🔫🚅🗽 AFLW's Most Valuable Players, 5th Edition

[The Nostradamus]

2024 version to come?

 

[Teen Wolf]

I drafted a 2024 version at the start of the year but decided to not develop and publish it because the concept felt stale to me:


I guess a few things of interest stand out there. But among the Supreme category, it's mostly just Goldsworthy at number 3, after not having her on the list at all for 2023. Gone full circle, as I'm now back to harbouring major concerns about her discipline and work ethic.

The only interesting thing I recall writing: floating a theory that Charlotte Mullins might've been mixed up at birth with Jason Akermanis' daughter, also named Charlotte.

Maybe I'll do a new one at the start of 2025, but there might not be the same motivation provided by the Sarah Blacks etc. The thrill has gone from pointing out Charlie Rowbottom is much better than Mimi Hill, for instance.

 

[Callipygian]

Kudos for doing this. I'd be more tempted to contribute more if I knew more. I mostly only know about my own team.

You are ambitious trying to balance potential v achievements. It's a tough ask. Also there seems to be some slippage between the thread title ('MVP') and the explanation which is about who you would draft if you wanted to form a team now. (Even in that explanation, is it the team you want to win the flag this season or is the team you want to be able to compete for years to come?) Overall I feel like youth and potential (which may never be realised) is weighted too heavily, although this makes more sense if you are drafting to contend for years to come.

Seeing the first three names be Charlie Rowbottom, Ella Roberts and Zarlie Goldsworthy is jolting. None of them would be in contention for MVP. They are elite players but the only thing that gets them in the conversation for the top draft picks across the whole league is their age and potential to have long, elite careers. Similarly (using my own team as an example), to rank Montana Ham ahead of Laura Gardiner is based wholly on her potential - her ceiling may be higher but she doesn't have the runs on the board and she may never surpass Laura Gardiner, who is a very fine player. In this case age doesn't play that much of a role because they are both young (b. 2002 v b. 2004).

Anyway, it is certainly interesting to read and I'm glad for your table and contributions.

 

[Teen Wolf]

Even in that explanation, is it the team you want to win the flag this season or is the team you want to be able to compete for years to come?

The players that would provide the best chance at winning the most flags.

Similarly (using my own team as an example), to rank Montana Ham ahead of Laura Gardiner is based wholly on her potential - her ceiling may be higher but she doesn't have the runs on the board and she may never surpass Laura Gardiner, who is a very fine player.

Gardiner is a very good accumulator... and an otherwise highly flawed player about whom opposition coaches aren't particularly bothered.

Having Ham above her isn't just about potential. Right here, right now: She has better skills, plays in a wider variety of positions, and is more aggressive with ball in hand.

 

[CURVE]

I still don't understand Jasmine Garner at 13, she may be in the second half of her career but there isn't a team in the league that wouldn't trade their first two picks and best player to get her into their squad. She is the best player in the game at the moment and such a unique talent, she was the only player to average a goal and 15+ disposals a game in 2024 (she averaged just under 27dpg), and despite being 30 she has at least another 5 years left in her.

 

[Teen Wolf]

I still don't understand Jasmine Garner at 13, she may be in the second half of her career but there isn't a team in the league that wouldn't trade their first two picks and best player to get her into their squad. She is the best player in the game at the moment and such a unique talent, she was the only player to average a goal and 15+ disposals a game in 2024 (she averaged just under 27dpg), and despite being 30 she has at least another 5 years left in her.

On the balance of probabilities, 5 years from now:

Garner will be 35yo and won't be averaging 25 disposals + a goal. Ella Roberts will be 25yo and will be averaging 25 disposals + a goal.

West Coast would be insane to make that trade.

 

[Liam Boy]

I drafted a 2024 version at the start of the year but decided to not develop and publish it because the concept felt stale to me:
View attachment 2186105

I guess a few things of interest stand out there. But among the Supreme category, it's mostly just Goldsworthy at number 3, after not having her on the list at all for 2023. Gone full circle, as I'm now back to harbouring major concerns about her discipline and work ethic.

The only interesting thing I recall writing: floating a theory that Charlotte Mullins might've been mixed up at birth with Jason Akermanis' daughter, also named Charlotte.

