Farewell Jack Watts

[jumbo returns 6,741]

49 minutes ago, Stretch Johnson said:

I need to watch that game again. 

I would not have said that silky skills were the mainstay of that gameplan.

Also Hibberd is an elite kick and Garlett and Petracca are close

Hibbo elite? And the other two close?

Surely you're taking the pizz?

[buck_nekkid 5,857]

1 minute ago, Fifty-5 said:

30 + 49 for Watts + 66 values him at about pick 22 and is about best case scenario.

Then 49 for Balic.

No it doesn’t, it values him at 30+49.  We would need to convert these to that pick 22 for it to be worth that.  This points system is abstract and leads to ‘false’ calculations.  Who would trade 22 for these two picks?  We wouldn’t!  

By your logic, Watts is worth Balic + 30.  I think that is a better way to look at it.  Late 2nd rounder plus targeted player.  I think the club would be happy with that, if no salary is paid out too.

[Sir Why You Little 37,033]

19 minutes ago, jumbo returns said:

And I gave you a simpler answer

He's probably had enough of making this everyone's business

He doesn’t want to go, more like it

[old55 23,546]

6 minutes ago, buck_nekkid said:

No it doesn’t, it values him at 30+49.  We would need to convert these to that pick 22 for it to be worth that.  This points system is abstract and leads to ‘false’ calculations.  Who would trade 22 for these two picks?  We wouldn’t!  

By your logic, Watts is worth Balic + 30.  I think that is a better way to look at it.  Late 2nd rounder plus targeted player.  I think the club would be happy with that, if no salary is paid out too.

A team who had 22 and whose next pick was 77 and had 2 list spots to fill would trade 22 for 30 and 49. I agree it's far from perfect but it's the best standard we have.

[beelzebub 23,347]

5 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

He doesn’t want to go, more like it

Or possibly hes making it a little more about what suits him/future...than the club...you know...the one kicking him out ?

Be surprised if not all resolved by/or on Monday.

Am sure he didn't want to go. Be past that now.

Edited October 13, 2017 by beelzebub

[SFebes 4,884]

If we can get pick 30 for Watts I'd take it and run. Downhill skier who still has effort issues after 9 years. 

[Bonkers 994]

19 hours ago, Ron Burgundy said:

Something I hope has been factored into the club's decision on Watts.

Beckham was recruited to Real Madrid to increase jumper sales. They're a much more elite club than any AFL club will ever be. It's a relevant consideration.

Motlop's off to Port. I expect their supporters are marching in excited unison right now.

 

How many jumper sales and sponsorship $ do you think Jack brings in? 

[Biffen 12,942]

7 minutes ago, SFebey said:

If we can get pick 30 for Watts I'd take it and run. Downhill skier who still has effort issues after 9 years. 

I liked it when he won that game against Gold coast in 2016 when everyone was crap.Then that game he won against Collingwood,then ran back to save the same game.

But winning is so over rated in football-it's about your effort on a Monday night and your preparation for Tuesdays training session.

BTW-Jim Stynes was the worst trainer we had alongside Allen Jakovich-another pair of absolute hacks.

[Redleg 40,895]

35 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

30 + 49 for Watts + 66 values him at about pick 22 and is about best case scenario.

Then 49 for Balic.

Leaves us with 28, 30,  36 and 47 but only 3 list spots.  We'd need to upgrade 2 of those picks to one earlier one.

So that would be 30 and Balic for Watts and 66.

Don't think we have finished with list spots yet.

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

4 minutes ago, Bonkers said:

How many jumper sales and sponsorship $ do you think Jack brings in? 

Dunno. Kids love him.

My 4 year old will be upset (and confused) to see him playing for Port.

The point I'm making is not actually about jumper sales though. It's about broadening the lens on assessing a player's worth to a club.

 

[daisycutter 29,613]

39 minutes ago, Mr Steve said:

If pick 21 from Geelong was what the Dee's wanted how can they justify taking pick 30 from Port. 

it's not just a question of which pick. it is also a question of who pays his existing contract value (or % thereof). You can't just look at one factor without the other.

Unfortunately, the latter issue does not receive much public airing so we know little of its impact

[SFebes 4,884]

5 minutes ago, Biffen said:

I liked it when he won that game against Gold coast in 2016 when everyone was crap.Then that game he won against Collingwood,then ran back to save the same game.

But winning is so over rated in football-it's about your effort on a Monday night and your preparation for Tuesdays training session.

BTW-Jim Stynes was the worst trainer we had alongside Allen Jakovich-another pair of absolute hacks.

