Scott Pendlebury - Standing in the game?

[Corn Cobbers]

And you know this how?

I lived over there at the time, everyone knew it, Judd was a token Eagles captain

On SM-A225F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Corn Cobbers]

On SM-A225F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[doppleganger]

Which is more to my point, none of these blokes have unblemished records as leaders. To make out as if Judd was an average leader despite captaining a premiership team (something Pendles has never managed) all because Fev got drunk on national TV and made a few crass jokes is just idiotic.

Pendles oversaw plenty of player scandals in his time as captain, he was always a stellar player as an individual but he's certainly not getting a leg up on any of the others for leadership contributions if we're judging it based off dopey players doing dumb stuff while they were at the helm.

Leadership is a bit like a players peak in that first off you need to actually agree on a definition of it.

I tend to think Fadge is talking about on-field coach when it comes to Pendles and Hodge. They help organize team defense, pull people into line and change game plans whilst out on-field.

Then you have guys like Voss and Carey who just did the inspirational stuff, they had the strut and arrogance and players loved playing with them.

IMHO, Cousins was clearly the on and off fielder leader when Judd was at WC.

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

I lived over there at the time, everyone knew it, Judd was a token Eagles captain

On SM-A225F using BigFooty.com mobile app

Just as everyone knows Geelong hand out $1 farmland to key recruits. Unfortunately when judging a player on their career, rumour and hearsay isn't really as useful as what we get to see on field through their play.

Luke Hodge and Michael Voss were imo the best 'leaders' of this century. Selwood slightly behind in my eyes but splitting hairs really.

I don't think many would have Hodge or Selwood in the top 5 players of this century on the back of their leadership or consistency when there were clearly much better players ahead of them.

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

Leadership is a bit like a players peak in that first off you need to actually agree on a definition of it.

I tend to think Fadge is talking about on-field coach when it comes to Pendles and Hodge. They help organize team defense, pull people into line and change game plans whilst out on-field.

Then you have guys like Voss and Carey who just did the inspirational stuff, they had the strut and arrogance and players loved playing with them.

IMHO, Cousins was clearly the on and off fielder leader when Judd was at WC.

I agree. Which is why I don't think it should really be a deciding factor when judging a players standing in the game.

Dusty appeared to the public as a media shy party animal and didn't look to have any hallmarks of a great leader in my opinion, but if I wanted someone to lift the team on their back and win them a game off their boot he'd be close to the first player I'd pick.

 

[Cdog71]

Should lose points for the dreadlocks.
Bloody terrible

 

[Fadge]

Luke Hodge and Michael Voss were imo the best 'leaders' of this century. Selwood slightly behind in my eyes but splitting hairs really.

Hang on....

Haven't you spent the last 24 hours telling everyone we don't know anywhere near enough to form any conclusions on leadership?

 

[Robroy22]

I'm not arguing Pendlebury isn't a good leader. I have family that work at the Pies and know how highly everyone in that organisation views him on and off field.

I'm arguing that Fadge's assessment of Judd's leadership based on something a drunken fool did on Brownlow night is ridiculous unless he's equally willing to attach the misdemeanours and scandals many Pies players have been caught up in to Pendlebury during his time as captain.

Both were fantastic leaders in their own rights. Judd captained a team to a premiership, Pendlebury consistently captained his team through finals campaigns but ultimately never achieved the ultimate success in the role.

My view is that neither Fevs idiotic actions nor the Pies players drug issues or run ins with the law should be attached to either players reputation as leaders. They were almost never in trouble themselves and presented as ultimate professionals throughout.

Mate I hate to say this but sometimes....(lets face it, on internet chats thats probably MOST of the time) you've just gotta let it go. Fadge is just one eyed, and that's why this sorta rubbish just gets rolled around infinitum.

Judd was a magnificent player, no doubt. And I wish for the sake of everybody's sanity that we (all posters) could just admit that EVERY club has its wonderful players, its larrikins, its role players and servants and just get on with it.

I dunno if its ever been tried on BigFooty but in 75 years I've certainly seen some wonderful opposition players as well as my own team's.

