Senior 4. Jack Watts

Remove this Banner Ad

Round 3 v Richmond

Disposals: 15 (67% efficiency, 7/9 Cont/Unc)
Marks: 9 (2 contested)
Goals: 1
Dream Team/SC: 77/70
My Rating: 6.5/10

For me, this was Watts' best game for the year.

He had an excellent first half; again we went with the 'move him deep forward in the third' plan... funnily enough this quarter is always the one Jack drifts out of the game in (is it any surprise when we've kicked 3 goals in our 3rd quarters this year to 23 or 24 against!?)

He had some really strong passages of play; that tackle on Cotchin (how was it not holding the ball!?!?!), a both his contested marks and spinning out of an Ellis bump (I had my Richmond supporting mates telling me he would be flattened.... awkward for them).

He presented and marked strongly most of the day, he was robbed of a few disposal efficiency percentages from some dropped chest marks (Sellar and Martin....) as well!!!

Again he's shown some really positive signs around the midfield and CHF; he's not broken out as such yet but he's been solid and one of our best half dozen in each of our encounters IMO.

I was disappointed he didn't even rate a mention on AFL.com in terms of best players when they only named three... yet Hurley played a worse game and was named 3rd/4th best in a win... Jack's got a while to go to win over the public I think.
 
Just going at the moment is Jack.

Three games in a row now where he has been around the 15 touch/1 goal mark. Time for the break-out game.
 
No doubt, he's definitely started off much better than last year.

In a worse performing team as well, I definitely feel we'll see a break out game in the second half of the season as the team gets it's act together.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

ThePuppetMaster said:
No doubt, he's definitely started off much better than last year.

In a worse performing team as well, I definitely feel we'll see a break out game in the second half of the season as the team gets it's act together.
Click to expand...

Yeah he's doing a decent job in a terrible team, can't expect too much more without any support to speak of.

Still looking for plenty of improvement for him, but he's been consistent and one of our best so far.
 
Round 4: The Bulldogs

Disposals: 12 (83% efficiency, 6/6 Cont/Unc)
Goals: 1.1 (2 GA's)
Marks: 6 (3 contested)
Dream Team/SC: 69/90
Tackles: 3
My Rating: 6.5/10

Yes, there was THAT dropped mark.

So what?

That shouldn't cloud was what essentially a solid wet weather game from Jack (and let's be honest, he's never been a great wet weather player... understandable as a key forward) - the positive SC ratio is a clear indicator of good performance and let's be honest, how many players could get 90 SC points from 12 disposals?

He had some really strong moments of play, his desire and intensity at the contest is ever improving and there was definitely a bit of 'off the ball hugging' (obviously it can't be called holding when the ump doesn't pay a free kick.... oh) whenever Jack was near it in the last.

He keeps making good decisions, 83% efficiency with a slippery ball is nothing to be sneezed at.

I look forward to seeing what he can do next week under the lights.
 
Round 5 vs Saints.

Poor game (4/10); no tackles was telling and it's obvious that the club really needs to build up his fitness levels.

He ran with Fisher for a quarter and was really blown up by an elite player.

Now obviously Jack has only completed two full pre-seasons, but no doubt his fitness will continue to improve until he starts to peak.

I would like to see him given more continuity in one role, he had five roles on Saturday night... all vastly different; a defensive forward on Fisher, a winger, a deep forward, a high half forward and he also went into the centre bounces in the 3rd quarter 3-4 times.

This can't be an easy task for a developing player,.
 
It has been said that tall forwards need time to develop, but judging from the list below, the fourth season is often a break out year for the good ones. Nearly all of the KPPs I've listed had made the All-Australian team at some point in their first 5/6 seasons. Perhaps Watts's (relative) lack of maturity may see him bloom as a late-developer similar to Barry Hall. Or maybe his wake-up call from Neeld will provide the spur he needs to kick on in the second half of the season and start producing the sort of numbers commensurate with a former number 1 draft pick.


