10 hours ago, Rogue said:

Yes, 'we' as in the Melbourne Football Club.

Good on you for writing a sternly worded letter to the Club about trading out Watts, though. Out of interest, were you also someone who wrote to the Club when Travis Johnstone and Sylvia left?

 

Nope.

23 hours ago, ProDee said:

You mean you wanted more proof ?

"WHY ARE AFL clubs lining up to offer a still-developing key defender from Adelaide a lucrative contract comparable to deals given to some of the game's very best?"

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-06-22/why-are-clubs-so-keen-to-lure-jake-lever

Hawthorn is mentioned in the next article.

You're a dope and I won't be wasting any more time on you.

Don't get me wrong, Lever has shown (so far) that he's a talented player and has great prospects. And I think it's a great pickup by the Dees.

But the articles you've provided fall well short of proving the claim in your post that "There wouldn't have been a club in Victoria who wouldn't want Lever on their list". They report that there were [possibly] 4 clubs "interested" in him. And I've even included in the count of 4, Hawthorn, even though all the article said was "Clubs including Hawthorn and Melbourne are keen to acquire young defenders such as Lever". That's very different to "Hawthorn wants Lever". I had assumed that you would have read them yourself before posting them.

You may like to believe that I'm a "troll". I figure that all I'm doing is calling out bulls**t when I read it. And in this particular instance I'm making a point to some of the dung beetles on this thread who want to take cheap shots at Jack by stating only one club was interested in him (because there was only one club that publicly made an offer) and that it was somehow a reflection of how poorly all the other clubs rated Jack. That's the sort of bulls**t that needs to be questioned.

There were a number of clubs interested in Jack (and if you read today's Age you'll see that Geelong were obviously interested).

But yes. In the end only one was seriously considered because that was where Jack wanted to go. Similar to Lever - how many clubs actually made an offer to him? One. And that was the club that he wanted to go to. Well done to the Dees.

As for your final statement, I can't help but feel a little sad for someone (I assume a grown man) who resorts to schoolboy name-calling antics to express their dissatisfaction/frustration. And as for claiming that you won't waste any more time on me. I'll get over it. But if you change you're mind do please try to piece together something that resembles some clear, rational thought with a little commonsense.

Thank you for your time.

6 minutes ago, ChewyOnMyBoot said:

Don't get me wrong, Lever has shown (so far) that he's a talented player and has great prospects. And I think it's a great pickup by the Dees.

But the articles you've provided fall well short of proving the claim in your post that "There wouldn't have been a club in Victoria who wouldn't want Lever on their list". They report that there were [possibly] 4 clubs "interested" in him. And I've even included in the count of 4, Hawthorn, even though all the article said was "Clubs including Hawthorn and Melbourne are keen to acquire young defenders such as Lever". That's very different to "Hawthorn wants Lever". I had assumed that you would have read them yourself before posting them.

You may like to believe that I'm a "troll". I figure that all I'm doing is calling out bulls**t when I read it. And in this particular instance I'm making a point to some of the dung beetles on this thread who want to take cheap shots at Jack by stating only one club was interested in him (because there was only one club that publicly made an offer) and that it was somehow a reflection of how poorly all the other clubs rated Jack. That's the sort of bulls**t that needs to be questioned.

There were a number of clubs interested in Jack (and if you read today's Age you'll see that Geelong were obviously interested).

But yes. In the end only one was seriously considered because that was where Jack wanted to go. Similar to Lever - how many clubs actually made an offer to him? One. And that was the club that he wanted to go to. Well done to the Dees.

As for your final statement, I can't help but feel a little sad for someone (I assume a grown man) who resorts to schoolboy name-calling antics to express their dissatisfaction/frustration. And as for claiming that you won't waste any more time on me. I'll get over it. But if you change you're mind do please try to piece together something that resembles some clear, rational thought with a little commonsense.

Thank you for your time.