My favourite all time Carlton players would be Jezza and Kenny Hunter. Both supremely talented and courageous but both also scrupulously fair and great sportsmen. Kouta was another of that ilk. But I'm sure everyone else has seen plenty of others and I wish we'd all just concentrate on that rather than trying to "one up" each other with character and legacy assassinations from ill informed sources.

 

[Lunchtime]

Mason's been good, but I personally have a few ahead of him.

Mason Cox is well behind the likes of Cox and Gawn.

 

[Cyclops]

View attachment 2204404

On SM-A225F using BigFooty.com mobile app

This really sums it up.

Judd was an exemplary player, amazing strength and will to win.

As a leader he set a great example and carried the blokes around him, but i never had the sense he was directing and inspiring his players like a Tony Shaw or a Kernahan.

Judd more like Buckley, except Bucks eventually learned to communicate and could get a bit out of some of our louts.

Should lose points for the dreadlocks.
Bloody terrible

Absolutely.

Also would be a terrible pub crawl captain "just a light for me fellas, and we should think about winding it up after this round, it's nearly dark".

Swan and Stevie J the after hours captains any club would adore.

 

[doppleganger]

I agree. Which is why I don't think it should really be a deciding factor when judging a players standing in the game.

Dusty appeared to the public as a media shy party animal and didn't look to have any hallmarks of a great leader in my opinion, but if I wanted someone to lift the team on their back and win them a game off their boot he'd be close to the first player I'd pick.

Yep, Dusty has the big finals games.

As does Pendles, a norm smith in 2010 and in 2023 GF he was Pies outstanding player late in the game...he put us back in front in Q3 with our only goal for the quarter. And then Q4 he had most disposals on the ground and when fell behind again it was Pendles who got the centre clearances that resulted in DeGoey goal.

Pendles won a GF with his heroics in 2023 (as a 35 year old!!) and won a flag in 2010 with overall dominance.

Of all recent midfielders, only GAJ has the combination of peak impact, consistency and longevity that betters Pendles.

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

Yep, Dusty has the big finals games.

As does Pendles, a norm smith in 2010 and in 2023 GF he was Pies outstanding player late in the game...he put us back in front in Q3 with our only goal for the quarter. And then Q4 he had most disposals on the ground and when fell behind again it was Pendles who got the centre clearances that resulted in DeGoey goal.

Pendles won a GF with his heroics in 2023 (as a 35 year old!!) and won a flag in 2010 with overall dominance.

Of all recent midfielders, only GAJ has the combination of peak impact, consistency and longevity that betters Pendles.

Dangerfield had a higher peak and has the 2nd most Brownlow votes in history. His longevity is criminally underrated with 8 AA seasons.

Will go down as comfortably a greater player too imo.

 

[Robroy22]

Dangerfield had a higher peak and has the 2nd most Brownlow votes in history. His longevity is criminally underrated with 8 AA seasons.

Will go down as comfortably a greater player too imo.

You shoulda seen him playing in the juniors!

 

[Mr Meow]

You shoulda seen him playing in the juniors!

I think people have already forgotten how good Danger was at Adelaide as well. He's been at the Cats for almost a decade now but his time as a Crow he had 3 junior seasons as a capable forward flanker, then 2012-2015 he was a very special midfielder with big scoreboard impact.

Ironically the clear 2 best years of his career (2016-2017) came at one of the worst times. He dragged Geelong to top 4 but they proved ill equipped for really contending. 2017 Adelaide were a much better team. 2019-2020 era Cats were stronger, but no longer had Dangerfield/Selwood at their absolute peak (still very good players, but their 2016 season for example was outrageous).

With Pendlebury, at least some of his very best work coincided with the best Collingwood side this century 2010-2011. But his actual best season in 2013 Collingwood were just making up the numbers and by the time they were really contending again, he was a high performing veteran but not "peak Pendles". Timing is a fickle thing.

 

[doppleganger]

Dangerfield had a higher peak and has the 2nd most Brownlow votes in history. His longevity is criminally underrated with 8 AA seasons.

