Farewell Jack Watts

[Dr. Gonzo 24,315]

1 hour ago, Die Hard Demon said:

I don't doubt they will be elite. As is GWS midfield. But for 2 years straight they have lost the prelim to two sides who don't have as much talent .. but what they do have are 22 blokes that give everything for 120min. I don't want one skillful individual who is not prepared to be on the same page as 21 other guys. Agree with me or not.. Watts has been on our list long enough now to know that he just will never bring the required effort to make a grand final – and WIN it!

That's the thing, the competition is so close now that often who wins comes down strictly to who brings the effort. You need every player on the ground playing total football, you can't excuse players just because they are better at kicking than tackling. Manic pressure is needed from everyone out there. Watts isn't the only one who faltered on this through the year but he is one of the few who has been doing it repeatedly throughout his career. 

I just don't get his mindset, he is comfortable being "very good" he doesn't have the desire to be great. Can you imagine what Viney and Jones must think of some of his efforts and preparation? They don't want our younger players picking up those bad habits and seeing that there are no repercussions for failing to address them. You pull your socks up or you can ply your trade elsewhere. 

[Dr. Gonzo 24,315]

1 hour ago, Socrates said:

If Jack Watts get traded then Simon Goodwin and Brendan McCartney can go as well. Their insipid coaching performance against a reserves Collingwood side was the most pathetic performance in 20 years, even worse than 186.

 

Oh please

[DV8 2,271]

2 hours ago, rjay said:

The question I have with the pick upgrade is why would the Pies help us get Lever when they're in the market for him?

 

Fishing, for inside Information?  So they can scuttle us.

[Demons1858 1,766]

1 hour ago, Akum said:

Watts does not lack effort. The problem is that, in our existing structure, it's mostly attacking effort rather than defensive effort. Watts does a helluva lot of running during a game for someone of his size, but a lot of it is offensive running to provide a target, or to take defenders away from the likes of Hogan, and much of it goes unrewarded. He's probably always seen himself as an attacking player, who is meant to win the ball and use it to advantage.

These are his great assets, and that's what we bought when we drafted him.

So my question is, do our coaches want him to keep up that level of offensive effort, and to massively increase his defensive effort as well? Or do they want him to curtail some of his offensive effort in order to preserve his energy to massively increase his defensive effort?

The third alternative is to make much better use of his attacking skills and efforts, as long as the defensive effort is covered across the team as a whole. I believe our coaches don't see it that way, but if he does go elsewhere, that's probably what they'll try to do. Howe at the Pies is a good example - he seems to be a much more effective player at Collingwood, but that's not because they've drastically improved his defensive game - they seem happy to just encourage him to do what he does best, not to try to rein it in to be more defensive.

So our coaches have chosen one way, and that just doesn't work for Watts. If Howe is any indication, it looks like Collingwood's coaches choose to make use of a player's strengths and to cover their faults across the team - in other words, to choose their team so that they've got a balance of attacking & defensive skills covered across the 22. 

Rubbish ... he lacks effort and second efforts. Doesn't have to be elite in terms of effort and intensity just be ok and he is not

[Dr. Gonzo 24,315]

1 hour ago, Akum said:

Watts does not lack effort. The problem is that, in our existing structure, it's mostly attacking effort rather than defensive effort. Watts does a helluva lot of running during a game for someone of his size, but a lot of it is offensive running to provide a target, or to take defenders away from the likes of Hogan, and much of it goes unrewarded. He's probably always seen himself as an attacking player, who is meant to win the ball and use it to advantage.

These are his great assets, and that's what we bought when we drafted him.

So my question is, do our coaches want him to keep up that level of offensive effort, and to massively increase his defensive effort as well? Or do they want him to curtail some of his offensive effort in order to preserve his energy to massively increase his defensive effort?

The third alternative is to make much better use of his attacking skills and efforts, as long as the defensive effort is covered across the team as a whole. I believe our coaches don't see it that way, but if he does go elsewhere, that's probably what they'll try to do. Howe at the Pies is a good example - he seems to be a much more effective player at Collingwood, but that's not because they've drastically improved his defensive game - they seem happy to just encourage him to do what he does best, not to try to rein it in to be more defensive.

So our coaches have chosen one way, and that just doesn't work for Watts. If Howe is any indication, it looks like Collingwood's coaches choose to make use of a player's strengths and to cover their faults across the team - in other words, to choose their team so that they've got a balance of attacking & defensive skills covered across the 22. 

Effort is two ways otherwise you're just a passenger. Good players don't have to sacrifice offensive effort for defensive effort. This is a team game and it takes 22 guys every week providing the effort as a team, not some deciding to preserve their energy for when they can get on the end of a kick.

[Robbie57 2,022]

25 minutes ago, america de cali said:

Watts to port?

