left him unsupported... I'd suggest this is not special pleading, but really just like saying Jetta cannot be expected to outmark Buddy, and so criticising him for failing to do so is just ignoring a fact.

No doubt Roos has his ideas of what to factor into his assessment of Watts, weighing whether his skills outweigh his deficiencies. It seems to me that on Demonland we keep hearing frustrated voices shouting here that Watts has deficiencies - and from my point of view those ventings of frustration must not be taken as the whole of the story... Jetta (or anybody) can still be a good player despite there being things he cannot do. Ditto Watts.

2. We are clearly still trying to work out how to use Watts. Garry Lyon offered his thoughts, and Roos is apparently still trying to nut it out. We have a player with these wonderful skills, but cannot get them into play often enough. For many of us his shortcomings keep obscuring the picture of what he brings to the team. I say there is a need - on here, at Demonland - for a more carefully weighed evaluation of what Watts offers.

It reminds me of Churchill, the First Lord of the Admiralty who dreamed up that absolute lunacy the Allied attack on Gallipoli in 1915. In fact, everything he did in politics was a fiasco until he became Prime Minister, replacing the insipid Chamberlain in the desperate days of the Blitz, and then Churchill eventually astonished his critics by becoming unmistakably the greatest of all British Prime Ministers. They finally had him in the job where his excellences were exactly what was needed; and his undoubted peculiarities and poor judgment simply didn't matter. Or Abraham Lincoln - a loose cannon personally and no fiscal manager, took the country through a most destructive civil war, but he abolished slavery. Great things can be done by people with great talents, despite their very-evident failings - if you can put them into the position to use their skills. If the times call for those particular skills.

Remember Norm Smith taking his old mate's boy who couldn't quite cut it, and creating the new ruck-rover position for him. Barassi had some excellences and some shortcomings - but the right fit unleashed all his good points and he became a superstar. Until we really have worked out where Watts ought to be played to maximise his undoubted skills, and to minimise the effect of his weaknesses, we haven't made use of him properly; and we won't really know. While there is no clarity about his proper role - and I think it is clear enough that there isn't yet - I think we have to hold back from passing judgment.

It is fascinating watching. Tantalising, seeing his first game last year, his first game this year - and then having him not kick on. Of course we'd like to see him grow stronger, with a more obviously competitive nature. But meantime, there are star qualities in there! All the Watts-hating on here is disappointing, because it ignores the real issue. What I want to see is the right fit; then and only then will we be able to gauge his value.

Until Roos gives him a settled position, and then either lets him and his team-mates grow into his playing that position, or else discards him as a failure in that position - I'd prefer to wait. I think I trust Roos to get it right in the end. Meantime I'm disappointed repeatedly, but still live in hope. Loving it when Watts deservedly gets named in the best. I still think that on skill - vision, hands, kicking, coolness - he is an outstanding talent. Such an amiable and patient person too - I wish it was easier to have the same qualities when watching him play for us!

what a lot of shyte.

everything you seem to base your thoughts on, is you think the noisy people want watts to be a pack crasher; or to look like he wants to hit someone.... caarp!

the people want watts to go in, to get to the ball first if he's closest, or to tackle if he happens to be the one in the position first. or to use a body bump to fight for a loose ball.... fact

All these traits were what robbie flower did on a daily basis on gamedays.

Posted this after last weeks loss and I still feel exactly the same for those who missed it:

Here's who I would be looking to turn over at seasons end Watts (trade) must have some currency lets just cash in these chips alreadyGarland (free agent) let him go, take whatever pick we get for him, he's too inconsistent Cross (retire) old man time catches up with everyone eventuallyGrimes (trade) try to find a vandenBerg type with better skills and a stronger body with the low pick we'll get for himHowe (trade) if he can attract a late first rounder like was rumoured last offseason that would have to be a win for usMcKenzie (delist)Gawn (delist)Toumpas (trade) steak knives in a trade with Adelaide or Port for someone decentBail (delist) Trengove (retire) don't think he'll make it back unfortunately

I'll admit Garland was better today, but I still think he'll leave and I won't be all that sad to see him go.

