3 minutes ago, Nasher said:

I'm neither angry, nor happy. I make no judgement on the price paid. I don't assume to know more than the club about the worth of player, nor do I assume they are infallible oracles who don't/won't make mistakes.

I'm just sad he had to go.

I'm in the same boat - while I've argued more for why we should move him on, it doesn't mean that I'm not sad to see him go.  He is clearly a great bloke who is well liked by kids, supporters and the playing group.

The one thing I did like from Mahoney was his comment about it being easier to make no decision than to make a tough decision.  You could argue in some ways that we have looked to shed that tag over the last 3-4 years, and I like the fact that the club will back itself to make a decision that it sees will help us in moving towards a premiership and not just hoping it will happen for us.  I think it's a great attitude to have, and while this decision would have been extremely tough to make, they realised it had to be done and put all the emotion aside and did what they see as best for our club.

53 minutes ago, Sargent Shultz said:

Watts all the fuss about? Pick 31 is a ripper. From 2004 to 2013 here is the stellar line up of pick 31's:

Jarrad Moore 68 games no longer playing

Trent West 70 games no longer playing

Clayton Collard 1 game no longer playing

John Mcarthy 39 games no longer playing

Jordan Roughead 126 games still playing

Jason Tuff 4o games no longer playing

Ariel Steinberg 10 games no longer playing 

Jackson Mcarit 54 games no longer playing

Kamdyn Mcintosh 53 games still playing

Malcolm Karpanny 7 games no longer playing

Conclusion: Jack Watts may have had his flawed, but really do you really want to trade him for a Clayton Collard?

But then again......

You do realise that every pick after 31 was also available ?  That there was a huge pool of players beyond that and that they're just the players selected at that number ?

16 minutes ago, Skuit said:

And lol Port Adelaide. Koch publicly blasts the playing group for not being fully committed to the team cause. PAFC respond by bringing in Watts, Motlop and Rockliff.  

You always bring some sanity Skuiy..

5 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

I'm with you, understand why the Club took the stance it did, just find it amusing watching all the hand wringing on here and Instagram when I have spent last 9 years listening and reading supporters lambasting Jack Watts

umm... perhaps they are not the same people.   It is possible to support the club's decisions on some issues and not on others.

At the end of all this I’m still darker at our Collingwood capitulation and softcoque losses against bottom sides than losing Watts. Like a hot looking gal who teases  but useless in the cot.

1 hour ago, DemonOX said:

Mahoney just said it’s a possibility that we will PAY some of his salary. 

FMD THAT IS PATHETIC. 

 The MFC is absolutely useless. 

This pretty much sums up up our trade negotiations:

 

Interesting quote from Mahoney on where the decision was coming from:

"the list management group felt that Jack's consistency of performance while at Melbourne hasn't been at the level expected"

Just now, ProDee said:

You do realise that every pick after 31 was also available ?  That there was a huge pool of players beyond that and that they're just the players selected at that number ?

I'm not that stupid (unless you ask my wife) But the point is that the people in charge of trade picks (they are paid a lot to get it right) in those years got it wrong 90% of the time (Roughead was OK). Why do we think MFC can bet the odds?

Also, whilst some great players were picked after 31, so were a lot of players that never kicked on - I suspect the 80% holds true after 31.

Anyone have any idea if we are paying some of his salary at Port?

(still think we could have played him at Sandi as a useful fill in and if he had of gotten the message and played an improved style, he would have been a handy backup)

Sad to see him go, the club won't be the same without him.

Which is the point.

2 hours ago, ignition. said:

This morning, caught up with Jack, decided just this morning (yeah right) he wanted to go to Port. Wanted to JUST get the deal done

Hahahaha. Mahoney wouldn't lay straight in bed. 

Took so long because Connors kept on running out of pineapples and places to insert them. Hahaha. "Ok. Next". Hahaha.

Pity we couldn't have offered up some of the posters here on Demonland.

on no level is this a good deal.

Whatever you think of him he's better than what we will get at pick 31 (sure I could win Tattslotto but unlikely).

And then we part pay his salary so the idea that somehow that it will free up money is a misnomer.

