Opinion Can Dustin Martin be the GOAT? (Answer: no)

[demondavey]

If they actually critically analysed the data, it is patently clear why Geelong have produced more All-Australians than Hawthorn and Richmond combined.

But we know the Richmond supporters on this thread are nowhere near capable of doing that.

Of course it’s obvious. There was probably huge numbers of Hawthorn AA reps between 1983-1991. Rightly so.

 

[Noidnadroj]

Richmond fans are now celebrating almost AA jumpers as an accolade for the great Dustin Martin

A selection panel rated 44 players to be in the top-6 % of players for the 2023 season. They then rated half of them in the top-3 %. About 720 players were rated somewhere in the bottom 94%.

In AFL footy ‘elite’ is regarded as being in the top-10% for your position, so Martin and 43 others had elite seasons ‘according to the AA panel’ in 2023.

Then there’s ‘stats’ that can place you in the elite category. And player ratings that can place you in the elite category.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Biased? You actually can’t be serious.

From 2007 - current Geelong has won 4 flags, lost two and been top 4 virtually every year. Finals were missed only twice.

Hawthorn were only up for 5 years. 12-16. Richmond have only been consistently top 4 for 4 years.

The only thing that’s biased is your view that Geelong shouldn’t have that many inclusions over a 16 year period. I mean you’ve absolutely done yourself over here. AA aren’t about picking players from dynasty teams, by your logic you’d think that every Richmond or Hawthorn player should be picked in their flag years to even it out because you’ve got a biased view.

I am deadly serious.

I provided the figures. I can accept Geelong should have comfortably more AA selections than Richmond in that period. And also comfortably more than Hawthorn, though somewhat less comfortably in Hawthorn's case. But there is no way known Geelong should have 35% more selections than the 2 combined. And 366% more leadership selections(Captain and Vice-Captain.)

In the period in question:

Geelong win 4 flags. Around home and away 270 wins. 15 times qualified for finals.

Richmond & Hawthorn COMBINED 7 flags. Around 415 home and away wins. 19 times qualified for finals.

The only single thing that Geelong has over the combination of Richmond and Hawthorn is top 4 finishes after the home and away season. The combine had 12 and Geelong has 14.

Considering all of that you would say the combine has performed roughly 30% better depending how you weight each item. So if the process was unbiased, or in any way an accurate reflection of the ability of the two pools of players, then we might expect roughly 30% more AA selections, and leadership selections to come from the combine. Not Geelong having 35% more AA selections and 366% more leadership selections than the two dynasty teams COMBINED.

Speaking of which, Geelong Premiership years they average 5.5 AA selections. The combine Premiership years they average barely above 2 AA selections. So Geelong from 4 Premiership teams got 22 players selected. The combination of Richmond and Hawthorn from 7 Premiership teams got 15 players selected AA.

So objectively, all things considered, the combine has roughly 75% more flags, 50% more wins, 25% more finals qualifications, and 14% less top 4 qualifications. But Geelong has 35% more AA selections and almost 4 times the leadership selections.




But let's go another way. Let's focus on Geelong's one wood. Dominant home and away seasons. Let's say then teams winning 18 or more home and away matches in a season are particularly dominant, and we should expect to see a relatively high amount of players selected AA in those seasons. I will list all the 18+ win seasons(or the equivalent win % in 2020) and the corresponding AA hauls.



2007 Geelong 18 wins(flag) 9 x AA selections

2008 Geelong 21 wins(r/u) 7 x AA selections

2009 Saints 20 wins(r/u) 5 x AA selections, Geelong 18 wins(flag) 5 x AA selections

2011 Collingwood 20 wins(r/u) 6 x AA selections, Geelong 19 wins(flag) 3 x AA selections, Hawks 18 wins(3rd) 2 x AA selections

2013 Hawthorn 19 wins(flag) 2 x AA selections, Geelong 18 wins(3rd) 4 x AA selections

2018 Richmond 18 wins(3rd) 4 x A selections

2020 Port Adelaide 14 wins(3rd) 3 x AA selections, Brisbane 14 wins(4th) 2 x AA selections

2022 Geelong 18 wins(flag) 5 x AA selections

2023 Collingwood 18 wins(?) 3 x AA selections

Geelong 6 dominant seasons 33 AA selections @ 5.5 average. (Geelong have been the most dominant home and away team on 3 occasions)

All other teams 8 dominant seasons 27 AA selections @ 3.5 average. (the rest combined have been the most dominant home and away team on 6 occasions)


You would have to be 100% blind with a blindfold on in a dark cave during an eclipse of the sun in the dark ages not to see the bias at play here.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Here we go, CD ratings again, the world in which Jack Sinclair is the best player in the competition. For two consecutive seasons.

