Carey or Ablett

[Cleansweep17]

You have NFI the more you post bagging Ablett SR the sillier you look. The bloke was a freak. Who would rather be out hunting or fishing than playing footy. Do yourself a favor and have a look at his goal-scoring stats once he became a permanent forward.
One day you will look back in old age and think was I really that stupid. Lots of us do. they don't say with age comes wisdom for nothing.

That doesn’t affect his % ability to convert you fool.

 

[caveman72]

Yep it is, he’s inefficient when you get it to him like the 94 and 95 GFs. GAS is lucky you can’t find Contested Marking and Contested Possessions stats. I’d have a feeling Carey would’ve flogged him again in those.

Who would win in a marking contest 185 cm GAS who cbf training or 192 cm Carey who was an utter specimen? I think the answer is pretty obvious who is the better player and we can end thread now. Carey was essentially better in every way apart from looking cool.

I'd back Gazza to outmark Carey more often than not. I would also rather be hit going for the by Carey than Ablett he hit to hurt and quite often he did was like being hit by a freight train and the majority of times was well within the laws of the game. Carey was good but so were a few other key position players at the time

 

[PhatBoy]

That doesn’t affect his % ability to convert you fool.

His percentage ability to convert doesn’t affect his overall output if he’s kicking more goals than everyone else either you fool.

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

Oh Falcon, this stuff is priceless. Keep it coming.

 

[Cleansweep17]

So?
Why is he lucky?

Do you get points for being a specimen?

Christ any team who drafted you would win 15 premierships on the bounce I’m guessing

Because we could then definitively prove that Carey was a better contested marker ending the debate of who is a better forward.

When one forward is a more accurate kick and also wins the ball more there is no more doubt of who is better.

Carey was a proven better kick and mostly likely the better contested mark, so the clear winner of this thread is Carey.

 

[caveman72]

That doesn’t affect his % ability to convert you fool.

No need for name-calling. Just have a look at his conversion rate once he was a permanent forward. You get fewer opportunities playing further up the ground.

 

[PhatBoy]

Because we could then definitively prove that Carey was a better contested marker ending the debate of who is a better forward.

When one forward is a more accurate kick and also wins the ball more there is no more doubt of who is better.

Carey was a proven better kick and mostly likely the better contested mark, so the clear winner of this thread is Carey.

Why would that prove he’s the better forward

 

[caveman72]

Oh Falcon, this stuff is priceless. Keep it coming.

At times it would be easier reasoning with a 2 yr old fighting to stay awake well past their bedtime

 

[PhatBoy]

Tom Hawkins

26

Tom Hawkins

Age

36

Ht

197cm

Wt

105kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.2

3star

K

7.9

3star

HB

4.4

3star

M

5.5

5star

T

1.9

4star

G

2.1

5star

D

12.7

3star

K

8.6

3star

HB

4.1

3star

M

5.1

5star

T

2.1

3star

G

1.6

5star

D

7.8

2star

K

5.6

3star

HB

2.2

2star

M

4.2

4star

T

1.0

3star

G

2.2

5star

is a better contested mark and a more accurate kick than Lance franklin, AND he can ruck.

Ergo, Tom Hawkins

26

Tom Hawkins

Age

36

Ht

197cm

Wt

105kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.2

3star

K

7.9

3star

HB

4.4

3star

M

5.5

5star

T

1.9

4star

G

2.1

5star

D

12.7

3star

K

8.6

3star

HB

4.1

3star

M

5.1

5star

T

2.1

3star

G

1.6

5star

D

7.8

2star

K

5.6

3star

HB

2.2

2star

M

4.2

4star

T

1.0

3star

G

2.2

5star

is the better forward out of he and Lance Franklin.

Glad we have that sorted.

 

[Cleansweep17]

Why would that prove he’s the better forward

Um because he wins the balls more and kicks it more efficiently. Wtf else do you want?

 

[PhatBoy]

Um because he wins the balls more and kicks it more efficiently. Wtf else do you want?

That’s all players do, is it?

So Hawkins >> Franklin, yeah?

 

[Cleansweep17]

No need for name-calling. Just have a look at his conversion rate once he was a permanent forward. You get fewer opportunities playing further up the ground.

Carey was a CHF so yeah that’s actually worse for GAS. Thank you.

 

[Cleansweep17]

Tom Hawkins

26

Tom Hawkins

Age

36

Ht

197cm

Wt

105kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.2

3star

K

7.9

3star

HB

4.4

3star

M

5.5

5star

T

1.9

4star

G

2.1

5star

D

12.7

3star

K

8.6

3star

HB

4.1

3star

M

5.1

5star

T

2.1

3star

G

1.6

5star

D

7.8

2star

K

5.6

3star

HB

2.2

2star

M

4.2

4star

T

1.0

3star

G

2.2

5star

is a better contested mark and a more accurate kick than Lance franklin, AND he can ruck.

Ergo, Tom Hawkins

26

Tom Hawkins

Age

36

Ht

197cm

Wt

105kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.2

3star

K

7.9

3star

HB

4.4

3star

M

5.5

5star

T

1.9

4star

G

2.1

5star

D

12.7

3star

K

8.6

3star

HB

4.1

3star

M

5.1

5star

T

2.1

3star

G

1.6

5star

D

7.8

2star

K

5.6

3star

HB

2.2

2star

M

4.2

4star

T

1.0

3star

G

2.2

5star

is the better forward out of he and Lance Franklin.

