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

[Meteoric Rise]

The awards don’t matter. They look nice, but ultimately mean nothing. How well the player played matters.

It’s the “most decorated” year. It’s not the best year. Leigh Matthews has that with his 1977 year. Martin’s 2017 is level with Matthews 1975, 1976, 1978, 1982, 1983 and 1984 years.

That’s 7 years equal with or better than Martin’s 2017. That’s why one year is no big deal. The very best do it repeatedly.

How well you played matters you say, but it doesn't matter if you played well enough to have the most awarded season ever, yep, makes sense.

If you hold that the most important thing in football is what the team achieves, then it follows the players who do most to make the team achieve success have done best. Nobody in history has an overwhelming case to say they did more than Dustin Martin in 2017 to make their team achieve success. Matthews was a truly great player and also built a resume of unique achievements and statistical records including being a great big game player in his career. But you don't have a better season than Martin did in 2017 by beating up on rubbish teams and then failing to win finals for your team.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

The answer of this thread has been a resounding no.

I just come hear to see you and a couple of other tigers supporters tie themselves in knots trying to come some way to try and justify something that simply isn’t the case.

I don't think there is anything "resounding" about the no camp.

Some think awards don't count.

Some think some awards count others don't depending on what Martin has won or not.

Some think the eye test is sufficient to know who is the best player ever. They purport to be able to watch a certain amount of a player play and this is enough to call him the best player ever.

Some think expert opinions matter, until the expert opinion is that Martin might be the best player ever.

Some think B&F's matter until it is pointed out the player they are trying to rate on the same level as Dusty has never finished top 5 then it matters at some clubs but not other clubs.

Some(seriously) think Dusty isn't actually that good it is just that the whole AFL just got really bad for 4 years while Dusty single handedly re-defined what it means to dominate finals.

Some think consistency matters but can't seem to explain away why a player as inconsistent as Martin has been so consistently elite for so many years.

No siree, there is nothing resounding about any of that, it all looks rather confused to me. If you want resounding, you need to take in some of the work of the yes camp. Then maybe have a meeting of all the good and great in the no camp and see if you clowns can actually make your mind the **** up about exactly why Dustin Martin is not the GOAT.

 

[Mr Meow]

I don't think there is anything "resounding" about the no camp.

Some think awards don't count.

Some think some awards count others don't depending on what Martin has won or not.

Some think the eye test is sufficient to know who is the best player ever. They purport to be able to watch a certain amount of a player play and this is enough to call him the best player ever.

Some think expert opinions matter, until the expert opinion is that Martin might be the best player ever.

Some think B&F's matter until it is pointed out the player they are trying to rate on the same level as Dusty has never finished top 5 then it matters at some clubs but not other clubs.

Some(seriously) think Dusty isn't actually that good it is just that the whole AFL just got really bad for 4 years while Dusty single handedly re-defined what it means to dominate finals.

Some think consistency matters but can't seem to explain away why a player as inconsistent as Martin has been so consistently elite for so many years.

No siree, there is nothing resounding about any of that, it all looks rather confused to me. If you want resounding, you need to take in some of the work of the yes camp. Then maybe have a meeting of all the good and great in the no camp and see if you clowns can actually make your mind the * up about exactly why Dustin Martin is not the GOAT.

It's been a resounding no, absolutely.

 

[H00t]

How well you played matters you say, but it doesn't matter if you played well enough to have the most awarded season ever, yep, makes sense.

If you hold that the most important thing in football is what the team achieves, then it follows the players who do most to make the team achieve success have done best. Nobody in history has an overwhelming case to say they did more than Dustin Martin in 2017 to make their team achieve success. Matthews was a truly great player and also built a resume of unique achievements and statistical records including being a great big game player in his career. But you don't have a better season than Martin did in 2017 by beating up on rubbish teams and then failing to win finals for your team.

If I’m judging team performance I’m judging how well the team went. If I’m judging individual performance I only go by how well the player performed.

The tigers team won those finals and they win them even if Martin didn’t play.

So yeah lots of players did more to try (or succeed) in giving their team success. Either through having a better season or by having the winning play.