Maybe I'll do a new one at the start of 2025, but there might not be the same motivation provided by the Sarah Blacks etc. The thrill has gone from pointing out Charlie Rowbottom is much better than Mimi Hill, for instance.

Erika O'Shea? What's the reasoning behind that? In her age bracket alone I'd have several ahead of her from North (Alice O'Loughlin, Bella Eddey, Tess Craven, Taylah Gatt, maybe also Amy Smith just off the top of my head) but you've got her as our 7th most valuable player? I thought she was good but not great last year. Definitely feel that as well as the ones I just listed Vikki Wall, Jasmine Ferguson, Kim Rennie and probably Libby Birch (maybe not if you're weighting it based on age) would be ahead of her too. Curious what the thinking is here.

 

[Teen Wolf]

Erika O'Shea? What's the reasoning behind that? In her age bracket alone I'd have several ahead of her from North (Alice O'Loughlin, Bella Eddey, Tess Craven, Taylah Gatt, maybe also Amy Smith just off the top of my head) but you've got her as our 7th most valuable player? I thought she was good but not great last year. Definitely feel that as well as the ones I just listed Vikki Wall, Jasmine Ferguson, Kim Rennie and probably Libby Birch (maybe not if you're weighting it based on age) would be ahead of her too. Curious what the thinking is here.

Well it's easy now to forget about all the important matches North Melbourne blew because the backline was too slow and unfit, given that it doesn't happen anymore largely thanks to the addition of O'Shea.

Collingwood and Fremantle were constantly turning these opportunities into goal when they were knocking NM out of finals in 2021-2022:


Wasn't just those two teams running rings around our sluggish defenders either:


She also doesn't panic with ball in hand (unlike Amy Smith), is more versatile than Taylah Gatt and Tess Craven, and isn't being carried by teammates around her (if anything she stepped up when Kearney was injured).

I would move Alice O'Loughlin somewhere into the 20s or 30s now that she has started capitalising on the supply that few forwards in the competition have ever enjoyed, though it is nevertheless not clear how well she or Bella Eddey would perform without the grunt work provided by Vikki Wall who imo completely changes the functionality of North's front half.

But without a clear commitment from Wall, in terms of where AFLW is prioritised vs rugby, it's just blind guesswork to assign her a valuation.

 

[Liam Boy]

That was quite a while ago now in footy terms and she's not the only thing that's changed, I think what's made the biggest change back there is Jasmine Ferguson and Libby Birch giving us greater aerial dominance so the ball ends up spilling from the pack in ways that favour us more. You could say Erika doesn't panic but she absolutely does turn it over because she's not the best kick, being relatively new to the game. I'm not sure how you can say she's more versatile than Tess Craven, who played in all 3 sections of the ground this year to great effect, while Erika only really plays as a rebounding HBF.

Just thought it was an odd choice to single her out among a really good team, that's all. Ruby Tripodi is another one I should've mentioned, she's a little bit older but she'd be one that other teams would be looking to shake loose in coming seasons I reckon, along with Mia King.

 

[Teen Wolf]

That was quite a while ago now in footy terms and she's not the only thing that's changed, I think what's made the biggest change back there is Jasmine Ferguson and Libby Birch giving us greater aerial dominance so the ball ends up spilling from the pack in ways that favour us more.

Jasmine Ferguson was already there when North's backline was being embarrassed in finals. Libby Birch joined in 2024.

The transformative period took place across 2022 S7 and 2023, i.e. O'Shea's first two seasons / the two most recent seasons at the time I assigned those rankings in post #27.

Considering the only match NM didn't win in 2024 was a game O'Shea missed, time has shown I'm guilty of underrating her, if anything.

You could say Erika doesn't panic but she absolutely does turn it over because she's not the best kick, being relatively new to the game.

That would be a description more fitting of her predecessor in Gilroy, who never looks before kicking. Clear difference in quality of ball use by O'Shea, who is already solid by foot despite a lack of experience, so the trajectory is extremely encouraging.

I'm not sure how you can say she's more versatile than Tess Craven, who played in all 3 sections of the ground this year to great effect, while Erika only really plays as a rebounding HBF.

Craven did not play in different positions to great effect. They were trying to find her a spot where her lack of pace and size wouldn't hurt the team. O'Shea's contest work is stronger in addition to being a damaging linebreaker = more versatile.

 

[Liam Boy]

Jasmine Ferguson was already there when North's backline was being embarrassed in finals. Libby Birch joined in 2024.