If Martin was in fact the 5th best forward in the competition this year, the AA selectors would have been duty bound to find a place for him in the team.

But he wasn't. So they didn't.

It was a good season from Martin. A season in which his best work was done once the horse had bolted for Richmond.

When I redo my Pendlebury and Martin season by season rankings, this season from Martin will likely slot very comfortably between Pendlebury's 9th and 10th best seasons, meaning Martin will elevate from having 8 of the best 20 seasons, to 9 of the best 20 seasons from their respective careers.

(Pendlebury's 9th best season was a 15 Brownlow vote, 62 coaches vote, AA Squad and 3rd in Club B&F year)

But of course, first we need to wait to see how Pendlebury performs in finals before we perform that assessment...

Checks CD ratings for the 2 seasons in question...calls bullshit. Fadge is making stuff up, where he got CD rating the best team in the competition 2 years running, who could ever say. Falsest of false claims.

2023...



2022:

 

[Fadge]

The only single thing that Geelong has over the combination of Richmond and Hawthorn is top 4 finishes after the home and away season. The combine had 12 and Geelong has 14.

But it's a pretty important 'single thing', with further consideration to the number of games won during these seasons.

The All-Australian team is selected based on home and away matches, so if you have a club regularly finishing higher on the ladder, and regularly winning more games, and for a much longer period of time, wouldn't that suggest Geelong have better players at the top end, and more of them, who have performed at that level for longer?

Come on man, it's not rocket surgery...

 

[Fadge]

A selection panel rated 44 players to be in the top-6 % of players for the 2023 season. They then rated half of them in the top-3 %. About 720 players were rated somewhere in the bottom 94%.

In AFL footy ‘elite’ is regarded as being in the top-10% for your position, so Martin and 43 others had elite seasons ‘according to the AA panel’ in 2023.

Then there’s ‘stats’ that can place you in the elite category. And player ratings that can place you in the elite category.

And Jack Sinclair has been the most elite of the elite, for two consecutive seasons.

I reckon we start to give him credit where it's due, and create a GOAT thread for him.

 

[Fadge]

I believe common sense takes 7 goals and 39 score involvements over 16 disposals, you would take the 16 disposals.

Oh no....

 

[STPer18]

 

[Fadge]

Checks CD ratings for the 2 seasons in question...calls bullshit. Fadge is making stuff up, where he got CD rating the best team in the competition 2 years running, who could ever say. Falsest of false claims.

2023...

View attachment 1792294

2022:

View attachment 1792295

Ah no, you're wrong. Again.

Hoyne (and Champion Data) now base their player ratings on actual performance (according to their algorithm) v. expected performance (according to their algorithm).

As Sinclair has played predominantly in the backline, his expected performance is well below that of a full-time midfielder.

As a result, he has exceeded his expected performance in the last two seasons by more than Bontempelli in 2023 and Oliver in 2022 and has been announced as the #1 player in the game by Hoyne, based on Player Ratings, for the past two seasons.

 

[Caligo]

Hawthorn were only up for 5 years. 12-16. Richmond have only been consistently top 4 for 4 yeyears.

2011 would count surely?

 

[Meteoric Rise]

But it's a pretty important 'single thing', with further consideration to the number of games won during these seasons.

The All-Australian team is selected based on home and away matches, so if you have a club regularly finishing higher on the ladder, and regularly winning more games, and for a much longer period of time, wouldn't that suggest Geelong have better players at the top end, and more of them, who have performed at that level for longer?

Come on man, it's not rocket surgery...

There are several points then in response to your post Mr Fadge.

1. if AA selections are taking into account only home and away performance, and excluding finals performance - which they do - then they cannot be used as any arbiter of who the greatest players are, because AA selection ignores THE MOST IMPORTANT MATCHES.