None of this matters though as the tigers team success doesn’t mean Martin played any better just as them getting defeated wouldn’t have meant he played worse.

 

[H00t]

I don't think there is anything "resounding" about the no camp.

Some think awards don't count.

Some think some awards count others don't depending on what Martin has won or not.

Some think the eye test is sufficient to know who is the best player ever. They purport to be able to watch a certain amount of a player play and this is enough to call him the best player ever.

Some think expert opinions matter, until the expert opinion is that Martin might be the best player ever.

Some think B&F's matter until it is pointed out the player they are trying to rate on the same level as Dusty has never finished top 5 then it matters at some clubs but not other clubs.

Some(seriously) think Dusty isn't actually that good it is just that the whole AFL just got really bad for 4 years while Dusty single handedly re-defined what it means to dominate finals.

Some think consistency matters but can't seem to explain away why a player as inconsistent as Martin has been so consistently elite for so many years.

No siree, there is nothing resounding about any of that, it all looks rather confused to me. If you want resounding, you need to take in some of the work of the yes camp. Then maybe have a meeting of all the good and great in the no camp and see if you clowns can actually make your mind the * up about exactly why Dustin Martin is not the GOAT.

Very resounding that everyone bar 3-4 die hard Martin fans have argued no.

And it’s nice you’ve got a nice long list against him but only a very small list for 2017 and a handful of other games. Even then that’s an incredibly weak argument.

 

[Caligo]

Is any particular player the GOAT?
A simple flow chart

Is the player Leigh Matthews?

• If yes, then he is the GOAT.
• If no, then he isn't.

Flow chart complete.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

If I’m judging team performance I’m judging how well the team went. If I’m judging individual performance I only go by how well the player performed.

The tigers team won those finals and they win them even if Martin didn’t play.

So yeah lots of players did more to try (or succeed) in giving their team success. Either through having a better season or by having the winning play.

None of this matters though as the tigers team success doesn’t mean Martin played any better just as them getting defeated wouldn’t have meant he played worse.

That just isn't knowable. But if you take Martin out of that 2017 Richmond team then at best you might get something roughly equivalent to Collingwood 2023. But that is just taking the 3 finals into consideration. From after round 13 of 2017, the unrated Richmond team needed to win 12 of 13 games to secure top 4 then win the flag. Martin's performance in those 13 games is not something I can recall being matched by any other player I have seen.

Richmond are not winning that flag if Dustin Martin wasn't there. You can probably fairly say that about quite a lot of other Premiership players over time. The difference is they weren't the best performed player in the league over the whole season with record votes, and best player in the finals series and Grand Final. Dusty was.

 

[H00t]

That just isn't knowable. But if you take Martin out of that 2017 Richmond team then at best you might get something roughly equivalent to Collingwood 2023. But that is just taking the 3 finals into consideration. From after round 13 of 2017, the unrated Richmond team needed to win 12 of 13 games to secure top 4 then win the flag. Martin's performance in those 13 games is not something I can recall being matched by any other player I have seen.

Richmond are not winning that flag if Dustin Martin wasn't there. You can probably fairly say that about quite a lot of other Premiership players over time. The difference is they weren't the best performed player in the league over the whole season with record votes, and best player in the finals series and Grand Final. Dusty was.

You are equating team perfomance with individual perfomance again. The tigers team lifted and brought Martin along for the ride. Even during this time every time the team played poorly Martin’s perfomance dropped off.

He wasn’t the driving force behind the improved perfomance. But he was the biggest benefactor.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

You are equating team perfomance with individual perfomance again. The tigers team lifted and brought Martin along for the ride. Even during this time every time the team played poorly Martin’s perfomance dropped off.

He wasn’t the driving force behind the improved perfomance. But he was the biggest benefactor.

You say I am equating team performance with individual performance as if they are 2 totally independent factors. They are inextricably linked. The rest of what you wrote is just pure bullshit. If Richmond had to chose its first picked player to play in any of those games, it would have been Dusty. If the opponent had to choose 1 Richmond player to miss any of those games it would have been Dusty. Your statement has no more validity than someone saying Hawthorn lifted in Leigh Matthews' career and brought him along for the ride.