Glad we have that sorted.

Wow, talk about not knowing where Buddy played during his career it wasn’t purely FF.

 

[PhatBoy]

Wow, talk about not knowing where Buddy played during his career it wasn’t purely FF.

Wow, talk about not knowing where Gary Ablett Sr played during his career it wasn’t purely FF

 

[Cleansweep17]

That’s all players do, is it?

So Hawkins >> Franklin, yeah?

Buddy played CHF

 

[PhatBoy]

We can pretty much establish that any of the modern big bodied key forwards were better forwards Buddy.

Nick. Matt. Browny. All better contested marks. All better kicks as far as I know.

These are the rules as set out by our overlord.

 

[PhatBoy]

Buddy played CHF

Oh did he. Then he should be a better contested mark than he was shouldn’t he.

Hawkins >>> Buddy.

 

[Cleansweep17]

Oh did he. Then he should be a better contested mark than he was shouldn’t he.

Hawkins >>> Buddy.

Nope that was his weakness but he has a better kick which is why he’s better.

 

[Cleansweep17]

We can pretty much establish that any of the modern big bodied key forwards were better forwards Buddy.

Nick. Matt. Browny. All better contested marks. All better kicks as far as I know.

These are the rules as set out by our overlord.

Can I ask you a serious question? How do you think goals are scored? Does winning the ball and being a more accurate kick effect it?

 

[PhatBoy]

Nope that was his weakness but he has a better kick which is why he’s better.

Oh ok so 59 per cent is now a higher number than 63 per cent.

So now, in the knowledge that Franklin’s lower kicking percentage is actually a HIGHER kicking percentage, and his lower amount of contested marks is also - presumably - a higher amount also, what is your new logic?

Is lower the new higher?

 

[PhatBoy]

Can I ask you a serious question? How do you think goals are scored? Does winning the ball and being a more accurate kick effect it?

Who the f*** cares.

Do you get extra points for getting it from a contested mark as opposed to an uncontested one?

If someone kicks 6.6 from uncontested marks, is it worth less than someone who’s kicked 6.0 from 6 contested marks? What f**king difference does it make?

One player might be as slow as shit so he has to compete with 5 opponents hanging off him for every touch he gets. The other might be so quick off the mark that no c**t can keep up with him and he barely has to compete for a single touch.

Who the f**k cares

 

[Cleansweep17]

Oh ok so 59 per cent is now a higher number than 63 per cent.

So now, in the knowledge that Franklin’s lower kicking percentage is actually a HIGHER kicking percentage, and his lower amount of contested marks is also - presumably - a higher amount also, what is your new logic?

Is lower the new higher?

The 3 factors for goal scoring is

1. The forward winning the ball

2. The forward kicking the ball

3. The number of entries to the forward.

Forwards do not have control over factor 3 so we can only judge them on factor 1 and 2.

Carey is better at both so he wins. Sorry bud that’s reality.

 

[PhatBoy]

The 3 factors for goal scoring is

1. The forward winning the ball

2. The forward kicking the ball

3. The number of entries to the forward.

Forwards do not have control over factor 3 so we can only judge them on factor 1 and 2.

Carey is better at both so he wins. Sorry bud that’s reality.

lol. So the forward getting to a position to receive the ball doesn’t count. Right.

At the end of each game, the scorers, and league officials get together, and they deduct all points scored, that DIDNT come from forwards getting the ball in a contested scenario, and they say ‘those points don’t count, now let’s see who won the game.’

Thank you for clearing that up.


I’m also very curious to know what they do about goals that were scored relative to behinds kicked.

Do the match officials remove goals scored because the kicker also kicked some behinds?

So if someone kicked 4.5 does their tally then just get nullified to being 0.1 for the match?

And lastly, just for my personal interest to be satisfied.

On a statistical database, is there somewhere I can find how much oxygen you were deprived of in your infancy?

 

[caveman72]

The 3 factors for goal scoring is

1. The forward winning the ball

2. The forward kicking the ball

3. The number of entries to the forward.

Forwards do not have control over factor 3 so we can only judge them on factor 1 and 2.

Carey is better at both so he wins. Sorry bud that’s reality.

I call Bull on factor 3. You are implying that no forward players create forward entries which is a load of bulldust. plus on 1 sometimes the forward doesn't win the ball but by a stroke of luck the ball comes off his foot and goes through for a goal. If you need an example of this have a look at Thursday nights game. You have 2 out of 3 wrong. Keep up the good work you are keeping us amused.

 

[Romeoh1]

I like your honesty and that’s a fair enough opinion. But it just highlights what I was saying earlier that people rate Ablett highly due to his “flashiness” rather than substance.

And again it’s a memory/nostalgia thing, you quoted “brilliant skills” it’s a very generic term than you used and completely overlooks his goal kicking accuracy which is one of the most important measures of a FF and statistically his accuracy sucked.

It wasn’t being ‘flashy’- it was being exciting and very skilful. Compelling viewing. Full of substance. I had no issues with his ‘accuracy’- and again-if you are just reliant on reading stats, you aren’t getting it. Footy skills are so much more than that.