Scott Pendlebury - Standing in the game?

[doppleganger]

Impact…hmmm
Impact to what end?

Consistently impacting games of football.

That is what things like player ratings are trying to capture.

And Pendles has higher career avg than Dusty (whilst also doing it for much longer).

It’s just a stupid merry go-round.

Just outve curiosity
Has Pendlebury had a better career than Mathews?
Explain it a little if you dont mind.

I am too young to have seen Leigh play.

But there are obvious things that point to his greatness

He acknowledged as league best play by players and media awards in full season.
8 BnFs (3 of which were in premiership years)
Won a Coleman for league goal kicker
Lead Hawthorn goal kicking 6 times
200+ brownlow votes

And then he had multiple seasons where he avg 25 disposals AND more than 3 goals per game - so trying to convert those to your player ratings / supercoach it would be off the charts.

From stats, Leigh had more disposals than Dusty but also kicked almost 600 more goals.

 

[BigPond101]

Dustin Martin is the most over rated player in football history. As soon as the heat came on the club , he bailed. Such a front runner. One good season. Martin is not fit to walk in Pendlebury’s shadow.

Pendlebury was a huge success in his first few years, won a premiership then spent about 10 years being terribly medicore while the lazy comms praised him out of cliches "That turnover was unpendlbury like !" 10 times a game for 10 years.

Eventually by 2023 Pendlebury had another slightly above average season just cause after so many years in the system he was statistically due

Pendlebury is a terrible human being and a average player

We all would have been better off if he just went to hell and used his basketball skills to play Euro D league or something

 

[Corn Cobbers]

Dustin Martin is the most over rated player in football history. As soon as the heat came on the club , he bailed. Such a front runner. One good season. Martin is not fit to walk in Pendlebury’s shadow.

Didnt give a stuff in the end, finished with 14 consecutive losses, even Gold Coast didn't want the arrogant passenger

On SM-A225F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[doppleganger]

Let's be honest and transparent though, unlike some other unnamed posters in this thread.

The absence of Player Ratings Data prior to 2012, and Coaches votes prior to 2016, not only means the absence of data for Pendlebury in his two best finals campaigns (2010 and 2011), but also for other great players such as GAJ and Chris Judd (as recent examples).

The table below provides data from GAJ's 4 x finals campaigns between 2007 and 2010, together with Judd's finals campaigns in 2005/06:
View attachment 2202098

I suspect a few of those campaigns would make an appearance in the top 10 finals campaigns of the 21st Century...

But also of note is that like Pendlebury (and unlike Martin), both GAJ and Judd were able to perform at a high level in losing finals games.

Is it really that astounding that great players are great finals players?

Yeah just running with MRs players.

Pendles up alongside him and Petracca with best finals series for 2012 (and Pies know his 2011 and 2010 were at that level).

Thanks to MR confirmed Pendles huge in finals (and arguably only behind Dusty as finals player).

Pendles consistently brilliant in H&A, and even MR acknowledge that Pendles is streets ahead in H&A.

GAJ the only mid who is clearly above Pendles in 21st century.

 

[Cdog71]

Consistently impacting games of football.

It’s a nothing answer.

Professional athletes preform and want to preform for the glory.
Clubs are in the business of winning premierships that’s why they turn over 10% of the list every year in the search for talent. To find players who can function at their highest level and more to function and preform to a level that can’t be mitigated or others can’t compete with.
In this sport it’s the pursuit of winning premeirships.
Pendlebury is absolutely in the top 2% of players who can get themselves prepared to preform and consistently preform at a very high level he’s done it for longer than anyone in the last 25 years.

Like I’ve posted I think he is 9or10 for players in the last 25 years and in my view that’s his standing in the game.
Trying to compare him to a scoreboard player like Martin to prove his status…it’s a nonsense.
Pendlebury isn’t a scoreboard player.

Comparing him to a fwd transition player is probably more accurate.
Like a Buckley and I think Buckley was a more talented footballer.
I dont give a sh.t who was the greatest Collingwood player, if it was choosing between the two to win one game of football when both were at their best I’d choose Buckley 7 days a week.
Just like I’d choose Martin 7 days a week and so would 98% of people.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Just highlighting Martin's alleged 26.9 Player Rating average in finals in 2020 comprises the following games:
Qualifying Final v. Brisbane - 12.1 Player Rating
Semi Final v. St. Kilda - 26.4 Player Rating
Preliminary Final v. Port Adelaide - 21.8 Player Rating
Grand Final v. Geelong - 25.7 Player Rating

So his average was actually higher than his best performance (according to Player Ratings) in the finals series.

