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

[Noidnadroj]

Not all have a pure attacking license supplemented by 30% or more time forward (especially finals).

Plenty of superb midfielder performances have had 1 or 0 goals. If Voss wins a ridiculously hard ball in a pack and dishes out to Lappin who finds Aker at half forward who then nails it from 40m out - is it only Aker who gets credit? Why would they throw Voss as a roaming half forward in that scenario?

You endlessly compare Martin's scoring metrics to midfielders who don't rotate forward and spend as much time in defensive 50 as at half forward.

If a midfielder is capable of scoring goals regularly they are deployed in an attacking midfield role. Doesn’t mean defensive midfielders or those who don’t kick many goals can’t be great players, it’s just a much easier position to play.

Scheezel played that role this year and averaged 27 touches and won the B&F on debut. He kicked 3 goals. He had a terrific year, but I guarantee he won’t remain in a non-attacking role moving forward. Just as Naicos will be deployed in an attacking midfield role more often than not. If players are capable of being a regular attacking threat it’s where they will play.

Finding players to play defensive midfield and/or half back roles is a hell of a lot easier than finding midfield goal scoring threats.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Mr Meow]

If a midfielder is capable of scoring goals regularly they are deployed in an attacking midfield role. Doesn’t mean defensive midfielders or those who don’t kick many goals can’t be great players, it’s just a much easier position to play.

Scheezel played that role this year and averaged 27 touches and won the B&F on debut. He kicked 3 goals. He had a terrific year, but I guarantee he won’t remain in a non-attacking role moving forward. Just as Naicos will be deployed in an attacking midfield role more often than not. If players are capable of being a regular attacking threat it’s where they will play.

Finding players to play defensive midfield and/or half back roles is a hell of a lot easier than finding midfield goal scoring threats.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

So Martin both rotates/sits forward (positional) and attacks more from midfield (instructional) more than Joel Selwood did. That much is very obvious. He therefore averages just over twice as many goals but Selwood is around double on the much less glamorous stats tackles and 1%ers. Selwood also has the lead for clearances and contested possessions. Martin almost twice as many marks inside 50, Selwood with a higher rebound 50 to inside 50 ratio than Martin.

A lot of these differences seem positional and instructional. But your inference is that if Selwood was a better player he would simply have Martin's role and the equivalent shift in stats for each category? It's not as though he spent his career mopping up easy loose balls at half back. I simply don't agree on this one. It may be rare for midfielders to be adept in the forward line but it doesn't stop comparisons on scoring outputs being wayward when you are not comparing like for like player roles.

There's a good chance they end up finishing within 30/40 coaches votes of each other over 16 year careers so I don't think the coaches have a real preference.

 

[Noidnadroj]

So Martin both rotates/sits forward (positional) and attacks more from midfield (instructional) more than Joel Selwood did. That much is very obvious. He therefore averages just over twice as many goals but Selwood is around double on the much less glamorous stats tackles and 1%ers. Selwood also has the lead for clearances and contested possessions. Martin almost twice as many marks inside 50, Selwood with a higher rebound 50 to inside 50 ratio than Martin.

A lot of these differences seem positional and instructional. But your inference is that if Selwood was a better player he would simply have Martin's role and the equivalent shift in stats for each category? It's not as though he spent his career mopping up easy loose balls at half back. I simply don't agree on this one. It may be rare for midfielders to be adept in the forward line but it doesn't stop comparisons on scoring outputs being wayward when you are not comparing like for like player roles.

There's a good chance they end up finishing within 30/40 coaches votes of each other over 16 year careers so I don't think the coaches have a real preference.

Yes, I am absolutely 100% saying players who are capable of being consistent goal kickers are deployed to take advantage of this ability - and it’s a much more difficult role, especially in todays age of ‘team defence’ and very few one on one contests. That’s why since 2015 we’ve seen 7 x players in total average 23+ and 1.1+ in a single season. It shows how rare and difficult the combo of winning the ball and kicking goals is. If a player was capable of doing it, instructions would be to do it.