You left out a few who should go:

Spencer

Fitzpatrick

Riley

King

Tehrlich

Matt Jones

Neal-Bullen

Harmes

Hunt

White

Jamar will retire

what a lot of shyte.

everything you seem to base your thoughts on, is you think the noisy people want watts to be a pack crasher; or to look like he wants to hit someone.... caarp!

the people want watts to go in, to get to the ball first if he's closest, or to tackle if he happens to be the one in the position first. or to use a body bump to fight for a loose ball.... fact

All these traits were what robbie flower did on a daily basis on gamedays.

ok. It's a difference of opinion.

it is possible that his role is not to be the extractor. I don't know if this is the case, but suppose it is; then while it seems obvious to us that there are times when he must be taking that definition of his role too literally, and it would be better if he went in and got the thing, so that we think he is letting the side down through not playing what we take for granted would be his role; yet he doesn't get dropped. You'd have to wonder why he is still in the team - Roos can see what we see. Hence my thinking there may be more to it than we have understood.

As to Robbie Flower, I saw him too. I remember him one time late in his career coralled by David Rhys-Jones, Flower with the ball but undecided where to go, and Rhys-Jones with his arms spread waiting for Flower to move. Nothing happened for what seemed a very long time - Rhys-Jones clearly figured he would be evaded if he lunged, while Robbie equally appeared unsure which way to go and I imagine convinced he'd be walloped if he tried to go anywhere. it was an absolute stalemate. Both guys had their strengths, and neither was confident of doing anything. Eventually the ball ended up over the boundary line, and nobody in hospital. There are times when the obvious isn't obvious, and "going" because you're there can be useless.

I just don't think the thing with Watts is as obvious as some on here think. If Roos drops him, ok, we can see what's going on - until then, our frustrated thoughts are not making clear any definite facts - not as Roos apparently sees it anyway. I see your point - and I do wonder if maybe only tough guys can be useful. But Roos keeps picking him...

Jack Watts drops uncontested marks more often than he does not.

He is a liability unless he can rectify this.

In September the game is 10 x as hard...

The prophets of doom often have the satisfaction of being vindicated - most items in any category of things turn out to be average - it's the statistical bell curve. Isn't the average AFL career around 5 years? So that on the law of averages Watts has done ok so far. Number one draft pick? Everybody thought so at the time; surely time to let that one go. The real question surely is whether or not we will ever get a regular match-winner out of his mix of skills/deficiencies. the impatient anti-Watts crowd are making a lot of noise - but will history prove them right?

Here's my couple of thoughts:

1. Talk about Watts being tough and playing aggressively, even thumping someone, is "begging the question" in that it offers as grounds for dumping him the fact that he isn't the sort of player that he isn't. It amounts to the question "Is a soft player worth anything?" being answered with "no, because he's soft." Robbie Flower wasn't one to hit anyone. Lots of good players aren't. It is at least theoretically possible that a team can have a "soft" player who is still worth a game. Whether Watts is one of them - well, that's the question.

So, what criteria can we think of (other than hitting people, bashing and crashing) that might be grounds for valuing his contribution - when his value is not going to be in terms of "toughness"? What KPI's can we come up with for a player like Watts?

I'd suggest we could look at, for example, things like efficient disposals compared to possessions lost due to his alleged softness; or examples of possession retained through his exceptional skills where we might well have lost possession had a less silky player had the use of the ball - the sort of break-the-game-open things that a Robbie Flower did used to do. The impact of his involvements on momentum in the game. And maybe also we might consider excusing his failing to win or retain possession if tougher players left him unsupported... I'd suggest this is not special pleading, but really just like saying Jetta cannot be expected to outmark Buddy, and so criticising him for failing to do so is just ignoring a fact.

No doubt Roos has his ideas of what to factor into his assessment of Watts, weighing whether his skills outweigh his deficiencies. It seems to me that on Demonland we keep hearing frustrated voices shouting here that Watts has deficiencies - and from my point of view those ventings of frustration must not be taken as the whole of the story... Jetta (or anybody) can still be a good player despite there being things he cannot do. Ditto Watts.

2. We are clearly still trying to work out how to use Watts. Garry Lyon offered his thoughts, and Roos is apparently still trying to nut it out. We have a player with these wonderful skills, but cannot get them into play often enough. For many of us his shortcomings keep obscuring the picture of what he brings to the team. I say there is a need - on here, at Demonland - for a more carefully weighed evaluation of what Watts offers.

