28 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I agree with the concept Macca,  but it doesn't always happen.  eg Howe was on his way to the GC when he decided to side step and go to the Pies.  That left mfc in a pickle to do a trade quickly and get the best we could from the Pies, not the best we could on the market.  That trade didn't turn out too well for us.

From a Jack perspective he is managed by Paul Connors who will make sure the best outcome for Jack in albeit less than ideal circumstances.  Neither Connors nor Watts have any obligation to do the 'right thing by the club'.  I believe, if the club is getting rid of Jack then it has forfeited its right to influence where he goes.   Like Howe, I do not hold out high hopes of us getting the best trade possible. 

Howe was almost certainly never going to be as good for us and he is (currently) for the Pies LH ... sometimes you just lose out that way.  Again, from an overall perspective,  Howe doing well for Collingwood is not that big a deal (but that's only my view)

Hibberd has turned out to be a bargain for instance ... Lewis the same if we can squeeze another productive year or 2 out of him.  Trading up to get Oliver looks like being a masterstroke.  Drafting Hunt & T-Mac in the 50's is an obvious win.  Gawn at pick 36 was another bargain as it's turned out.

We've won out more than we've lost out (more recently)

The primary reason why we've progressively improved in the last 3 or 4 years is because of our improved list ... we are slowly but surely adding more decent players whilst at the same time culling others who don't fit (or who are simply not up to it)

If we're being honest Watts just simply doesn't fit into Goodwin's plans.  And we have to give the coach clear air.  I even felt that way about Neeld & Moloney even though I thought Neeld was largely incompetent. 

The club is always bigger than any individual. 

1 hour ago, Vogon Poetry said:

bin, you can't possibly judge the decision until you see what we get back.

If it's a pick in the draft WE USE post 20 I'll spew but I strongly suspect it will be for something much more acceptable.

Yep, you're probably right. Though there is more than just the trade to factor in. The impact on team moral and culture has to be factored in. it could go either way - that's to say a powerful message is sent that reinforces goody's team rules or the opposite occurs and player moral drops and divisions open up. 

5 minutes ago, Red and Bluebeard said:

Been reading your thoughts with interest of late, BB. I think the effect you mention may come from both trading Jack Watts at the same time as we cut Jack Trengove. One has talent to burn, one has an unquestionable work ethic, but both end up out of here, it seems. In other words, neither talent nor hard work alone will keep you on the list.

Nor probably should it  R & B . The thing I possibly find most interesting is Jack for intents and purposes was having a pretty good year in 2017. He manfully took upon the role thrusted his way to  stop gap at times for the great Max. He arguably, of the three, Pedo , Tmac and Jack carried off the role the best. It surprised many, possibly Jack himself the most.

He often ISNT the bloke to go missing during game starts.  He had an injury this year. Not alone there. His form suffered. Im not convinced ( and its only my opinion possibly but have seen a few others here voice similarly ) that he seemed somewhat proppy and unable to run full stride ( something HE is best at )  subsequent to his return. He for the most part answered his critics on the field, where in reality its where it matters. Granted...my opinion.

I dont see the same rush to judgment  let alone execution for the likes of Gawn who actually stood there at times NOT competing  through frustration. I mean...fmd. But that's somehow excusable. Seldom have I ever seen the brain fades of the McDonalds, the Bernies  the Frosts  ever perpetrated by Watts. Jones must be right up there in terms of kicking to opponents...do we hear boo ??

Jack is far from the perfect player. He obviously doesnt fit the bluebrint of Goodwin/Mccartney/Viney( t) and Jones

Watts for all and any faults is far from the worst at Melb. Many offer up...ah but look at what he has or hasnt done and thats a fair comment upon a career but  his capacity to add to any team is what he can do RIGHT now and right now hes a decent player.

I still feel that getting rid of Watts is  going to hurt us. Its cutting off a nose to save someones face.

I wish Jack well and good luck where ever. He's not gone ( yet ) but it only seems a matter of where/when, not if.

Can't wait to see what we get.