Dusty spent a lot of his time in crowded forward lines ahead of the ball in those big finals. When he was fit, and Richmond played well, he nailed them 3 priceless flags with unmatched finals performances. This happened 10 times and Dusty was BOG or near BOG in 9 of those. Nobody else has done that. In his other 6 finals where Richmond lost, he had reasonable alibis in 3 of them where he played as well as his fitness, preparation or inexperience might lead us to expect. It leaves 3 other losing finals he did not dominate. But even in those he amassed an average of about 24 disposals, and 1 goal + assist. In other words, higher than Scott Pendlebury's average finals output.

That puts into perspective just how ludicrous your post is.

 

[Mr Meow]

You say I am equating team performance with individual performance as if they are 2 totally independent factors. They are inextricably linked. The rest of what you wrote is just pure bullshit. If Richmond had to chose its first picked player to play in any of those games, it would have been Dusty. If the opponent had to choose 1 Richmond player to miss any of those games it would have been Dusty. Your statement has no more validity than someone saying Hawthorn lifted in Leigh Matthews' career and brought him along for the ride.

Dusty spent a lot of his time in crowded forward lines ahead of the ball in those big finals. When he was fit, and Richmond played well, he nailed them 3 priceless flags with unmatched finals performances. This happened 10 times and Dusty was BOG or near BOG in 9 of those. Nobody else has done that. In his other 6 finals where Richmond lost, he had reasonable alibis in 3 of them where he played as well as his fitness, preparation or inexperience might lead us to expect. It leaves 3 other losing finals he did not dominate. But even in those he amassed an average of about 24 disposals, and 1 goal + assist. In other words, higher than Scott Pendlebury's average finals output.

That puts into perspective just how ludicrous your post is.

Someone's been caught lying again.

Throughout Richmond's 2017-2020 dynasty Martin played in 12 finals.

The coaches nominated him outright BOG in the 2017 QF, 2019 GF, 2020 SF, 2020 PF and 2020 GF. 5 times out of 12 games. 3 in the COVID affected season that sadly people care less about. Slightly less than once per finals series until the big 2020 campaign.

In the 2017 PF he shared the honours with Rioli.

In the 2017 GF the coaches rated Houli higher.

In the 2018 QF the coaches rated Grimes higher.

In the losing 2018 PF he received no votes.

In the 2019 QF he shared the honours with Edwards.

In the 2019 PF he received no votes while Prestia and Lunch effectively secured the premiership in the only game of jeapordy.

In the losing 2020 QF he was a non factor.

In Richmond's last chance to extend the dynasty in 2022, a losing EF, he received no votes. Much like the pre dynasty finals performances in 3 consecutive seasons.

It was still a strong collection of finals, but your exaggerations as usual are eye roll inducing.

The only real games of serious jeapordy where it could be argued he was a critical factor were the last two games of 2020. Which makes that the best finals series he had. But plenty of champions over the years have been the crucial difference in some close finals. And plenty more performed much stronger when their side weren't dominant or even victorious.

 

[H00t]

You say I am equating team performance with individual performance as if they are 2 totally independent factors. They are inextricably linked. The rest of what you wrote is just pure bullshit. If Richmond had to chose its first picked player to play in any of those games, it would have been Dusty. If the opponent had to choose 1 Richmond player to miss any of those games it would have been Dusty. Your statement has no more validity than someone saying Hawthorn lifted in Leigh Matthews' career and brought him along for the ride.

Dusty spent a lot of his time in crowded forward lines ahead of the ball in those big finals. When he was fit, and Richmond played well, he nailed them 3 priceless flags with unmatched finals performances. This happened 10 times and Dusty was BOG or near BOG in 9 of those. Nobody else has done that. In his other 6 finals where Richmond lost, he had reasonable alibis in 3 of them where he played as well as his fitness, preparation or inexperience might lead us to expect. It leaves 3 other losing finals he did not dominate. But even in those he amassed an average of about 24 disposals, and 1 goal + assist. In other words, higher than Scott Pendlebury's average finals output.

That puts into perspective just how ludicrous your post is.