Will go down as comfortably a greater player too imo.

How do you define higher peak?

Danger doesn't have a norm smith.
Bont doesn't have a brownlow or norm smith.

All of Pendles, Bont and Danger just have 1 AFLCA award - Judd and Fyfe never were judged as best player by coaches in any season.

Or instead of awards, do you run with number of votes or highest player ratings?

Pendles may end up 3rd for brownlow votes (using single umpire system).
Coaches votes only 30 split Danger and Pendles.
Pendles has 10 seasons where he was on H&A leaderboard in the Top 20 finishes in coaches votes.

Pendles and Danger both have best individual player ratings game of above 36 (higher than Dusty, Bont etc.)

IMHO Danger who would be leading candidate for #2 mid of 21st century, like Pendles he is often overlooked / underrated. His 2016/17 peak was just as good as Dusty.

 

[Mr Meow]

How do you define higher peak?

Danger doesn't have a norm smith.
Bont doesn't have a brownlow or norm smith.

All of Pendles, Bont and Danger just have 1 AFLCA award - Judd and Fyfe never were judged as best player by coaches in any season.

Or instead of awards, do you run with number of votes or highest player ratings?

Pendles may end up 3rd for brownlow votes (using single umpire system).
Coaches votes only 30 split Danger and Pendles.
Pendles has 10 seasons where he was on H&A leaderboard in the Top 20 finishes in coaches votes.

Pendles and Danger both have best individual player ratings game of above 36 (higher than Dusty, Bont etc.)

IMHO Danger who would be leading candidate for #2 mid of 21st century, like Pendles he is often overlooked / underrated. His 2016/17 peak was just as good as Dusty.

Let's not be silly with statements that miss the point. Dangerfield was BOG in the 2022 GF to quite a lot of people and at the very least his game rivalled Smith's. That performance would win most Norm Smith medals.

Much the same as Dangerfield's 2017 season would've won most Brownlow's, Coaches Association and League MVP awards. After the suspension he had a clear BOG where he didn't get a Brownlow vote from memory. So again, H&A-wise he rivalled one of the best individual seasons we've seen.

I provided the best seasons by coaches votes before and I shall do so again:

Ablett: 105, 104, 95, 92, 92, 80 (note that 2014 had 72 votes from 14 games, it was set to be a monster season)
Dangerfield: 121, 118, 97, 92, 73, 65
Martin: 122, 90, 90, 77, 70, 61
Pendlebury: 96, 79, 76, 73, 72, 68

Pendlebury would have had his 2011 season pushed into the 90s after finals so I think it's fair to allocate him 2 monster seasons. That's still behind the others. 2 of Martin's monster seasons were labelled as such only after finals but that's a a significant reason why he was a champion, dominating those important games.

So I would agree with the statement that Pendlebury did not have the ultra dominant, 3+ season peak that the other players listed here had. 6 for Ablett, 4 for Danger, 3 for Dusty and 2 for Pendlebury is where I'd have it. The other 3 players all had seasons where they won all 3 of the big H&A awards: Brownlow, Coaches, League MVP. That is dominance in anyone's language.

PS Dangerfield's coaches vote average is comfortably higher than Pendlebury's was at the same point in his career. Same for Brownlow average. Danger won't play 400+ games but to have the averages he has after 334 games is something Pendlebury did not achieve, and is another way to demonstrate a higher peak.

 

[Robroy22]

I think people have already forgotten how good Danger was at Adelaide as well. He's been at the Cats for almost a decade now but his time as a Crow he had 3 junior seasons as a capable forward flanker, then 2012-2015 he was a very special midfielder with big scoreboard impact.

Ironically the clear 2 best years of his career (2016-2017) came at one of the worst times. He dragged Geelong to top 4 but they proved ill equipped for really contending. 2017 Adelaide were a much better team. 2019-2020 era Cats were stronger, but no longer had Dangerfield/Selwood at their absolute peak (still very good players, but their 2016 season for example was outrageous).