A coach isn’t going to say ‘Joel, I know if you were deployed a little differently you’d kick us lots more goals, but I’d prefer you stick to being a non goal scoring threat ’….

In 2023 2 x players averaged 23+ and 1.1+, Martin and Petracca. In 2022 it was zero.

For 25+ and 0.3+ goals in 2023 it was 27 players. Ball winners who don’t kick many goals are a dime a dozen. Doesn’t mean they’re all as good as each other, just means they’re much much easier to find than midfielders who kick goals.

This doesn’t mean that role isn’t important and not to be valued from players who do it well. It’s just clear that it’s an easier role to play, and for that reason goal kicking mids IMO are much more valuable as in modern footy goals are very hard to
find.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[H00t]

Yes, I am absolutely 100% saying players who are capable of being consistent goal kickers are deployed to take advantage of this ability - and it’s a much more difficult role, especially in todays age of ‘team defence’ and very few one on one contests. That’s why since 2015 we’ve seen 7 x players in total average 23+ and 1.1+ in a single season. It shows how rare and difficult the combo of winning the ball and kicking goals is. If a player was capable of doing it, instructions would be to do it.

A coach isn’t going to say ‘Joel, I know if you were deployed a little differently you’d kick us lots more goals, but I’d prefer you stick to being a non goal scoring threat ’….

In 2023 2 x players averaged 23+ and 1.1+, Martin and Petracca. In 2022 it was zero.

For 25+ and 0.3+ goals in 2023 it was 27 players. Ball winners who don’t kick many goals are a dime a dozen. Doesn’t mean they’re all as good as each other, just means they’re much much easier to find than midfielders who kick goals.

This doesn’t mean that role isn’t important and not to be valued from players who do it well. It’s just clear that it’s an easier role to play, and for that reason goal kicking mids IMO are much more valuable as in modern footy goals are very hard to
find.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Because arbitrary stat cut offs are silly.

Daicos in his second year averaged 31 disposals but only 0.9 goals a game. Only didn’t win the Brownlow due to injury.

But I guess he’s just not good enough as he didn’t average 0.1 goal a game more. Or 0.2 as you’ve now made it 1.1 goals a game.

 

[Romeoh1]

Lol thread still going.

 

[My Tilly]

Wouldn't even be top 15 all-time let alone the top 10.

 

[Noidnadroj]

Because arbitrary stat cut offs are silly.

Daicos in his second year averaged 31 disposals but only 0.9 goals a game. Only didn’t win the Brownlow due to injury.

But I guess he’s just not good enough as he didn’t average 0.1 goal a game more. Or 0.2 as you’ve now made it 1.1 goals a game.

You’ve completely missed the point. Naicos will be deployed moving forward as an attacking midfielder because he will be a consistent goal kicker. He won’t be deployed in any sort of sweeping/defensive midfielder role on a regular basis. That role is reserved for players who aren’t able to hit the scoreboard regularly.



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Because arbitrary stat cut offs are silly.

Daicos in his second year averaged 31 disposals but only 0.9 goals a game. Only didn’t win the Brownlow due to injury.

But I guess he’s just not good enough as he didn’t average 0.1 goal a game more. Or 0.2 as you’ve now made it 1.1 goals a game.

Cut the 1+ goals per game kickers off at 16.5 disposals - this is the average disposals of the average player in the median team for disposals. See who is left in 2023.

Toby Greene 17 and 2.8

Shai Bolton 22 and 1.4

Brent Daniels 17 and 1.3

Dustin Martin 24 and 1.2

Zac Bailey 17 and 1.2

Christian Petracca 28 and 1.1

Ben Ainsworth 18 and 1.0


It is a pretty tidy list of players who are obviously having a strong goal kicking impact whilst playing often enough up the ground to obtain higher than AFL average disposal numbers.