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/port-adelaide-firming-as-home-for-melbournes-jack-watts-20170927-gyq8kr.html

What do we get from a trade to Port?  And why do we need to trade Hogan to get Lever? The latter is very strange to me, first we wouldn't put him on the table and if we did it would have to involve more than just Lever. Indeed trading both Watts and Hogan leaves our forward line very bare, make no sense to me. 

[Deemented Are Go! 3,684]

1 hour ago, Socrates said:

If Jack Watts get traded then Simon Goodwin and Brendan McCartney can go as well. Their insipid coaching performance against a reserves Collingwood side was the most pathetic performance in 20 years, even worse than 186.

 

And overreaction of the year goes to........Socrates! Congratulations!

 

Get a grip dude.

[beelzebub 23,383]

1 hour ago, Sir Why You Little said:

He didn’t make it to September ‘87

injuries got him

Had heard he never stepped back in the door despite many invites  etc.  Could be wrong..It's what Ive heard ( gels with what's occured , thats all )

[DV8 2,271]

1 hour ago, beelzebub said:

Others here are better situated about the history. But the versions im aware have Moore never having anything to do with Melb after leaving. Bit of a rift i heard.

can you pm me?

[rpfc 28,782]

'We have to harden up as a club rah rah rah, that first quarter against Collingwood was unacceptable rah rah rah'

How that equals 'have to trade Watts' is where you lose me. 

Who rocked up in the first quarter of that game for us?

That start was an indictment on the team, the leadership group, and the coaching staff in some order. 

Watts was brought back into that team against the wishes of some and he was one of the few that could walk to the group at qtr time and say 'I did my job in the most important game for this club in 11 years.'

He can go, but we better get back that need for skills and vision moving into our forward line this trade period or we are running on the spot.

[McQueen 17,867]

38 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

wonder how Port fans view this ? 

I don't think they've finished thanking us for the Toump.

[beelzebub 23,383]

6 minutes ago, DV8 said:

can you pm me?

what I know is essentially above.

[drdrake 3,187]

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

Can't see Lever going for 2 first round picks. Everyone bar Crows seems to agree.

I'm suggesting the trade looks like

Melb Out: Watts, Pick 10, 27, 45

Melb In: Lever, Pick 29, 35, 53

Adl Out Lever Pick 35, 53

Adl In: Pick 10, 27, 45

Port Out: Pick 29

Post: In Watts

Everyone a winner

[DemonOX 8,801]

24 minutes ago, DV8 said:

You must be able to see the difference now at the club. the hard physical stakes on-field, show the level of desire & commitment to your footy & the club.

It's obvious we are developing now, the first real group since the turn of the century.

Yeah DV8 I can see the club turning around buts it's s pathetic record. 

We r turning it around but it's s very very slow burn. 

[Akum 2,660]

1 hour ago, jackaub said:

So Akum please tell why our team don't honour Jacks' offensive efforts

That's the question. However we divide up the blame between Watts and the team, there's a big mismatch. And that's the problem.

[bandicoot 1,395]

1 hour ago, drdrake said:

Ports Second round pick.  I think we will loose our first two picks for Lever, hopefully can be a change in pick we get Adelaide second round pick as well, swap third round as well.  Watts for pick 29 is about right.

Leaves us with Pick 29, 35, and Crows third rounder 54ish.  

Watts potential is worth far more than pick 29 which is a hit or miss selection. 

You can get Alex Morgan/Dillon or lobb

2015 - Alex Morgan essendon 0 games

2014 - Dillon Viojo-Rainbow Carlton 0 games 

2013 - Rory lobb GWS

2012 - Tim clurey Port 

2011 - Alex Forster Freo 1 game

2010 - Scott lycett WCE

[ding 5,126]

4 minutes ago, bandicoot said:

Watts potential is worth far more than pick 29 which is a hit or miss selection. 

You can get Alex Morgan/Dillon or lobb

2015 - Alex Morgan essendon 0 games

2014 - Dillon Viojo-Rainbow Carlton 0 games 

2013 - Rory lobb GWS

2012 - Tim clurey Port 

2011 - Alex Forster Freo 1 game

2010 - Scott lycett WCE

Thomas.

[DV8 2,271]

1 minute ago, DemonOX said:

Yeah DV8 I can see the club turning around buts it's s pathetic record. 

We r turning it around but it's s very very slow burn. 

culture... when the culture has gone bad, its takes a long time to rid it from the threads of the club. Years and years. It cannot be removed surgically alone. But that's the start of it.

Because the people who carry that poor culture on-board, do not realise they are carriers of it.

By bad, I mean lazy, part committed, a tolerance of soft, and acceptance of that norm within the club walls. And also outside the clubs walls. within the support base.

It creeps in when things are cosy, & before you know, its taken hold.

Self protection & defensive attitudes are the foundations of this thing.

[Akum 2,660]

31 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Effort is two ways otherwise you're just a passenger. Good players don't have to sacrifice offensive effort for defensive effort. This is a team game and it takes 22 guys every week providing the effort as a team, not some deciding to preserve their energy for when they can get on the end of a kick.

