The most important metric when judging a player's career ?

[Cursed Cat]

Selwood top 10 is not rational. That is a Fact.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Selwood has played in more wins than anyone else of his generation - and he was regularly the architect of those wins.
People have short memories - his last 3 seasons were fine, but prior to that if a game was close at three quarter time Geelong fans - a neurotic lot at the best of times - were positively sanguine in the knowledge that Selwood would be at the coal face and could get. it. done.

I put Gary Ablett senior and Joel Selwood as the two Geelong footballers I have seen who could win the club a game of football more or less off their own boot. They're 1,2 in my book.

Selwood never phoned it in, that's why he has all those AA jumpers. But it's not just his intensity; the guy knew how to orchestrate a win from a 50-50 contest.

 

[bradfisher14]

Great question!

1. Premiership success and the extent to which they contributed to that success.

Daylight.

2. Number of All-Australian selections.
3. Individual accolades.
4. Eye test.
5. Stats.

 

[RUNVS]

Great question!

1. Premiership success and the extent to which they contributed to that success.

So Nick Davis one of the best players of all time?

 

[Cuzz09]

So Nick Davis one of the best players of all time?

prob McLeod 2 GFs 2 Normies 2 flags

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[GhostofJimJess]

So Nick Davis one of the best players of all time?

I would imagine the metric "Contribution To Premiership Success" extends well beyond kicking (or preventing) a winning goal every now and then.

 

[RUNVS]

I would imagine the metric "Contribution To Premiership Success" extends well beyond kicking (or preventing) a winning goal every now and then.

"Contributes to premiership success". Without Nick Davis there is no premiership success for the Swans in 2005, none, so I would say Nick Davis clearly brought in a massive contribution and as a result he is clearly the best player of all time.

 

[Blackhawk42]

So Nick Davis one of the best players of all time?

And Liam Picken! .


(I jest, but I loved the way that bloke went about it. Shattered bis career ended the way it did).

 

[GhostofJimJess]

"Contributes to premiership success". Without Nick Davis there is no premiership success for the Swans in 2005, none, so I would say Nick Davis clearly brought in a massive contribution and as a result he is clearly the best player of all time.

What about the bloke who kicked it to him? Without that bloke, there is no Nick Davis?

 

[My_Username]

So Nick Davis one of the best players of all time?

Tuck?

prob McLeod 2 GFs 2 Normies 2 flags

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

On that basis, Martin...3,3 & 3...

 

[Cuzz09]

Tuck?



On that basis, Martin...3,3 & 3...

true.

they're all greats.

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Dazb86]

20 and 3

 

[nineteen eighty]

Least important metric when judging the merits of a player would have to be premierships IMO.

On SM-G960F using BigFooty.com mobile app

Jason Castagna disagrees!!

 

[nineteen eighty]

I honestly believe forwards and mids are where your best players are. I don’t really care about the rest. Does anybody have a backman or Ruck as their GOAT? It’s extremely rare, I don’t know anybody that does.

You primarily judge them on AAs.

Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Simon Madden is one of the best players I have ever seen. Name me one ruckman who comes even close? As a full time ruck who pinched hit as a forward, he kicked almost 600 goals. Obscene. His ruckwork was sensational!! He made his mids play better.

I won't even start on some of the greatest defenders to play the game and how they were the equal of mids / forwards.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Football supporters of every club argue the merits of current and previous players when it comes to their standing in the game and legacy.

It's obviously subjective and there are a number of various criterion to assess a player's worth. These range from 'Best & Fairests', 'Leigh Matthews Award', 'AFLCA' (coaches award), 'All Australians', 'Brownlow votes', 'Finals career', 'Norm Smiths', Premierships', 'games played', 'media awards', 'eye test' (if possible) and countless 'ingame statistics', ie goals, disposals, contested possessions, goal assists, hitouts, contested marks, etc.

There's probably no right answer, but my top 5 when assessing a player's career would be in order:

1. All Australians
2. AFLCA
3. Best & Fairest
4. Ingame statistics
5. Eye test

For me AA is the best guage, as players are judged by a multitude of experts, who, in the main, have played very successfully at the highest level. That's not to say it's fool proof, as it's not. Martin should have one more AA and some others should have one or two less (IMO).

That's why one metric isn't enough and we assess players across a number of factors.

But I'm interested to know what people place the most value in. Even B&Fs used to be manipulated by clubs in years gone by, especially if they found out a player was leaving.

And with the 'eye test' biases come into play, or you saw far more of some players than others.