If you went the other way and said let's take all players who scored more than the AFL goal average of 0.54 per game and see how many of those averaged over 20 disposals, it is a bit more extensive list:

Bolton D Martin Petracca Gulden N Daicos DeGoey Rozee Bontempelli Taranto N Martin Newcombe Uniacke, Dylan Moore, J Kelly, Warner, Treloar, J Daicos, Mason Wood, Anderson, Dangerfield, Coniglio.


So 7 on the first list of players who averaged 1+ goals and above AFL average disposals 16.5.

22 on the second list of players who averaged 20+ disposals and above AFL average goals 0.54.

Only 3 players appear on both lists. Bolton, D Martin, Petracca. And you could say this same statement about all 3 of them, there isn't anybody in the AFL who had BOTH more goals & more disposals than them on average. And there are probably several of the top disposal getters and goal kickers you could make the same statement about. Toby Greene, Charlie Curnow, Taylor Walker, Tom Green, Nick Daicos.

If you dug deeper you might find some others. But if you ignore arbitrary cutoffs and focus on players can make those sort of statements about, ie that nobody in the AFL both averaged more disposals AND more goals per game than them, the list starts looking very very elite:

Petracca, Bolton, Martin, Curnow, Walker, Toby Greene, Tom Green, Nick Daicos, not sure if there are others. These are the highest possession winning mids, the highest goal scoring forwards and the most productive mid-forward combination players in the AFL, and Dusty is sitting comfortably on the list after being written off by many on this thread before this season as finished. More remarkably, posters on this thread are trying to dress his season up as some sort of sheep in wolf's clothing AFTER the fact. They don't even have the insight or decency to recognise what a brilliant season he actually put together.

 

[Mr Meow]

Yes, I am absolutely 100% saying players who are capable of being consistent goal kickers are deployed to take advantage of this ability - and it’s a much more difficult role, especially in todays age of ‘team defence’ and very few one on one contests. That’s why since 2015 we’ve seen 7 x players in total average 23+ and 1.1+ in a single season. It shows how rare and difficult the combo of winning the ball and kicking goals is. If a player was capable of doing it, instructions would be to do it.

A coach isn’t going to say ‘Joel, I know if you were deployed a little differently you’d kick us lots more goals, but I’d prefer you stick to being a non goal scoring threat ’….

In 2023 2 x players averaged 23+ and 1.1+, Martin and Petracca. In 2022 it was zero.

For 25+ and 0.3+ goals in 2023 it was 27 players. Ball winners who don’t kick many goals are a dime a dozen. Doesn’t mean they’re all as good as each other, just means they’re much much easier to find than midfielders who kick goals.

This doesn’t mean that role isn’t important and not to be valued from players who do it well. It’s just clear that it’s an easier role to play, and for that reason goal kicking mids IMO are much more valuable as in modern footy goals are very hard to
find.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Sorry, this is complete nonsense masquerading as analysis based on your starting position of "how can I pump Martin's tires up based on the stats I have to hand?". Which is very similar for almost every point you've tried to make in this thread.

Positional and instructional. That's why his goals are higher than average. All for what, 0.1 goals a game more than Dangerfield who spends less time forward? And has more contested possessions, clearances, tackles, contested marks and inside 50s.

Dangerfield has 2.8% less score involvements than Martin, while Martin has 38.1% less score launches than Dangerfield. Dangerfield does more work at the source. So 6.8 more score launches/CPs/clearances/tackles/i50s/CMs but 0.3 less goals/assists/SIs per game. But apparently that minor edge on the latter categories is more valuable than the significant edge in the former.

By the way if I change your slider to how many seasons of 26.5+ disposals and 0.9+ goals then Dangerfield has 6 seasons compared to Martin's 1. It doesn't actually mean much but this is the way your basic line of analysis works. I just picked different arbitrary cut off points.

