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

[RUNVS]

Except the AA selectors are clueless flogs who get it wrong every single year.

They do get it wrong sometimes, but overall they are far more accurate than the umpires deciding the Brownlow and even the coaches deciding the coaches award or whatever it is called.

The All Australian is the best award when it comes to accuracy, selecting players who are not midfielders and also determining who are the best players for said positions in a given season. Yes there are mistakes, and they try and push too many midfielders into the side, but it is the award I trust the most given it is basically the only subjective award that isn't just a midfielders award.

 

[Mr Meow]

Just to be really clear here, you are saying Dusty was not only THE DIFFERENCE between winning & losing a PF & GF but was also clearly and unanymously BOG by every conceivable measure in both of those games. Can you find anyone else in history that can even come close to matching that?

You are writing it like yeah whatever, every good player does this.

But let's just have a look at the other 5 where Dusty was clear BOG.

2017 GF Richmond leads by 9 points at HT. What happens if Dusty does a Danger & turns it up in the second half? Crows had smashed Richmond h & a.

2017 QF Richmond leads by 9 at HT, 13 at 3/4 time. The game still had to be won. What happens if Dusty does a Danger and turns it up after HT? Cats had beaten Richmond just a few weeks earlier.

2020 SF Tigers comfortably ahead all night but game still not dead 3/4 time(23 pt lead.) Saints had beaten Tigers well in h&a.

2019 QF Tigers 11 points up 1/2 time before Dusty put Lions to the sword with great goals Q3. Lions 8.17 v Tigers 18.4. What happens if you put Dusty on the Lions team kicking 6 amazing goals without a miss, and say Zorko 0.3 on Richmond's team? 12.7 v 14.13 Lions way, very comfortable margin for the Lions.

2019 GF Agreed, Tigers could have replaced Dusty with K McIntosh and still won.

It is a pretty stupid line of argument regardless, because the players are all on notice to bring their best in these games, and nobody did that better than Dusty. However, it is clear from the above, that it is spurious at best to assume all these games would be won without Dusty's presence.

I'm saying that Dusty's 2020 PF/GF were exceptional, different making games when Richmond were in jeopardy. If he was injured in the first minute of the prelim OR the grand final, you could argue Richmond don't get that third flag.

I'm also in no way discrediting the impact Martin had in the tail end of each 3 premiership seasons, his hot streaks were a huge factor in Richmond finding their mojo each time and flexing when it mattered.

But it remains silly to overstate just how important Martin was in the results of any winning Richmond final 2017-2019. The team mauled their opponents, ones who proved ill equipped to handle Richmond. You seem to think the only difference was Martin. It simply isn't true.

 

[Mr Meow]

Surely you have to admit it is easier to perform if your team is smashing the opposition.

Exactly - and we only need to look at some other tough Richmond finals where they weren't dominant to see how true that was - 2013 EF, 2014 EF, 2015 EF, 2018 PF and 2022 EF. There isn't a single noteworthy Martin performance in any of those. So his finals record, while still brilliant, wasn't perfect. Richmond just didn't play many finals outside of 2017-2020 to test that further. It is certainly interesting to imagine how he might've performed if he played 12 finals in his 30s, or 10 before he was 26. Richmond being terrible during those phases means we only have limited data, but it is still data that tells us something.

 

[Mr Meow]

They do get it wrong sometimes, but overall they are far more accurate than the umpires deciding the Brownlow and even the coaches deciding the coaches award or whatever it is called.

The All Australian is the best award when it comes to accuracy, selecting players who are not midfielders and also determining who are the best players for said positions in a given season. Yes there are mistakes, and they try and push too many midfielders into the side, but it is the award I trust the most given it is basically the only subjective award that isn't just a midfielders award.

Exactly and for midfielders there are pretty much 8-9 spots each year. That is a lot of opportunity to be included in the team of the year.

It can be a harsh award when looking at the roles that receive very few spots - ruckmen, KPFs, KPDs and small forwards/defenders. For midfielders, it is one of the best awards there is for assessing elite consistency across a season and to not be in the top 8 brings question marks. Fyfe and Martin both were outrageously dominant when playing their best games, but did not have the "across a whole season excellence" as many times as some others mentioned. And their AA tallies do reflect that accurately.