2. if top 4 finishes were the one and only important factor in how many AA selections you should produce, then Geelong has 16% more top 4 finishes than the combination of Richmond and Hawthorn over the period, but 35% more AA selections. Which is about 9 more individual selections than what you might expect. Of course top 4 finishes are no more important than overall wins, or top 8 finishes, both of which the combine are comfortably leading.

3. it is obvious Geelong should have more selections than either Richmond or Hawthorn over the period. But there is no reason at all that we would expect Geelong to have 35% more selections than the two dynasty clubs COMBINED, and it is totally mystifying how players who played for Geelong occupy 11 leadership positions of the 34 available leadership positions and players who have played for the two dynasty teams combined occupy only 3 of the 34 leadership positions.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Ah no, you're wrong. Again.

Hoyne (and Champion Data) now base their player ratings on actual performance (according to their algorithm) v. expected performance (according to their algorithm).

As Sinclair has played predominantly in the backline, his expected performance is well below that of a full-time midfielder.

As a result, he has exceeded his expected performance in the last two seasons by more than Bontempelli in 2023 and Oliver in 2022 and has been announced as the #1 player in the game by Hoyne, based on Player Ratings, for the past two seasons.

You are an idiot.

They are two separate things. The ratings I posted are CD's overall player ratings. You are quoting the alternative rating against expectation for the position as if it is the overall player ratings.

He has not been announced as the number 1 player in the game by Hoyne at all. He has been announced as the player furthest ahead of par expectations for his position in the AFL. Two very different things.

 

[Fadge]

There are several points then in response to your post Mr Fadge.

1. if AA selections are taking into account only home and away performance, and excluding finals performance - which they do - then they cannot be used as any arbiter of who the greatest players are, because AA selection ignores THE MOST IMPORTANT MATCHES.

Hang on, the specific topic of the current discussion is the worthiness of AA selections. This is a weird pivot.

2. if top 4 finishes were the one and only important factor in how many AA selections you should produce, then Geelong has 16% more top 4 finishes than the combination of Richmond and Hawthorn over the period, but 35% more AA selections. Which is about 9 more individual selections than what you might expect. Of course top 4 finishes are no more important than overall wins, or top 8 finishes, both of which the combine are comfortably leading.

Go back and re-read, and importantly comprehend my post, as this has been explained. I said it wasn't rocket surgery... maybe it is to you. Please let me know if a diagram would assist....

 

[demondavey]

I am deadly serious.

I provided the figures. I can accept Geelong should have comfortably more AA selections than Richmond in that period. And also comfortably more than Hawthorn, though somewhat less comfortably in Hawthorn's case. But there is no way known Geelong should have more 30% more selections than the 2 combined. And 366% more leadership selections(Captain and Vice-Captain.)

In the period in question:

Geelong win 4 flags. Around home and away 270 wins. 15 times qualified for finals.

Richmond & Hawthorn COMBINED 7 flags. Around 415 home and away wins. 19 times qualified for finals.

The only single thing that Geelong has over the combination of Richmond and Hawthorn is top 4 finishes after the home and away season. The combine had 12 and Geelong has 14.

Considering all of that you would say the combine has performed roughly 30% better depending how you weight each item. So if the process was unbiased, or in any way an accurate reflection of the ability of the two pools of players, then we might expect roughly 30% more AA selections, and leadership selections to come from the combine. Not Geelong having 30% more AA selections and 366% more leadership selections than the two dynasty teams COMBINED.

Speaking of which, Geelong Premiership years they average 5.5 AA selections. The combine Premiership years they average barely above 2 AA selections. So Geelong from 4 Premiership teams got 22 players selected. The combination of Richmond and Hawthorn from 7 Premiership teams got 15 players selected AA.

So objectively, all things considered, the combine has roughly 75% more flags, 50% more wins, 25% more finals qualifications, and 14% less top 4 qualifications. But Geelong has 35% more AA selections and almost 4 times the leadership selections.




But let's go another way. Let' focus on Geelong's one wood. Dominant home and away seasons. Let's say then teams winning 18 or more home and away matches in a season are particularly dominant, and we should expect to see a relatively high amount of players selected AA in those seasons. I will list all the 18+ win seasons(or the equivalent win % in 2020) and the corresponding AA hauls.