Unless your name is Paul Connors and whoever is Lever's manager , neither of you would know who was interested in either player

Move on

5 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

Unless your name is Paul Connors and whoever is Lever's manager , neither of you would know who was interested in either player

Move on

That of itself is a ridiculous conclusion. To go further along your own line unless you know either how do you know what they DO know There might be any number of people that have a window to what is going on.

So much is assumed by so many people. It's a little bit like folk believe things happen as they do on film or tv only to find reality either far more confronting or far more tiring waiting for anything to actually happen.

There's a lot of herd mentality to believing in things. One of the key 'sells' in anything is to sell an idea, vision etc. Often the facts let things down.

Of those two... Ive  not real idea what PD actually knows ....but he seems he might be quite adept at interpolation. COMB has a very different view and who knows, just strikes me as someone who might know something. Actually...theres a few lurking that I suspect might know something. I even have a sneakier suspicion there are some here who DO know something , but may not have said ANYTHING !!

One thing I am happy to believe..the MFC like just about all in Footy  more often skirts or evades truths  than adheres to them.  So theyre probably the last I'll believe.

11 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

That of itself is a ridiculous conclusion. To go further along your own line unless you know either how do you know what they DO know There might be any number of people that have a window to what is going on.

So much is assumed by so many people. It's a little bit like folk believe things happen as they do on film or tv only to find reality either far more confronting or far more tiring waiting for anything to actually happen.

There's a lot of herd mentality to believing in things. One of the key 'sells' in anything is to sell an idea, vision etc. Often the facts let things down.

Of those two... Ive  not real idea what PD actually knows ....but he seems he might be quite adept at interpolation. COMB has a very different view and who knows, just strikes me as someone who might know something. Actually...theres a few lurking that I suspect might know something. I even have a sneakier suspicion there are some here who DO know something , but may not have said ANYTHING !!

One thing I am happy to believe..the MFC like just about all in Footy  more often skirts or evades truths  than adheres to them.  So theyre probably the last I'll believe.

There are a few on here who give the impression they know somethong, but in reallity they are like rest, believe or not

My opinion, if you have an issue I really don't care, Jack Watts has  gone, Lever is in, roll on pre season

2 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

There are a few on here who give the impression they know somethong, but in reallity they are like rest, believe or not

My opinion, if you have an issue I really don't care, Jack Watts has one, Lever is in, roll on pre season

In reality they may not be like the rest...as they may  actually know something. Clear comprehension not your forte ?

Many here don't know anything and it's all pure opinion. Some DO know some things and speak to them, not always in a matter of fact way though.

The 'rest' as you would have lump everyone is erroneous. Some might know something without knowing everything of a situation.

Yes, it all borders on observational semantics. Only Paul Connors knows what Paul Connors knows and that's about the only statement that's unequivocal about all of this. That is..what it is.

As to Jack, well,  last one out turn the light off.

16 hours ago, Mazer Rackham said:

Torn strips off him?

Norm isn't around to ask but maybe there is a clue in this story ....

Anyone remember David Cordner?

Melbourne royalty. Part of "the" Cordner family. Tall, skilled, showed enormous promise, etc. Nearly drove Barassi mad.

"He looks like a professional but he thinks like an amateur" he would say (or something very close to that).

Spent hours in one on one skills sessions trying to get him to mark at arms length, to protect the ball from spoils, and trying to get some mongrel into him.

The experiment went for a few seasons and finally an underperforming DC was shipped off to the Swans where he played only a handful of games and that was the end of that.

Interesting analogy.

There are other similarities between Cordner and Watts.

Both came from private schools, Cordner from Melbourne Grammar/Geelong Grammar and Watts from Brighton Grammar.

Both were very tall schoolboys who dominated school football and in Cordner's case under 19s, kicking over 100 goals and dominating the competition.

Both had it easy at this level due to their height. 

Both had huge wraps on them. Cordner had very high expectations placed on him until Barassi got to him.

Both were weak in the air and in contested situations. Both were easily out bodied by experienced tough defenders.

Both players played in times when the Club was losing week in week out. Getting thrashed.