The transformative period took place across 2022 S7 and 2023, i.e. O'Shea's first two seasons / the two most recent seasons at the time I assigned those rankings in post #27.

Considering the only match NM didn't win in 2024 was a game O'Shea missed, time has shown I'm guilty of underrating her, if anything.



That would be a description more fitting of her predecessor in Gilroy, who never looks before kicking. Clear difference in quality of ball use by O'Shea, who is already solid by foot despite a lack of experience, so the trajectory is extremely encouraging.



Craven did not play in different positions to great effect. They were trying to find her a spot where her lack of pace and size wouldn't hurt the team. O'Shea's contest work is stronger in addition to being a damaging linebreaker = more versatile.

I don't know how you can talk that kind of shit about Tess Craven with the season she just had, you think they were trying to hide her? She'd had a wing all to herself for about a season, then they tried her back while Emma Kearney was out because they needed a good user back there. She took two crucial intercept marks in defense and kicked the opening goal pushing forward in the grand final, you don't think that's great effect, or versatility? Tess's contest work is great, she has very clean hands and usually finds good options in congestion, and she's probably the best kick in the team. Yes she's not the fastest player but she punches above her weight in marking and aerial contests. How is Erika's contest work stronger? Is there a stat you can point to? It's hard to compare players that play different positions obviously but Tess averages more tackles and contested possessions.

Alice O'Loughlin also missed the Geelong game. Far bigger absence as they failed to generate scores all day. You're right that they got the backline mix wrong in Erika's absence, but that has less to do with her unique traits than the fact that they replaced her with Lucy Burke who's more of an undersized key back than a rebounder. I'm not going to argue that Erika hasn't been good but I think you're fixating a bit much on her as an individual, and ascribing massive club-wide changes to her to a degree that doesn't quite match reality.

 

[Teen Wolf]

I don't know how you can talk that kind of shit about Tess Craven with the season she just had, you think they were trying to hide her? She'd had a wing all to herself for about a season, then they tried her back while Emma Kearney was out because they needed a good user back there. She took two crucial intercept marks in defense and kicked the opening goal pushing forward in the grand final, you don't think that's great effect, or versatility? Tess's contest work is great, she has very clean hands and usually finds good options in congestion, and she's probably the best kick in the team. Yes she's not the fastest player but she punches above her weight in marking and aerial contests.

Just obvious Crocker's no.1 concern is about getting caught out on rebound/turnovers, which is the main reason a slower player like Craven has been moved around. If this was the "say something nice about Tess Craven" thread, I'd quote some of my posts from 3 years ago which were full of praise about her performance at VFLW level... but it hasn't translated to AFLW level yet.

How is Erika's contest work stronger? Is there a stat you can point to? It's hard to compare players that play different positions obviously but Tess averages more tackles and contested possessions.

Not true. O'Shea is +1.4 for contested possessions, +15.8% contested possession rate, and +0.6 for tackles.

Alice O'Loughlin also missed the Geelong game. Far bigger absence as they failed to generate scores all day. You're right that they got the backline mix wrong in Erika's absence, but that has less to do with her unique traits than the fact that they replaced her with Lucy Burke who's more of an undersized key back than a rebounder.

North Melbourne still kicked a winning score in the context of the rest of the season. The problem was they conceded their highest score for the season against a team without its best forward. Furthermore, Mikayla Bowen (perfect matchup for O'Shea) kicked the match-tying goal. And that has nothing to do with Lucy Burke, who wasn't even on the ground.

I'm not going to argue that Erika hasn't been good but I think you're fixating a bit much on her as an individual, and ascribing massive club-wide changes to her to a degree that doesn't quite match reality.

Here's the reality: I named 108 individual players, and Erika O'Shea is the one you're fixating on.

 

[Cdog71]

O’Shea is more the free wheeling fwd transition type and quick. Seems to takes ground before she thinks to use it which gives fwds a mtr or two with nobody sure where the ball will end up.
I think Craven is a better footballer and clever ( it was her that filled Olaughlins role when she was off getting assessed, not sure what game).

O’Sheas game might lead to more goals..
I didn’t notice Ellie McKenzie in the list, reckon she’s got a bit of upside.

 

[Teen Wolf]

I didn’t notice Ellie McKenzie in the list, reckon she’s got a bit of upside.