It reminds me of Churchill, the First Lord of the Admiralty who dreamed up that absolute lunacy the Allied attack on Gallipoli in 1915. In fact, everything he did in politics was a fiasco until he became Prime Minister, replacing the insipid Chamberlain in the desperate days of the Blitz, and then Churchill eventually astonished his critics by becoming unmistakably the greatest of all British Prime Ministers. They finally had him in the job where his excellences were exactly what was needed; and his undoubted peculiarities and poor judgment simply didn't matter. Or Abraham Lincoln - a loose cannon personally and no fiscal manager, took the country through a most destructive civil war, but he abolished slavery. Great things can be done by people with great talents, despite their very-evident failings - if you can put them into the position to use their skills. If the times call for those particular skills.

Remember Norm Smith taking his old mate's boy who couldn't quite cut it, and creating the new ruck-rover position for him. Barassi had some excellences and some shortcomings - but the right fit unleashed all his good points and he became a superstar. Until we really have worked out where Watts ought to be played to maximise his undoubted skills, and to minimise the effect of his weaknesses, we haven't made use of him properly; and we won't really know. While there is no clarity about his proper role - and I think it is clear enough that there isn't yet - I think we have to hold back from passing judgment.

It is fascinating watching. Tantalising, seeing his first game last year, his first game this year - and then having him not kick on. Of course we'd like to see him grow stronger, with a more obviously competitive nature. But meantime, there are star qualities in there! All the Watts-hating on here is disappointing, because it ignores the real issue. What I want to see is the right fit; then and only then will we be able to gauge his value.

Until Roos gives him a settled position, and then either lets him and his team-mates grow into his playing that position, or else discards him as a failure in that position - I'd prefer to wait. I think I trust Roos to get it right in the end. Meantime I'm disappointed repeatedly, but still live in hope. Loving it when Watts deservedly gets named in the best. I still think that on skill - vision, hands, kicking, coolness - he is an outstanding talent. Such an amiable and patient person too - I wish it was easier to have the same qualities when watching him play for us!

Firstly "begging the question" is a term from logic which means the argument is not proved because the premise carries the conclusion...as in there is a God because the Bible says so!

But more importantly stop saying that Jack Watts has magnificent skills when they are in reality only good AFL standard on game day.

He drops marks regularly, not only when under pressure, and his kicks go astray when there is the slightest implied pressure.

What he has is good skills with a very balanced and classical execution......so what?

He could retire and make a good living out of coaching public school boy footballers how to play the game correctly.

in fairness to watts, i would think being third tall in the melbourne forward line where the majority of our mids can't hit a target to save themselves would be a super hard job.

in fairness to our mids, watts shouldn't be dropping chest marks like he did yesterday.

wild speculation on 2015 list changes based on us finishing, say, third last:

Retire: Cross, Jamar

Delist: McKenzie, Pedersen, Riley, Hunt, Spencer, Harmes*, King*, Terlich

Live picks: 3, 21, 39, 57, 75, Rookie 3*, Rookie 21*

Upgrade: vandenBerg (pick 75)

Trade:

- Howe to Richmond for, say, pick 6 (based on GWS offering pick 7 for him last year)

- Pick 6 and pick 21 to GC Suns for Prestia and pick 40 (optimistic, Prestia is a gun, can't see GC17 wanting to give him up)

- Toumpas to Adelaide for pick 33 (optimistic, but not outside the realms of possibility)

- Pick 39 to North Melbourne for Ryan Bastinac (as above)

- Leuenberger as a free agent acquisition

Live picks 3, 33, 40, 57

in fairness to watts, i would think being third tall in the melbourne forward line where the majority of our mids can't hit a target to save themselves would be a super hard job.

in fairness to our mids, watts shouldn't be dropping chest marks like he did yesterday.

wild speculation on 2015 list changes based on us finishing, say, third last:

Retire: Cross, Jamar

Delist: McKenzie, Pedersen, Riley, Hunt, Spencer, Harmes*, King*, Terlich

Live picks: 3, 21, 39, 57, 75, Rookie 3*, Rookie 21*

Upgrade: vandenBerg (pick 75)

Trade:

- Howe to Richmond for, say, pick 6 (based on GWS offering pick 7 for him last year)

- Pick 6 and pick 21 to GC Suns for Prestia and pick 40 (optimistic, Prestia is a gun, can't see GC17 wanting to give him up)

- Toumpas to Adelaide for pick 33 (optimistic, but not outside the realms of possibility)

- Pick 39 to North Melbourne for Ryan Bastinac (as above)

- Leuenberger as a free agent acquisition

Live picks 3, 33, 40, 57

In April?