I'm sure it was just an oversight that MR failed to point this out.

This following explanation is just so others are not confused by you trying to deceive everybody here.

Those player ratings are adjusted by multiplying them by 1.25 for the shortened game times. This is the exact way I have heard Daniel Hoyne of Champion Data discuss the 2020 Player Ratings. It is the only sensible way they can be adjusted, like all other statistical measures in those shortened games. Without making that adjustement, fair comparisons to performances in other seasons become impossible.

And it is very obvious the figures need adjusting by any reference to total team or individual player ratings that season compared to surrounding seasons. You could equally adjust by reducing ratings in all other seasons by 20% to allow a fair comparison to be made but of course it is easier to adjust the single effected season than each of the other 12 seasons.

Leading average team ratings each season(all players' within the teams ratings being added together):

2012 240.6
2013 233.6
2014 249.6
2015 228.4
2016 241.4
2017 237.9
2018 233.9
2019 217.2
2020 175.5(x 1.25 = 219.37)
2021 216.2
2022 217.1
2023 225.7
2024 228.5

We can see the overall team ratings are almost exactly 25% higher in surrounding seasons.

Leading individual player ratings year by year:

2012 21.37
2013 20.09
2014 22.21
2015 20.2
2016 20.5
2017 20.86
2018 17.73
2019 18.49
2020 15.79(x 1.25 = 19.73)
2021 18.76
2022 18.17
2023 18.71
2024 19.08


That is the clearest way to demonstrate why the player ratings for 2020 need to be adjusted to bring them into line with player ratings from all other seasons for comparison purposes. Otherwise you would have us believing the players all just magically got 20% worse in the 2020 season.

 

[Mr Meow]

2017 24.1 average
2018 16.5 average
2019 18.6 average
2020 26.9 average




Others:

Bontempelli best 18.75
Cripps best 12.66
Heeney 14.66
Gawn 14.5
Neale 20.6
Nick Daycare 10.9
Petracca 23.66
Warner 19.33
Butters 10.1
Newcombe 17.8
Holmes 18.0
J Kelly 16.8
Liberatore 16.5
T Green 17.2
Dangerfield 21.1
Walsh 16.9
T Kelly 15.4
Dunkley 13.2
Jezza Cameron 13.6
B Grundy 19.6
Pendlebury 21.5(2nd best 15.6)
Oliver 19.9
Selwood 24.3
J Kennedy(Swans) 20.6
Swan 15.6(only one series applicable)
Cyril 15.8
S Mitchell 20.7
Cotchin 14.6
Fyfe 17.2
T Greene 23.8
J Macrae 16.8


So from all those players I could think of here are the top 16 rated finals series by average player rating across multiple games(2, 3 or 4)

1. Martin 26.9(4 games)
2. Selwood 24.3(2 games)
3. Martin 24.1(3 games)
4. T Greene 23.8(2 games)
5. Petracca 23.7(3 games)
6. Selwood 21.6(2 games)
7. Pendlebury 21.5(3 games)
8. Dangerfield 21.1(2 games)
9. J Kenney(Swans) 20.6(2 games)
10. S Mitchell 20.7(3 games)
11. Neale 20.6(2 games)
12. Oliver 19.9(3 games)
13. Grundy 19.6(2 games)
14. Warner 19.3(3 games)
15. Bontempelli 18.8(4 games)
16. Martin 18.6(3 games)

The order for players who played 3 or more games in a finals series is:

1. Martin 26.9
2. Martin 24.1
3. Petracca 23.7
4. Pendlebury 21.5
5. S Mitchell 20.7
6. Oliver 19.9
7. Warner 19.3
8. Bontempelli 18.8
9. Martin 18.6
10. Holmes 18.0

We can see Pendlebury's 2012 sits pretty high in this table, but it is a fair way off the pace of the top 3 full finals series based on average player ratings. I doubt Pendlebury's average player ratings in the 2010 & 11 finals series would be higher than his 2012 average. You can see that by looking at his stats. There is absolutely nothing in those 2 series to suggest he would have challenged the top 3 rated finals series recorded by Martin, Martin & Petracca.