Haha. I mean I get in your mind Dusty lifted and single handedly won the tigers the flag.

But this just isn’t the case. Team performance is about all 22-23 players performing together against the other 22-23 players. It’s about the teamwork, synergy and effort those players put in.

The facts are the tigers won most games very comfortably and the out of all the games that were close or the tigers lost Martin only really performed in 1 (could make it 2 at a stretch if you consider the 2020 GF close)

It’s definitely easier to play well when your teams on top. Martin has certainly proved that. A lot of it was the case of right place right time. A very, very good player playing in a team that’s comfortably the best at the time while having a game plan that allows him to roam free.

None of this brings him into any GOAT discussions though, which is what this thread is about. As much as you try to derail it.

 

[Judd2Sewell]

Since the turn of the century I'd say he's in the top three, behind GAJ and Buddy.

Within that same period, if there was a big final to be played he'd probably be the first picked. His finals record is ridiculous. IMO Dusty and Hodge were two amazing big finals performers, particularly in Grand Finals. I don't think I'd pick anyone else over those two.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Since the turn of the century I'd say he's in the top three, behind GAJ and Buddy.

Within that same period, if there was a big final to be played he'd probably be the first picked. His finals record is ridiculous. IMO Dusty and Hodge were two amazing big finals performers, particularly in Grand Finals. I don't think I'd pick anyone else over those two.

They actually played on each other at times during one final, the 2019 Qualifying Final. Unfortunately Hodge was 35 years old and well past the peak of his powers and Dusty was right in his prime. We all know Dusty was parked forward where he kicked 6 straight and had a goal assist from 14 disposals, 13 of which were contested. I recall from the match and have been reminded by some highlights Dusty pulled off some key plays on Hodge and had the better of him, as we might expect given their age difference at the time. But Hodge played a more than respectable game. He had 27 disposals, 10 of which were contested, was the 7th highest rated player on the ground with a very tidy 15.4 rating, took 2 contested marks and had 4 score involvements. It was Hodge's second last game and relative to his age, probably his last great finals performance. It was just interesting the two intersected in this one finals game and if you apply reasonable expectations to the 35yo Hodge, both played outstandingly well.

 

[Noidnadroj]

Someone's been caught lying again.

Throughout Richmond's 2017-2020 dynasty Martin played in 12 finals.

The coaches nominated him outright BOG in the 2017 QF, 2019 GF, 2020 SF, 2020 PF and 2020 GF. 5 times out of 12 games. 3 in the COVID affected season that sadly people care less about. Slightly less than once per finals series until the big 2020 campaign.

In the 2017 PF he shared the honours with Rioli.

In the 2017 GF the coaches rated Houli higher.

In the 2018 QF the coaches rated Grimes higher.

In the losing 2018 PF he received no votes.

In the 2019 QF he shared the honours with Edwards.

In the 2019 PF he received no votes while Prestia and Lunch effectively secured the premiership in the only game of jeapordy.

In the losing 2020 QF he was a non factor.

In Richmond's last chance to extend the dynasty in 2022, a losing EF, he received no votes. Much like the pre dynasty finals performances in 3 consecutive seasons.

It was still a strong collection of finals, but your exaggerations as usual are eye roll inducing.

The only real games of serious jeapordy where it could be argued he was a critical factor were the last two games of 2020. Which makes that the best finals series he had. But plenty of champions over the years have been the crucial difference in some close finals. And plenty more performed much stronger when their side weren't dominant or even victorious.

In 27 x H&A wins to secure top-4 in 2017/19/20 he got 51 Brownlow votes and 159 coaches votes. So fair to say without Martin top-4 was a pipe dream. In 9 x finals win to secure flags he got 72 x coaches votes.

So 231 coaches votes in 36 wins to secure top-4 and then win flags in three separate seasons. It’s absurd.

In regards to BOG’s, if Martin gets 8 and Grimes gets 9 from the coaches, but every radio station and media outlet gives Martin BOG, then it’s hardly a great exaggeration to say he was adjudged BOG. Let’s just say from now on he got 72 coaches votes in 9 winning finals in the flag years. As you’d say ‘a strong collection of finals’….. maybe see who the next highest vote getter is from their very best 9 x final set to see how ‘strong’ it is …. ?!??