 

[Mr Meow]

Yes, I am absolutely 100% saying players who are capable of being consistent goal kickers are deployed to take advantage of this ability - and it’s a much more difficult role, especially in todays age of ‘team defence’ and very few one on one contests. That’s why since 2015 we’ve seen 7 x players in total average 23+ and 1.1+ in a single season. It shows how rare and difficult the combo of winning the ball and kicking goals is. If a player was capable of doing it, instructions would be to do it.

A coach isn’t going to say ‘Joel, I know if you were deployed a little differently you’d kick us lots more goals, but I’d prefer you stick to being a non goal scoring threat ’….

In 2023 2 x players averaged 23+ and 1.1+, Martin and Petracca. In 2022 it was zero.

For 25+ and 0.3+ goals in 2023 it was 27 players. Ball winners who don’t kick many goals are a dime a dozen. Doesn’t mean they’re all as good as each other, just means they’re much much easier to find than midfielders who kick goals.

This doesn’t mean that role isn’t important and not to be valued from players who do it well. It’s just clear that it’s an easier role to play, and for that reason goal kicking mids IMO are much more valuable as in modern footy goals are very hard to
find.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

If you want to talk about truly elite seasons, you and MR are a fan of things like CD's AFL Player Ratings. Afterall they take all of the stats and blend them into one overall score.

Your contention is that Martin is "unlucky" to only have 4 AA's and not 8 or 9. Dangerfield the opposite - "any half decent season gets an AA selection".

Why is that Dangerfield has had seasons with an AFL Player Rating of 16 or above on 8 occassions, compared to 4 times (1 being his truncated 2021 season - so in reality 3 times) for Martin? Supercoach average above 110 points once for Martin compared to 8 times for Dangerfield? Coaches votes average of 2.9 or above 5 times compared to 7 times for Dangerfield?

Are the coaches and analysts doing something wrong with the raw data? If only they would just set elite at "23+ disposals and 1.1+ goals". That seems to be the most comprehensive approach. It's one hell of a reach.

 

[H00t]

You’ve completely missed the point. Naicos will be deployed moving forward as an attacking midfielder because he will be a consistent goal kicker. He won’t be deployed in any sort of sweeping/defensive midfielder role on a regular basis. That role is reserved for players who aren’t able to hit the scoreboard regularly.



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Does he need to be though?

You’ve put a higher value on a very specific role (because of Martin)

 

[H00t]

Cut the 1+ goals per game kickers off at 16.5 disposals - this is the average disposals of the average player in the median team for disposals. See who is left in 2023.

Toby Greene 17 and 2.8

Shai Bolton 22 and 1.4

Brent Daniels 17 and 1.3

Dustin Martin 24 and 1.2

Zac Bailey 17 and 1.2

Christian Petracca 28 and 1.1

Ben Ainsworth 18 and 1.0


It is a pretty tidy list of players who are obviously having a strong goal kicking impact whilst playing often enough up the ground to obtain higher than AFL average disposal numbers.

If you went the other way and said let's take all players who scored more than the AFL goal average of 0.54 per game and see how many of those averaged over 20 disposals, it is a bit more extensive list:

Bolton D Martin Petracca Gulden N Daicos DeGoey Rozee Bontempelli Taranto N Martin Newcombe Uniacke, Dylan Moore, J Kelly, Warner, Treloar, J Daicos, Mason Wood, Anderson, Dangerfield, Coniglio.


So 7 on the first list of 1+ goals and above AFL average disposals 16.5.

22 on the second list of 20+ disposals and above AFL average goals 0.54.

Only 3 players appear on both lists. Bolton, D Martin, Petracca. And you could say this same statement about all 3 of them, there isn't anybody in the AFL who had BOTH more goals & more disposals than them on average. And there are probably several of the top disposal getters and goal kickers you could make the same statement about. Toby Greene, Charlie Curnow, Taylor Walker, Tom Green, Nick Daicos.