3 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Nor probably should it  R & B . The thing I possibly find most interesting is Jack for intents and purposes was having a pretty good year in 2017. He manfully took upon the role thrusted his way to  stop gap at times for the great Max. He arguably, of the three, Pedo , Tmac and Jack carried off the role the best. It surprised many, possibly Jack himself the most.

He often ISNT the bloke to go missing during game starts.  He had an injury this year. Not alone there. His form suffered. Im not convinced ( and its only my opinion possibly but have seen a few others here voice similarly ) that he seemed somewhat proppy and unable to run full stride ( something HE is best at )  subsequent to his return. He for the most part answered his critics on the field, where in reality its where it matters. Granted...my opinion.

I dont see the same rush to judgment  let alone execution for the likes of Gawn who actually stood there at times NOT competing  through frustration. I mean...fmd. But that's somehow excusable. Seldom have I ever seen the brain fades of the McDonalds, the Bernies  the Frosts  ever perpetrated by Watts. Jones must be right up there in terms of kicking to opponents...do we hear boo ??

Jack is far from the perfect player. He obviously doesnt fit the bluebrint of Goodwin/Mccartney/Viney( t) and Jones

Watts for all and any faults is far from the worst at Melb. Many offer up...ah but look at what he has or hasnt done and thats a fair comment upon a career but  his capacity to add to any team is what he can do RIGHT now and right now hes a decent player.

I still feel that getting rid of Watts is  going to hurt us. Its cutting off a nose to save someones face.

I wish Jack well and good luck where ever. He's not gone ( yet ) but it only seems a matter of where/when, not if.

Can't wait to see what we get.

All goood points, and I for one would prefer to keep Jack. On the other hand, if we are ever going to trade him, now is probably the time. But my point was more about the effect on the rest of the list. Yes, one can make a case for Jack to stay (as you have done), but the fact that there is such a case and he is still on the table means that others will no doubt be looking over their shoulder, particularly the fringe ones that you have highlighted. It may not be a rocket directed at them, but they will certainly hear it pass them by ...

58 minutes ago, Redleg said:

The list below makes interesting reading. Sorry for the capital letters it's the bloody computer.

JW is number 19 on the list for average tackles. Billy who most would consider non aggressive has more average tackles than JW. Think of the Tiger's forward pressure. This is a must in today's game. The Tigers are not a star studded team but they have manic pressure.

Tom Mac a part time forward kicked more goals than JW and Melksham another part time forward nearly kicked more. Petracca another forward/mid also kicked more. Jeffy of course was well ahead. Jesse hardly played.

Not that he has to lead the goal kicking, but it shows we have other players who can kick goals too.

Obviously there are a lot of things that players have to do at a club and when you don't do several you are on thin ice.

Just a note TMac did play 6 more games. ( Milkshake 3 Trac 6 ) I do take in your points Red. I dont for one sec consider Jack without faults. Many others have too. Jeffy literally goes walkabout at times. He can vague in and out of games but what real critique do we see there. Maybe he should be accountable for all of a game , all season like Jack is ?  Trac...a bear in the making  is afforded  more leeway yet application in a game is not really markedly any better..but he's young , so gets a pass. Jake going forward is a major win.

Anyone who watches at a game can see the colossal amount of running and work Jack puts in. A lot of it goes unmentioned and dare I say not-honoured.

Jack for any faults is probably the most likely player to be in the right spot at the right time. Hogan about the only one to give him a run for the money there.

If I were a betting man Id wager his card was penciled in at seasons start....the texta was always poised.

So be it.

As a supporter of this Club Im not impressed but it will never matter what I think.

We'd want to get more than a slab and a box of doritos  in lieu !!

 

35 minutes ago, Stretch Johnson said:

and you know this because...?

Coz he was out for a month with a 'slight' (heh) tear and it came straight back into the team and was rubbish.

If we are talking about correlating those three weeks of poor performance before he was dropped with anything - there is a higher connection to his hammy than to application and commitment issues.