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Haha. I mean I get in your mind Dusty lifted and single handedly won the tigers the flag.

But this just isn’t the case. Team performance is about all 22-23 players performing together against the other 22-23 players. It’s about the teamwork, synergy and effort those players put in.

The facts are the tigers won most games very comfortably and the out of all the games that were close or the tigers lost Martin only really performed in 1 (could make it 2 at a stretch if you consider the 2020 GF close)

It’s definitely easier to play well when your teams on top. Martin has certainly proved that. A lot of it was the case of right place right time. A very, very good player playing in a team that’s comfortably the best at the time while having a game plan that allows him to roam free.

None of this brings him into any GOAT discussions though, which is what this thread is about. As much as you try to derail it.

You are saying nothing.

All players rely heavily on their team-mates to achieve great team results in this sport. What we are really discussing is the degree to which a single player influences the team's performance as measured by the scoreboard. In key games and finals, no player with his playing deeds has had a greater influence on his team's finals fortunes than Dustin Martin did in that 2017-2020 period. The one important final in that period that Richmond lost was also the only time they radically under-performed to betting market expectations in their 12 finals over those 4 years. Dustin Martin played with a well known leg injury in that match and was clearly nowhere near his brilliant best for once.

2017-20

Dusty at his best: Richmond 10 finals victories, including 7 wins in must-win finals, in only 1 of these was Dusty not near BOG.

Dusty well below his best due to injury: Richmond enter the game about a 3 goal favourite and are beaten by 39 points in a must-win final, the only one of these the club lost in this period.

Dusty decent but not as highly influential as normal: Richmond are defeated by Brisbane by 15 points after starting a very slight favourite in the 2020 QF, and Richmond defeat Geelong by 19 points in the 2019 PF.

You seem to have it the wrong way around. But you have introduced a new concept. We all know some under-performing players get carried to Premierships by their teams. But you have bestowed upon us this new knowledge where a player can be carried to 3 Premierships by his team despite him being BOG or near BOG in 8 of the 9 finals his team had to win to secure those Premierships. Novel.

 

[H00t]

You are saying nothing.

All players rely heavily on their team-mates to achieve great team results in this sport. What we are really discussing is the degree to which a single player influences the team's performance as measured by the scoreboard. In key games and finals, no player with his playing deeds has had a greater influence on his team's finals fortunes than Dustin Martin did in that 2017-2020 period. The one important final in that period that Richmond lost was also the only time they radically under-performed to betting market expectations in their 12 finals over those 4 years. Dustin Martin played with a well known leg injury in that match and was clearly nowhere near his brilliant best for once.

2017-20

Dusty at his best: Richmond 10 finals victories, including 7 wins in must-win finals, in only 1 of these was Dusty not near BOG.

Dusty well below his best due to injury: Richmond enter the game about a 3 goal favourite and are beaten by 39 points in a must-win final, the only one of these the club lost in this period.

Dusty decent but not as highly influential as normal: Richmond are defeated by Brisbane by 15 points after starting a very slight favourite in the 2020 QF, and Richmond defeat Geelong by 19 points in the 2019 PF.

You seem to have it the wrong way around. But you have introduced a new concept. We all know some under-performing players get carried to Premierships by their teams. But you have bestowed upon us this new knowledge where a player can be carried to 3 Premierships by his team despite him being BOG or near BOG in 8 of the 9 finals his team had to win to secure those Premierships. Novel.

Players don’t win flags teams do. It’s the team playing well that enabled Martin to do what he did.

When the tigers played well it enabled Martin to shine. When the tigers played poorly Martin suffered. Not the other way around.

Lance Franklin in his first final had more say on his teams fortunes than any final Dusty had.

That’s not to say Dusty didn’t play well in finals, he did. You’ve just added so much mayo to it.

None of this gets to the real point though. There have been much better players than Dusty over the course of the last 150 years of football.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Players don’t win flags teams do. It’s the team playing well that enabled Martin to do what he did.