Both players were nice amiable guys but not contested ball players.

With poor form and team weaknesses, neither player settled into a spot or had the confidence of their teammates. Cordner ended up playing as a defender/centre half back or in the reserves at Melbourne.  Both were tall enough to ruck but not sufficiently combative. 

Both were confidence players. They required the team to play well. They required coaches that encouraged but at important times in their careers were left to flounder.

Both were poor defensively and struggled to lay tackles.

Having said all that, Watts had better all round skills. Cordner was a lead mark and go back set shot player, slow and cumbersome on the ground. 

 

I would have preferred pick 21 to pick 31, who wouldn't, but as the table below shows, if you draft well once you get into the 20s and 30s there's historically not much difference in the outcomes.

Pick 31 has a marginally better record from a games played perspective than 21.  It's the top 5 where you usually get the cream, although our drafting hasn't helped the table below.

Club	Drafts	Trades
National Draft pick 1	33 drafts	151 avg games
National Draft pick 2	33 drafts	131 avg games
National Draft pick 3	33 drafts	128 avg games
National Draft pick 4	33 drafts	96 avg games
National Draft pick 5	33 drafts	111 avg games
National Draft pick 6	33 drafts	53 avg games
National Draft pick 7	33 drafts	105 avg games
National Draft pick 8	33 drafts	98 avg games
National Draft pick 9	33 drafts	92 avg games
National Draft pick 10	33 drafts	87 avg games
National Draft pick 11	33 drafts	88 avg games
National Draft pick 12	33 drafts	82 avg games
National Draft pick 13	33 drafts	106 avg games
National Draft pick 14	33 drafts	83 avg games
National Draft pick 15	33 drafts	73 avg games
National Draft pick 16	33 drafts	89 avg games
National Draft pick 17	33 drafts	68 avg games
National Draft pick 18	33 drafts	76 avg games
National Draft pick 19	33 drafts	88 avg games
National Draft pick 20	33 drafts	70 avg games
National Draft pick 21	33 drafts	59 avg games
National Draft pick 22	33 drafts	43 avg games
National Draft pick 23	33 drafts	54 avg games
National Draft pick 24	33 drafts	73 avg games
National Draft pick 25	31 drafts	56 avg games
National Draft pick 26	31 drafts	63 avg games
National Draft pick 27	31 drafts	61 avg games
National Draft pick 28	31 drafts	46 avg games
National Draft pick 29	31 drafts	79 avg games
National Draft pick 30	31 drafts	57 avg games
National Draft pick 31	31 drafts	60 avg games
National Draft pick 32	31 drafts	63 avg games
National Draft pick 33	31 drafts	62 avg games
National Draft pick 34	31 drafts	57 avg games
National Draft pick 35	31 drafts	28 avg games
National Draft pick 36	31 drafts	50 avg games
National Draft pick 37	31 drafts	80 avg games
National Draft pick 38	31 drafts	45 avg games
National Draft pick 39	31 drafts	55 avg games
National Draft pick 40	30 drafts	85 avg games

5 minutes ago, ProDee said:

 

I would have preferred pick 21 to pick 31, who wouldn't, but as the table below shows, if you draft well once you get into the 20s and 30s there's historically not much difference in the outcomes.

Pick 31 has a marginally better record from a games played perspective than 21.  It's the top 5 where you usually get the cream, although our drafting hasn't helped the table below.