 

[Mr Meow]

Over looking the Coleman medal winner for the equal second placers is about as glaring an oversight and it is an issue.
Not to mention the selection of team is never with the thought of actually competing that’s why there’s so many inside Mids and rarely defenders selected to play on small fwds.

You’ll never convince me what you’ve come up with determines the best players.
It’s talent that wins games.

Rory Sloane…geez

You're still not dealing with the real issue. DEAN COX WAS A FORWARD POCKET. Hawkins and Riewoldt both deserved to be in. Like I said, you get unlucky key forwards or defenders because of limited spots. Attacking midfielders in theory have 10 spots they could fill in for each year, because they are put in the forward line, wing and bench spots as well. If you're not in those 8-10 midfielder spots, you were not as consistent as those who were. Your best may have been better, but we are measuring the distribution of the full 22-23 games. Not deciding who had the best 8 games that season.

 

[nineteen eighty]

Chris Judd six times AA in 14 seasons for 42% also. Five times B&F at 36%. It’s clear who the truly elite players were this century.

I'm surprised Judd was only a 6x AA. Very surprising. I had him winning at least a couple more. Was he robbed of any?

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Surely you have to admit it is easier to perform if your team is smashing the opposition.

And easier for your team to smash the opposition when you perform the way Dusty did.

Let me get this straight, you are seeking to exclude or downplay Dusty's performances where he caused the team to smash the opposition because they won by too much?

But:

• B & F's(Dusty finished top three 9 times & was his team's leading Coaches vote poller 8 times)
• finals where Dusty wasn't fit(2 we know of, leaving just 5 where he was fit & wasn't in the best 2 OG)
• AA selections(Dusty had 4 & could as easily have had 6-7-8-9 but couldn't possibly have had less than 4)
• and finals where Richmond got smashed( v Port 2014 Dusty 29 touches, 9 score involvements, 9 contested possessions, 3 clearances, 20 pressure acts, and 403 metres gained)...

they have no nuance at all - they all count fully against Dusty, but not against any of his rivals?

Seems pretty shallow to me Run my man.

 

[Cdog71]

You're still not dealing with the real issue. DEAN COX WAS A FORWARD POCKET.

No
Selecting other forwards ahead of the Coleman medalist is the issue.

Doesn’t matter which you slant it, that’s what happened.

 

[Mr Meow]

I'm surprised Judd was only a 6x AA. Very surprising. I had him winning at least a couple more. Was he robbed of any?

2007 (last year at WCE) and 2008 (first year at Carlton) he was thereabouts but working through injury related consistency issues relative to his very best seasons. 59 and 65 coaches votes those seasons, in an era where the tallies for the best players weren't as inflated.

2004-2006 West Coast and 2009-2011 Carlton he was outrageously good.

 

[nineteen eighty]

Said it before but here goes again...

Dusty for mine is the GOAT finals player. Happily discuss that point ad nauseum.

He is no where neat GOAT across H&A and finals. He had the potential and his one season where he was magnificent is proof of that. But he simply didn't do it at that GOAT level for long enough.

Leigh Mathews for mine is easily the GOAT. Easily!!!

But those finals he played for us including the GF's...MAGNIFICENT!!!!

 

[Mr Meow]

And easier for your team to smash the opposition when you perform the way Dusty did.

Let me get this straight, you are seeking to exclude or downplay Dusty's performances where he caused the team to smash the opposition because they won by too much?

But:

• B & F's(Dusty finished top three 9 times & was his team's leading Coaches vote poller 8 times)
• finals where Dusty wasn't fit(2 we know of, leaving just 5 where he was fit & wasn't in the best 2 OG)
• AA selections(Dusty had 4 & could as easily have had 6-7-8-9 but couldn't possibly have had less than 4)
• and finals where Richmond got smashed( v Port 2014 Dusty 29 touches, 9 score involvements, 9 contested possessions, 3 clearances, 20 pressure acts, and 403 metres gained)...

they have no nuance at all - they all count fully against Dusty, but not against any of his rivals?

Seems pretty shallow to me Run my man.

