Analysis Where does Buddy Franklin rank amongst the greats?

[greatwhiteshark]

Tony Lockett

Tony Lockett

Age

58

Ht

191cm

Wt

108kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.2

3star

K

8.4

3star

HB

1.8

2star

M

6.3

5star

T

0.5

3star

G

4.8

5star

No current season stats available

D

8.2

2star

K

5.6

3star

HB

2.6

3star

M

4.0

4star

T

0.0

1star

G

1.4

5star

Is The best FF I have seen.
Gary Ablett Snr is the best footballer I have Ever seen. He played FF

Take from that what you will.

Ablett Snr - Then the rest

 

[PhatBoy]

How comfortable would any modern day defender be if they were one on one with Buddy in the forward 50 with no backup?

They already struggle with him - how often does he get double teamed though? The whole idea of someone zoning off their own man is generally to thwart someone who is rag dolling and outmuscling their opponent, and doing it from a relatively limited space on the field - which is precisely what enables other defenders to help out. They are close enough to do it. Franklin’s brilliance doesn’t revolve around congested football it’s around space and athleticism and being able to bob up anywhere within 60m of goal.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

I reckon these greats from the 80’s and 90’s wouldn’t mind having their midfield running around with 50% of the game uncontested.

 

[RUNVS]

They already struggle with him - how often does he get double teamed though? The whole idea of someone zoning off their own man is generally to thwart someone who is rag dolling and outmuscling their opponent, and doing it from a relatively limited space on the field - which is precisely what enables other defenders to help out. They are close enough to do it. Franklin’s brilliance doesn’t revolve around congested football it’s around space and athleticism and being able to bob up anywhere within 60m of goal.

A zone is not just about double teaming someone. It is about cutting off leading patterns, making it much harder for the forward to find space.

 

[Xtreme]

Jonathan Brown ran circles around him AND he has more premierships. Buddy was good but never great.

 

[Trav 20]

Dunstall usually led the head to head goal tally throughout their careers and was generally expected to kick the most goals and was generally considered the better player.

Utter nonsense.

 

[garbo]

Somewhere in the top 5 post 2000 which I consider the modern game, I’d have Ablett Jnr clear number one, then probably Dusty for doing it when it counts. Franklin would be in the next few after them, as a fwd in the same time frame I’d have it between him and Roo. If I’m nitpicking I probably mark him down a bit due to his wastefulness in front of goal and at time selfish play particularly in his time at hawks and also due to not getting a flag at swans while hawks went and won the next 2 without him.

 

[The Devils Advocate]

From the forwards I've seen, I have him in the tier above Richardson and Lloyd, and a tier below Lockett, Carey, and Gary Ablett Sr.

Probably the same tier as Dunstall for mine. You could argue that Lloyd ane Richardson belong in the same tier.

Immortals: Carey, Ablett Sr., Lockett
Divines: Dunstall, Buddy
Ancients: Lloyd, Richardson,
Legends: Tredrea, Betts, Modra, Matera, Brown, Riewoldt, Pavlich, Milne, C. Rioli, Salmon

Just off the top of my head while I do a poop.

 

[JackFlash]

He might get a game in the 4th best team on the bench? But he plays a vastly different game than just 20 years ago, let alone blokes from the 30s 40s 50s 60s 70s 80s or 90s! Nothing against Buddy, it's just the game they play today, I can only find 3 players over the past 20 seasons who would make the first game of 22 per side. Ablett Jr, Martin and Judd...

 

[Kappa]

I reckon these greats from the 80’s and 90’s wouldn’t mind having their midfield running around with 50% of the game uncontested.

Are you seriously suggesting ball carriers from the 80s were under more pressure than the modern game? How much absolute objectively wrong bullshit can you spew in one thread? What reality do u live in?