With Pendlebury, at least some of his very best work coincided with the best Collingwood side this century 2010-2011. But his actual best season in 2013 Collingwood were just making up the numbers and by the time they were really contending again, he was a high performing veteran but not "peak Pendles". Timing is a fickle thing.

I actually meant when he was growing up playing for Anglesea mate but yeah he was also great early days at the Crows. He's always been a cut above in terms of determination and willingness to do whatever it takes to succeed.

 

[Mr Meow]

I actually meant when he was growing up playing for Anglesea mate but yeah he was also great early days at the Crows. He's always been a cut above in terms of determination and willingness to do whatever it takes to succeed.

Yeah I knew you meant juniors, I was just building on it from the stuff the public should be well aware of as far as the first half of his AFL career. But this can happen with players who switch clubs and have marathon careers, as opposed to one club players. By about his 3rd or 4th year as a Cat, he was already a veteran about to hit 30 years old.

Anyway, keeping it on topic, Pendlebury of course has been a standard-bearer for long term excellence. I just think that appreciation hasn't necessarily carried over to Dangerfield as much, for whatever reason.

 

[doppleganger]

Let's not be silly with statements that miss the point. Dangerfield was BOG in the 2022 GF to quite a lot of people and at the very least his game rivalled Smith's. That performance would win most Norm Smith medals.

My point is actually trying to determine if there actual is any criteria that people actually use when saying peak?

Plenty seem to rattle off norm smiths and Brownlow's in support of a players peak.

Much the same as Dangerfield's 2017 season would've won most Brownlow's, Coaches Association and League MVP awards. After the suspension he had a clear BOG where he didn't get a Brownlow vote from memory. So again, H&A-wise he rivalled one of the best individual seasons we've seen.

Completely agree.

Not much between Martin and Danger in 2017, but Danger was at very similar level in 2016...IMHO edge to Danger.

I provided the best seasons by coaches votes before and I shall do so again:

Ablett: 105, 104, 95, 92, 92, 80 (note that 2014 had 72 votes from 14 games, it was set to be a monster season)
Dangerfield: 121, 118, 97, 92, 73, 65
Martin: 122, 90, 90, 77, 70, 61
Pendlebury: 96, 79, 76, 73, 72, 68

Yes that is a actually what I am talking about, having people actually pick something they base their peak on.

If coaches votes are your thing, as presented Danger/Martin the highest peak from an individual season perspective. Some may then say they had the highest peaks (above GAJ even).

Pendlebury would have had his 2011 season pushed into the 90s after finals so I think it's fair to allocate him 2 monster seasons. That's still behind the others. 2 of Martin's monster seasons were labelled as such only after finals but that's a worthy reason for him to receive credit for them.

So I would agree with the statement that Pendlebury did not have the ultra dominant, 3+ season peak that the other players listed here had. 6 for Ablett, 4 for Danger, 3 for Dusty and 2 for Pendlebury is where I'd have it.

Can't fault the logic.

Your view of peak looks at seasons in the 90+ coaches votes realm, which is sort of top5 territory, instead of just winning itself. And considers repeat performance a key factor.

Others, might prefer to use player ratings over coaches votes. Ie set the bar at avg 18 as a monster year...in 2024 only two players were at that level (Bont and Cripps).

Noting they only started in 2012, so cost GAJ probably 5 and a couple for Pendles, but GAJ had 4 above 18, Danger also had 4, Pendles 2 and Dusty just 1...Bont is up to 3 and Fyfe had 3.

Or could run with something like AA etc.

Just be good for people to actually clarify how they will assess "peak".

Most ways you cut it, GAJ clear #1 and a gap back to whichever mid comes in 2nd. Danger probably the most regular name popping up in 2nd if people actually give a methodology behind their rating.

 

[Mr Meow]

My point is actually trying to determine if there actual is any criteria that people actually use when saying peak?

Plenty seem to rattle off norm smiths and Brownlow's in support of a players peak.

Completely agree.

Not much between Martin and Danger in 2017, but Danger was at very similar level in 2016...IMHO edge to Danger.