Except he didn't just "make the rest of his team mates dominate the opposition". You once again undersell how good they were and how immaculate Hardwick's game plan/personnel combination was for finals. You seem to think he just blindly let Dusty carry a bunch of scrubbers to a flag, and that was the gameplan.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

I'm saying that Dusty's 2020 PF/GF were exceptional, different making games when Richmond were in jeopardy. If he was injured in the first minute of the prelim OR the grand final, you could argue Richmond don't get that third flag.

I'm also in no way discrediting the impact Martin had in the tail end of each 3 premiership seasons, his hot streaks were a huge factor in Richmond finding their mojo each time and flexing when it mattered.

But it remains silly to overstate just how important Martin was in the results of any winning Richmond final 2017-2019. The team mauled their opponents, ones who proved ill equipped to handle Richmond. You seem to think the only difference was Martin. It simply isn't true.

Just to go back to my earlier question, so we can understand the magnitude of what Dusty did in those two crucial finals...

Can you think of any other player in history who has been both the main difference between winning and losing AND been clear BOG from every conceivable source in not one but two finals? (and Preliminary & Grand Finals no less in Dusty's case, so games do not get any bigger.)

Before you brush it off as a mere bagatelle, who else has done that? Like, ever.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Except he didn't just "make the rest of his team mates dominate the opposition". You once again undersell how good they were and how immaculate Hardwick's game plan/personnel combination was for finals. You seem to think he just blindly let Dusty carry a bunch of scrubbers to a flag, and that was the gameplan.

Foolish post, I don't think anything of the sort. And neither would anyone have to think that to believe Dusty was by a distance the player most responsible for Richmond's scoreboard dominance in those finals.

 

[Mr Meow]

Just to go back to my earlier question, so we can understand the magnitude of what Dusty did in those two crucial finals...

Can you think of any other player in history who has been both the main difference between winning and losing AND been clear BOG from every conceivable source in not one but two finals? (and Preliminary & Grand Finals no less in Dusty's case, so games do not get any bigger.)

Before you brush it off as a mere bagatelle, who else has done that? Like, ever.

I understand why you're circling back to that point rather than addressing the rest. I've said probably 500 times in this thread that those two finals to wrap up 2020 were legendary, and arguably the games that have him in conversation for top 10 players this century (what a great double exclamation point to finish his 2016-2020 period).

What I don't do is get absolutely carried away with how crucial the other strong finals performances were to the result, I don't overrate the opposition in those and I don't discredit the 5 seasons where Dusty was very much not a strong/flawless finals performer. It is perfectly fine to say he had a dominant, memorable hot streak of finals, the MVP of the best side - that was not replicated in any big games where Richmond were less than dominant.

 

[Mr Meow]

Foolish post, I don't think anything of the sort. And neither would anyone have to think that to believe Dusty was by a distance the player most responsible for Richmond's scoreboard dominance in those finals.

The fact remains nobody will ever find a strong Martin final when he was aged 18-25 or when he was in his 30s. We will never find an elite consistent season outside of the period he was aged 25-29. We will only be able to locate one good season in his 30s, 2023 as a forward flanker - and even that season was wildly inconsistent (almost no coaches votes until the last 8 or 10 games of the season. A large cold patch and then a hot streak. Many of his seasons were like this).

The GOAT contenders were simply better for longer, dominant across whole seasons many times, had strong finals across their whole long careers (in all sorts of contexts) and have mountainous accolades tallies both at league-wide and club level.

This is absolutely in line with neutral opinion and any sort of data exercise that objectively measures the greats overall career contributions.

There is unsurprisingly a pocket of fanatical Richmond supporters who disagree. They will never convince the masses to side with them. Wanting something to confirm your beliefs doesn't make it true.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

I understand why you're circling back to that point rather than addressing the rest. I've said probably 500 times in this thread that those two finals to wrap up 2020 were legendary, and arguably the games that have him in conversation for top 10 players this century (what a great double exclamation point to finish his 2016-2020 period).