When the tigers played well it enabled Martin to shine. When the tigers played poorly Martin suffered. Not the other way around.

Lance Franklin in his first final had more say on his teams fortunes than any final Dusty had.

That’s not to say Dusty didn’t play well in finals, he did. You’ve just added so much mayo to it.

None of this gets to the real point though. There have been much better players than Dusty over the course of the last 150 years of football.

Teams are made up of players last I checked.

You don't need to add any mayo to Dustin Martin's finals record to revel how good it is, nor how influential it was. Aside from everything else, in Premiership seasons, in the matches the team needed to win to win a flag, Dusty has the highest relative(to overall goals scored in the matches) average finals scoreboard impact of any Premiership player this century - higher than Franklin, and by a distance. In fact Dusty's figure is outright much higher than Franklin's. And the difference was Dusty was playing mainly on the ball and about 35% forward when he did it.

But if you do want me to mix in some spices:

Dusty 3 Grand Finals 10 goals v opposition TEAMS 18 goals combined. Dusty loses an average GF by 2.66 goals to the whole opposition team while playing mainly midfield. As far as I know this is the lowest average amount any player in history has ever been outscored by when compared to the opposition TEAMS he played against in multiple Grand Finals.

Franklin 6 Grand Finals kicked 11 goals v opposition teams 87 goals combined. Franklin loses a Grand Final to the opposition TEAM on average by almost 13 goals.

I guess Franklin's team-mates mustn't have been as good, or as good to him, or something.

Franklin last seen racing out to get a copy Dusty's book:

How to Kick More Goals Per Grand Final From the Midfield Than a Goal Kicking Specialist Legend Who Had More Influence in his First Final than The GOAT.

 

[juss]

Is any particular player the GOAT?
A simple flow chart

Is the player Leigh Matthews?

• If yes, then he is the GOAT.
• If no, then he isn't.

Flow chart complete.

No way I want to see if Bigfooty can drag this out to 300 pages now

 

[Noidnadroj]

Players don’t win flags teams do. It’s the team playing well that enabled Martin to do what he did.

When the tigers played well it enabled Martin to shine. When the tigers played poorly Martin suffered. Not the other way around.

Lance Franklin in his first final had more say on his teams fortunes than any final Dusty had.

That’s not to say Dusty didn’t play well in finals, he did. You’ve just added so much mayo to it.

None of this gets to the real point though. There have been much better players than Dusty over the course of the last 150 years of football.

So … let me understand …When the Tigers played well it enabled Martin to shine. He got 231 coaches votes in 36 wins to secure top-4 and flags. Next best vote getters for Richmond were Cotchin and Prestia around 65.

He got 51 Brownlow votes in the 27 x H&A wins. Next best Tigers were Cotchin (10) and Prestia (8).

Coaches votes:
Martin 231
Cotchin 65
Prestia 65

Brownlow votes:
Martin 51
Cotchin 10
Prestia 8

Lucky he piggy backed off his teammates … about 36 times ….


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Mr Meow]

Yep. But what was the lie?

Most tenuous gotcha moment in the history of this website. What a ******* imbecile.

I mean for starters you said he was BOG or close for all but one game in the 3 premierships. Twice he didn't receive any votes. I'm just trying to figure out which of those games he was just about BOG in. Slicing out 2018 or indeed 2022 which was still practically the same side is as stupid as if I tried to exclude 2008 and 2010 for Bartel's finals or something.

You also said he averaged 24 disposals, 1 goal and 1 assist in losing finals he "didn't have an excuse for". This is a truly pathetic attempt at a save-face. He averages 20 disposals, 0.3 goals and 0.8 goal assists in losing finals. As an ultra attacking midfielder who rotates or sits forward plenty too. 4.3 disposals and 0.8 goals down on his career average.

5 out of 16 finals in Martin's career he was outright BOG. So on average just over once every two finals series he played in, mostly down to a stacked 2020. Twice he was close as he shared the honours with a teammate. Two more times he was in the votes and 7 times he wasn't in the best 8 players on the ground.

It's not a flawless record. He caught fire when Richmond did and did nothing of note in the other finals series except one good showing Vs mighty Hawthorn in 2018.