2007 Geelong 18 wins(flag) 9 x AA selections

2008 Geelong 21 wins(r/u) 7 x AA selections

2009 Saints 20 wins(r/u) 5 x AA selections, Geelong 18 wins(flag) 5 x AA selections

2011 Collingwood 20 wins(r/u) 6 x AA selections, Geelong 19 wins(flag) 3 x AA selections, Hawks 18 wins(3rd) 2 x AA selections

2013 Hawthorn 19 wins(flag) 2 x AA selections, Geelong 18 wins(3rd) 4 x AA selections

2018 Richmond 18 wins(3rd) 4 x A selections

2020 Port Adelaide 14 wins(3rd) 3 x AA selections, Brisbane 14 wins(4th) 2 x AA selections

2022 Geelong 18 wins(flag) 5 x AA selections

2023 Collingwood 18 wins(?) 3 x AA selections

Geelong 6 dominant seasons 33 AA selections @ 5.5 average. (Geelong have been the most dominant home and away team on 3 occasions)

All other teams 8 dominant seasons 27 AA selections @ 3.5 average. (the rest combined have been the most dominant home and away team on 6 occasions)


You would have to be 100% blind with a blindfold on in a dark cave during an eclipse of the sun in the dark ages not to see the bias at play here.

Between 07-16 Richmond were basically irrelevant bar some mid table finishes. Hawthorn was average from 09-11. Hawthorn has been irrelevant from 17-22.

In every one of those years bar 2015 Geelong have been top 4 bar 2018.

 

[Fadge]

You are an idiot.

They are two separate things. The ratings I posted are CD's overall player ratings. You are quoting the alternative rating against expectation for the position as if it is the overall player ratings.

He has not been announced as the number 1 player in the game by Hoyne at all. He has been announced as the player furthest ahead of par expectations for his position in the AFL. Two very different things.

Champion Data's top 10 players after Round 20, 2023

Daniel Hoyne joined SEN's Sportsday to reveal the list.

www.sen.com.au

Read this, comprehend, swallow some pride, then come back and join the conversation.

(Quick search could only find the article after round 20, but the premise remains the same).

 

[Noidnadroj]

You could have stopped here as this paragraph displays how much of an obscure stat 20 and 1 is.

I mean, I'm very comfortable rating Martin on the same rung as the likes of Garry Wilson and Brent Harvey.

I just checked the history books and no, neither of those guys dominated 3 x final series and 3 x Grand Finals.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Noidnadroj]

We have all watched the footy.

you’ve named Lethal and three players who were all great but I have never heard anywhere near a GOAT conversation (though all much lauded) in my life.

The 20+ 1+ is not to establish GOAT credentials. It’s to discredit those whose contention is he’s had 4 x elite seasons. 20+ and 1+ is an elite season, noting that Martin is often 25+ and/or 1.4+.

DeGoey was in AA squad this year and is 24 / 0.8.

It’s not easy to get that many possessions as a forward, and it’s not easy to kick that many goals as a midfielder.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Champion Data's top 10 players after Round 20, 2023

Daniel Hoyne joined SEN's Sportsday to reveal the list.

www.sen.com.au

Read this, comprehend, swallow some pride, then come back and join the conversation.

(Quick search could only find the article after round 20, but the premise remains the same).

Lol.
"Champion Data’s Daniel Hoyne has handed down the top 10 players in the competition after Round 20 and there’s movement in the list.

Champion Data’s new ratings system works by analysing how far above or below expectation players have performed per 100 minutes, meaning all positions on the ground can be compared."

They are still publishing their ratings lists. Jack Sinclair is not the highest rated player in the game according the CD. He is the highest rated versus expectations for his position.


1. Jack Sinclair (St Kilda)

“He is the no.1 rated player in the competition, performing six rating points above his expectation.”

Hoyne also revealed several players who have risen significantly in recent weeks.

“Dusty (Dustin Martin) is coming with a bullet, he’s gone from 28th to 13th,” Hoyne added.

“Tim English is coming with a bullet, he’s gone from 57th to 16th.

“Max Gawn, 53rd to 18th.

“And Adam Cerra is now a top 20 player in the competition based on expectation.”


He repeats over and again this is based on expectation(for the position played.)

The highest rated players outright is the lists I posted.


Your brain must be deprived of nutrients Fadge. Eat some superfood mate.

 

[Noidnadroj]

Here we go, CD ratings again, the world in which Jack Sinclair is the best player in the competition. For two consecutive seasons.