Nah you still can't complete the task.

2013
2014
2015
2022

All missing.

2020 is wrong. Actual numbers please, not projections.

The task is to list every finals series average for both Pendlebury and Martin (minus the years Pendlebury played finals where the data wasn't recorded). It can't be that hard.

 

[TigerTime88]

Dustin Martin is the most over rated player in football history. As soon as the heat came on the club , he bailed. Such a front runner. One good season. Martin is not fit to walk in Pendlebury’s shadow.

So difficult to overrate 3 x Norm Smiths and a Brownlow. Sounds like you've managed to do it with ignorance which is an incredible effort.

 

[Mr Meow]

Fadge Mr Meow

All jokes and pissing aside, where do you rank Pendlebury from players of the AFL era? Obviously Collingwood bias would see you rank him higher than others but do you see him as one of those all time greats? Dustin Martin, Gary Ablett, Lance Franklin?

Most probably see him as a rung below, if not two rungs below which is no slight at all. He has been a bloody good player

Firstly if there was bias it would be for the team I support: Geelong. There isn't any reason to elevate Collingwood players above Essendon, Richmond, Carlton, Melbourne, Sydney or any other team.

Regarding all time greats, my opinion means nothing for the untelevised era and for the part of the televised era where few games are available even now. The ones before my time.

The late VFL era and entire AFL era is closer to what a good chunk of people here have some sort of informed idea about. The 21st century most people will have a more concrete view IMO. So let's look at that.

Ablett and Franklin I'd have at the top. Judd probably next.

Then very little splits the likes of Pavlich, Pendlebury, Dangerfield, Bontempelli, Martin, Selwood. It gets trickier to know where to put ruckmen, traditional key forwards and defenders. Cox and Gawn are obviously well ahead of every other ruckman this era, which counts for something. Goodes played most of his footy this century and would be up there. Cripps and Neale's achievements can't be overlooked for current players still in their prime. Fyfe's career is difficult to assess but his best handful of seasons alone would still have him in this tier. Key forwards and defenders should probably just be compared among themselves unless they're all timers.

This is ranking overall career output. If people really think one of the players I listed in the previous paragraph is a significant level below the rest, they see something I don't. They were all top 10 players in the league (or best player in their position) and best player at their club enough seasons to earn the champion label. Cornerstones of successful seasons and contending ones. Close to unstoppable at their peak.

There are things you could pick at for all of them, but that's only worth doing if one person completely rubbishes one player to put another well ahead (MR in here...which predictably then gets return fire from Pies supporters).

 

[Cdog71]

There are things you could pick at for all of them, but that's only worth doing if one person completely rubbishes one player to put another well ahead (MR in here).

I’ve been reading the thread and that’s not how I see it.
It’s actually MT replying to posters who try and rubbish Martin .

Did Fadge pm you to see if you could both try and have a go at him together?

And well done on being noncommittal on your top ten.

 

[South of the Yarra]

So difficult to overrate 3 x Norm Smiths and a Brownlow. Sounds like you've managed to do it with ignorance which is an incredible effort.

And only two club Best and Fairests which shows his club has only rated him as the best player in a season twice.

 

[Mr Meow]

I’ve been reading the thread and that’s not how I see it.
It’s actually MT replying to posters who try and rubbish Martin .

Did Fadge pm you to see if you could both try and have a go at him together?

And well done on being noncommittal on your top ten.

Is this another CFL conspiracy? All I've seen in this thread was MR pretending he and Fadge had private messages, then MR deleting posts when that was pointed out. I'm not sure what the rest of these so called spy missions involve.

You were just as noncommittal. Didn't you just post an aggregate of three other guys opinions? So it looks like your opinions could change with the wind depending on what article comes out next.

It seems pretty obvious you do rate Pendlebury comfortably below at least a few players I listed in that big paragraph, so you might as well have the balls to explicitly state it and give your reasons.

 

[Fadge]

This following explanation is just so others are not confused by you trying to deceive everybody here.

Those player ratings are adjusted by multiplying them by 1.25 for the shortened game times. This is the exact way I have heard Daniel Hoyne of Champion Data discuss the 2020 Player Ratings. It is the only sensible way they can be adjusted, like all other statistical measures in those shortened games. Without making that adjustement, fair comparisons to performances in other seasons become impossible.