2 games in 9 years, wow, what an achievement...also, we were in front when Watts kicked the Coll goal.

Someone else mentioned the 1994 era yesterday, just ridiculous to compare how footy was played then to the standards being set today.

Winning is the exact reason we are offloading Watts, to get 22 committed soldiers to the end goal of winning every game.

[Skuit 10,031]

Forget 186. The real deal is 187.

The 'California Penal Code section 187, subdivision (a) defines murder as "the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought.' Still not entirely sure where Jack fits on the human/fetus spectrum, but, with all malicious forethought intended, the last time there was some contention as to Watts, we ended up with this:

640 × 357 - timetoast.com

 

Free Max King.

[Dippy 17]

Watts and 46 for port 30 and 33

66 for balic (he is not worth a 3rd round. Watched his a afl game, not much there)

Trade 28 and 35  for gc 20 and furure third (56)

Go the draft with 20 30 33 83 (smith upgrade)

[whatwhat say what 22,741]

Jim Stynes was a ‘terrible trainer’ because he was carrying various injuries, including broken ribs, that never stopped him from starring in matches

Please don’t compare that warhorse or a mercurial talent like Alan Jakovich with Jack Watts

Absurd

[Mr Steve 3,820]

Question. As this thread has now gone past 186 is it now a Coach Killer. 

[Biffen 12,942]

1 minute ago, SFebey said:

2 games in 9 years, wow, what an achievement...also, we were in front when Watts kicked the Coll goal.

Someone else mentioned the 1994 era yesterday, just ridiculous to compare how footy was played then to the standards being set today.

Winning is the exact reason we are offloading Watts, to get 22 committed soldiers to the end goal of winning every game.

2 games is 8 points. When all the others froze and went into their shells.

How about Hannans 18 quiet games.?

Frosts dogs?

Lewis' nonentities/stupid suspension

Hogans lack of effort/nothing games

Vinces' turnovers resulting in losses

Tom Macs terrible days?

Jetts 9-12 touch games for 7 years

Gawns shockers?

Petraccas  cameos/disappearing act.

Dysons pinpoint opportunity passes?

You don't trade the most accurate set shot in the competition for a second round pick who will never win you a game.

[DubDee 25,836]

Who are we going to blame for choking when Watts leaves I wonder??

[Biffen 12,942]

4 minutes ago, DemonAndrew said:

Jim Stynes was a ‘terrible trainer’ because he was carrying various injuries, including broken ribs, that never stopped him from starring in matches

Please don’t compare that warhorse or a mercurial talent like Alan Jakovich with Jack Watts

Absurd

Watts has given us about 150 games in his time and played in spudley teams.

Stynes and Jako played in very competitive eras.

Watts is being shown the door for training and preparation issues so the point stands.

[Skuit 10,031]

1 minute ago, DubDee said:

Who are we going to blame for choking when Watts leaves I wonder??

Watts. For abandoning us.

[Redleg 40,895]

3 minutes ago, Biffen said:

 

You don't trade the most accurate set shot in the competition for a second round pick who will never win you a game.

Who did we get for that second round pick and how many games has he played Biff?

[Biffen 12,942]

9 minutes ago, Skuit said:

Forget 186. The real deal is 187.

The 'California Penal Code section 187, subdivision (a) defines murder as "the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought.' Still not entirely sure where Jack fits on the human/fetus spectrum, but, with all malicious forethought intended, the last time there was some contention as to Watts, we ended up with this:

640 × 357 - timetoast.com

 

Free Max King.

If we trade Watts and don't win a flag the above is going to look like a picnic

[SFebes 4,884]

4 minutes ago, Biffen said:

2 games is 8 points. When all the others froze and went into their shells.

How about Hannans 18 quiet games.?

Frosts dogs?

Lewis' nonentities/stupid suspension

Hogans lack of effort/nothing games

Vinces' turnovers resulting in losses

Tom Macs terrible days?

Jetts 9-12 touch games for 7 years

Gawns shockers?

Petraccas  cameos/disappearing act.

Dysons pinpoint opportunity passes?

You don't trade the most accurate set shot in the competition for a second round pick who will never win you a game.

Deduct those for his NM, GWS and Port games while you're at it.

As for the others, at least they [censored] try

[Redleg 40,895]

2 minutes ago, Biffen said:

 

Watts is being shown the door for training and preparation issues so the point stands.

Or so the public has been told.

[SFebes 4,884]

4 minutes ago, DubDee said:

Who are we going to blame for choking when Watts leaves I wonder??

Goodwin