 

[Noidnadroj]

I mean for starters you said he was BOG or close for all but one game in the 3 premierships. Twice he didn't receive any votes. I'm just trying to figure out which of those games he was just about BOG in. Slicing out 2018 or indeed 2022 which was still practically the same side is as stupid as if I tried to exclude 2008 and 2010 for Bartel's finals or something.

You also said he averaged 24 disposals, 1 goal and 1 assist in losing finals he "didn't have an excuse for". This is a truly pathetic attempt at a save-face. He averages 20 disposals, 0.3 goals and 0.8 goal assists in losing finals. As an ultra attacking midfielder who rotates or sits forward plenty too. 4.3 disposals and 0.8 goals down on his career average.

5 out of 16 finals in Martin's career he was outright BOG. So on average just over once every two finals series he played in, mostly down to a stacked 2020. Twice he was close as he shared the honours with a teammate. Two more times he was in the votes and 7 times he wasn't in the best 8 players on the ground.

It's not a flawless record. He caught fire when Richmond did and did nothing of note in the other finals series except one good showing Vs mighty Hawthorn in 2018.

Obviously Ayres award votes have only been going since 2016, and here is some interesting data for average coaches votes per final since 2016:

Martin : 6.08 (13 finals)
Petracca: 2.70 (10)
Danger: 2.42 (19)
Sidey: 2.42 (12)
Bont: 2.36 (11)
DeGoey: 2.00 (14)
Selwood: 1.37 (19)
Pendles: 1.36 (14)

Of course Pendles, Selwood etc…would’ve gotten votes had the award existed 14-years ago …. but if we just look at Martin’s finals exploits compared to others who’ve been playing plenty of finals in the last 8-seasons since the award existed, it’s hard to comprehend the gap. And then ask why nobody else has been able to replicate anything even remotely similar in the same era against the same opposition…??


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Caligo]

Obviously Ayres award votes have only been going since 2016, and here is some interesting data for average coaches votes per final since 2016:

Martin : 6.08 (13 finals)
Petracca: 2.70 (10)
Danger: 2.42 (19)
Sidey: 2.42 (12)
Bont: 2.36 (11)
DeGoey: 2.00 (14)
Selwood: 1.37 (19)
Pendles: 1.36 (14)

Of course Pendles, Selwood etc…would’ve gotten votes had the award existed 14-years ago …. but if we just look at Martin’s finals exploits compared to others who’ve been playing plenty of finals in the last 8-seasons since the award existed, it’s hard to comprehend the gap. And then ask why nobody else has been able to replicate anything even remotely similar in the same era against the same opposition…??


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Martin sure benefits from losing a whole bunch of bad finals due to starting it in 2016.

The main argument for Martin though is still the number of elite goals/disposals seasons yeah? Remind me how many 20 disposal 2 goal a game seasons Dusty has had, and how many Lethal has had.

 

[Noidnadroj]

Martin sure benefits from losing a whole bunch of bad finals due to starting it in 2016.

The main argument for Martin though is still the number of elite goals/disposals seasons yeah? Remind me how many 20 disposal 2 goal a game seasons Dusty has had, and how many Lethal has had.

Here are the averages if you include ALL of Martin’s finals:

Martin : 4.94 (16 finals)
Petracca: 2.70 (10)
Danger: 2.42 (19)
Sidey: 2.42 (12)
Bont: 2.36 (11)
DeGoey: 2.00 (14)
Selwood: 1.37 (19)
Pendles: 1.36 (14)



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Caligo]

Here are the averages if you include ALL of Martin’s finals:

Martin : 4.94 (16 finals)
Petracca: 2.70 (10)
Danger: 2.42 (19)
Sidey: 2.42 (12)
Bont: 2.36 (11)
DeGoey: 2.00 (14)
Selwood: 1.37 (19)
Pendles: 1.36 (14)



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

You didn't say how many seasons he averaged 2 goals/20 disposals. It must be a lot for him to be GOAT. At least a dozen like Lethal right?

 

[My Tilly]

rofl, why even mention Martin in the same breath as Matthews for?
I mean come on, it's silly hour right now.