If you dug deeper you might find some others. But if you ignore arbitrary cutoffs and focus on players can make those sort of statements about, ie that nobody in the AFL both averaged more disposals AND more goals per game than them, the list starts looking very very elite:

Petracca, Bolton, Martin, Curnow, Walker, Toby Greene, Tom Green, Nick Daicos, not sure if there are others. These are the highest possession winning mids, the highest goal scoring forwards and the most productive mid-forward combination players in the AFL, and Dusty is sitting comfortably on the list after being written off by many on this thread before this season as finished. More remarkably, posters on this thread are trying to dress his season up as some sort of sheep in wolf's clothing AFTER the fact. They don't even have the insight or decency to recognise what a brilliant season he actually put together.

You don’t find it odd that of the 3 players appearing on both lists, 2 play for one team?

Is this why you rate it so highly.

Also Dusty is a really good player. He just isn’t in the GOAT discussion.

And he had a good season. So did a lot of players this year.

Maybe go start a thread saying Dusty is a really good player.

 

[Mr Meow]

You don’t find it odd that of the 3 players appearing on both lists, 2 play for one team?

Is this why you rate it so highly.

Also Dusty is a really good player. He just isn’t in the GOAT discussion.

And he had a good season. So did a lot of players this year.

Maybe go start a thread saying Dusty is a really good player.

I wonder whether Petracca and Bolton are also "license to all out attack" mids who spend considerable time in the forward line and whose heat maps wouldn't look out of place compared to your average forward flanker?

We've been told the rationale is that these are the only 3 players capable of attacking and being a midfielder, hence why the role (positional and instructional) is designated to them. It hasn't been designated to Bontempelli, Butters or Neale who actually took home the awards this season. Or Walsh, who won the Ayres medal during finals. If only they could learn how to attack so their coaches would let them spend more time forward and be pure attacking rather than balanced midfielders.

 

[Monsterdarlz]

And yet would beat any Collingwood side of the last 50 years

Collingwood 2010-2011 would wipe the floor with your mob that year

 

[Meteoric Rise]

You don’t find it odd that of the 3 players appearing on both lists, 2 play for one team?

Is this why you rate it so highly.

Also Dusty is a really good player. He just isn’t in the GOAT discussion.

And he had a good season. So did a lot of players this year.

Maybe go start a thread saying Dusty is a really good player.

That is the list formed around the arbitrary statistics of averaging 1 goal + and 20+ disposals per game.

They are also 2 of the only 9 players I could find who it can be said nobody in the AFL has both averaged more goals AND more disposals per game than them. There are no questionable players on either list.

In terms of the 2 Richmond players....they are 2 of Richmond's best 3 players along with Tom Lynch. They are 2 of Richmond's highest 3 paid players, and this is a club that retained about 17 Premiership players on their list in 2023. So they are bona fide stars. And they both play in the midfield and forward of the ball very very well. Overall, on evidence across at least several seasons, they are among the best very small handful of players in the AFL at combining those 2 roles within games.

So why would anyone find their appearance on these lists odd?

 

[Mr Meow]

That is the list formed around the arbitrary statistics of averaging 1 goal + and 20+ disposals per game.

They are also 2 of the only 9 players I could find who it can be said nobody in the AFL has both averaged more goals AND more disposals per game than them. There are no questionable players on either list.

In terms of the 2 Richmond players....they are 2 of Richmond's best 3 players along with Tom Lynch. They are 2 of Richmond's highest 3 paid players, and this is a club that retained about 17 Premiership players on their list in 2023. So they are bona fide stars. And they both play in the midfield and forward of the ball very very well. Overall, on evidence across at least several seasons, they are among the best very small handful of players in the AFL at combining those 2 roles within games.

So why would anyone find their appearance on these lists odd?

Neither Richmond player made the AA side. They had one best 44 squad selection between them. You'd think if such rarefied air meant anything they'd all be first picked in the AA side and all over 90 coaches votes. Yet Petracca had a fair distance to either of them. Maybe something besides an arbitrary disposal/goal cut off point explained that? Or else I'm not sure why these three didn't have a 3 way tie for the Brownlow, Coaches Association Award and Players League MVP.