In a thread full of speculation - saying he was brought back from his injury too early is not a stretch...

The wildly different views on Jack should be proof enough that it's time to move on.  He is entering his 10th season and we are still having the exact same conversations about him that we've been having for more than half a decade.

If that's not evidence enough then I don't know what is.

4 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Coz he was out for a month with a 'slight' (heh) tear and it came straight back into the team and was rubbish.

Watched him closely. He had a limp up very often. No excuses or anything, players play with worse all throughout the year, only has to look as far as his captain to see that. But Jacks first and most important strength that's led to him being a real AFL player is his ability to cover ground (QB winner). Take that away he's just a neat kick who can't get into the areas he needs to to get it.

Every opposition supporter you know has him as an early second rounder. round 16 he was a first rounder easily.

wonder how long it will be till this thread hits a 100 pages?

50 minutes ago, Stretch Johnson said:

and you know this because...?

I'm a doctor

52 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

3 years into a 5 year contract and this is the 1st as senior coach.

 

It is barely 12 months since Goodwin was involved in re signing Jack for 3 more years (Roos departed some 6 weeks later so input was limited, if any).  Now, after his first year as a rookie coach he decides to move Jack on.

I do not pretend to know what goes on behind the doors.  But I feel it was reasonable to ask a question about Goodwin's willingness to take on the challenge of getting the best from Jack, which was the essence of my post.

just being devil's advocate here , luci, but it could be argued that three previous coaches failed in this regard, so it's not just a one year problem and the clock has been ticking for a long time......

5 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

wonder how long it will be till this thread hits a 100 pages?

About 60 more pages dc!

Just now, Bitter but optimistic said:

About 60 more pages dc!

sauce?

1 minute ago, daisycutter said:

sauce?

Confidential.

Just now, Bitter but optimistic said:

Confidential.

pm me then

4 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

The wildly different views on Jack should be proof enough that it's time to move on.  He is entering his 10th season and we are still having the exact same conversations about him that we've been having for more than half a decade.

If that's not evidence enough then I don't know what is.

If you had written this two years ago I would have agreed with you.

But the last two years have seen his most consistent effective footy, and while he is just a role player he has a dire need of ours - outside skill and run and vision.

Criticising his tackling numbers as an indicator of his inability to apply pressure is a misnomer - I was at a coaching conference about 4 years ago and Clarkson was banging on about people talking about tackling numbers when he doesn't care about tackle numbers (incomplete tackles another matter), he cares about pressure acts and keeping the ball in your half.

As an example, Watts only had two tackles against Collingwood but was equal 5th with Jones for pressure acts.

Stats make us liars at the best of times but make of that data what you will...

@Redleg   Not too long ago in a galaxy not far you considered it more beneficial should we continue to work with whats good about Jack and work on what isn't , that this was surely preferable .

Still think that ?  I'm just interested

2 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

just being devil's advocate here , luci, but it could be argued that three previous coaches failed in this regard, so it's not just a one year problem and the clock has been ticking for a long time......

I'd say that's all part of the decision. Jack came back after his best season in 2016 not in the condition expected of a professional. He was probably on thin ice then and who knows what has transpired throughout the year. On appearances he seems pretty happy with himself and if some of his teammates are saying it's not good enough there's a big problem. From my perspective you have to have desire to succeed that can't be coached or instilled in someone. If he's not preparing adequately and not taking pre season seriously then I'd question his desire to succeed and make a difference. I don't question his talent but you can see from his actions when he plays his desire to impact contests is questionable. If that's what the coaches and players think then I'd back them to trade him. Personally I'd be sad to see him leave as he seems like a good bloke and he has a story at the mfc. Unfortunately having a team of good blokes isn't going to be enough to win you a flag.

1 minute ago, rpfc said:

If you had written this two years ago I would have agreed with you.

But the last two years have seen his most consistent effective footy, and while he is just a role player he has a dire need of ours - outside skill and run and vision.

