![](https://images.bigfootymedia.com/icons/mobile-bullets/geelong.png)
Franklin kicked 21 goals in 20 games in his first season.
Calsh has 19 after 14 games.
Has had a seriously good debut year.
This week on BF I have seen Dear compared to Wayne Carey and Buddy Franklin.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: GWS Giants v Brisbane Lions - 7:30PM Sat
Squiggle tips Lions at 65% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Semi Finals
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
AFLW 2024 - Round 3 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Franklin kicked 21 goals in 20 games in his first season.
Calsh has 19 after 14 games.
Has had a seriously good debut year.
This week on BF I have seen Dear compared to Wayne Carey and Buddy Franklin.
No current season stats available
Next thing, people will be comparing him to Harley Reid.This week on BF I have seen Dear compared to Wayne Carey and Buddy Franklin.
Next thing, people will be comparing him to Harley Reid.
Sure, if you’re unable to do context.This week on BF I have seen Dear compared to Buddy Franklin.
Sure, if you’re unable to do context.
You conflated a post about Franklin’s 1st season and Dear’s as being the same as one made by a poster saying he could be the next Wayne Carey. Comprehension fail.Argues unable to do context.
Ignores that the post was in context of being compared to two players.
Then edits a post to misrepresent the context.
Marvellous work![]()
Nah I don't think so TBH - Not consistent enough - TBH if Darcy was eligible he would be my pick.If Harley Reid didn't lose eligibility would he have won the rising star? The raw talent is bleedingly obvious, he also had a few stunning games but I'm just wondering if the weight of numbers (or lack of) over the entire season go against him.
Calsher and Gryan are not names. I don’t care that these dudes are using them as names, they are not names.
Forgot about Darcy, I'd have him winning by a marginNah I don't think so TBH - Not consistent enough - TBH if Darcy was eligible he would be my pick.
Wardlaw has been off lately.. Dempsey should win it from here.
Well no, he isn’t: if we are going off scoring shots, he doesn’t average 3, or close to it - he averages 2.5. I would assume he averages the odd ‘did not score.’
But so too would have Charlie Cameron who actually registered 2.8 scoring shots per game in his first season and himself probably had numerous non-scores. And that’s having only looked at two players (Cameron and Eddie Betts).
Edit: Stephen Milne had 47 scoring shots from 17 games in his first year. That too doesn’t include shots on goal that didn’t register a score. So no, we don’t know that ‘The Wizard’ is the first small forward to ever do it because he’s not.
If he's not scoring with that proportion of shots maybe he is getting quite a few off in places above his current scoring ability.I didn't say scores, I said shots (although I used to scores for players before Champion Data started recording shots in 2012).
It's true that Cameron registered 3.3 shots per game in first season but only played 7 games, where as Watson has played 15 matches at 3.2 shots per game.
So unless you include Cameron who only played 7 games in his first year, Watson is the first for a small forward since we started recording.
Hogan was the last player, but he wasn't a small forward, 3.5 shots per game in his rookie year and won the Norwich Rising Star and will be this year's Coleman medalist.
Hogan was also 20 in his first season, where as Watson is 19. You also mentioned Milne who averaged 2.7 scores per game (.2 more than Watson) but also debuted at 21 years of age.
Rankine debuted at 19, with 2.6 shots per game, Betts (the most prolific small forward of all time) debuted at 19 and 1.6 scores per game, (averaged 3.7 shots from 2012).
Dual Coleman medalist Curnow, in his first session played only 6 matches and averaged 1.2 shots per game, and the following season he played 20 matches and averaged 1.7 shots per game.
Doesn't matter how you spin it, 2.7 scores per game, or 3.2 shots per game, for a 19 year old in their first season is unprecedented and very impressive, small or tall forward.
I didn't say scores, I said shots (although I used to scores for players before Champion Data started recording shots in 2012).
It's true that Cameron registered 3.3 shots per game in first season but only played 7 games, where as Watson has played 15 matches at 3.2 shots per game.
So unless you include Cameron who only played 7 games in his first year, Watson is the first for a small forward since we started recording.
Hogan was the last player, but he wasn't a small forward, 3.5 shots per game in his rookie year and won the Norwich Rising Star and will be this year's Coleman medalist.
Hogan was also 20 in his first season, where as Watson is 19. You also mentioned Milne who averaged 2.7 scores per game (.2 more than Watson) but also debuted at 21 years of age.
Rankine debuted at 19, with 2.6 shots per game, Betts (the most prolific small forward of all time) debuted at 19 and 1.6 scores per game, (averaged 3.7 shots from 2012).
Dual Coleman medalist Curnow, in his first session played only 6 matches and averaged 1.2 shots per game, and the following season he played 20 matches and averaged 1.7 shots per game.
Doesn't matter how you spin it, 2.7 scores per game, or 3.2 shots per game, for a 19 year old in their first season is unprecedented and very impressive, small or tall forward.
I didn't say scores, I said shots (although I used to scores for players before Champion Data started recording shots in 2012).
It's true that Cameron registered 3.3 shots per game in first season but only played 7 games, where as Watson has played 15 matches at 3.2 shots per game.
So unless you include Cameron who only played 7 games in his first year, Watson is the first for a small forward since we started recording.
Hogan was the last player, but he wasn't a small forward, 3.5 shots per game in his rookie year and won the Norwich Rising Star and will be this year's Coleman medalist.
Hogan was also 20 in his first season, where as Watson is 19. You also mentioned Milne who averaged 2.7 scores per game (.2 more than Watson) but also debuted at 21 years of age.
Rankine debuted at 19, with 2.6 shots per game, Betts (the most prolific small forward of all time) debuted at 19 and 1.6 scores per game, (averaged 3.7 shots from 2012).
Dual Coleman medalist Curnow, in his first session played only 6 matches and averaged 1.2 shots per game, and the following season he played 20 matches and averaged 1.7 shots per game.
Doesn't matter how you spin it, 2.7 scores per game, or 3.2 shots per game, for a 19 year old in their first season is unprecedented and very impressive, small or tall forward.
And I don’t know if it was recorded then but as I said, Milne had almost 3 SCORES per game in his first season. Not shots, scores. So I can only imagine his total shots would be significantly higher. That’s from just looking at the first 3 guys that popped into my head.
He’s done well to be as prolific as he has, but making a very big historic claim like ‘no one has ever done this before’ is the sort of thing that is usually backed up. In this case it’s pretty clear that others have done similar or more.
If you wanted to be a bit of a smart arse you could point to the guy who most people actually think of as the wizard and say well he played 7 games in his first year - but he was only 17 at the time.
In his first full season, when he was 18 - a year younger than the new Wizard - he actually averaged 3.1 scoring shots, not shots on goal, scoring shots, per game, across 19 matches.
Shots per game. I thought our Hawks friends were past using the cherry picker.
I'm not being a smart arse, you're being a smart arse with all your posts (including another thread where you claimed I said that Geelong didn't best Hawthorn this year at that stupid GMHBA ground)
The wizard in his first season at 17, averaged 1.3 scores per game. But yes he had a great career, anyone else you can think to best Watson?
Probably would have been a close run thing. He had games where he would have got the maximum votes possible, others where he wasn't sighted much. Wouldn't be surprised if his profile would have gotten him over the line though.If Harley Reid didn't lose eligibility would he have won the rising star? The raw talent is bleedingly obvious, he also had a few stunning games but I'm just wondering if the weight of numbers (or lack of) over the entire season go against him.
You don't like measuring forwards in their first season on how many opportunities they create to score for themselves?
Cherry picking stats would be like in the Daicos thread, where posters are enamoured with contester marks comparisons amongst midfielders.