 

[Mr Meow]

Minimum 15 games played

1/3 (33%) of players with Meteoric Rise arbitrary cut off line of 20+ disposals and 1+ goals per game made the 2023 AA side.

7/14 (50%) of players with arbitrary cut off line of 25+ disposals and 0.5+ goals made the 2023 AA side.

8/12 (75%) of players with 26+ disposals and 0.6+ goal assists made the 2023 AA side.

3/4 players (75%) of players with 18.5+ kicks made the 2023 AA side.

4/5 (80%) of players with 8+ marks made the 2023 AA side.

4/4 players (100%) with 2.8+ goals made the 2023 AA side.

Wow! I found some much stronger identifiers for elite players than the 20 and 1+. Interestingly the league MVP and coaches association award winners can be found in some of the latter categories but not the first, and the Brownlow leaderboard includes a bunch from the second and third categories.

 

[Captain_Bender]

Collingwood 2010-2011 would wipe the floor with your mob that year

That Collingwood side had mediocre defenders, mediocre forwards, and outside two absolute stars in Swan and Pendlebury a mediocre midfield, no it wouldn't

 

[Noidnadroj]

Sorry, this is complete nonsense masquerading as analysis based on your starting position of "how can I pump Martin's tires up based on the stats I have to hand?". Which is very similar for almost every point you've tried to make in this thread.

Positional and instructional. That's why his goals are higher than average. All for what, 0.1 goals a game more than Dangerfield who spends less time forward? And has more contested possessions, clearances, tackles, contested marks and inside 50s.

Dangerfield has 2.8% less score involvements than Martin, while Martin has 38.1% less score launches than Dangerfield. Dangerfield does more work at the source. So 6.8 more score launches/CPs/clearances/tackles/i50s/CMs but 0.3 less goals/assists/SIs per game. But apparently that minor edge on the latter categories is more valuable than the significant edge in the former.

By the way if I change your slider to how many seasons of 26.5+ disposals and 0.9+ goals then Dangerfield has 6 seasons compared to Martin's 1. It doesn't actually mean much but this is the way your basic line of analysis works. I just picked different arbitrary cut off points.

Don’t confuse the message … taking out Martin’s 4 x AA seasons his career average is 23.47 and 1.15. Those are his averages. So I then looked at who has averaged more than that in a single season and it’s 7-players over the last 9-years. Doesn’t mean any more or any less than that.

It’s no different to saying Buddy’s goal average taking out his best 4 x seasons is 2.9 goals (for example), and each season only 1-2 players achieve this. You can then get your knickers in a knot and say … ‘yeah … but but but such and such took more marks or got more SI’s or had more goal assists etc….’ But if almost no-one averages as many goals in a single season as Buddy averages across his career ‘taking out’ his best seasons we know Buddy is an elite goal kicker.

All I was addressing was on-going criticism of Martin’s supposed lack of elite seasons. So by presenting very easy to understand disposal and goal averages he has maintained across 199 x games, and showing almost nobody achieves this in a single season, it puts to bed any thoughts of Martin not being amazingly consistent and elite from day one.

I don’t know why you felt compelled to spew out Dangers stats as it has nothing to do with anything I was talking about.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Meteoric Rise]

That Collingwood side had mediocre defenders, mediocre forwards, and outside two absolute stars in Swan and Pendlebury a mediocre midfield, no it wouldn't

It takes a special kind of gimp supporter to believe that a team who never won an actual Grand Final would wipe the floor with a team who won 3 Grand Finals.

 

[Noidnadroj]

Neither Richmond player made the AA side. They had one best 44 squad selection between them. You'd think if such rarefied air meant anything they'd all be first picked in the AA side and all over 90 coaches votes. Yet Petracca had a fair distance to either of them. Maybe something besides an arbitrary disposal/goal cut off point explained that? Or else I'm not sure why these three didn't have a 3 way tie for the Brownlow, Coaches Association Award and Players League MVP.