What I don't do is get absolutely carried away with how crucial the other strong finals performances were to the result, I don't overrate the opposition in those and I don't discredit the 5 seasons where Dusty was very much not a strong/flawless finals performer. It is perfectly fine to say he had a dominant, memorable hot streak of finals, the MVP of the best side - that was not replicated in any big games where Richmond were less than dominant.

So the fact Dusty has the 7th most Brownlow votes of all players to have played this century, at the 5th highest average per game of any retired player to have played this century, and none of the players ahead of him have spent anywhere near as big a % of their playing time parked forward as him, + 3 x NS + 3 x Ayres Medals + the best season anyone has played is not enough to put him in the conversation for the top 10 players players this century....

According to you he is only in that conversation because of yet another thing he has done that nobody else in history seems to have done....

ie Twice he was the difference and unanymous BOG in big finals.

Pretty amusing stuff by you.

 

[Mr Meow]

So the fact Dusty has the 7th most Brownlow votes of all players to have played this century, at the 5th highest average per game of any retired player to have played this century, and none of the players ahead of him have spent anywhere near as big a % of their playing time parked forward as him, + 3 x NS + 3 x Ayres Medals + the best season anyone has played is not enough to put him in the conversation for the top 10 players players this century....

According to you he is only in that conversation because of yet another thing he has done that nobody else in history seems to have done....

ie He was twice the difference and unanymous BOG in big finals.

Pretty amusing stuff by you.

Dusty is 8th and about to be overtaken by 3 of players in the Brownlow tally.

If a 21st century midfielder isn't in the top 10 by about 2027, has 4x AA and 2x B&F, it's a mark of a brilliant but not overwhelmingly consistent player relative to some others.

There is no other player in history that has such a gap in finals performances in premiership vs non premiership seasons. I can't even think of another player in this AFL era conversation who had no strong finals 18-25 or in their 30s.

There was only one season where Martin won any of the big 3 H&A season awards (2017). Players like Ablett and Judd had 4-5 different seasons doing that. These awards have existed a lot longer than Finals MVP and cover a lot more data points.

So then what are we left with, that can be definitely proven as a POD against other champion midfielders of the AFL era? Best grand final player. Okay, fair enough. We can go as far as saying "most damaging finals performer during an AFL dynasty". That and his otherwise very good career have him knocking around the top 10, or perhaps the top 5, players this century depending on what you emphasise. It certainly isn't enough to have you batting for #1. And that's what the neutrals agree on. Sorry.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Dusty is 8th and about to be overtaken by 3 of players in the Brownlow tally.

If a 21st century midfielder isn't in the top 10 by about 2027, has 4x AA and 2x B&F, it's a mark of a brilliant but not overwhelmingly consistent player relative to some others.

There is no other player in history that has such a gap in finals performances in premiership vs non premiership seasons. I can't even think of another player in this AFL era conversation who had no strong finals 18-25 or in their 30s.

There was only one season where Martin won any of the big 3 H&A season awards (2017). Players like Ablett and Judd had 4-5 different seasons doing that. These awards have existed a lot longer than Finals MVP and cover a lot more data points.

So then what are we left with, that can be definitely proven as a POD against other champion midfielders of the AFL era? Best grand final player. Okay, fair enough. We can go as far as saying "most damaging finals performer during an AFL dynasty". That and his otherwise very good career have him knocking around the top 10, or perhaps the top 5, players this century depending on what you emphasise. It certainly isn't enough to have you batting for #1. And that's what the neutrals agree on. Sorry.

That's a lot of bollocks to avoid having to admit your statement that Dusty is only in the conversation to be a top 10 player this century due to his last 2 matches of 2020.

It was a patently ludicrous statement about a player who has played the best season in history(as far as can be told) had elite performance in anything up to 12 seasons, been the best finals player by panels, the Best GF performer(in history) by miles, etc etc.

 

[doppleganger]

That just illustrates the point further how flawed your thinking is.

career
Representative team honours
International team honours
Career highlights
Years	Club	Games (Goals)
2009–2024	Adelaide	255 (136)
Years	Team	Games (Goals)
2020	Victoria	1 (0)
2017	Australia	2 (0)
Adelaide co-captain: 2019; captain: 2020–2022 All-Australian team: 2016 2× Malcolm Blight Medal: 2013, 2016 Robert Rose Award: 2017 Showdown Medal: 2017 (game 1) 22under22 team: 2012

Rory might be a good guy but to say he’s consistently better than Martin
you’ve lost all credibility.