Yes that is a actually what I am talking about, having people actually pick something they base their peak on.

If coaches votes are your thing, as presented Danger/Martin the highest peak from an individual season perspective. Some some may say the highest peak.

Can't fault the logic.

Your view of peak looks at seasons in the 90+ coaches votes realm, which is sort of top5 territory, instead of just winning itself. And considers repeat performance a key factor.

Others, might prefer to use player ratings over coaches votes. Ie set the bar at avg 18 as a monster year...in 2024 only two players were at that level (Bont and Cripps).

Noting they only started in 2012, so cost GAJ probably 5 and a couple for Pendles, but GAJ had 4 above 18, Danger also had 4, Pendles 2 and Dusty just 1...Bont is up to 3 and Fyfe had 3.

Or could run with something like AA etc.

Just be good for people to actually clarify how they will assess "peak".

Most ways you cut it, GAJ clear #1 and a gap back to whichever mid comes in 2nd. Danger probably the most regular name popping up in 2nd if people actually give a methodology behind their rating.

I have to admit I'm not a fan of Player Ratings, never have been. Each ranking system is flawed of course but some sort of average for coaches, League MVP, Brownlow, B&F votes/ranking is what I'd trust the most when determining one of those dominant, ultra elite seasons.

Obviously it's easiest when there's a clean sweep and they're backed by strong finals performances, but life isn't easy. And wherever you draw the line will be arbitrary to some degree.

And I agree that depending on the way you flip it, Ablett will stay as a clear number 1 but various factors could push any of a batch of 5 or 6 midfielders to 2nd. It's close enough that you can just pick your favourites. A little bit easier if you strip it down to one category but as you've alluded to even that can be complex.

 

[Gone Critical]

For me the divider of the absolute best elite mids compared to the superstar mids who fall just a step below is the ability to be the goalkicking threat. Its the hardest thing for a mid to achieve and you in practice can't be at the very highest level without it.

Those who have/ had it are GAJ, Danger, Judd, Bont, Dusty, Bucks, Voss, Fyfe Swan

Those who are superb but not at the very highest level are Pendles, Mitchell, Cripps, Neale, Selwood,

At Collingwood since 2000 if I look at who has had the very best seasons I would have all of Buckley, Swan and Daicos having 2 seasons better than Pendles best ever.

Pendles has been a sensational player but he is just a bit below the very best. Love him as a player and watching him stop time has made him one of the best players ever to watch.

 

[doppleganger]

PS Dangerfield's coaches vote average is comfortably higher than Pendlebury's was at the same point in his career. Same for Brownlow average. Danger won't play 400+ games but to have the averages he has after 334 games is something Pendlebury did not achieve, and is another way to demonstrate a higher peak.

Id note that approach is not really specifically related to peak. If talking peak, having 2 seasons above 100 when Pendles best was 96 already reflects Danger had the higher peak if coaches votes are your thing.

And you have established a "monster" season type approach as an alternate that gives a nod to consistent dominance ie GAJ had 6 monster seasons to Danger 4, Dusty with 3, Pendles 1 or 2 according to coaches votes which is a good reflection of sustained peak.

Richmond fans may argue that Dusty (and Danger) had a higher peak than GAJ...and fair enough but that opens the door for one and done type players Heeney to be added to discussion for best peak, as they had years above 130 coaches votes.

To complement peak (as some might define simply as best season),,,.., an option for longevity (that isn't simply how many games) could be something like how many seasons in top 20 in coaches votes or just pick a figure to approximate - above 60 coaches votes or an avg of 3 per game (sort of reflecting an AA quality equivalent). Where or how you choose the threshold will be up to your own preference.

But this is the Pendles space, he has 10 Top20 seasons, 9 above 60 votes and 8 with an avg of 3 votes per game for a full season.

Danger again great but slightly down on Pendles - 7 above 60 and 6 with an avg of 3 votes per game or more...Dusty 6 and 5, GAJ 9 and 9.

Again no right or wrong, GAJ will almost always come out on top and then a group behind him even when people just go on a vibe with no real clarification of what they