And it is very obvious the figures need adjusting by any reference to total team or individual player ratings that season compared to surrounding seasons. You could equally adjust by reducing ratings in all other seasons by 20% to allow a fair comparison to be made but of course it is easier to adjust the single effected season than each of the other 12 seasons.

Leading average team ratings each season(all players' within the teams ratings being added together):

2012 240.6
2013 233.6
2014 249.6
2015 228.4
2016 241.4
2017 237.9
2018 233.9
2019 217.2
2020 175.5(x 1.25 = 219.37)
2021 216.2
2022 217.1
2023 225.7
2024 228.5

We can see the overall team ratings are almost exactly 25% higher in surrounding seasons.

Leading individual player ratings year by year:

2012 21.37
2013 20.09
2014 22.21
2015 20.2
2016 20.5
2017 20.86
2018 17.73
2019 18.49
2020 15.79(x 1.25 = 19.73)
2021 18.76
2022 18.17
2023 18.71
2024 19.08


That is the clearest way to demonstrate why the player ratings for 2020 need to be adjusted to bring them into line with player ratings from all other seasons for comparison purposes. Otherwise you would have us believing the players all just magically got 20% worse in the 2020 season.

Great.

You've now been transparent (after being called out).

 

[Fadge]

Is this another CFL conspiracy? All I've seen in this thread was MR pretending he and Fadge had private messages, then MR deleting posts when that was pointed out. I'm not sure what the rest of these so called spy missions involve.

You were just as noncommittal. Didn't you just post an aggregate of three other guys opinions? So it looks like your opinions could change with the wind depending on what article comes out next.

It seems pretty obvious you do rate Pendlebury comfortably below at least a few players I listed in that big paragraph, so you might as well have the balls to explicitly state it and give your reasons.

Except the Big CDog also rates players who hit the scoreboard, despite the likes of J. Kennedy and J. Riewoldt being excluded from the Top 10 of the last 25 years article that he posted.

So we're still not quite sure where he stands...

And for a player who spent as much time forward of centre as Martin did, is an average of 1.12 goals per game over his career that great a return?

I mean, GAJ averaged a similar goal return whilst he was also averaging over 30 possessions a game during his stint at the Gold Coast (a far lesser team), where he spent very little time forward of centre...

 

[Stax on the mill]

Please don't make this another Martin flogfest.

As the OP, I request everyone to ignore any future comments about Martin.

And yet, despite your polite request when you first started this thread in July 2023, here we are 18 months later with Tiger posters still trying to make it all about Dusty and Richmond. Another thread they’ve hijacked.

 

[Cdog71]

So it looks like your opinions could change with the wind depending on what article comes out next.

Rubbish.

It seems pretty obvious you do rate Pendlebury comfortably below at least a few players I listed in that big paragraph, so you might as well have the balls to explicitly state it and give your reasons.

As I’ve posted more than three times now it was Rohan Connolly and others objectively discussing players and giving them a points value based on
20 points for their highest peak
10 points for Accolades
10 points for Longevity

I happen to think that’s the most balanced and fair way to discuss and rank different players from different roles when you agree on the parameters and stay within them.

I don’t give a sh.t if you don’t agree with that or if you put more weight on Longevity or Leadership or any other criteria you can think of, but for mine that gives a better indication of a players “Standing in the game”.

 

[Fadge]

Rubbish.


As I’ve posted more than three times now it was Rohan Connolly and others objectively discussing players and giving them a points value based on
20 points for their highest peak
10 points for Accolades
10 points for Longevity

I happen to think that’s the most balanced and fair way to discuss and rank different players from different roles when you agree on the parameters and stay within them.

I don’t give a sh.t if you don’t agree with that or if you put more weight on Longevity or Leadership or any other criteria you can think of, but for mine that gives a better indication of a players “Standing in the game”.

So do you rate players who hit the scoreboard, such as J. Riewoldt and J. Kennedy (who were excluded from 'your' top 10), or don't you?

And what were the scores given for each of the 3 metrics for each of the players, and do you completely agree with them for every player? Because that would be quite the coincidence if you did.

I notice there was zero consideration given to leadership? Surely that would be an important metric when measuring the greatness of an AFL player?

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Great.

