Mind you MFC has a great track record at the draft- pick number and games played

here is a stellar line up:

• 2007 Cale Morton pick 4-  76 games
• 2008 Sam Blease 17 - 34 games
• 2008 James Stauss 19 - 24 games
• 2009 Jordan Gysberts 11- 19 games
• 2010 Lucas Cook 12 - 0 games
• 2011 Rory Taggert 36 - 0 games
• 2012 Jimmy Toumpas 4 -37 games 
• 2013 Christan Salem 9 -46 games 
• 2014 on we seem to be getting better

Pick 29 for Watts isn't far off the money considering we traded a late 20's pick for this year's all Australian back pocket.

Meanwhile Watts failed to make the All Australian 240 squad.

5 minutes ago, ProDee said:

But what about all of those in the 30's, 40s, 50s, and beyond who are superb players ?

When you have a pick in the late 20s don't you also have access to those ?

Do you want me to name a few or 30 ?

sure for every 1 you can name ill show you another that was a dud.

The point is its a raffle versus a known 150 game player that we will need in the next few years as we move into the finals

If Port are jerks at the trade table , Watts lines up for us round 1 next year. 

5 minutes ago, Sargent Shultz said:

Mind you MFC has a great track record at the draft- pick number and games played

here is a stellar line up:

• 2007 Cale Morton pick 4-  76 games
• 2008 Sam Blease 17 - 34 games
• 2008 James Stauss 19 - 24 games
• 2009 Jordan Gysberts 11- 19 games
• 2010 Lucas Cook 12 - 0 games
• 2011 Rory Taggert 36 - 0 games
• 2012 Jimmy Toumpas 4 -37 games 
• 2013 Christan Salem 9 -46 games 
• 2014 on we seem to be getting better

Hold on everyone, we've got another one here who likes to trawl back through the last decade to dig up 'dud' draft picks as some sort of proof that we shouldn't get picks to go to the draft with.  Forget all the ones who have been excellent for the club, we only focus on the bad ones.

1 minute ago, Sargent Shultz said:

sure for every 1 you can name ill show you another that was a dud.

The point is its a raffle versus a known 150 game player that we will need in the next few years as we move into the finals

Back Taylor to pick a quality player at 29 or keep a culture killer ?

I'll back Goody.

They have reasons for wanting to move Watts on.  No guarantees with the pick, but I'll back the reasons behind it.

2 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

Hold on everyone, we've got another one here who likes to trawl back through the last decade to dig up 'dud' draft picks as some sort of proof that we shouldn't get picks to go to the draft with.  Forget all the ones who have been excellent for the club, we only focus on the bad ones.

come on, the point is simply that a pick is a pick in a poke.  There may be reasons for dumping Watts, but relying on a pick as compensation is a risky one.

1 hour ago, Deeprived Childhood said:

On the topic of 2 man kpf forward lines. This was an Interesting article on the rise of importance on forward pressure and speed with this years trade period. Mentions JW and a few others in relation to the 'third tall' becoming an increasingly less relevant position

Doesn't matter, JW at his best can't be categorised. He's like a lesser Adam Goodes. Just put him anywhere on the ground and let him do good things.

Just now, sue said:

come on, the point is simply that a pick is a pick in a poke.  There may be reasons for dumping Watts, but relying on a pick as compensation is a risky one.

Trading anyone is always a risk.  Listen to Goodwin at the B&F - it's time to take some risks and stop playing it safe.  This is just the beginning.

And let's be honest mate, using some failures at the draft as some sort of reason for wanting to keep Watts around is flimsy and shallow at best.

Watt a great name - Rory Taggert

You don't offer someone a three year deal if you aren't confident and prepared to trade something in the vicinity of what we are asking for him.

It is believed that Watts is valued at  somewhere between pick 20 and 30, so 29 just gets there, and in the end if Watts has decided that Port is where he wants to go then the club will facilitate that.