 

[owen87]

He might get a game in the 4th best team on the bench? But he plays a vastly different game than just 20 years ago, let alone blokes from the 30s 40s 50s 60s 70s 80s or 90s! Nothing against Buddy, it's just the game they play today, I can only find 3 players over the past 20 seasons who would make the first game of 22 per side. Ablett Jr, Martin and Judd...

Voss 2001 - 2003 wasn't exactly a bad player inside the last 20 years...

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Are you seriously suggesting ball carriers from the 80s were under more pressure than the modern game? How much absolute objectively wrong bullshit can you spew in one thread? What reality do u live in?

I didn’t say that you nut job, I just simply pointed out that the modern game is 50% uncontested. What part of that is not correct? There is more cheap possessions in the game now than ever in its history. Teams actually concede these uncontested possessions. But like it or not no teams conceded easy possessions back then, the game was man on man. The contested possessions part of the modern game has never been better, the pressure is immense when it is applied.

 

[Happy Mastenator]

I didn’t say that you nut job, I just simply pointed out that the modern game is 50% uncontested. What part of that is not correct? There is more cheap possessions in the game now than ever in its history. Teams actually concede these uncontested possessions. But like it or not no teams conceded easy possessions back then, the game was man on man. The contested possessions part of the modern game has never been better, the pressure is immense when it is applied.

Teams don't concede uncontested possessions anywhere but in the backline, and that's only because they are flooding back to their defense to block up the forwards.

 

[owen87]

I didn’t say that you nut job, I just simply pointed out that the modern game is 50% uncontested. What part of that is not correct? There is more cheap possessions in the game now than ever in its history. Teams actually concede these uncontested possessions. But like it or not no teams conceded easy possessions back then, the game was man on man. The contested possessions part of the modern game has never been better, the pressure is immense when it is applied.

Yes. Zone defence has changed the game. It's much harder to score now, because teams realised that man-on-man was inferior.

Not sure how this is relevant to past FF's somehow liking the change, given modern FF's get significantly less scoring opportunities yet run significantly more distance to get them.

 

[JackFlash]

Voss 2001 - 2003 wasn't exactly a bad player inside the last 20 years...

Voss is good, he would be talked about in the 2nd team, but he would definitely make the 3rd or 4th team along with Hird and Buckley, he did however play 8 seasons in the last real era of football and won a Brownlow in 1996.

 

[Guardian Hawk]

Utter nonsense.

Lockett debuted in '83 and Dunstall in '85.

Due to the earlier start, Lockett held a 150 odd goal lead in the head to head early in the initial stages of Dunstall's career.

After 10 years of Dunstall's career (and 12 of Lockett's) so up to the end of 1994, Dunstall led the head to head goalkicking by over 100 goals.

Dunstall had the higher goal average and had kicked more goals in 7 of the previous 9 seasons.

Dunstall had the three highest individual seasons (which he maintained) and the most goals in a game (which he maintained).

Dunstall had more Brownlow votes (which he maintained, just), more Colemans, more Team Of The Year/AA's, more B&F's (which he maintained) and obviously more flags and team success.

In some of those seasons, obviously Lockett missed some games but that was due to him constantly getting himself suspended from ill discipline.

They were constantly compared as players and the general consensus was that Lockett was very highly talented but poorly disciplined and Dunstall was similarly talented but more rounded and better disciplined. Lockett was considered more fun to watch (equally brilliant and fiery) but Dunstall was considered more effective/efficient and the better team player. Looking at newspaper articles, Mike Sheahan's top 50, etc from those years backs up this view and that Dunstall was generally rated the better overall player. Dunstall's accolades and goals were tracking well ahead and it was anticipated he would end up with the better resume and the goalkicking record.

Unfortunately, after that point, Dunstall had 2 knee recos, a broken collarbone, a smashed face, etc and his averages took a dip and he needed to retire. Lockett had comparatively little injury trouble, kept going and eventually overtook Dunstall for goals kicked and claimed the record (Dunstall retired 46 goals short of the record) at a goal average 0.1 higher than Dunstall. Now everyone seems to restrospectively believe that Lockett was always comfortably the better player.

