10 minutes ago, Wells 11 said:

Lets hope we see that suspicion put to the test. 

Funny thing is that if he keeps getting better on the same scale, his career will be Booked. Potentially that interesting....

2 hours ago, Ricky P said:

I have a sneaking suspicion he'll be a finals specialist. Will have a knack of nailing set shots at crucial times. 

What ever gives you that impression #24/7

You have to wonder if Watt's form will continue to improve, as the criticism from both inside and outside the club subsides.

I'm surprised he continued to play after all the crap he copped in his first few years.  He's been good this year and whilst some expect more of him, i'd be happy if he continued to play the way he is with a bit of improvement as we go along.

He's 26 and probably has another 6 years in him which could bring him up to around 250 games which, if achieved, will be a very good outcome.

1 hour ago, Dante said:

 

He's 26 and probably has another 6 years in him which could bring him up to around 250 games which, if achieved, will be a very good outcome.

He's recently turned 25. Has a lot of footy ahead.

38 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

He's recently turned 25. Has a lot of footy ahead.

and he stays remarkably injury free ( relatively )

he may well be another ( next ) 300 gamer

Now wouldnt that make some sit up ?

I think he's finally found a hunger , an appetite for this  game. Not just to play or even to compete...but to impact. Thats where players make the change up

31 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

and he stays remarkably injury free ( relatively )

he may well be another ( next ) 300 gamer

Now wouldnt that make some sit up ?

 

If he gets to 300 games he will earn them all. If he gets there then any knocks on him as a number 1 pick will have evaporated given i think reiwoldt would be the only number 1 to do so

53 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

and he stays remarkably injury free ( relatively )

he may well be another ( next ) 300 gamer

Now wouldnt that make some sit up ?

I think he's finally found a hunger , an appetite for this  game. Not just to play or even to compete...but to impact. Thats where players make the change up

I have barracked for Jack since day one through the many lows and more recent highs. But unless he significantly improves he is not allowed to take one step past 271 games

On 17/06/2016 at 1:37 AM, Radar Detector said:

4. His natural talent levels mean he should have a higher ceiling and be held to a higher standard than many other players. 

However I don't think it is in any way unreasonable to assume that this should be a building block to becoming an even better player, rather than an anomaly year before he regresses or plateaus. He is capable of more. I would suggest that holding this season out as a minimum standard is completely appropriate and don't really understand why anyone would think otherwise.

Of course this is where the use of language gets very difficult.

Is there anyone on this site who believes Jack Watts doesn't deserve his spot in the team at present?  I doubt it. This, according to some, is some sort of "minimum standard".

Is there anyone on this site who believes Jack Watts wouldn't deserve his spot in the team if he dropped his output slightly?  I doubt it.  But of course he would be playing below his "minimum standard". Hence much of this discussion is bluster and posturing.

I'd suggest that the concept of "minimum standard" is related to peoples expectations based on his talent.  It's got nothing to do with whether he is "value to the team". It's pretty simple.  Jack gets a game while there is nobody better to play his role. He is value to us when he is one of the best 22 players on the list.

This silly concept of "minimum standard" allows people to pontificate about "he could have been so much more" or "he got everything out of himself".  I dislike ProDees setting of "minimum standard criteria" because it allowed him (PD) to pronounce him a failure if he doesn't achieve them and that would support and justify PD's previous stated position on Watts. I think it was nothing more than a clever slight of hand. But of course if he kicks 37 goals instead of 40 he isn't a failure particularly when you look at the other functions he's now playing in the team.  ProDee is no fool and most were taken down his path.

So just recognize that the whole concept of "minimum standard" is for each of us to set and ultimately make a judgement on.  Jack will play and be value to us as long as he is better than others on the list that can play his role.

JW is having a fantastic year and everyone should be delighted.

Done.

3 hours ago, Vogon Poetry said:

Of course this is where the use of language gets very difficult.

Is there anyone on this site who believes Jack Watts doesn't deserve his spot in the team at present?  I doubt it. This, according to some, is some sort of "minimum standard".