EDIT: added a couple.

You don't need to post a top 5, you can simply list your most important metric.

As you can see I'm not a huge fan of judging players by the Brownlow, but others might be.

I reckon your list is about as good as you can get, but the more metrics, the better IMO. A player's achievements will speak for themselves most of the time and I'm nota fan of trying to measure one player against another. Player A doesn't have to be better than player B to be considered a champion, and we don't need to crown someone as the best player to ever play the game.

Every metric has its flaws though.
Most awards in the modern era are weighted towards favouring mids. Even AA has got to a point where it can be harder for pockets and flankers to make the team as they try to squeeze more mids into unnatural positions.
AFLCA - a player can win the Coleman and might get a few coach's votes for 5+ goal games, but most weeks the mids who get 30+ touches are going to take away the majority of votes.
B&F - every team does these differently. Some vote a top 4-5. Some have a set number of votes that can be spread across as many players as they deem worthy. Some reward consistency. Some use KPIs that go beyond touches and goals. The AFL full back of the century has only won 2 B&Fs.
Ingame stats - can be difficult when measuring a forward vs a mid, or defender vs a ruck. Can be ok when measuring two players of the same position, but differences in team tactics and quality of surrounding players can have an impact on output. High possession teams vs low possession teams (Dogs vs Suns). High scoring vs low scoring (Cats vs North). Is it easier for Larkey to kick 5+ goals being virtually the only target, or harder because they have less entries and he gets the number 1 defender, compared to a Hawkins who gets more entries, might not get the number 1 defender every week, but has to share his chances with Cameron?
Hell, even the eye test isn't perfect due to differences of opinion. Someone will value the hardball winning inside mid higher than the outside player who does all the hard running, gets to the right spots to receive it from the inside player, and generally has better ball use.
Even KPFs. Some prefer the more athletic forwards who can push up the ground a bit more and get involved in general play. Others like the slower gorillas who might get less than 10 touches a game but mark and kick everything that comes near them.

So, I don't think any one metric in isolation is more important than another and agree that using a number of factors is a better way of doing it, but it doesn't matter how good your system is, you will always have arguments over what's more important, or who's better.

I do believe that premierships is probably the worst way to gauge though. It's more of a team achievement. There are plenty of champions of the game who have never won a single flag, or only one. And even more ordinary players who have multiple premiership medallions hanging in their closet.

 

[My_Username]

Jason Castagna disagrees!!

He's actually a good example of the kind of useful role player that makes a good team great.

He's nobody's idea of a star, but his manic pressure in the forward line was a big part of the Richmond game plan and success.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

What about the bloke who kicked it to him? Without that bloke, there is no Nick Davis?

Tuck?



On that basis, Martin...3,3 & 3...

So Nick Davis one of the best players of all time?

This is why premiership success is the single worst metric. Is Ablett Snr out of the convo because he never won a flag?
Does Selwood win 4 flags without Ablett, Bartel, Ling, Danger, Hawkins, Scarlett, Stevie J, Mooney, Chapman, Mooney, Taylor, Kelly, Duncan, Stewart, Tuohy, Smith, Guthrie? Personally I hate Selwood because I think he was a dirty player, who sooked and played for frees, but despite that, I can't deny that he's one of the greats, but he was also surrounded by greats.
Are Harvey, Lockett, Buckley and Riewoldt not greats of the game because they didn't achieve ultimate team success?

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Selwood has played in more wins than anyone else of his generation - and he was regularly the architect of those wins.
People have short memories - his last 3 seasons were fine, but prior to that if a game was close at three quarter time Geelong fans - a neurotic lot at the best of times - were positively sanguine in the knowledge that Selwood would be at the coal face and could get. it. done.

I put Gary Ablett senior and Joel Selwood as the two Geelong footballers I have seen who could win the club a game of football more or less off their own boot. They're 1,2 in my book.

Selwood never phoned it in, that's why he has all those AA jumpers. But it's not just his intensity; the guy knew how to orchestrate a win from a 50-50 contest.

I think we all know Selwood has a well earned reputation for lifting in close games that the Cats won. But finals?

