After watching the footy tonite, it was amazing to see how much of a dud Jack Watts is considering he was taken at #1. It got me thinking about who else taken at #1 in the draft was a spud. Remember, this is my opinion re Watts and would like to hear other ppls views on this matter.
Opinion Biggest spud taken at #1
- Thread starter sr9767
- Start date
- Tagged users None
HyperAgressiveDonk
Cancelled
- Banned
- #2
Jack Watts is a 20 year old key position player. How can anyone seriously say he is a spud? We won't know for another 3 or 4 years whether or not Melbourne made the right choice. Give him time.
Richard Lounder wins this thread question hands down. Anyone who thinks there has been a worse number 1 pick than Richard Lounder is wrong. He played 4 games for Richmond, then never played again.
Richard Lounder wins this thread question hands down. Anyone who thinks there has been a worse number 1 pick than Richard Lounder is wrong. He played 4 games for Richmond, then never played again.
bobbycatsfanme
Club Legend
Stephen Hooper - 1990, Geelong 
Hurt us for a good 4 to 5 seasons with John Barnes (6ft'4) mainly rucking in his absence until Steven King gave much needed support in 1996.
Hurt us for a good 4 to 5 seasons with John Barnes (6ft'4) mainly rucking in his absence until Steven King gave much needed support in 1996.
- Moderator
- #4
I would rebut this, but the argument that you present is flawless.
It just makes sense to judge a 20 year old key position forward on two "games" of NAB Cup footy, especially when a) it was slippery and raining heavily, b) it was his first game under a new coach with a completely new forward structure, and c) the standard of football in general was sub-par.
Just flawless.
- Thread starter
- #5
I should say that i only started thinking about this after last nite's games. Overall, he has done nothing to justify being taken at #1. I think Kosi was taken with a priority pick, correct me if i am wrong, but injuries have killed him. But i do agree that Kosi is a spud and should have been traded. Remember, this is MY Opinion. Michael Hurley is a KPP and he has more talent in his little finger than Jack Watts, Hurley is one player that can change a game and he is around the same age as Watts. Buddy Franklin is a KPP and showed more when he started than Watts has shown at the same stage of their respective careers.
Eth
For sale
Oh, so this is a Watts thread, cleverly disguised by the title 'Biggest spud taken at #1,' and your reasoning for him being the worst is because you watched him in the NAB Cup in treacherously slippery and wet conditions playing as a tall forward and thought he was below par?
Do you want me to show you to Bay 13 or can you find your own way there?
Watts looks like he will be a disappointment in the same way Deledio and (To a lesser extent) Gibbs are a disappointment.
He's a good all round athlete with good skills who can play pretty much anywhere which means he will be around for a long time yet, his biggest problem is that he was taken at pick 1 and not pick 5. He is not a complete dud and will improve over time but he just doesn't look like he will have that ability to drag a team up the ladder which is what you hope you're getting with pick 1.
He's a good all round athlete with good skills who can play pretty much anywhere which means he will be around for a long time yet, his biggest problem is that he was taken at pick 1 and not pick 5. He is not a complete dud and will improve over time but he just doesn't look like he will have that ability to drag a team up the ladder which is what you hope you're getting with pick 1.
- Thread starter
- #8
If this was a Jack Watts thread, i would have named it a Jack Watts thread. I wrote that after watching that particular NAB game i started thinking about the duds being taken at No1 in the draft. My observation is made on his career so far and IMO, he does not show that ability to change games as you would expect from a No1 draft pick. Same as Bryce Gibbs from Carlton.
And as for your bay 13 comment, only if you can show me where the original Bay 13 was. So why dont you get your ski's out and start waxing them up ready for snow season. Watch the game from your nice warm lounge instead of the cold outdoors at the "G". By the way, I am a MCC member and go most weeks when not working.
Eth
For sale
So, going by your logic David Swallow is a hack, because he's a number one draft pick and he averaged under twenty disposals per game last year when other number one picks like Marc Murphy and Brendon Goddard are seriously outperforming him.
Watts is a 20-year-old key forward who was drafted at the age of 17. Just because he's a top pick doesn't mean he'll come out and kick two goals a game, take eight marks and rack up twenty disposals. It doesn't work like that. It's a shame that there's a lot of people who don't actually have the patience to give a player time. For what it's worth I was happy with his progress last year, as he started showing a lot more of the signs of a top player, and went from someone who was given a game to someone who truly deserved it.
But if you're going to talk skiing, going to the snow and not going to the G to watch Melbourne play, I'll let you know I do none of those three and don't intend to, either. Those stereotypical sort of comments do belong on the bay, mate.