Being a goal kicking midfielder is much harder than being a non goal kicking midfielder. This doesn’t mean the non goal kickers are worse than the goal kickers. The players who can do it are more valuable as they’re harder to find.

And if players are comparable in their pure midfield abilities, give me the ones who kick goals please.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Minimum 15 games played

1/3 (33%) of players with Meteoric Rise arbitrary cut off line of 20+ disposals and 1+ goals per game made the 2023 AA side.

7/14 (50%) of players with arbitrary cut off line of 25+ disposals and 0.5+ goals made the 2023 AA side.

8/12 (75%) of players with 26+ disposals and 0.6+ goal assists made the 2023 AA side.

3/4 players (75%) of players with 18.5+ kicks made the 2023 AA side.

4/5 (80%) of players with 8+ marks made the 2023 AA side.

4/4 players (100%) with 2.8+ goals made the 2023 AA side.

Wow! I found some much stronger identifiers for elite players than the 20 and 1+. Interestingly the league MVP and coaches association award winners can be found in some of the latter categories but not the first, and the Brownlow leaderboard includes a bunch from the second and third categories.

The AA side. Lol.


No player in the AFL averaged more goals AND more disposals than Dustin Martin in 2023. So he is going ok for a player you said was finished.

 

[Noidnadroj]

If you want to talk about truly elite seasons, you and MR are a fan of things like CD's AFL Player Ratings. Afterall they take all of the stats and blend them into one overall score.

Your contention is that Martin is "unlucky" to only have 4 AA's and not 8 or 9. Dangerfield the opposite - "any half decent season gets an AA selection".

Why is that Dangerfield has had seasons with an AFL Player Rating of 16 or above on 8 occassions, compared to 4 times (1 being his truncated 2021 season - so in reality 3 times) for Martin? Supercoach average above 110 points once for Martin compared to 8 times for Dangerfield? Coaches votes average of 2.9 or above 5 times compared to 7 times for Dangerfield?

Are the coaches and analysts doing something wrong with the raw data? If only they would just set elite at "23+ disposals and 1.1+ goals". That seems to be the most comprehensive approach. It's one hell of a reach.

Did you just quote SC scores? Now you’ve really jumped the shark. Joel Bowden used to dominate those. Your analysis used to be credible … SC scores … hahaha.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Did you just quote SC scores? Now you’ve really jumped the shark. Joel Bowden used to dominate those. Your analysis used to be credible … SC scores … hahaha.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

I notice he steered clear of finals scores for some unknowable reason.

 

[H00t]

Don’t confuse the message … taking out Martin’s 4 x AA seasons his career average is 23.47 and 1.15. Those are his averages. So I then looked at who has averaged more than that in a single season and it’s 7-players over the last 9-years. Doesn’t mean any more or any less than that.

It’s no different to saying Buddy’s goal average taking out his best 4 x seasons is 2.9 goals (for example), and each season only 1-2 players achieve this. You can then get your knickers in a knot and say … ‘yeah … but but but such and such took more marks or got more SI’s or had more goal assists etc….’ But if almost no-one averages as many goals in a single season as Buddy averages across his career ‘taking out’ his best seasons we know Buddy is an elite goal kicker.

All I was addressing was on-going criticism of Martin’s supposed lack of elite seasons. So by presenting very easy to understand disposal and goal averages he has maintained across 199 x games, and showing almost nobody achieves this in a single season, it puts to bed any thoughts of Martin not being amazingly consistent and elite from day one.

I don’t know why you felt compelled to spew out Dangers stats as it has nothing to do with anything I was talking about.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

You start by saying it doesn’t mean much. Then try to use it as a justification for him being elite.

And Dusty has been really good his whole career. He’s only had one year at the level needed to put himself in the GOAT conversation though. Where the players who are in that conversation have done it for many many years.

It’s a tough bar to clear and Dusty doesn’t clear it.