No, this is the point, and you guys keep missing it.

If we're placing all our emphasis on defensive effort and none on attacking effort, I don't know that's a good thing. There needs to be a balance. If there's no attacking effort, nobody runs into space and we keep turning the ball over because we don't care enough about disposal skills. I'm not sure we've got that balance right. 

Look at the Crouch brothers. What's made them so much more dangerous this year is that they've both worked hard on improving their disposal. I can't see a similar improvement among any of our mids - in fact some (notably Tyson) have gone backwards in their disposal, either because they couldn't be bothered or because our coach doesn't think it's important. Adelaide, to me, have a great balance of attacking & defensive effort.

This is not about for or against Watts - it's about what a post-Watts Demons will look like.

But that's the path our coaches have chosen, and it's their right and responsibility to make that choice. I just hope that we won't suffer post-Watts because our disposal skills are so shite and we keep turning it over at half forward like we did in the latter half of the season.

Edited September 28, 2017 by Akum

[DubDee 26,129]

3 hours ago, DemonOX said:

So if Watts goes that's another number 1 pic who walks out the door along with god knows how many other top 25 pics over the yrs. 

How diff could it have been if we could have developed these players properly.  

Goodwin and Co better know what the hell they r doing.

God this footy club makes it hard to continually support them. 

no top 10 draft picks in the Crows line up.

Goody and crew are concentrating on culture and attitude and it's the right way to go

Chin up Ox

[frankie_d 1,471]

20 minutes ago, Akum said:

That's the question. However we divide up the blame between Watts and the team, there's a big mismatch. And that's the problem.

Because he's not very good 1 on 1.

When he's out on his own (like QB, and he worked <really> hard to get space), he's our best player, but he's not reliable 1 on 1. Of course, there are exception (taking on 2 and kicking to Tyson in the forward pocket), but many more times, he's beaten by smaller, less talented players with more appetite for the physical contest.

 

Edited September 28, 2017 by frankie_d
out -> out on his own

[Dr.D 1,771]

I couldn't be more happy to see Watts go. This is like Christmas coming early.  Whoever wants to keep Watts can't see the forest for the trees. You can't carry soft guys like Watts, especially in finals. Every week he plays we know one thing and that is that he isn't going to give 100% and that his tackling efforts will be disgraceful. Pedersen played better in 5 games than Watts has showed in his whole career. Give him away for some steak knives and thanks very much. 

[drdrake 3,187]

16 minutes ago, ding said:

Thomas.

 

21 minutes ago, bandicoot said:

Watts potential is worth far more than pick 29 which is a hit or miss selection. 

You can get Alex Morgan/Dillon or lobb

2015 - Alex Morgan essendon 0 games

2014 - Dillon Viojo-Rainbow Carlton 0 games 

2013 - Rory lobb GWS

2012 - Tim clurey Port 

2011 - Alex Forster Freo 1 game

2010 - Scott lycett WCE

It is around his value, every draft pick is hit and miss including the No1 pick.  Depends on what the club wants, I agree with you Watts you know what you will get and hopefully more of his good, but if the club wants a top 30 pick in this years draft or needs this trade to happen to get another player he will be traded.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,315]

20 minutes ago, Akum said:

No, this is the point, and you guys keep missing it.

If we're placing all our emphasis on defensive effort and none on attacking effort, I don't know that's a good thing. There needs to be a balance. If there's no attacking effort, nobody runs into space and we keep turning the ball over because we don't care enough about disposal skills. I'm not sure we've got that balance right. 

Look at the Crouch brothers. What's made them so much more dangerous this year is that they've both worked hard on improving their disposal. I can't see a similar improvement among any of our mids - in fact some (notably Tyson) have gone backwards in their disposal, either because they couldn't be bothered or because our coach doesn't think it's important. Adelaide, to me, have a great balance of attacking & defensive effort.

This is not about for or against Watts - it's about what a post-Watts Demons will look like.

But that's the path our coaches have chosen, and it's their right and responsibility to make that choice. I just hope that we won't suffer post-Watts because our disposal skills are so shite and we keep turning it over at half forward like we did in the latter half of the season.

We expect a player like Garlett to pressure the defense and keep the ball locked in to the forward line while also providing offensive efforts to run hard out the back and link up across half forward. Why is Watts different? 

Yeah it's a balance but each player needs to contribute to both sides of that balance. Otherwise the team gets picked apart via the weak link.

[Dr.D 1,771]

30 minutes ago, drdrake said:

I'm suggesting the trade looks like

Melb Out: Watts, Pick 10, 27, 45

Melb In: Lever, Pick 29, 35, 53

Adl Out Lever Pick 35, 53

Adl In: Pick 10, 27, 45

Port Out: Pick 29

Post: In Watts

Everyone a winner

Umm Adelaide lose out. Lever just for pick 10 ? The later picks cancel themselves out so Lever for just pick 10 is not enough.