I dont know why I bother.

Credibility LOL.

You do realise that it is another poster who spams the thread with player ratings stats as "evidence" of his greatness.

The same ratings detail that Dusty's overall career player rating average is lower than Rory Sloane (and a fair way behind the stars of recent era like GAJ, Pendles, Danger, Bont).

So yes, Dusty was the best finals player of the 2010s, but in terms of actual overall career impact is not at the level of the 2010s compatriots.

Dusty had a single outstanding season, 2017 where his rating was off the charts 20+, but apart from that wasn't a standout and in total only had 5 seasons where his player rating avg was above 14.

Sloane had 9 seasons where his player ratings was above 14.

So yes, according to player ratings Sloane was consistently better than Dusty, and Dusty just had a little spike.

 

[doppleganger]

And easier for your team to smash the opposition when you perform the way Dusty did.

Let me get this straight, you are seeking to exclude or downplay Dusty's performances where he caused the team to smash the opposition because they won by too much?

But:

• B & F's(Dusty finished top three 9 times & was his team's leading Coaches vote poller 8 times)

Pendles 14 top 3 BnF

• finals where Dusty wasn't fit(2 we know of, leaving just 5 where he was fit & wasn't in the best 2 OG)
• AA selections(Dusty had 4 & could as easily have had 6-7-8-9 but couldn't possibly have had less than 4)

LoL at possibly 9

Yeah if you think a season where he is outside top40 of player ratings makes him unlucky.

Pendles has 6AA and missed out in 15,16 and 17 despite being top6 for avg player ratings.

• and finals where Richmond got smashed( v Port 2014 Dusty 29 touches, 9 score involvements, 9 contested possessions, 3 clearances, 20 pressure acts, and 403 metres gained)...

they have no nuance at all - they all count fully against Dusty, but not against any of his rivals?

A player rating of 11, seven Tigers were better than him that day.

All pretty meh stuff compared to the real stars MR.

 

[Chronz]

Meow and Dopple obliterating poor old Meteoric Rise. Your biased and arbitrary statistical data gets blown apart by the full picture that is bought to light by these two. Very eye opening data at that.

 

[RUNVS]

Meow and Dopple obliterating poor old Meteoric Rise. Your biased and arbitrary statistical data gets blown apart by the full picture that is bought to light by these two. Very eye opening data at that.

Truth be told I don't even know where to find these player ratings, or how they are calculated.

 

[Chronz]

Truth be told I don't even know where to find these player ratings, or how they are calculated.

It's more to do that MR loves to skew statistical data, it's good to see him scrambling on the defensive for once, he's met his match and then some!

 

[JackOutback]

Said it before but here goes again...

Dusty for mine is the GOAT finals player. Happily discuss that point ad nauseum.

He is no where neat GOAT across H&A and finals. He had the potential and his one season where he was magnificent is proof of that. But he simply didn't do it at that GOAT level for long enough.

Leigh Mathews for mine is easily the GOAT. Easily!!!

But those finals he played for us including the GF's...MAGNIFICENT!!!!

Precisely*

I doN’t know why so many Richmond supporters want to die on this hill of all-time GOAT when you got to see the modern day finals GOAT deliver you three flags. That should bring you more than enough joy.

* There is an interesting discussion to be had between Martin, Matthews, Ayres and Bartlett re: finals GOAT as they all delivered before the introduction of these new awards.

 

[RUNVS]

Precisely*

I doN’t know why so many Richmond supporters want to die on this hill of all-time GOAT when you got to see the modern day finals GOAT deliver you three flags. That should bring you more than enough joy.

* There is an interesting discussion to be had between Martin, Matthews, Ayres and Bartlett re: finals GOAT as they all delivered before the introduction of these new awards.

Richmond fans are trying to fly too close to the sun. If they were arguing Martin was a top 5 player in the 21st century there is a strong argument there, or even the best finals player of the 21st century I could perhaps see an argument, but best player of all time is the hill they are trying to die on and it just won't work for them.