She's number 1 in the pre-2023 list (post #1), and number 10 in the pre-2024 list (post #27).

 

[Cdog71]

She's number 1 in the pre-2023 list (post #1), and number 10 in the pre-2024 list (post #27).

Yeah, right. Oops.
Carry on

 

[Liam Boy]

Just obvious Crocker's no.1 concern is about getting caught out on rebound/turnovers, which is the main reason a slower player like Craven has been moved around. If this was the "say something nice about Tess Craven" thread, I'd quote some of my posts from 3 years ago which were full of praise about her performance at VFLW level... but it hasn't translated to AFLW level yet.


Not true. O'Shea is +1.4 for contested possessions, +15.8% contested possession rate, and +0.6 for tackles.


North Melbourne still kicked a winning score in the context of the rest of the season. The problem was they conceded their highest score for the season against a team without its best forward. Furthermore, Mikayla Bowen (perfect matchup for O'Shea) kicked the match-tying goal. And that has nothing to do with Lucy Burke, who wasn't even on the ground.

Are you comparing career stats? I'm talking about 2024, since I thought your list was about 2024 and beyond. Craven averaged 3.4 contested and 6.6 uncontested to O'Shea's 3.1 contested, 5 uncontested. Craven averaged 2.3 tackles, O'Shea 1.6. Tess was noticably better this year, improved her fitness a lot and got a lot more time on ground. All I'm saying is I think Craven had the better 2024 and the stats support that, and I don't think it was a flash in the pan, it's a result of her maturing physically and getting closer to her potential, barring some kind of long-term injury I think it's safe to assume it'll continue. I'm not sure if you could say the same about O'Shea who's been at about the level she was in 2024 for multiple seasons now, in fact her 2023 was better than her 2024.

Here's the reality: I named 108 individual players, and Erika O'Shea is the one you're fixating on.

I asked you about a specific placing and now we're talking about that specific placing. And you're explaining yourself by pointing to big shifts in the way the club plays and ascribing them largely to the introduction of a single player. I'm not trying to slight you or anything, I just don't know if that makes sense to do. You're absolutely right that North's improvement has come from better fitness and run, but that's been a change across the side. They play the best team defense in the league. Everyone's fitness is better, I think due to partly to the establishment and growth of players like King, Tripodi, Gatt, Smith, O'Loughlin, Eddey, and of course Erika O'Shea and Tess Craven.

I feel based on your explanation that you're placing Erika O'Shea so highly because you think she's the reason (or one of the main reasons) we're not slow in defense anymore, but I just don't know how much that maps onto reality. I'm not saying I think Tess Craven should be on your list or anything, I just don't think Erika O'Shea is our 7th most valuable player based on the season she just had. In fact I think she's probably the most likely out of our GF lineup to miss games next year in favour of Eilish Sheerin.

 

[Teen Wolf]

Are you comparing career stats? I'm talking about 2024, since I thought your list was about 2024 and beyond. Craven averaged 3.4 contested and 6.6 uncontested to O'Shea's 3.1 contested, 5 uncontested. Craven averaged 2.3 tackles, O'Shea 1.6. Tess was noticably better this year, improved her fitness a lot and got a lot more time on ground. All I'm saying is I think Craven had the better 2024 and the stats support that, and I don't think it was a flash in the pan, it's a result of her maturing physically and getting closer to her potential, barring some kind of long-term injury I think it's safe to assume it'll continue. I'm not sure if you could say the same about O'Shea who's been at about the level she was in 2024 for multiple seasons now, in fact her 2023 was better than her 2024.

Even if it was just based on 2024 (it's not), O'Shea still had a higher contested possession rate, which supports my point about her contest work.

I asked you about a specific placing and now we're talking about that specific placing. And you're explaining yourself by pointing to big shifts in the way the club plays and ascribing them largely to the introduction of a single player. I'm not trying to slight you or anything, I just don't know if that makes sense to do.

That's the whole premise of the thread. A premise which you seem fine with when it's applied to 107 other players (and also when I did it with Vikki Wall yesterday). So, again, I'm not the one fixating on O'Shea.

I just don't think Erika O'Shea is our 7th most valuable player based on the season she just had.

I'm not just basing it on one season when there's a bigger sample size to consider.

