Have Richmond passed North and west coast

[Obeanie1]

You don't poll anything in the Richmond B & F for below average performances. Presumably this is below what the coaches perceive as AFL average.

Trainor has had a good season for a first year player, but most of his performances would have been below AFL average, as we might expect. Lalor from his 11 games would have turned in more performances above AFL average, therefore voting in more games and ultimately accumulating more votes. You don't get Richmond B & F votes for just showing up.

Lalor actually had very high rating games in 2 of his 9 matches where he played the full game. That is a very high proportion for a first year player. Murphy Reid for eg won high praise for his season and the Rising Star gong, but he did not have a game even close to Lalor's best 2 rating games, and he played forward in a better team and played 24 matches.

So two decent games was all a player needed to win B&F 1st year player.

So not much competition from fellow draftees then.

Bit of a strange award 1st year player. Not many kids play year 1 so it's not a huge group competing for it.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

I saw on the Instagram post that it's based on Jack Dyer medals votes.

I dunno, I think Trainor was way better across the season, whereas Lalor had 2 very good games but was mostly a contributor for the other.

Sems very heavily skewed for a couple of standout performances and doesn't reward consistency whatsoever.

Basically, you could have 3-4 incredible games, then donuts for the rest of the season, whilst another player may be consistently good across more games and not even get a look in.

Very weird system, IMO. Surely the best first year player should actually be the best for the entire season and voted on accordingly, not just give it to a bloke for a couple of good games?

100% based on Jack Dyer Medal votes.

To my eye, Lalor was exceptional. I don't think too many people disagree with that.

The part of your post I have bolded above is not correct. If you were consistently good you would be above AFL average. Richmond for the purpose of these awards just ignores any performances below AFL average, regardless of your level of experience or how consistent you are. If you think about it, it is probably a sensible system. It is essentially saying to a Luke Trainor, that was fine for an 18-19yo player, but at a strong club you would be playing VFL at this point. Lalor when fit would get a game in any team based on his 2025 performances.

 

[Rich01]

Any Richmond supporter care to explain why 11 game Lalor won best first year player, whilst 21 gamer Trainor(who was far more impressive IMO) couldn't get a look in?

Yep, Trainor will be a gun.
Our 2024 draft looking extremely promising.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

So two devent games was all a player needed to win B&F 1st year player.

So not much competition from fellow draftees then.

I didn't say Lalor played 2 decent games. He played two games that rated at a very high level. If the metric is switched to "decent" then probably 7 of Lalor's games were decent by AFL standards. In Trainor's case he only rated above 7 in 2 games.

Very, very few 18-19yo players achieve AFL average in their roles in their first year.

For Richmond in 2025, you would say Lalor and Hotton were around that mark. In the whole competition there are only about 6-7 first year players aged 18-19 you would say threatened AFL average in their roles. Many more of these players will start achieving that standard over the next 3 years or so.

 

[Obeanie1]

I didn't say Lalor played 2 decent games. He played two games that rated at a very high level. If the metric is switched to "decent" then probably 7 of Lalor's games were decent by AFL standards. In Trainor's case he only rated above 7 in 2 games.

Decent v standout.

End of the day it's an award that two or three players were contending. That's the point.

Now if it was best player under 21 then you start getting competition for the award.

 

[bzparkes]

100% based on Jack Dyer Medal votes.

To my eye, Lalor was exceptional. I don't think too many people disagree with that.

The part of your post I have bolded above is not correct. If you were consistently good you would be above AFL average. Richmond for the purpose of these awards just ignores any performances below AFL average, regardless of your level of experience or how consistent you are. If you think about it, it is probably a sensible system. It is essentially saying to a Luke Trainor, that was fine for an 18-19yo player, but at a strong club you would be playing VFL at this point. Lalor when fit would get a game in any team based on his 2025 performances.

Maybe it's just me but I feel that Trainor was the best first year player for Richmond. Seems I'm not alone based off the IG post.

Lalor's standout games were definitely better but they were only a few, whereas I thought Trainor should've made top 10 in your BnF, especially considering Prestia made 10th and I thought Trainor was better this year.

Looked very comfortable at the level from day 1 and across the entire season.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Maybe it's just me but I feel that Trainor was the best first year player for Richmond. Seems I'm not alone based off the IG post.

Lalor's standout games were definitely better but they were only a few, whereas I thought Trainor should've made top 10 in your BnF, especially considering Prestia made 10th and I thought Trainor was better this year.

Looked very comfortable at the level from day 1 and across the entire season.

I suppose you are just looking at the things you see and notice on your TV screen. The Richmond coaches are considering a lot more than that, so they are in a much better position to judge.

The club seems very happy with Trainor's progress, it is just an honest assessment of where he is versus AFL average at this point in time. The player ratings certainly back up the view of the Tiger coaches over your casual observations. For what it is worth, if you just went by casually watching, I thought Trainor had a terrific year as well.