Criticising his tackling numbers as an indicator of his inability to apply pressure is a misnomer - I was at a coaching conference about 4 years ago and Clarkson was banging on about people talking about tackling numbers when he doesn't care about tackle numbers (incomplete tackles another matter), he cares about pressure acts and keeping the ball in your half.

As an example, Watts only had two tackles against Collingwood but was equal 5th with Jones for pressure acts.

Stats make us liars at the best of times but make of that data what you will...

I would agree that 2016 was his best year for the club.

However, this year he didn't put the effort in for pre-season and was then dropped towards the end of this season as well.  His commitment and work ethic have again been questioned, which means internally the players and coaching staff aren't happy with him at all.  It's almost as if he had a ripper 2016 and then took two steps back.  And that's including the middle rounds this year when he was terrific as well.

I just feel as though we'll have these discussions over and over and over again until his retirement and nothing will have changed.  If he still has the currency to get something that will help us now then I don't blame the club for pursuing it.  You only have patience for so long, and he's been given more than most.

This is a marvellous opening partnership by Lever and Watts.

Lever the ton and good on ya Wattsy, nearing a half century.

36 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Coz he was out for a month with a 'slight' (heh) tear and it came straight back into the team and was rubbish.

If we are talking about correlating those three weeks of poor performance before he was dropped with anything - there is a higher connection to his hammy than to application and commitment issues.

In a thread full of speculation - saying he was brought back from his injury too early is not a stretch...

Thanks for your response which is completely speculative, has not been corroborated by player or club and is based on nothing.

Anything that has no evidence attached to it is a stretch.

There is plenty of corroboration that the player has had consistent issues with his application.  So whilst they are both possible explanations, one is more likely than the other.

7 minutes ago, rpfc said:

If you had written this two years ago I would have agreed with you.

But the last two years have seen his most consistent effective footy, and while he is just a role player he has a dire need of ours - outside skill and run and vision.

Criticising his tackling numbers as an indicator of his inability to apply pressure is a misnomer - I was at a coaching conference about 4 years ago and Clarkson was banging on about people talking about tackling numbers when he doesn't care about tackle numbers (incomplete tackles another matter), he cares about pressure acts and keeping the ball in your half.

As an example, Watts only had two tackles against Collingwood but was equal 5th with Jones for pressure acts.

Stats make us liars at the best of times but make of that data what you will...

In the three games he was pizz poor in after coming back from his hammy and before he got dropped - he was 5th, 5th, and 10th for Pressure Acts.

Of the forwards - only T Mac and ANB were ahead of him in the last game, ANB and Petracca the game before that, and those two again in the first game above.

The rest of the 'small forwards' in those games...

Hannan 10th, 8th, and rested.

Melksham 11th, 13th, 17th.

Garlett 15th, 7th, 13th.

!

Who is getting pushed out again?

Let's assume we're in the market for someone with Watts' skill set and classy disposal (as we will be soon).

Check out the marking attempt at the 2min mark of this clip.

Would we want this guy?

 

 

 

1 minute ago, Stretch Johnson said:

Thanks for your response which is completely speculative, has not been corroborated by player or club and based on nothing.

Anything that has no evidence attached to it is a stretch.

He was off for a month.

No speculation there, that is a real tear to be off for that long.

Injuries affect players performances when they come back.

Argue that if you want to.

Happy to stand here and say 'a bad hammy tear affected his form.'

Feel free to disregard.

1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

3 years into a 5 year contract and this is the 1st as senior coach.

 

It is barely 12 months since Goodwin was involved in re signing Jack for 3 more years (Roos departed some 6 weeks later so input was limited, if any).  Now, after his first year as a rookie coach he decides to move Jack on.

I do not pretend to know what goes on behind the doors.  But I feel it was reasonable to ask a question about Goodwin's willingness to take on the challenge of getting the best from Jack, which was the essence of my post.

What about the 2yrs as assistant, thats 3 years that his looked at all the players inc Watts.

Love to keep Watts the question is if its a deal breaker to get Lever do you roll the dice with Watts vs the upside of Lever @ 22yo?