You've now been transparent (after being called out).

Being "called out" for making a correct adjustment. Lol.

 

[Cdog71]

Except the Big CDog also rates players who hit the scoreboard, despite the likes of J. Kennedy and J. Riewoldt being excluded from the Top 10 of the last 25 years article that he posted.

So do you rate players who hit the scoreboard,

I rate Buddy #1, Hawkins and Goodes in the top ten.
In fact all of the top ten I listed I’d call scoreboard players apart from Pendlebury who has the lowest goal ave.

Do I rate players who score more highly?
Of course.

There’s a reason why LeBron and Jordan, Chamberlain and Bird are discussed as the greatest.
The same reason why Messi and Ronaldo and Kerr are thought of as the best.
Sport is about winning and you do that by scoring, Aussie Rules has more positions and roles than any other sport but it’s still about defending your goals and the reason you can’t defend some players is because they’re better than you.

Like I said before, there aren’t any World records for the most consistently above average player or athlete.

 

[Fadge]

I rate Buddy #1, Hawkins and Goodes in the top ten.
In fact all of the top ten I listed I’d call scoreboard players apart from Pendlebury who has the lowest goal ave.

Do I rate players who score more highly?
Of course.

There’s a reason why LeBron and Jordan, Chamberlain and Bird are discussed as the greatest.
The same reason why Messi and Ronaldo and Kerr are thought of as the best.
Sport is about winning and you do that by scoring, Aussie Rules has more positions and roles than any other sport but it’s still about defending your goals and the reason you can’t defend some players is because they’re better than you.

Like I said before, there aren’t any World records for the most consistently above average player or athlete.

So why have you left J. Kennedy (who has a higher goal average than everyone bar Buddy) and Riewoldt out of your top 10?

What are your scores for each of the metrics, and why do you accept 40 points for peak, accolades and longevity, but 0 points for leadership or 'ability to hit the scoreboard'?

I just find it quite the coincidence that you completely agree with the rationale used (including breakdown of points per metric), together with the scores per metric for each player.

Can you please explain how Buddy is rated higher than GAJ given the three metrics and points breakdown used?

When 'accolades' were assessed, how were they measured when Martin won 3 x Gary Ayres Medals, when this award wasn't available to other players (for example)?

 

[Cdog71]

So why have you left J. Kennedy (who has a higher goal average than everyone bar Buddy) and Riewoldt out of your top 10?

What are your scores for each of the metrics, and why do you accept 40 points for peak, accolades and longevity, but 0 points for leadership?

I just find it quite the coincidence that you completely agree with the rationale used (including breakdown of points per metric), together with the scores per metric for each player.

Can you please explain how Buddy is rated higher than GAJ given the three metrics and points breakdown used?

It’s my algorithms Fadgey, you wouldn’t understand.

Reiwoldt kicked more goals then Hawkins and I think Reiwoldt is underrated.
But nobody took more from contested marks than Hawkins and no key fwd as many GA.
No Fwd was as intimidating Rucking in the pocket and I think Hawkins played better in bigger games more often than Kennedy.
I could go on Fadgey but I really couldn’t be arsed.
I’ve put down my view of Pendlebury’s standing in the game I’ve laid out the criteria for how it was assessed.

You continue to create threads where you can spout absolutes and try look for opponents to argue over bullsh.t details.
I’ve got better things to do.

 

[Mr Meow]

Rubbish.


As I’ve posted more than three times now it was Rohan Connolly and others objectively discussing players and giving them a points value based on
20 points for their highest peak
10 points for Accolades
10 points for Longevity

I happen to think that’s the most balanced and fair way to discuss and rank different players from different roles when you agree on the parameters and stay within them.

I don’t give a sh.t if you don’t agree with that or if you put more weight on Longevity or Leadership or any other criteria you can think of, but for mine that gives a better indication of a players “Standing in the game”.

Where's the article? I need to see how they scale the 0-20 and 0-10 for each metric. You might be confused on what "objective" actually means. And you're still just posting Connolly et al's thoughts, not your own.

What is your own top 20? If you don't name one then it's a bit silly to call me non-committal. I at least elaborated on the players I thought Pendlebury stood next to for career output (and 3 from the 21st century I definitely have ahead). Maybe next time I'll just find someone else's article and post that - which is apparently both objective and your own opinion.