If Martin was in fact the 5th best forward in the competition this year, the AA selectors would have been duty bound to find a place for him in the team.

But he wasn't. So they didn't.

It was a good season from Martin. A season in which his best work was done once the horse had bolted for Richmond.

When I redo my Pendlebury and Martin season by season rankings, this season from Martin will likely slot very comfortably between Pendlebury's 9th and 10th best seasons, meaning Martin will elevate from having 8 of the best 20 seasons, to 9 of the best 20 seasons from their respective careers.

(Pendlebury's 9th best season was a 15 Brownlow vote, 62 coaches vote, AA Squad and 3rd in Club B&F year)

But of course, first we need to wait to see how Pendlebury performs in finals before we perform that assessment...

Fadgeratings. The state of the art ratings system that gave Pendlebury’s 2011 final series with zero goals, zero goal assists, zero Norm Smiths and zero flags a 27/30, whilst Martin’s 5 goal, 8 goal assists, Norm Smith medal (and 7 more contested possessions) and a flag got 26.5/30.

Word on the street is the Fadgeratings system developed by a passionate Collingwood supporter is under review. Early indications are there’s an inherent bias that includes a 25% Fadgelogic loading for Collingwood players.



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Between 07-16 Richmond were basically irrelevant bar some mid table finishes. Hawthorn was average from 09-11. Hawthorn has been irrelevant from 17-22.

In every one of those years bar 2015 Geelong have been top 4 bar 2018.

It is pointless telling me those things without also telling me why that should translate into the relative AA selection and leadership numbers we have seen for Geelong v Richmond and Hawthorn COMBINED.

You are telling me only why Geelong should have more selections than Richmond. And why they should have more selections than Hawthorn. Everybody here already knows that so you are telling us nothing.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Johnson, Cornes and Healy name their favourite finals players of all time

“Is anyone ever going to do what he's done?”

www.sen.com.au

Johnson has a hail mary to get a guy he rates above Dusty as a finals performer. Healy and Cornes put him straight back in his box.

 

[Noidnadroj]

And Jack Sinclair has been the most elite of the elite, for two consecutive seasons.

I reckon we start to give him credit where it's due, and create a GOAT thread for him.

If he helps break the Saints 56-year Premiership drought and wins 3 x Ayres Medals, 3 x Norm Smiths, 3 x flags, an AFLCA, AFLMVP and a Brownlow from 2023-2026 then don’t worry, we will.

But that would be something beyond belief if achieved that, don’t you think?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

Johnson, Cornes and Healy name their favourite finals players of all time

“Is anyone ever going to do what he's done?”

www.sen.com.au

Johnson has a hail mary to get a guy he rates above Dusty as a finals performer. Healy and Cornes put him straight back in his box.

Just because Dusty is possibly the best finals player of all time (he does make a fairly solid case) does not translate into him automatically being also the greatest player of all time in nearly over 130 seasons since the VFL/AFL started.

Why don't you Richmond fans get that ? So infuriating

I think Haydn Bunton Snr is probably the best player of all time myself. His playing career resume more than stacks up against Dusty's.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Just because Dusty is possibly the best finals player of all time (he does make a fairly solid case) does not translate into him automatically being also the greatest player of all time in nearly over 130 seasons since the VFL/AFL started.

Why don't you Richmond fans get that ? So infuriating

I think Haydn Bunton Snr is probably the best player of all time myself. His playing career resume more than stacks up against Dusty's.

Yep, probably right Elmer.

1. Hayden Bunton Snr

2. Dusty

 

[Noidnadroj]

You are an idiot.

They are two separate things. The ratings I posted are CD's overall player ratings. You are quoting the alternative rating against expectation for the position as if it is the overall player ratings.

He has not been announced as the number 1 player in the game by Hoyne at all. He has been announced as the player furthest ahead of par expectations for his position in the AFL. Two very different things.

Fadge likes to think he’s the most intelligent person in the room, but alas…..

It’s just the same as comparing Adam Gilchrist averaging 47 batting at #7 against others batting at #7 and giving him a rating compared to others in the same position, and not comparing him to Ponting batting at #3.

For their AA team of course this makes sense… they compare everyone against all others when playing the same position and choose whomever rates most about the average in each position.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com