Is there anyone on this site who believes Jack Watts wouldn't deserve his spot in the team if he dropped his output slightly?  I doubt it.  But of course he would be playing below his "minimum standard". Hence much of this discussion is bluster and posturing.

I'd suggest that the concept of "minimum standard" is related to peoples expectations based on his talent.  It's got nothing to do with whether he is "value to the team". It's pretty simple.  Jack gets a game while there is nobody better to play his role. He is value to us when he is one of the best 22 players on the list.

This silly concept of "minimum standard" allows people to pontificate about "he could have been so much more" or "he got everything out of himself".  I dislike ProDees setting of "minimum standard criteria" because it allowed him (PD) to pronounce him a failure if he doesn't achieve them and that would support and justify PD's previous stated position on Watts. I think it was nothing more than a clever slight of hand. But of course if he kicks 37 goals instead of 40 he isn't a failure particularly when you look at the other functions he's now playing in the team.  ProDee is no fool and most were taken down his path.

So just recognize that the whole concept of "minimum standard" is for each of us to set and ultimately make a judgement on.  Jack will play and be value to us as long as he is better than others on the list that can play his role.

So entering his prime years and with 8 seasons under his belt you're satisfied if he's holding his spot in the best 22 ?

Here's a spade, so you can start digging and set the bar even lower. 

Why you think it's disingenuous to use this season as a benchmark as we move forward is beyond me. 

3 hours ago, Vogon Poetry said:

Of course this is where the use of language gets very difficult.

Is there anyone on this site who believes Jack Watts doesn't deserve his spot in the team at present?  I doubt it. This, according to some, is some sort of "minimum standard".

Is there anyone on this site who believes Jack Watts wouldn't deserve his spot in the team if he dropped his output slightly?  I doubt it.  But of course he would be playing below his "minimum standard". Hence much of this discussion is bluster and posturing.

I'd suggest that the concept of "minimum standard" is related to peoples expectations based on his talent.  It's got nothing to do with whether he is "value to the team". It's pretty simple.  Jack gets a game while there is nobody better to play his role. He is value to us when he is one of the best 22 players on the list.

This silly concept of "minimum standard" allows people to pontificate about "he could have been so much more" or "he got everything out of himself".  I dislike ProDees setting of "minimum standard criteria" because it allowed him (PD) to pronounce him a failure if he doesn't achieve them and that would support and justify PD's previous stated position on Watts. I think it was nothing more than a clever slight of hand. But of course if he kicks 37 goals instead of 40 he isn't a failure particularly when you look at the other functions he's now playing in the team.  ProDee is no fool and most were taken down his path.

So just recognize that the whole concept of "minimum standard" is for each of us to set and ultimately make a judgement on.  Jack will play and be value to us as long as he is better than others on the list that can play his role.

I am coming from the position that we are currently sitting 6-6 and 10th. We have good players playing well and young players showing signs. Jack Watts is an important part of the team, no doubt. But we need players like him to deliver on their higher ceilings if we are to improve and hopefully become a real contender. The same is true of Viney and Hogan, not just Oliver, Petracca et al. whose development is unlikely to be linear as history shows us.

If we can content ourselves with the output of guys like Watts, who I re-iterate is having a good year, then we are happy to leave the growth of our team to others. I don't accept that as a base position, he has more in him. He will still be valuable to our team even if he goes slightly backwards but we won't necessarily be a better team if he does.

3 hours ago, jumbo returns said:

JW is having a fantastic year and everyone should be delighted.

Done.

Just to be clear, I don't disagree with that comment. Just hope he can continue to build from here. I think he is the type who works hard to correct his weakness. It has been incremental but he has improved year on year. If he can continue to get better in the contest and iron out a few flat patches here and there he could still become a top 10 forward in the comp.

Play your role - there is your minimum standard.

Moving the goalposts on this bloke so you don't lose an argument is petty - he either plays his role as a high HFF/third tall and keeps his spot or he doesn't.