I could suggest Nick Riewoldt...
- Oct 5, 2004
- 14,145
- 7,084
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Rochester FC, Waroona FC, Pacers
Lounder or Hooper.
Well said. Watts looks pretty promising to me.
It's amazing how short the attention span is of footy fans now. You only have to go back to the last finals series - even just the Grand Final - to see how key forwards take time to put it all together.
Lounder still number one for me. Hooper wasn't too flash but everyone forgets he did his knee. He wasn't the first ruckman not to recover from a knee injury. Lounder on the other hand was horrendous.
Not really. His first game was fantastic. Stood in the goalsquare, stuck his hands up, grabbed it and kicked 4 goals. What more could you want from a big kid in his first game?
He was built like a brick sh#thouse, but was not quite as mobile. His Sunday Morning recovery session famously consisted of stubbies and KFC at 11 o'clock while watching World Of Sport. This was AFTER the club had told him to sharpen up his attitude.
I'm not sure he played enough games to qualify as horrendous. It's almost a surreal moment in the football landscape.
Yeah that's a fair call. Not having the right attitude is very different to not having any ability. You have to admire his post-match diet though.
Very much the era of players drafted seemingly on hearsay and not much else. There were far worse than him too.
- Jan 13, 2001
- 15,892
- 6,917
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Man City
John Hutton has to be up there with the worst of them. 36 games over a 5 year period with 3 clubs.
Only the last 15 years or so should really be considered in these sort of discussions, before then clubs didn't put anywhere near the resources into drafting as what they do today.
You can not put Gibbs in the same basket as watts in this early stage of his career, and I'm just going to ignore the deledio comparison.. So far Watts has been like tambling, plenty of athleticism and natural ability, but I just don't see that competitive streak that makes a great player.. Brown, Riewoldt, Riewoldt, Franklin etc. all showed glimpses in their first couple of years, and all looked to have a burning desire within. I don't see that with watts on the field.
I will admit I also didn't see it with Hawkins in his early stages, but he certainly got it together in the finals last year. Will that Hawkins continue this year?? And will Watts ever reach his potential? I don't know??
It's certainly too early to make a call on watts, but so far he has been very underwhelming. Prior to 2000 a lot of number one picks, didn't reach the heights expected of them, it is probably the quality of the last ten years that makes watts look bad. I would take all of Riewoldt, Hodge, Goddard, Cooney, Deledio, Murphy, Gibbs, Kreuzer, Scully, Swallow and Patton before him..
I will admit I also didn't see it with Hawkins in his early stages, but he certainly got it together in the finals last year. Will that Hawkins continue this year?? And will Watts ever reach his potential? I don't know??
It's certainly too early to make a call on watts, but so far he has been very underwhelming. Prior to 2000 a lot of number one picks, didn't reach the heights expected of them, it is probably the quality of the last ten years that makes watts look bad. I would take all of Riewoldt, Hodge, Goddard, Cooney, Deledio, Murphy, Gibbs, Kreuzer, Scully, Swallow and Patton before him..
kayliesharks
All Australian
Anthony Banik was a shocker too, ironically also drafted by Richmond.
- Nov 5, 2010
- 9,014
- 4,485
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Banned
- #21
I must admit Watts is starting to worry me, just his intencity, might be just me though, Josh Fraser for me is the biggest no1 flop, because he was our flop.
- Aug 8, 2010
- 7,721
- 6,828
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Banned
- #22
Gibbs and Deledio are amazing talent that's still developing so to say either have been disapointing is silly. In Deledio's case he's played most of his career with poor teamates under coaches that don't how to utilise him.
As for Watts, this thread is rediculous, KPP take years to develop properly and Watts is/will be very good. KPPs like Michael Hurley, who people seem to compare KPPs far too often, are an exception, the majority aren't ready made at 19/20.
If Watts was say pick 10-15, we'd be pretty happy with his progress for a tall kid in his 3rd year. No.1 brings alot of pressure. While Nic Nat may have been a much better pick as things stand now all you want, even at no.1, is something who can play damn good footy in their own right for many years.You don't necessarily get the very best at pick 1, too much a "lottery" for that as things change with maturity, as long as you get a very good one. While NicNat's come straight on almost from the start, unsual for a tall, Watts is developing nicely for a young tall.
00Stinger
100 - 7
How do you know that Patton won't lack intensity?
I've always said if Tambling had been drafted at No 40 instead of No 4 he would be regarded as a fine AFL player. Throw in the Franklin factor and he has always been under extreme scrutiny.
But that's the way the game is played.........