Firstly "begging the question" is a term from logic which means the argument is not proved because the premise carries the conclusion...as in there is a God because the Bible says so!

But more importantly stop saying that Jack Watts has magnificent skills when they are in reality only good AFL standard on game day.

He drops marks regularly, not only when under pressure, and his kicks go astray when there is the slightest implied pressure.

What he has is good skills with a very balanced and classical execution......so what?

He could retire and make a good living out of coaching public school boy footballers how to play the game correctly.

or as in "soft players are no good because they're soft". The conclusion depends on the premise being a reason for itself. Firstly yourself. What did you think I was saying?

I beg to differ re his skills. Possibly I'm in the majority, in this opinion.

"So what?" So these are worthwhile and by no means run-of-the-mill skills. Why should he retire? Why not try to use the skills? Which is what he and the club are working on.

"when there is the slightest implied pressure" - that's just silly talk. If it were true, and he was known to be soft (as he is), in the AFL he'd be scoring 0% efficiency.

Edited April 19, 201510 yr by robbiefrom13

In April?

think i actually did this speculation back in march...

Lions CEO Greg Swann confident Aish will be gone at years end.

Haven't seen much of him at all, heard the name that's about it. Worth a shot?

Apologies if already discussed.

Lions CEO Greg Swann confident Aish will be gone at years end.

Haven't seen much of him at all, heard the name that's about it. Worth a shot?

Apologies if already discussed.

Will be in adelaide.Was meant to be there from day dot.

We want Danger,Shiel or treloar.

The prophets of doom often have the satisfaction of being vindicated - most items in any category of things turn out to be average - it's the statistical bell curve. Isn't the average AFL career around 5 years? So that on the law of averages Watts has done ok so far. Number one draft pick? Everybody thought so at the time; surely time to let that one go. The real question surely is whether or not we will ever get a regular match-winner out of his mix of skills/deficiencies. the impatient anti-Watts crowd are making a lot of noise - but will history prove them right?

Here's my couple of thoughts:

1. Talk about Watts being tough and playing aggressively, even thumping someone, is "begging the question" in that it offers as grounds for dumping him the fact that he isn't the sort of player that he isn't. It amounts to the question "Is a soft player worth anything?" being answered with "no, because he's soft." Robbie Flower wasn't one to hit anyone. Lots of good players aren't. It is at least theoretically possible that a team can have a "soft" player who is still worth a game. Whether Watts is one of them - well, that's the question.

So, what criteria can we think of (other than hitting people, bashing and crashing) that might be grounds for valuing his contribution - when his value is not going to be in terms of "toughness"? What KPI's can we come up with for a player like Watts?

I'd suggest we could look at, for example, things like efficient disposals compared to possessions lost due to his alleged softness; or examples of possession retained through his exceptional skills where we might well have lost possession had a less silky player had the use of the ball - the sort of break-the-game-open things that a Robbie Flower did used to do. The impact of his involvements on momentum in the game. And maybe also we might consider excusing his failing to win or retain possession if tougher players left him unsupported... I'd suggest this is not special pleading, but really just like saying Jetta cannot be expected to outmark Buddy, and so criticising him for failing to do so is just ignoring a fact.

No doubt Roos has his ideas of what to factor into his assessment of Watts, weighing whether his skills outweigh his deficiencies. It seems to me that on Demonland we keep hearing frustrated voices shouting here that Watts has deficiencies - and from my point of view those ventings of frustration must not be taken as the whole of the story... Jetta (or anybody) can still be a good player despite there being things he cannot do. Ditto Watts.

2. We are clearly still trying to work out how to use Watts. Garry Lyon offered his thoughts, and Roos is apparently still trying to nut it out. We have a player with these wonderful skills, but cannot get them into play often enough. For many of us his shortcomings keep obscuring the picture of what he brings to the team. I say there is a need - on here, at Demonland - for a more carefully weighed evaluation of what Watts offers.