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

So entering his prime years and with 8 seasons under his belt you're satisfied if he's holding his spot in the best 22 ?

Here's a spade, so you can start digging and set the bar even lower. 

Why you think it's disingenuous to use this season as a benchmark as we move forward is beyond me. 

It's not a matter of whether I'm satisfied or not.  And I'm not "setting the bar" anywhere, I'm not using a spade and I'm not using a ladder.

I'm saying if he's best 22 he plays regardless of where he sits when measured against expectations (minumum standards).  It's nonsensical to suggest I don't want him (and every other player in the team) to be better.

 

29 minutes ago, Vogon Poetry said:

It's not a matter of whether I'm satisfied or not.  And I'm not "setting the bar" anywhere, I'm not using a spade and I'm not using a ladder.

I'm saying if he's best 22 he plays regardless of where he sits when measured against expectations (minumum standards).  It's nonsensical to suggest I don't want him (and every other player in the team) to be better.

 

Who's debating whether he deserves his spot in the team ?

Edit: I realise this thread started last year, but no-one questions his place at round 13.

Edited June 18, 20169 yr by ProDee

1 hour ago, Vogon Poetry said:

It's not a matter of whether I'm satisfied or not.  And I'm not "setting the bar" anywhere, I'm not using a spade and I'm not using a ladder.

I'm saying if he's best 22 he plays regardless of where he sits when measured against expectations (minumum standards).  It's nonsensical to suggest I don't want him (and every other player in the team) to be better.

 

In my view, it's partially the weight of expectation that has delayed JW from getting to stage he's at now. He has been bashed from pillar to post by media and supporters alike. I now want to sit back and enjoy the second half of his career.  I'm sure there will be many great games ahead!!

Is it too much to expect JW's increased potency being somewhat in parallel with the whole team's improved performance. This would indicate to me that JW's future form may be read in correlation with us improving to the extent of playing in the finals this year as a penultimate step. Indeed every team member's form would need to improve and it is possible.

Just finally I think with him like a lot of players with that mindset you need the like minded individuals around you, thinking, creative and having the periphery. Much more than minimum standard. You know the 90%/ 10% business.

7 hours ago, stuie said:

This is my favourite post ever made in any Jack Watts thread ever.... look at that dog go! 

 

He looked like a beast vs Swans, couldnt believe what I was seeing.  Standing up in tackles and busting through packs, I honestly thought it was Hogan a couple of times.

2 minutes ago, Petraccattack said:

He looked like a beast vs Swans, couldnt believe what I was seeing.  Standing up in tackles and busting through packs, I honestly thought it was Hogan a couple of times.

I personally didn't, but he was one of our best today. Continues to develop at a steady rate.

4 minutes ago, Petraccattack said:

He looked like a beast vs Swans, couldnt believe what I was seeing.  Standing up in tackles and busting through packs, I honestly thought it was Hogan a couple of times.

Yeah i saw him cop a few hits and even dish out a bit that i thought would take the stuffing out of him, but he just soldiered on. He is becoming a very dependable player who now gives his all which could not be said in any previous year he has played!

 

Not since Travis Johnston have we had a player with so much time. He just finds time and space where there is non. 

Always been talented but is finally combining talent with hunger for the contest. 

One of the highlights of this season. Well done to him!

I would like to see him played closer to goal for more of the game, that's where his footy smarts are best used for us. He has started to use his body in marking contests and everyone knows how good a set shot he is.

Jack Watts had more than a baptism of fire. I cannot think of any player that has been the subject of so much criticism and ridicule from the football world and Melbourne supporters. His form this year tells us a lot about his talent and his character. We knew he had the talent but not the physical and mental toughness to make it. He proved me wrong and many others. It also shows good judgement by the club in sticking by him. I was as frustrated as many others with his game. So happy for him to see him emerge from the darkness.  In this dog eat dig world that craves immediate success, it is a lesson that patience and persistence can pay off. It shows that Jack despite being labelled as soft has a resilience and toughness that has sustained him.  He has succeeded when many would have failed under the weight of public opinion.