Opinion Elite Potential on our List

[Blind Turn]

I think he's elite in the champion data sense but not in the Hird, Lloyd, and Fletcher sense of regularly imposing their will on a game such that it so obviously changes the result.

Merrett is the only one there right now. Durham might have it in him. Caddy is the young player who has shown glimpses of this potential and is getting people outside of our fanbase really excited, which is probably the fairest way of assessing it.

Glad you mentioned Fletch. He was a champion and an elite performer. And this thread is aimed at finding players like him as well as your Hirds and Lloyds. But I’m going even higher than Fletch in my expectations. Will any on our list be a game-changing stars of the comp?

I crave it and I know most here do too. Not a great white hope like Courtney Johns, Gumby, or even Hurley to an extent. False dawns are too prevalent. I want to see someone emerging from the pack and putting their stamp on the comp. I worry that Caddy could be being built up for the same fall. A clear run on the injury front will be crucial when you consider that all 3 I mentioned above had injury issues.

 

[DERO]

Reid is a 205 centimetre key defender who kicks piss missiles.

Ridley is a 195 centimetre back flanker who runs a sub 3 second 20 metres and can out contested mark talls while jumping off two feet.

McGrath is an obscene athlete who can shut down literally everyone, and does, regularly.

That’s one line on the team sheet.

I won’t hear ‘there is no talent there’, I’m not copping that shit.

You had me at “piss missiles”

 

[Happyskeret]

Glad you mentioned Fletch. He was a champion and an elite performer. And this thread is aimed at finding players like him as well as your Hirds and Lloyds. But I’m going even higher than Fletch in my expectations. Will any on our list be a game-changing stars of the comp?

I crave it and I know most here do too. Not a great white hope like Courtney Johns, Gumby, or even Hurley to an extent. False dawns are too prevalent. I want to see someone emerging from the pack and putting their stamp on the comp. I worry that Caddy could be being built up for the same fall. A clear run on the injury front will be crucial when you consider that all 3 I mentioned above had injury issues.

That player you crave would be nice I’m not gonna lie. I still prefer just to have a good team if I had to choose.

I still remember how absorbed blues fans were when they acquired Judd. They boasted about him for years but in the end he didn’t do shit for them in regards to team success. Sure he won a Brownlow and had some impact but one man doesn’t make a team or guarantee team success. Blues fans were deluded by him.

Hird and Lloyd as good as they were, we’re surrounded by some decent players. Wanganeen, Fletcher and Mercuri come to mind. Same in the 80’s the elite players were backed up by a solid block of good players.

 

[I Remember Bluey]

You had me at “piss missiles”

Careful mate that gun he's holding looks cocked and loaded

 

[Nifft]

The thread title is 'elite potential on our list'.

There is absolutely ****ing shitloads of it but it's being wasted, misused, undervalued, malnourished and all the other adjectives you would use to describe orphans growing up in a refugee camp.

How would you rate these guys against Hird or Lloyd? I'm not sure that anyone on our list is in that category, but I'd be super happy to be proven wrong if some of them step up in the near future.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on whether Harley Reid would show his full potential with us, or whether he would get stifled by our player support systems? I personally think if you have a player of that caliber that they would shine through no matter what. And I think Zach Merrett proves that is the case.

 

[Blind Turn]

That player you crave would be nice I’m not gonna lie. I still prefer just to have a good team if I had to choose.

I still remember how absorbed blues fans were when they acquired Judd. They boasted about him for years but in the end he didn’t do shit for them in regards to team success. Sure he won a Brownlow and had some impact but one man doesn’t make a team or guarantee team success. Blues fans were deluded by him.

Hird and Lloyd as good as they were, we’re surrounded by some decent players. Wanganeen, Fletcher and Mercuri come to mind. Same in the 80’s the elite players were backed up by a solid block of good players.

The team aspect is absolutely of the highest importance. But, as you have highlighted in a round about way, a good team needs elite stars to surround with a unit of cohesive teammates who just get the job done. But for the most part they still need the elite players. It’s not like those teams were just an even bunch of beige.

I have a thread on the Lists area on this site that I update yearly that rates the top 100 players I’ve seen since 1980. Looking at the premiership teams since we last won the only side without a player in that top 100 is West Coast in 2018. Below, I’ve highlighted those players and the successful eras. Those in brackets would be very close to the 100 best I’ve seen.