4 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

Hold on everyone, we've got another one here who likes to trawl back through the last decade to dig up 'dud' draft picks as some sort of proof that we shouldn't get picks to go to the draft with.  Forget all the ones who have been excellent for the club, we only focus on the bad ones.

I am not saying we should not go to the draft. I'm saying we should not risk a high 20's pick against a 150 game player. I think its a very bad deal full of risk we don't have to take. Adelaide will take our two picks for Lever, we don't need to trade Watts.

21 minutes ago, Sargent Shultz said:

Mind you MFC has a great track record at the draft- pick number and games played

here is a stellar line up:

• 2007 Cale Morton pick 4-  76 games
• 2008 Sam Blease 17 - 34 games
• 2008 James Stauss 19 - 24 games
• 2009 Jordan Gysberts 11- 19 games
• 2010 Lucas Cook 12 - 0 games
• 2011 Rory Taggert 36 - 0 games
• 2012 Jimmy Toumpas 4 -37 games 
• 2013 Christan Salem 9 -46 games 
• 2014 on we seem to be getting better

Wow you mean we just happened to get better all of a sudden after 2014? Lucky us! Must've found a 4 leaf clover or something 

Edited October 11, 20177 yr by Dr. Gonzo

15 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Back Taylor to pick a quality player at 29 or keep a culture killer ?

I'll back Goody.

They have reasons for wanting to move Watts on.  No guarantees with the pick, but I'll back the reasons behind it.

Just out of interest, did you back Neeld, or dump him early?

ND29 is more value than I thought clubs would offer for a player we are clearly trying to move for a myriad of reasons.

If I was Port I wouldn't have it on the table.

If I was Jack I wouldn't move to Adelaide... 

But I would be the kind of d!ckhead who would play twos for a FD that didn't want me just for the chance to play for the Dees...

27 minutes ago, DeeZee said:

I believe it will happen and Wattsy will head to Port on a three year deal for pick 29.

Looks shocking in that jumper though

Most likely outcome i agree.

 

4 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Wow you mean we just happened to get better all over a sudden after 2014? Lucky us! Must've found a 4 leaf clover or something 

Actually, Jason Taylor joined in 2013 and improved our recruiting- but I guess you knew that 

6 minutes ago, Akum said:

Just out of interest, did you back Neeld, or dump him early?

Don't know don't care.

 

Google it.

Don't believe we'll take whatever we get for Watts (pick) to the draft.

(If it goes through of course.)

 can't see us expending 162 pages of drivel on a future pick 20-30.

was is Sam Warner that said

"The kid stays in the picture".

I'm sure it's been mentioned, but my understanding is that one of the main reasons for trading out Watts is to free up some money (for Lever). I'm thinking up to $300k salary cap relief? 

29 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Back Taylor to pick a quality player at 29 or keep a culture killer ?

I'll back Goody.

They have reasons for wanting to move Watts on.  No guarantees with the pick, but I'll back the reasons behind it.

just out of interest, are you backing Goody because he failed to get us in the finals, even though Richmond and Port Adelaide finished below MFC in 2016 and they managed it? or is it because Watts finished 5 in the Bluey in 2016 when coached by Roos, but 21st under Goody. Or is there another reason? 

1 minute ago, Sargent Shultz said:

just out of interest, are you backing Goody because he failed to get us in the finals, even though Richmond and Port Adelaide finished below MFC in 2016 and they managed it? or is it because Watts finished 5 in the Bluey in 2016 when coached by Roos, but 21st under Goody. Or is there another reason? 

I don't answer stupid questions.

Watts' pound of flesh dowery is just currency.

All picks are fluid.

11 minutes ago, M_9 said:

I'm sure it's been mentioned, but my understanding is that one of the main reasons for trading out Watts is to free up some money (for Lever). I'm thinking up to $300k salary cap relief? 

That's contradictory to what Mahoney said. Said it was purely performance and money wasn't even a factor.