2013 QF Cats 5 points down 3/4 time to Dockers at Wingless and lose by 15.

2013 PF Cats 20 points ahead of Hawks at 3/4 time and lose by 5.

2014 QF Cats 14 down 3/4 time lose by 36.

2014 SF Cats lose by a goal to North.

2017 QF Cats down by 13 at 3/4 time lose to Tigers by 51.

2018 EF Cats down by 23 at 3/4 time lose by 29.

2019 QF 10 point loss to Collingwood.

2019 PF Cats 4 points behind Tigers 3/4 time lose by 19.

2020 QF Cats down by 16 v Port at 3/4 time lose by 16.

2020 GF Cats down by 2 points 3/4 time v Tigers lose by 31.

I thought he was strong in the close final term v Collingwood in the 2022 QF, without necessarily orchestrating the win.

But do all these losses from winnable positions in big games show there was a limit to Selwood’s ability to orchestrate a win from a 50-50 contest?

 

[ThatsjustDappa]

"Contributes to premiership success". Without Nick Davis there is no premiership success for the Swans in 2005, none, so I would say Nick Davis clearly brought in a massive contribution and as a result he is clearly the best player of all time.

I raise you Shannon Byrnes who in the 4th quarter 2009 GF, his run and carry destroyed St Kilda.

Well done Shagger the GOAT...(nick name suits just right too Shagger!)

 

[Trav 20]

I think we all know Selwood has a well earned reputation for lifting in close games that the Cats won. But finals?

2013 QF Cats 5 points down 3/4 time to Dockers at Wingless and lose by 15.

2013 PF Cats 20 points ahead of Hawks at 3/4 time and lose by 5.

2014 QF Cats 14 down 3/4 time lose by 36.

2014 SF Cats lose by a goal to North.

2017 QF Cats down by 13 at 3/4 time lose to Tigers by 51.

2018 EF Cats down by 23 at 3/4 time lose by 29.

2019 QF 10 point loss to Collingwood.

2019 PF Cats 4 points behind Tigers 3/4 time lose by 19.

2020 QF Cats down by 16 v Port at 3/4 time lose by 16.

2020 GF Cats down by 2 points 3/4 time v Tigers lose by 31.

I thought he was strong in the close final term v Collingwood in the 2022 QF, without necessarily orchestrating the win.

But do all these losses from winnable positions in big games show there was a limit to Selwood’s ability to orchestrate a win from a 50-50 contest?

I would have thought a more significant statistic was the amount of times Geelong were blown out of the water in the first quarter in finals prior to 2022.

How often were they down by 3-5 goals at quarter time in finals, which is when your midfield stars really need to show the way ?

 

[Meteoric Rise]

I would have thought a more significant statistic was the amount of times Geelong were blown out of the water in the first quarter in finals prior to 2022.

How often were they down by 3-5 goals at quarter time in finals, which is when your midfield stars really need to show the way ?

Well, Selwood’s record in finals where he was in his prime from say 2012 onwards includes 4 wins and 14 losses versus teams who finished top 4. If we eliminate the post prime period and focus on him aged 24 to 31, was 4 wins and 11 losses, with zero wins against teams who finished the finals series in the top 4. So we can see from that when he was in his prime and leading he club, his famous(and earned) ability to lift his team in crucial moments DID NOT extend to the matches that matter most - ie finals. I am not sure whether it was the beginning, middle or end of those matches where he failed to get his team on top the most, but somewhere along the line he wasn’t good enough to do that. Whether a greater player could have, we will never know.

 

[ThatsjustDappa]

Well, Selwood’s record in finals where he was in his prime from say 2012 onwards includes 4 wins and 14 losses versus teams who finished top 4. If we eliminate the post prime period and focus on him aged 24 to 31, was 4 wins and 11 losses, with zero wins against teams who finished the finals series in the top 4. So we can see from that when he was in his prime and leading he club, his famous(and earned) ability to lift his team in crucial moments DID NOT extend to the matches that matter most - ie finals. I am not sure whether it was the beginning, middle or end of those matches where he failed to get his team on top the most, but somewhere along the line he wasn’t good enough to do that. Whether a greater player could have, we will never know.

He was AA in 2009 dingbat.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

He was AA in 2009 dingbat.

I didn’t say he wasn’t pea brain.

If you can’t follow the reasoning in the post, you are welcome to ask questions.

 

[ThatsjustDappa]

I didn’t say he wasn’t pea brain.

If you can’t follow the reasoning in the post, you are welcome to ask questions.

So not in his prime until 2012 when he was AA in 2009 and 2010 with a carji to boot, yeah ok...

 

[Meteoric Rise]

So not in his prime until 2012 when he was AA in 2009 and 2010 with a carji to boot, yeah ok...

Righto, you are right I am wrong, his prime ended at 2011. Fmd. Who do they employ to teach you idiots in the schools down in Geelong?

 

[Red Bull]

September …