Brisbane: Voss, Akermanis, Brown, Black, Lappin, (Leppitsch, Lynch)

Port: Tredrea, Wanganeen, (C Cornes)

Sydney: Goodes, Kennedy (Hall, O’Keefe, O’Loughlin)

WC: Judd, Cox, Cousins (Glass, Kerr)

Geelong: Ablett, Scarlett, Chapman, Bartel, Enright, Selwood, Johnson, Hawkins

Hawthorn: Franklin, Hodge, Mitchell, Crawford, Burgoyne, Rioli (Smith, Breust)

Coll: Pendlebury, Swan (Sidebum, Cloke)

Rich: Martin, Riewoldt (Rance, Cotchin)

WC: none (McGovern, Kennedy)

Melb: Gawn, Petracca (Oliver)

Gee: Dangerfield, Stewart, Hawkins, Selwood (Cameron)

 

[faible]

How would you rate these guys against Hird or Lloyd? I'm not sure that anyone on our list is in that category, but I'd be super happy to be proven wrong if some of them step up in the near future.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on whether Harley Reid would show his full potential with us, or whether he would get stifled by our player support systems? I personally think if you have a player of that caliber that they would shine through no matter what. And I think Zach Merrett proves that is the case.

FWIW Hird didn't look like he'd be that good early days either.

Draft late in 1990 as a F/S, no games in 1991, 4 in 1992, from memory drafted as an injury prone CHF that they wanted to de-list after 1991.

Due to injury his career total of; a Brownlow, 5 x AA, 5 x B&F, and 3 x ANZAC Medals probably undersells just how good he was. Wins a Brownlow in 1996, then misses most games for the next 3 years.

Just re-reading it all reminds me of how absurdly good he was, to the point that we probably underappreciate it.

 

[Happyskeret]

The team aspect is absolutely of the highest importance. But, as you have highlighted in a round about way, a good team needs elite stars to surround with a unit of cohesive teammates who just get the job done. But for the most part they still need the elite players. It’s not like those teams were just an even bunch of beige.

I have a thread on the Lists area on this site that I update yearly that rates the top 100 players I’ve seen since 1980. Looking at the premiership teams since we last won the only side without a player in that top 100 is West Coast in 2018. Below, I’ve highlighted those players and the successful eras. Those in brackets would be very close to the 100 best I’ve seen.

Brisbane: Voss, Akermanis, Brown, Black, Lappin, (Leppitsch, Lynch)

Port: Tredrea, Wanganeen, (C Cornes)

Sydney: Goodes, Kennedy (Hall, O’Keefe, O’Loughlin)

WC: Judd, Cox, Cousins (Glass, Kerr)

Geelong: Ablett, Scarlett, Chapman, Bartel, Enright, Selwood, Johnson, Hawkins

Hawthorn: Franklin, Hodge, Mitchell, Crawford, Burgoyne, Rioli (Smith, Breust)

Coll: Pendlebury, Swan (Sidebum, Cloke)

Rich: Martin, Riewoldt (Rance, Cotchin)

WC: none (McGovern, Kennedy)

Melb: Gawn, Petracca (Oliver)

Gee: Dangerfield, Stewart, Hawkins, Selwood (Cameron)

That’s a very interesting analysis. Nice work. Hopefully a top hundred player comes our way in the not to distant future and we have a decent team to back them up.

 

[Blind Turn]

That’s a very interesting analysis. Nice work. Hopefully a top hundred player comes our way in the not to distant future and we have a decent team to back them up.

Zach Merrett is a new entry in that top 100 too. So at least I can say we’ve got a player worthy of being a linchpin for success.

Of my top 100 only 27 weren’t premiership players (Modra was a tad unlucky), including my top choice being Ablett sr and with Plugger not far behind. Both of those players had plenty of talent around them too so obviously that team cohesion historically trumps the superstars so I’m not deluded in my desire for champions to come through our club. But let’s face it, they help a lot.

 

[Agronomus]

FWIW Hird didn't look like he'd be that good early days either.

Draft late in 1990 as a F/S, no games in 1991, 4 in 1992, from memory drafted as an injury prone CHF that they wanted to de-list after 1991.

Due to injury his career total of; a Brownlow, 5 x AA, 5 x B&F, and 3 x ANZAC Medals probably undersells just how good he was. Wins a Brownlow in 1996, then misses most games for the next 3 years.