It reminds me of Churchill, the First Lord of the Admiralty who dreamed up that absolute lunacy the Allied attack on Gallipoli in 1915. In fact, everything he did in politics was a fiasco until he became Prime Minister, replacing the insipid Chamberlain in the desperate days of the Blitz, and then Churchill eventually astonished his critics by becoming unmistakably the greatest of all British Prime Ministers. They finally had him in the job where his excellences were exactly what was needed; and his undoubted peculiarities and poor judgment simply didn't matter. Or Abraham Lincoln - a loose cannon personally and no fiscal manager, took the country through a most destructive civil war, but he abolished slavery. Great things can be done by people with great talents, despite their very-evident failings - if you can put them into the position to use their skills. If the times call for those particular skills.

Remember Norm Smith taking his old mate's boy who couldn't quite cut it, and creating the new ruck-rover position for him. Barassi had some excellences and some shortcomings - but the right fit unleashed all his good points and he became a superstar. Until we really have worked out where Watts ought to be played to maximise his undoubted skills, and to minimise the effect of his weaknesses, we haven't made use of him properly; and we won't really know. While there is no clarity about his proper role - and I think it is clear enough that there isn't yet - I think we have to hold back from passing judgment.

It is fascinating watching. Tantalising, seeing his first game last year, his first game this year - and then having him not kick on. Of course we'd like to see him grow stronger, with a more obviously competitive nature. But meantime, there are star qualities in there! All the Watts-hating on here is disappointing, because it ignores the real issue. What I want to see is the right fit; then and only then will we be able to gauge his value.

Until Roos gives him a settled position, and then either lets him and his team-mates grow into his playing that position, or else discards him as a failure in that position - I'd prefer to wait. I think I trust Roos to get it right in the end. Meantime I'm disappointed repeatedly, but still live in hope. Loving it when Watts deservedly gets named in the best. I still think that on skill - vision, hands, kicking, coolness - he is an outstanding talent. Such an amiable and patient person too - I wish it was easier to have the same qualities when watching him play for us!

Excellent, excellent post with analysis of a quality we rarely see around here.

You left out a few who should go:

Spencer

Fitzpatrick

Riley

King

Tehrlich

Matt Jones

Neal-Bullen

Harmes

Hunt

White

Jamar will retire

Neal-Bullen?

That's a bit rough

And White?

Both after zero games?

ok. It's a difference of opinion.

it is possible that his role is not to be the extractor. I don't know if this is the case, but suppose it is; then while it seems obvious to us that there are times when he must be taking that definition of his role too literally, and it would be better if he went in and got the thing, so that we think he is letting the side down through not playing what we take for granted would be his role; yet he doesn't get dropped. You'd have to wonder why he is still in the team - Roos can see what we see. Hence my thinking there may be more to it than we have understood.

As to Robbie Flower, I saw him too. I remember him one time late in his career coralled by David Rhys-Jones, Flower with the ball but undecided where to go, and Rhys-Jones with his arms spread waiting for Flower to move. Nothing happened for what seemed a very long time - Rhys-Jones clearly figured he would be evaded if he lunged, while Robbie equally appeared unsure which way to go and I imagine convinced he'd be walloped if he tried to go anywhere. it was an absolute stalemate. Both guys had their strengths, and neither was confident of doing anything. Eventually the ball ended up over the boundary line, and nobody in hospital. There are times when the obvious isn't obvious, and "going" because you're there can be useless.

I just don't think the thing with Watts is as obvious as some on here think. If Roos drops him, ok, we can see what's going on - until then, our frustrated thoughts are not making clear any definite facts - not as Roos apparently sees it anyway. I see your point - and I do wonder if maybe only tough guys can be useful. But Roos keeps picking him...

his role is to do what is best for the team, at the time.