Jack Watts (2008 draft)
2009 - 3 games, 5 goals,
2010 - 15 games, 10 goals
2011 - 22 games, 21 goals
2012 - 5 games, 4 goals
45 games, 37 goals

Jack Riewoldt (2006 draft)
2007 - 8 games, 7 goals
2008 - 18 games, 18 goals
2009 - 20 games, 32 goals
2010 - 22 games, 78 goals, All-Australian, Coleman Medal
68 games, 135 goals

Jarryd Roughead (2004 draft)
2005 - 16 games, 6 goals
2006 - 20 games, 12 goals
2007 - 22 games, 40 goals
2008 - 25 games, 75 goals
81 games, 133 goals

Lance Franklin (2004 draft)
2005 - 22 games, 21 goals
2006 - 14 games, 31 goals
2007 - 22 games, 73 goals
2008 - 25 games, 113 goals, All-Australian, Coleman Medal, best and fairest
83 games, 238 goals

Nick Riewoldt (2000 draft)
2001 - 6 games, 2 goals
2002 - 22 games, 21 goals, best and fairest
2003 - 22 games, 30 goals
2004 - 25 games, 67 goals, All-Australian, MVP, best and fairest
75 games, 120 goals

Matthew Pavlich (1999 draft)
2000 - 18 games, 14 goals
2001 - 21 games, 28 goals
2002 - 22 games, 10 goals, All-Australian FB, best and fairest
2003 - 23 games, 37 goals, All-Australian
84 games, 89 goals

Chris Tarrant (1997 draft)
1998 - 11 games, 13 goals
1999 - 13 games, 15 goals
2000 - 19 games, 28 goals
2001 - 22 games, 53 goals
65 games, 109 goals

Warren Tredrea (1996 Port draft)
1997 - 1 game, 0 goals
1998 - 17 games, 33 goals
1999 - 20 games, 40 goals
2000 - 21 games, 32 goals
59 games, 105 goals

Barry Hall (1995 draft)
1996 - 4 games, 2 goals
1997 - 15 games, 14 goals
1998 - 13 games, 6 goals
1999 - 20 games, 41 goals
52 games, 63 goals

Daniel Bradshaw (1995 draft)
1996 - 3 games, 0 goals
1997 - 16 games, 35 goals
1998 - 16 games, 19 goals
1999 - 19 games, 56 goals
54 games, 100 goals

Matthew Lloyd (1994 supplementary draft)
1995 - 5 games, 7 goals
1996 - 11 games, 18 goals
1997 - 20 games, 63 goals
1998 - 23 games, 70 goals, All-Australian
59 games, 158 goals

Fraser Gehrig (1994 draft)
1995 - 16 games, 21 goals
1996 - 24 games, 12 goals
1997 - 22 games, 31 goals, All-Australian
1998 - 23 games, 42 goals
85 games, 106 goals

Matthew Richardson (1992 draft)
1993 - 14 games, 31 goals
1994 - 19 games, 56 goals
1995 - 9 games, 27 goals
1996 - 22 games, 91 goals, All-Australian
64 games, 205 goals

Chris Grant (1989 draft)
1990 - 20 games, 51 goals
1991 - 15 games, 18 goals
1992 - 24 games, 50 goals
1993 - 17 games, 33 goals
76 games, 151 goals

Wayne Carey
1989 - 4 games, 0 goals
1990 - 21 games, 38 goals
1991 - 14 games, 28 goals
1992 - 21 games, 46 goals, best and fairest
60 games, 112 goals
 
Well, when he's labelled Watts the biggest spud of a no.1 pick in history on the main board I think I'm within my rights.
 
Watts bashing on the main board aside, Furuncle, I think that is a good post and the stats worthy of consideration.

I'm unsure of the draft ages and circumstances of the other players during each of their first years, but I would argue that Watts' first year should not be counted. We all know that he should not have debuted in 2009 while he was still a 17 y.o. school boy. The only reason he played at all was the MFC (foolishly) trying to drum up some optimism amongst the supporters and generate some positive publicity - talk about a fail.

Anyway, I would think it more accurate to completely write off Watts' first year.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

In my books this is pretty much Watts' 3rd year.

Drafted underage, he will take a few more years to fill out as a KPP.

Playing him in 2009 was a joke of mismanagement and the 'unveiling' of him against the Pies did him no favours at all.
 
Watts - CHB?

I thought long and hard about starting another Watts thread, and apologies if this topic has been done to death, but I had to get this off my chest.

After watching the VFL match on tv yesterday, I just wondered whether we should throw Watts into defence for the rest of the season - be it in VFL or AFL.

Watching yesterday, he had an OK game, but again lacked desperation and didn't have a great deal of impact imo.

He's been tried as a winger/midfielder after showing a little bit as a forward, so it seems Neeld is experimenting with him to make him a more rounded player I guess.