Just re-reading it all reminds me of how absurdly good he was, to the point that we probably underappreciate it.

Disagree with the Hird call. He looked like Harley Reid in 1992 at times. I remember we got smashed by Collingwood at vfl Park and everyone was chanting "f**k the pies we've got James Hird". We were a lot more optimistic in those days

 

[Blind Turn]

Disagree with the Hird call. He looked like Harley Reid in 1992 at times. I remember we got smashed by Collingwood at vfl Park and everyone was chanting "f**k the pies we've got James Hird". We were a lot more optimistic in those days

My memory of Hird in ‘92 was his marking ability at the time and his ability to drift across with superior judgement. His last 2 games that year were a nice little taster for what was to come but at that early point we all thought he was going to be an undersized key forward.

 

[Happyskeret]

Zach Merrett is a new entry in that top 100 too. So at least I can say we’ve got a player worthy of being a linchpin for success.

Of my top 100 only 27 weren’t premiership players (Modra was a tad unlucky), including my top choice being Ablett sr and with Plugger not far behind. Both of those players had plenty of talent around them too so obviously that team cohesion historically trumps the superstars so I’m not deluded in my desire for champions to come through our club. But let’s face it, they help a lot.

Even though those players you mentioned missed out they definitely were in teams that were in premiership contention at certain stages of their careers.

 

[boncer34]

FWIW Hird didn't look like he'd be that good early days either.

Draft late in 1990 as a F/S, no games in 1991, 4 in 1992, from memory drafted as an injury prone CHF that they wanted to de-list after 1991.

Due to injury his career total of; a Brownlow, 5 x AA, 5 x B&F, and 3 x ANZAC Medals probably undersells just how good he was. Wins a Brownlow in 1996, then misses most games for the next 3 years.

Just re-reading it all reminds me of how absurdly good he was, to the point that we probably underappreciate it.

Lost the 2003 brownlow by 3 votes due to injury. He played 5/6 games less than the winners.

 

[joey_jo_jo]

a couple of hot takes:

- Merrett is bloody great and an A grader in my mind, also our best captain in yonks. But if we are going by the initial definition of Elite that started this thread, I dont think he fits it.
He has high footy IQ, amazing foot skills, wills himself to win contests etc, but I dont think he is a game changing match winner. Its not his fault, i think he is just too small and doesnt have the blistering pace to compensate for that lack of size to single handedly impact games.

- Ridley has all the talent to be elite, but I dont think he has the mindset at the moment. He too often is conservative in the way he positions himself/the options he takes. I felt like, outside of the tigers game and maybe one or two games after that he positioned himself deep inside our defensive area so his intercepts were more goal saving rather than goal creating. he also is happy to take short options to less talented guys when he is under pressure rather than try create an attacking opportunity.
This is why I believe they kept playing Martin in the backline even when Ridley came back. Martin and Redman are the only guys in our backline that are willing to back themselves and take the riskier option (and also have the skills to back it up unlike mckay/lav/mcgrath who will take the riskier options that are outside their ability).

 

[Yoda_]

Think people are confused with generational talent and list defining talent

 

[fairbump_playon]

I can see Tsatas, Caddy, Kako, Caldwell, Reid, Ridley, Durham, Jones, Martin, Draper/Bryan being in a flag winning side.

Can Merrett hang on 5 years? Maybe. Langford can’t. Redman? Not sure.

 

[Vander18]

I'd have Parish in there at his absolute best!

What’s your definition of elite?

Would Parish be a top 20 mid? He’s not top 10.

 

[Darealrath]

Lost the 2003 brownlow by 3 votes due to injury. He played 5/6 games less than the winners.

Missed 6 and was injured and off for good in the first quarter of 2 others. Crazy.

 

[Vander18]

Hird was an unbelievable player - rare combo of off the charts footy IQ, insane bravery and magnificent hands. Kicking was all over the joint but it never mattered.

Will say that I’ll go to my grave believing Mercs was a better pure footy talent. Had absolutely everything and like Cyril Rioli he could rip a game apart with 15 touches. His prime was short but the quality was absolutely ridiculous.

 

[joey_jo_jo]

Hird was an unbelievable player - rate combo of off the charts footy IQ, insane bravery and magnificent hands. Kicking was all over the joint but it never mattered.