So we are left only with the send a message brigade... that is so old school it does not need to be discussed

Can the poll be removed now, please?

3 minutes ago, tallstuey said:

Anyone have any idea if we are paying some of his salary at Port?

(still think we could have played him at Sandi as a useful fill in and if he had of gotten the message and played an improved style, he would have been a handy backup)

Yep that's part of this Shonky deal!!

I’m sad to see Jack go, but not at the expense of this team figuring out that chances have to be taken and that we have to be ruthless to succeed.

At the end of the day you can’t change culture without showing everyone you want too.

34 minutes ago, picket fence said:

Sorry Lever is a different player not better!!

The decision to trade JW ranks as the worst ever trade 

Worse than Jim Tilbrook, Jimmy T, Lucas Cook, Sam Blease, Luke Tapscott, et al much worse 

We have effectively offloaded our best ball user, proven goal kicker, and effective link man for 

Pick 31 ( Good luck son) AND paying part of his Salary!! 

Madness!

Goodwin and cronies had better deliver in 2018 

If not this site and club will implode!!

Goodwin & Co will need to deliver in 2018 Picket as what may go down, at the end of 2018, could send this club into a final nose dive that it may not recover from IF we don't make finals (and get a decent result in them also).  

I'm assuming (rightly or wrongly) that Goodwin & Co have probably also gotten wind of this and realise that its 2018 or bust (for them/us?) with the Lever trade and JW sacrifice a sign of their ruthless attempt to make the most of next year (an "all - in" play now, given the hole cards they know will probably be dealt at the end of 2018??).

Apparently JW wasn't the only player to return from the summer break in a bad way either, but unfortunately was made the sole scapegoat.  Easy target (nice guys always finish last sit?)

8 minutes ago, tallstuey said:

Anyone have any idea if we are paying some of his salary at Port?

(still think we could have played him at Sandi as a useful fill in and if he had of gotten the message and played an improved style, he would have been a handy backup)

yep, we are paying some of his salary. we don't know how much at this stage....guess?......>= 100k <= 200k per annum

4 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

yep, we are paying some of his salary. we don't know how much at this stage....guess?......>= 100k <= 200k per annum

Word is we're paying $365 and Port $135

12 minutes ago, Sargent Shultz said:

I'm not that stupid (unless you ask my wife) But the point is that the people in charge of trade picks (they are paid a lot to get it right) in those years got it wrong 90% of the time (Roughead was OK). Why do we think MFC can bet the odds?

Also, whilst some great players were picked after 31, so were a lot of players that never kicked on - I suspect the 80% holds true after 31.

Ok.

Now post the picks after, like Sloane, Hannebery, Beams, etc.

1 hour ago, sue said:

Before this becomes accepted as fact, would you care to explain your arithmetic?

what do you need confirmed @sue

No one can give exact details on JWs contracts because those detail are not public

But if reported is true that JW was only offered 500k for 2 seasons (so he took a pay cut) then pick 31 is more then fair value based on his contract.

The rest is pure speculation.

Good luck to JW by the way, good bloke. DId deserve better, but footy is a harsh business

It's ironic that people are upset over the cost of bringing in a pick 4 equivalent player who's playign to his potential and turfing out a pick 1 that didn't.

4 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

yep, we are paying some of his salary. we don't know how much at this stage....guess?......>= 100k <= 200k per annum

So who was screwing who? Did the club screw Jack over or Jack screwed the club by taking big money and then slacking off?

I love the dees and fully respect the footy dept we have....but I have the same feeling I have when we lose a tight game. I'll miss him. 

1 hour ago, Mach5 said:

The last sentence, and your post, are both merely guesswork.

I feel like he won't apply himself, he'll do for Port what he did for us, and they won't tolerate it, just like we were unwilling to do.

more guesswork

mind boggling to think that people are unhappy with this trade. look at the richmond and bulldogs premiership teams from the last 2 years, they had 22 players that bought in and had a crack.

i wouldnt trust Watts to win a 1 on 1 contest against nikki webster.

best ball user blah blah blah, the guy doesnt have a crack.