Wayne Carey, Mike Sheahan and others who have weighed in still consider Dunstall the better of the two and I think the post you quoted above demonstrates why. Either way you look at it, they are bloody close and very comparable players who are both in the argument for the greatest full forward of all time and in the best 10 players of all time.

 

[Trav 20]

Lockett debuted in '83 and Dunstall in '85.

Due to the earlier start, Lockett held a 150 odd goal lead in the head to head early in the initial stages of Dunstall's career.

After 10 years of Dunstall's career (and 12 of Lockett's) so up to the end of 1994, Dunstall led the head to head goalkicking by over 100 goals.

Dunstall had the higher goal average and had kicked more goals in 7 of the previous 9 seasons.

Dunstall had the three highest individual seasons (which he maintained) and the most goals in a game (which he maintained).

Dunstall had more Brownlow votes (which he maintained, just), more Colemans, more Team Of The Year/AA's, more B&F's (which he maintained) and obviously more flags and team success.

In some of those seasons, obviously Lockett missed some games but that was due to him constantly getting himself suspended from ill discipline.

They were constantly compared as players and the general consensus was that Lockett was very highly talented but poorly disciplined and Dunstall was similarly talented but more rounded and better disciplined. Lockett was considered more fun to watch (equally brilliant and fiery) but Dunstall was considered more effective/efficient and the better team player. Looking at newspaper articles, Mike Sheahan's top 50, etc from those years backs up this view and that Dunstall was generally rated the better overall player. Dunstall's accolades and goals were tracking well ahead and it was anticipated he would end up with the better resume and the goalkicking record.

Unfortunately, after that point, Dunstall had 2 knee recos, a broken collarbone, a smashed face, etc and his averages took a dip and he needed to retire. Lockett had comparatively little injury trouble, kept going and eventually overtook Dunstall for goals kicked and claimed the record (Dunstall retired 46 goals short of the record) at a goal average 0.1 higher than Dunstall. Now everyone seems to restrospectively believe that Lockett was always comfortably the better player.

Wayne Carey, Mike Sheahan and others who have weighed in still consider Dunstall the better of the two and I think the post you quoted above demonstrates why. Either way you look at it, they are bloody close and very comparable players who are both in the argument for the greatest full forward of all time and in the best 10 players of all time.

I don't need a history lesson, as I saw both of their entire careers.

Of course, some lean one way and others lean another way, but you suggested that Dunstall was ''generally considered the better player.''

That's crap. Most considered Lockett superior, although pleny certainly favoured Dunstall.

Don't try and rewrite history.

 

[Guardian Hawk]

I don't need a history lesson, as I saw both of their entire careers.

Of course, some lean one way and others lean another way, but you suggested that Dunstall was ''generally considered the better player.''

That's crap. Most considered Lockett superior, although pleny certainly favoured Dunstall.

Don't try and rewrite history.

I'm not trying to rewrite anything.

I evidenced what I was trying to say by comparing accolades, achievements, goalkicking records, newspaper articles, top 50 rankings, etc from the time.

My perception at the time was that most considered Plugger the more spectacular/fun to watch but Dunstall the more effective. Most saw their goalkicking exploits as very similar (Dunstall was the slight leader at the time) but that Dunstall offered more to the team (on and off field) beside goals.

Perhaps as Hawthorn supporter living in the Eastern suburbs at the time, my broad circle painted a slightly different picture to yours but the retrospective analysis appears to support this view as well.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

I'm not trying to rewrite anything.

I evidenced what I was trying to say by comparing accolades, achievements, goalkicking records, newspaper articles, top 50 rankings, etc from the time.

My perception at the time was that most considered Plugger the more spectacular/fun to watch but Dunstall the more effective. Most saw their goalkicking exploits as very similar (Dunstall was the slight leader at the time) but that Dunstall offered more to the team (on and off field) beside goals.