Will say that I’ll go to my grave believing Mercs was a better pure footy talent. Had absolutely everything and like Cyril Rioli he could rip a game apart with 15 touches. His prime was short but the quality was absolutely ridiculous.

His 99 season was insane. So sad what happened in 2000 with his bro, dont think he ever recovered from it

 

[MiguelM]

What’s your definition of elite?

Would Parish be a top 20 mid? He’s not top 10.

Good question, what is elite?

Parish at his best I said. ie, AA year. He has dropped a fair way.

In the end we lack elite atm. Merrett is IMO, Caldwell close.

Positive direction now though, no more top ups.

Hard to accept when you have seen careers of Madden, Daniher, Watson's, Hird, Lloyd, Mecuri, Salmon, Baker, Long, Bewick, Hawker, Tippa.....I could go on.

 

[Mercurial89]

Not getting into the amount of quality players we have on the list too much but I would say that being elite has to include some kind of consistency at a certain level.

My tiers would be something like this

Legend
Superstar
Elite
Great
Good
Above average
Average
Below average
Bad

Good players can look like great players for a stretch of time but water finds its level and they drop back down to the good tier. That's what makes them only good, not great.
Similarly players can play below their level for stretches.
As time goes on if your playing more lower tier football than your perceived level then you just become that tier (good player strings multiple years together of average football then the good tier looks to be the aberration).

Zach is a great player who looks like he is elite, at times, but cannot string it together enough to be considered truly elite. Not enough game winning performances or moments.

We also have a few players with elite traits, but at some point actual performance has to be what they are. Injuries also play a role, I don't consider you "elite" if you play a 3rd of seasons looking really great in those games but your missing a bunch, best ability is availability so that knocks you down in the ranks (Eg. Ridley).

 

[Vander18]

Elite for me is the guys who can will themselves to impact games, no matter how big the stage or how tough the opposition.

Bont, Danger, Dusty, GAJ, Buddy….we haven’t had anyone that level since Hird and Lloyd. Joe could have been but didn’t have the mental strength for it.

 

[Blind Turn]

Not getting into the amount of quality players we have on the list too much but I would say that being elite has to include some kind of consistency at a certain level.

My tiers would be something like this

Legend
Superstar
Elite
Great
Good
Above average
Average
Below average
Bad

Good players can look like great players for a stretch of time but water finds its level and they drop back down to the good tier. That's what makes them only good, not great.
Similarly players can play below their level for stretches.
As time goes on if your playing more lower tier football than your perceived level then you just become that tier (good player strings multiple years together of average football then the good tier looks to be the aberration).

Zach is a great player who looks like he is elite, at times, but cannot string it together enough to be considered truly elite. Not enough game winning performances or moments.

We also have a few players with elite traits, but at some point actual performance has to be what they are. Injuries also play a role, I don't consider you "elite" if you play a 3rd of seasons looking really great in those games but your missing a bunch, best ability is availability so that knocks you down in the ranks (Eg. Ridley).

Going by this, in my time we’ve possibly had;

3 Superstars who you could argue are legends - Hird, T Watson, S Madden

1 Superstar - Lloyd

4 Elite players - T Daniher, Fletcher, Salmon, Wanganeen

5 Great players who you could argue were elite - Long, Mercuri, Goddard, J Watson, Z Merrett

Salmon, Wanganeen, and Goddard are all judged on dual-club careers.

There have probably been many great players with some elite traits required of a premiership core. Vander Haar and Lucas for game-changing ability, R Merrett for presence and longevity, N Daniher for unfulfilled talent, Baker for big-game performances, Bewick for goal sense, etc etc

It’s a grey area when it comes to what makes a great player elite, or a good player great. As you point out short careers, inconsistency, a sense of unfulfilment or being short-changed (Rioli anyone?), lack of success (Jobe, Hep), consistent output without being a game-changer (O’Donnell, Stanton), are all variables in how a player is perceived. Do all great players even reach greatness? Did Derek Kickett reach greatness? I’d argue he was a great player. It’s all a bit murky when it comes to tiers of performance.

 

[Blind Turn]

Elite for me is the guys who can will themselves to impact games, no matter how big the stage or how tough the opposition.

Bont, Danger, Dusty, GAJ, Buddy….we haven’t had anyone that level since Hird and Lloyd. Joe could have been but didn’t have the mental strength for it.

Goddard had it. He did it in a GF in what was possibly the best GF performance I’ve seen. We didn’t get that version of him at Essendon though.