Club	Drafts	Trades
National Draft pick 1	33 drafts	151 avg games
National Draft pick 2	33 drafts	131 avg games
National Draft pick 3	33 drafts	128 avg games
National Draft pick 4	33 drafts	96 avg games
National Draft pick 5	33 drafts	111 avg games
National Draft pick 6	33 drafts	53 avg games
National Draft pick 7	33 drafts	105 avg games
National Draft pick 8	33 drafts	98 avg games
National Draft pick 9	33 drafts	92 avg games
National Draft pick 10	33 drafts	87 avg games
National Draft pick 11	33 drafts	88 avg games
National Draft pick 12	33 drafts	82 avg games
National Draft pick 13	33 drafts	106 avg games
National Draft pick 14	33 drafts	83 avg games
National Draft pick 15	33 drafts	73 avg games
National Draft pick 16	33 drafts	89 avg games
National Draft pick 17	33 drafts	68 avg games
National Draft pick 18	33 drafts	76 avg games
National Draft pick 19	33 drafts	88 avg games
National Draft pick 20	33 drafts	70 avg games
National Draft pick 21	33 drafts	59 avg games
National Draft pick 22	33 drafts	43 avg games
National Draft pick 23	33 drafts	54 avg games
National Draft pick 24	33 drafts	73 avg games
National Draft pick 25	31 drafts	56 avg games
National Draft pick 26	31 drafts	63 avg games
National Draft pick 27	31 drafts	61 avg games
National Draft pick 28	31 drafts	46 avg games
National Draft pick 29	31 drafts	79 avg games
National Draft pick 30	31 drafts	57 avg games
National Draft pick 31	31 drafts	60 avg games
National Draft pick 32	31 drafts	63 avg games
National Draft pick 33	31 drafts	62 avg games
National Draft pick 34	31 drafts	57 avg games
National Draft pick 35	31 drafts	28 avg games
National Draft pick 36	31 drafts	50 avg games
National Draft pick 37	31 drafts	80 avg games
National Draft pick 38	31 drafts	45 avg games
National Draft pick 39	31 drafts	55 avg games
National Draft pick 40	30 drafts	85 avg games

Geez picks 6 is cursed. I have always thought pick 7 is gold because the footy dept can take a risk at that number. Much harder to go against the orthodox picks in the top 5....

19 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Geez picks 6 is cursed. I have always thought pick 7 is gold because the footy dept can take a risk at that number. Much harder to go against the orthodox picks in the top 5....

Pick 31 has 3 players (Shane Wakelin, Paul Chapman and Jake Sinclair) around or above 200 games. Take them out (you are talking 31 year averages) and the average number of  games played drops down substantially.

Perhaps better to look at the median level of games which I suspect is around or below 30 games for pick 31.

By the way we got Jakovich for pick 6 but of course he only played 47 games. The top game players for pick 6 were Kepler Bradley and Chad Wingard both at just above 100 games. As you say a cursed pick.

7 hours ago, ProDee said:

When I saw who'd quoted me I wondered what 'special' post I was in for.

Whether I'm a member or not is none of your business, but in this instance I'll indulge.  Yes, I am a member.

Thanks for the history lesson on Deledio, who won 3 B&Fs and had a far greater career at Richmond and was just as revered by supporters and the club alike.

 

He was a great player but injured up until he played 7 games this year . Im happy you support the club Pro dee good to see .

a good trade out by the tiges - we have been screwed on pick 31 for watts for sure his future output will be more than pick 31 is worth . 

 hope it was special for you . 

can't see the triple ton coming up as extra time is running out and the light is fading fast

3 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

Unless your name is Paul Connors and whoever is Lever's manager , neither of you would know who was interested in either player

Move on

Fair enough. So I'm obviously not PC. But what if, perhaps, i am in the position to hear things second hand. From Jacks side of course. Would that be sufficient for you?

11 minutes ago, ChewyOnMyBoot said:

Fair enough. So I'm obviously not PC. But what if, perhaps, i am in the position to hear things second hand. From Jacks side of course. Would that be sufficient for you?

We are all in positions to relate second hand, I communicate with a player or two, as is continually pointed out to me by certain anal reyentives, is what you are being told the truth

Can I just say how weird Jack looked in a port polo top. 

also I know it shouldn't happen but I hope know one boos Watts next year. We ditched im not the other way around. 

Can I also say I already feel for whoever we draft at number 31. Because he will always be the player we traded watts for. 

I know how Jack feels having to go to Port.

Circumstance at the Gatwick Hotel have lead me to purvey drugs to the good folk of Ballarat in the interim period of my career.