Perhaps as Hawthorn supporter living in the Eastern suburbs at the time, my broad circle painted a slightly different picture to yours but the retrospective analysis appears to support this view as well.

I agree with your point that Dunstall offered more from a team perspective. It was obvious to the spectator at the time and the disposal stats, as you mentioned earlier, bear it out:

	Lockett	Dunstall
Kicks	8.42​	9.67​
Goals	4.84​	4.66​
Behinds	2.1​	2.38​
Other kicks	1.48​	2.63​
Handballs	1.78​	2.26​
Tackles	0.68​	0.75​

But in terms of pure goalkicking, I think Plugger was always ahead of Dunstall for the period they were both playing:

	Lockett			Dunstall
	Games	Goals	Career	Games	Goals	Career
1985​	21​	79​	175​	16​	36​	36​
1986​	18​	60​	235​	22​	77​	113​
1987​	22​	117​	352​	24​	94​	207​
1988​	8​	35​	387​	23​	132​	339​
1989​	11​	78​	465​	24​	138​	477​
1990​	12​	65​	530​	18​	83​	560​
1991​	17​	127​	657​	18​	82​	642​
1992​	22​	132​	789​	23​	145​	787​
1993​	10​	53​	842​	21​	123​	910​
1994​	10​	56​	898​	19​	101​	1011​
1995​	19​	110​	1008​	17​	66​	1077​
1996​	22​	121​	1129​	23​	102​	1179​
1997​	12​	37​	1166​	8​	21​	1200​
1998​	23​	109​	1275​	13​	54​	1254​
Total	227​	1179​		269​	1254​
Average		5.193833​			4.66171​

In years where they played similar numbers of games Dunstall led twice (1986, 1992) while Lockett led 4 times (1987, 1991, 1995, 1996). He was also a lot closer to Dunstall in those two years than Dunstall was to him in the other years.

It is true that Lockett missed 23 games due to suspension during his career. But during the 1985-1998 period he missed 88 games in total, so he did have his own issues with injuries.

As footballers, in broad terms, I agree that they are very close. But as a goalkicker, to me at least, Lockett has a comfortable lead.

 

[Kappa]

I didn’t say that you nut job, I just simply pointed out that the modern game is 50% uncontested. What part of that is not correct? There is more cheap possessions in the game now than ever in its history. Teams actually concede these uncontested possessions. But like it or not no teams conceded easy possessions back then, the game was man on man. The contested possessions part of the modern game has never been better, the pressure is immense when it is applied.

Do you actually understand modern football at all? That uncontested position is all across the back pocket and halfback lines because of zones, how the * does that make life easier for modern forwards exactly?

 

[RUNVS]

I don't have the time and I suspect I don't have the stats necessary but one way of trying to see how Buddy compares could be

Average up all players goals by how much more goals teams scored in 1990 compared to now, so basically give every score an additional 20% (just a guess)

and then once you have that compare the percentage of times the ball went to Dunstall or Lockett when they were in their forward 50 compared to Buddy since back then key forwards were much more focal points than they are now.

so if the ball went to Dunstall 40% of the time and Buddy 25% of the time then add 15% to Buddy's overall goal tally.

 

[Holy Rioli]

Dunstall also got to play as full forward for a dominant Hawks team for most of his career. Think that mean a few more opportunities came his way.

he had to share a forward line with Brereton, Buckenara etc and had to come back from a fractured skull. Plugger had the fwd line to himself and so did Ablett especially when he went forward permanently.

FWIW I think if Franklin played in the 80's & 90's era he probably finishes up with 1500 goals.

 

[TheUnicorn]

If we were including VFL i would say maybe top 15? if it were just AFL i would have to say he's top 5

 

[Goomba1973]

Top 10 player at the end of his career
Best forward of this era by a country mile
2nd best player of this era (Behind GOAT Jr)

 

[carloss]

Top 10 player at the end of his career
Best forward of this era by a country mile
2nd best player of this era (Behind GOAT Jr)

Better than Dustin Martin?