If he is the closest player to the ball, or the closest player to the opponent who has the ball, his job is to try to get the ball, or stop that opponent from using the ball.

in fairness to watts, i would think being third tall in the melbourne forward line where the majority of our mids can't hit a target to save themselves would be a super hard job.

in fairness to our mids, watts shouldn't be dropping chest marks like he did yesterday.

wild speculation on 2015 list changes based on us finishing, say, third last:

Retire: Cross, Jamar

Delist: McKenzie, Pedersen, Riley, Hunt, Spencer, Harmes*, King*, Terlich

Live picks: 3, 21, 39, 57, 75, Rookie 3*, Rookie 21*

Upgrade: vandenBerg (pick 75)

Trade:

- Howe to Richmond for, say, pick 6 (based on GWS offering pick 7 for him last year)

- Pick 6 and pick 21 to GC Suns for Prestia and pick 40 (optimistic, Prestia is a gun, can't see GC17 wanting to give him up)

- Toumpas to Adelaide for pick 33 (optimistic, but not outside the realms of possibility)

- Pick 39 to North Melbourne for Ryan Bastinac (as above)

- Leuenberger as a free agent acquisition

Live picks 3, 33, 40, 57

In fairness to Cale Morton he played with the exact same enthusiasm for the contest as Watts does now. & bennell did as well.

IF, they were all taught correctly from the first day they pulled on the RednBlue jumper, they may have healthy careers now, or maybe not, but I feel certain that they would be more AFL competative at the very least, than they turned into as 23 year olds.

We are not helping them by being soft on them, we are destroying careers at Melbourne by allowing them to not do the fundamentals at all levels of their development.

Ray Jordan would be doing backflips in his grave, if he had to watch them perform like this. and get paid for it as well.

Edited April 19, 201510 yr by dee-luded

ok. It's a difference of opinion.

it is possible that his role is not to be the extractor. I don't know if this is the case, but suppose it is; then while it seems obvious to us that there are times when he must be taking that definition of his role too literally, and it would be better if he went in and got the thing, so that we think he is letting the side down through not playing what we take for granted would be his role; yet he doesn't get dropped. You'd have to wonder why he is still in the team - Roos can see what we see. Hence my thinking there may be more to it than we have understood.

As to Robbie Flower, I saw him too. I remember him one time late in his career coralled by David Rhys-Jones, Flower with the ball but undecided where to go, and Rhys-Jones with his arms spread waiting for Flower to move. Nothing happened for what seemed a very long time - Rhys-Jones clearly figured he would be evaded if he lunged, while Robbie equally appeared unsure which way to go and I imagine convinced he'd be walloped if he tried to go anywhere. it was an absolute stalemate. Both guys had their strengths, and neither was confident of doing anything. Eventually the ball ended up over the boundary line, and nobody in hospital. There are times when the obvious isn't obvious, and "going" because you're there can be useless.

I just don't think the thing with Watts is as obvious as some on here think. If Roos drops him, ok, we can see what's going on - until then, our frustrated thoughts are not making clear any definite facts - not as Roos apparently sees it anyway. I see your point - and I do wonder if maybe only tough guys can be useful. But Roos keeps picking him...

the difference is rf13, that in that description of yours which i remember, is that (WE) Robbie Flower had control of the ball. it ended over the line? the contest halved.

back to setup for the throwin.

Robbie didn't squib a contest for the ball. he flew like superman in that RednBlue jumper.

others playing in the same colours in the past 10 years have done that standard a lot of harm, & now youngsters think they're witnessing the standard... guess what, its a hollow shell of the courage that was needed in the 80's & 90's .

the style of morton, bennel, gysberts, watts, is an indictment on our jumpers heritage.

Edited April 19, 201510 yr by dee-luded

You left out a few who should go:

Spencer

Fitzpatrick

Riley

King

Tehrlich

Matt Jones

Neal-Bullen

Harmes

Hunt

White

Jamar will retire

Yes lets delist a kid we drafted just 6 months ago and who most experts predicted to get taken in the 20-30 range yet we snagged him at pick 40

Great idea

Joking, right ? 1 round into the VFL season and you think White & NB be should de-listed

You left out a few who should go:
Spencer
Fitzpatrick
Riley
King
Tehrlich
Matt Jones
Neal-Bullen
Harmes
Hunt
White
Jamar will retire

Lions CEO Greg Swann confident Aish will be gone at years end.

Haven't seen much of him at all, heard the name that's about it. Worth a shot?

Apologies if already discussed.

I think there is a recent thread on him Ethan. Outside runner, has a bit of leg. If we got him and Prestia and kept our first pick I would be happy.