Once I get a new product Established in town I will be back by the sea faster than you can say "You Bute".

23 minutes ago, ChewyOnMyBoot said:

Fair enough. So I'm obviously not PC. But what if, perhaps, i am in the position to hear things second hand. From Jacks side of course. Would that be sufficient for you?

But can we trust you Chewy? We've been hurt before. We're not ready to commit to a relationship with some new rumourmonger. Don't disappoint us. I don't think we could take being hurt one more time. Let's just be friends.

26 minutes ago, ChewyOnMyBoot said:

Fair enough. So I'm obviously not PC. But what if, perhaps, i am in the position to hear things second hand. From Jacks side of course. Would that be sufficient for you?

Then you might well know something lol 

3 hours ago, ChewyOnMyBoot said:

And I think it's a great pickup by the Dees.

You mean "us" right?

26 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

But can we trust you Chewy? We've been hurt before. We're not ready to commit to a relationship with some new rumourmonger. Don't disappoint us. I don't think we could take being hurt one more time. Let's just be friends.

Hahahaha. Mazer. I'll be gentle with you. ? I've really enjoyed your posts. You have a balanced, reasoned approach to the topic of this thread. Neither a wildy pro Jack nor anti Jack stance.

My son lives with Jack.

I've tried to gently put forward my understanding of what i know has happened. Is it the truth? I believe it is. 

Happy to be friends. I love the Dees. Have a particular man crush on Petracca. Am i a member. Absolutely. Have been since Jack got signed up. So not a lifetime supporter but love em none the less.

As to whether you get hurt.....it depends on how much you want to know.

18 minutes ago, ChewyOnMyBoot said:

Hahahaha. Mazer. I'll be gentle with you. ? I've really enjoyed your posts. You have a balanced, reasoned approach to the topic of this thread. Neither a wildy pro Jack nor anti Jack stance.

My son lives with Jack.

I've tried to gently put forward my understanding of what i know has happened. Is it the truth? I believe it is. 

Happy to be friends. I love the Dees. Have a particular man crush on Petracca. Am i a member. Absolutely. Have been since Jack got signed up. So not a lifetime supporter but love em none the less.

As to whether you get hurt.....it depends on how much you want to know.

Yep...think you might know something...and some lol 

Well played sir . The force is strong with you.

Didn’t realise there was a vote to this thread. I belatedly voted yes now.

37 minutes ago, ChewyOnMyBoot said:

Hahahaha. Mazer. I'll be gentle with you. ? I've really enjoyed your posts. You have a balanced, reasoned approach to the topic of this thread. Neither a wildy pro Jack nor anti Jack stance.

My son lives with Jack.

I've tried to gently put forward my understanding of what i know has happened. Is it the truth? I believe it is. 

Happy to be friends. I love the Dees. Have a particular man crush on Petracca. Am i a member. Absolutely. Have been since Jack got signed up. So not a lifetime supporter but love em none the less.

As to whether you get hurt.....it depends on how much you want to know.

And as such, your commentary of events has been emotional rather than rational. Your perception of Jack Watts the footballer, is blinkered by your feelings of Jack Watts the person.

The FD's decision was based on cold hard facts, not emotion. And that's how a Football Department should operate.

6 minutes ago, mo64 said:

And as such, your commentary of events has been emotional rather than rational. Your perception of Jack Watts the footballer, is blinkered by your feelings of Jack Watts the person.

The FD's decision was based on cold hard facts, not emotion. And that's how a Football Department should operate.

You know i reckon he might have some reasonable credentials here.

You talk of emotions..isnt that what a dinky di signed up member is supposed to possess whilst swallowing the club's koolaid ?

There's knowledge..and theres supposition.

3 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

You know i reckon he might have some reasonable credentials here.

You talk of emotions..isnt that what a dinky di signed up member is supposed to possess whilst swallowing the club's koolaid ?

There's knowledge..and theres supposition.

and there's three types of truth, bub