But I would love to see Watts play CHB where he is forced to compete hard against a strong key forward, learn the workrate and intensity required. He could take that on board to help him when he returns to the forwardline, or he could potentially warm to the position and become an excellent key defender. (Or it could fail dismally....)

Thoughts?
 
Re: Watts - CHB?

Bluelegs said:
I'd like to see him play in the position we drafted him for.
Click to expand...
Which was? There seems to be a bit of dispute as to what that is; some say KPF, but he doesn't seem to have the size/strength/aggression to succeed there yet. CHF floating up the ground maybe? But then, arguably, he isn't accountable enough and just picks up cheap possies, without getting really involved in the contest. Playing him on a wing is the same, he gets plenty of ball, but doesn't do much damage with it or get his hands too dirty.
Personally I think have him as CHF, but don't have him float too far up the ground. Playing forward means he can use his agility and speed with his height and be hard to match up. Maybe for a game or two play him across the backline to try and get him to harden up a bit and become more accountable, but I think it's about time we settled down a position for him. I know the 'modern game' has players playing in a veriety of positions, but I think he needs to specialise somewhere, preferrably up forward imo.
 
Re: Watts - CHB?

Dory_77 said:
Which was? There seems to be a bit of dispute as to what that is; some say KPF, but he doesn't seem to have the size/strength/aggression to succeed there yet. CHF floating up the ground maybe? But then, arguably, he isn't accountable enough and just picks up cheap possies, without getting really involved in the contest. Playing him on a wing is the same, he gets plenty of ball, but doesn't do much damage with it or get his hands too dirty.
Personally I think have him as CHF, but don't have him float too far up the ground. Playing forward means he can use his agility and speed with his height and be hard to match up. Maybe for a game or two play him across the backline to try and get him to harden up a bit and become more accountable, but I think it's about time we settled down a position for him. I know the 'modern game' has players playing in a veriety of positions, but I think he needs to specialise somewhere, preferrably up forward imo.
Click to expand...
Agree with this...wasn't he likened to RIewoldt before we drafted him....therefore should be played at CHF. Dunno if he can gutrun like Riewoldt could tho. Watts is reminding me a lot like Travis Johnstone in where he appears to be coasting and never really trying his guts out when in reality he probably is trying his guts out just like Travis was. That means he is the type of player that is going to be maligned (like he already has been) every time he plays a bad game while our team is struggling.
 
Re: Watts - CHB?

Dory_77 said:
Which was? There seems to be a bit of dispute as to what that is; some say KPF, but he doesn't seem to have the size/strength/aggression to succeed there yet. CHF floating up the ground maybe? But then, arguably, he isn't accountable enough and just picks up cheap possies, without getting really involved in the contest. Playing him on a wing is the same, he gets plenty of ball, but doesn't do much damage with it or get his hands too dirty.
Personally I think have him as CHF, but don't have him float too far up the ground. Playing forward means he can use his agility and speed with his height and be hard to match up. Maybe for a game or two play him across the backline to try and get him to harden up a bit and become more accountable, but I think it's about time we settled down a position for him. I know the 'modern game' has players playing in a veriety of positions, but I think he needs to specialise somewhere, preferrably up forward imo.
Click to expand...

Key Position Foward, bailey said he'd be a KPF even Schwab and Neeld say KPF, but we play him on the wing and instead of developing and honing his skills in one area he becomes mediocre at every position and doesn't impact games.
 
Re: Watts - CHB?

He was recruited as a KPF, and I believe he will end up as a KPF, but I guess I'm suggesting a stint playing at CHB could teach him a thing or two about some areas he really struggles with - competitiveness, accountability, intensity etc.

I think that'd be better than letting him drift in and out of games on the wing getting 20 odd cheap touches.
 
Re: Watts - CHB?

The Dr said:
He was recruited as a KPF, and I believe he will end up as a KPF, but I guess I'm suggesting a stint playing at CHB could teach him a thing or two about some areas he really struggles with - competitiveness, accountability, intensity etc.

I think that'd be better than letting him drift in and out of games on the wing getting 20 odd cheap touches.
Click to expand...

I like the idea but I think our back six is the most settled part of our team right now.

They should stick him deep forward with Clark and Davey at their feet and let him work his ass off. He looks okay on the wing but he can kick goals when given the chance... so let's give him the chance!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Senior 4. Jack Watts

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top