In fact I think she's probably the most likely out of our GF lineup to miss games next year in favour of Eilish Sheerin.

No chance imo.

 

[Liam Boy]

Even if it was just based on 2024 (it's not), O'Shea still had a higher contested possession rate, which supports my point about her contest work.


That's the whole premise of the thread. A premise which you seem fine with when it's applied to 107 other players (and also when I did it with Vikki Wall yesterday). So, again, I'm not the one fixating on O'Shea.


I'm not just basing it on one season when there's a bigger sample size to consider.


No chance imo.

Sorry, did I say that's great when applied to 108 other players? I'm asking you about one of your choices. Didn't realise you'd get so precious about it.

Lmao, ok, so even though Tess Craven gets more contested ball, she's worse in the contest because she gets even more uncontested ball? Nonsense.

 

[Teen Wolf]

Sorry, did I say that's great when applied to 108 other players? I'm asking you about one of your choices. Didn't realise you'd get so precious about it.

You singled out one of the players, so I talked about the player, and then you said I was fixated on her.

It wouldn't be precious of me to reiterate the idea of a football forum is to give opinions about the performance of players and teams etc, not psychoanalyse other members of the forum.

Lmao, ok, so even though Tess Craven gets more contested ball, she's worse in the contest because she gets even more uncontested ball? Nonsense.

She doesn't, I already showed you the stats.

 

[Liam Boy]

You singled out one of the players, so I talked about the player, and then you said I was fixated on her.

It wouldn't be precious of me to reiterate the idea of a football forum is to give opinions about the performance of players and teams etc, not psychoanalyse other members of the forum.

I said you're fixating on her as the cause of wider changes that I don't think can be attributed to her. It's really, really clear that that's what I was saying, and it was before I explained it again for you. Are you upset that I used the word fixated? How about focused then?

She doesn't, I already showed you the stats.

It is a fact that Tess Craven got more contested ball than Erika O'Shea in 2024. Averages and raw numbers. You know that's what I was talking about, and you know that I was responding to your claim that your argument holds up regardless because O'Shea had "a higher contested possession rate" in 2024, effectively meaning that Craven would be the better contested ball winner if she simply got fewer uncontested possessions, which is nonsense. Can you respond to me without playing these little games?

 

[Teen Wolf]

Didn't realise you'd get so precious

Are you upset

Football talk only in here pls.

It is a fact that Tess Craven got more contested ball than Erika O'Shea in 2024. Averages and raw numbers. You know that's what I was talking about, and you know that I was responding to your claim that your argument holds up regardless because O'Shea had "a higher contested possession rate" in 2024, effectively meaning that Craven would be the better contested ball winner if she simply got fewer uncontested possessions, which is nonsense. Can you respond to me without playing these little games?

She wouldn't get a game or another contract if she "simply got fewer uncontested possessions".

Therein lies the issue of singling out a player and comparing her to a different kind of player using stats from one season while ignoring a bunch of other seasons. It's not something I do to form these rankings.

 

[Liam Boy]

Therein lies the issue of singling out a player and comparing her to a different kind of player using stats from one season while ignoring a bunch of other seasons. It's not something I do to form these rankings.

You're the one who said she's better in the contest than Craven, specifically. Yes, it's hard to compare the stats for different kinds of players that play different positions, but it's something as opposed to nothing.

She wouldn't get a game or another contract if she "simply got fewer uncontested possessions".

Do you seriously not get it or are you trolling? I'm saying your idea of a "contested possession rate", yes, you really did say this:



is absurd because Craven could get her "contested possession rate" up by getting fewer uncontested possessions. It's an absurd thing to point to to prove that O'Shea is a better contested ball winner. Do you understand?

 

[Teen Wolf]

You're the one who said she's better in the contest than Craven, specifically. Yes, it's hard to compare the stats for different kinds of players that play different positions, but it's something as opposed to nothing.


Do you seriously not get it or are you trolling? I'm saying your idea of a "contested possession rate", yes, you really did say this:

View attachment 2213438

is absurd because Craven could get her "contested possession rate" up by getting fewer uncontested possessions. It's an absurd thing to point to to prove that O'Shea is a better contested ball winner. Do you understand?

For some reason it's important I only refer to certain stats from a certain year. I understand now. In the future, I will seek your permission and approval to ensure I don't make the same mistake again.