 

[ShereKhan]

Tigers will be able to stay competitive as they are based in Vic and every year players move to Vic clubs or change clubc in Melbourne. Much more active trade market. Its why they won 5 games this season.

So they may finish bottom 3 but it wont be a 1 win season, they will continue winning 5 or 7 games as they rebuild. Not because they are better at rebuilding but because they will have more players willing to be traded there.

WTF are u on about? Owies, Baker, Graham, Hunt, Young, Starcevich….

 

[GhostofJimJess]

Maybe it's just me but I feel that Trainor was the best first year player for Richmond. Seems I'm not alone based off the IG post.

Lalor's standout games were definitely better but they were only a few, whereas I thought Trainor should've made top 10 in your BnF, especially considering Prestia made 10th and I thought Trainor was better this year.

Looked very comfortable at the level from day 1 and across the entire season.

I agree. I think Trainor certainly produced the most output across the full season and was really stiff not to win it.

Could be a bit of the old Rising Star secret herbs and spices associated with it too, where the rookie with the best numbers and output is often overlooked for the one that has shown the highest ceiling.

AA has a fair chunk of that too.
Eg. play well on a Friday night and it’s worth more it seems than a Sunday arvo.

 

[Grockadoc]

Maybe it's just me but I feel that Trainor was the best first year player for Richmond. Seems I'm not alone based off the IG post.

Lalor's standout games were definitely better but they were only a few, whereas I thought Trainor should've made top 10 in your BnF, especially considering Prestia made 10th and I thought Trainor was better this year.

Looked very comfortable at the level from day 1 and across the entire season.

I personally feel that Faull was Richmond's best first year player given his output and position he was asked to play coming off an interrupted year last year and minimum preseason.

 

[Shueygod]

Prestia averaged 2.17 votes per game. TT who won averaged 2.24/game. Vlastuin who came second averaged 2.19. So whattya know....if they all played 23 x games the top-3 would've been TT, Vlastuin then Prestia.

Jack Graham missed 5 x games and came 4th in your B&F. If he played 23 x games like Baker he would've come a very close 2nd.....who would've thought senior players playing majority of the season would figure prominently in your B&F.....like Baker, Graham, Duggan, Ryan, Cripps......

I wonder, where do you think McGovern, Yeo, Waterman and Allen would've finished if they played 20+ games? I reckon they might've finished in the top-10, don't you?

In rebuilding teams, almost every half decent senior player who plays majority of the season comes top-10 in the B&F.......it happened at the Eagles, happened at the Tigers, happened at the Roos....it's just crazy....

It’s fine you can just admit your kids are trash, all the kids in our top 10 bar Ginbey missed a fair few games. If it was on a per game basis we’d have more kids in the top 10.

Richmond’s best and fairest results are very concerning.

 

[ShereKhan]

Decent v standout.

End of the day it's an award that two or three players were contending. That's the point.

Now if it was best player under 21 then you start getting competition for the award.

The award is for the best first year player - not the best first 3-season player … The winner is whichever first year player gets the most votes in the B&F.

I saw on the Instagram post that it's based on Jack Dyer medals votes.

I dunno, I think Trainor was way better across the season, whereas Lalor had 2 very good games but was mostly a contributor for others and little to no impact in the rest.

Sems very heavily skewed for a couple of standout performances and doesn't reward consistency whatsoever.

Basically, you could have 3-4 incredible games, then donuts for the rest of the season, whilst another player may be consistently good across the entire season and not even get a look in.

Very weird system, IMO. Surely the best first year player should actually be the best for the entire season and voted on accordingly, not just give it to a bloke for a couple of good games?

Why over analyse it? It’s for the best first year player and it’s awarded to whomever gets the most votes in the B&F. Black and white. Done. Simple.

 

[ShereKhan]

It’s fine you can just admit your kids are trash, all the kids in our top 10 bar Ginbey missed a fair few games. If it was on a per game basis we’d have more kids in the top 10.

Richmond’s best and fairest results are very concerning.

You had 6 x players for the season who played 21+ games … they all finished top-10 in the B&F. Your only youngster who came top-10 in the B&F who played less than 20 games was Harley Reid (he played 19).

So surprise surprise … if you stayed on the park you finished top-10 in the Eagles B&F.

This had little to do with age and much more to do with games played.

I’m wiling to predict if Yeo and Waterman have full seasons … and Maric and Hough don’t, then Yeo and Warerman will finish higher in the B&F in 2026….

 

[Shueygod]

You had 6 x players for the season who played 21+ games … they all finished top-10 in the B&F. Your only youngster who came top-10 in the B&F who played less than 20 games was Harley Reid (he played 19).

So surprise surprise … if you stayed on the park you finished top-10 in the Eagles B&F.

This had little to do with age and much more to do with games played.

I’m wiling to predict if Yeo and Waterman have full seasons … and Maric and Hough don’t, then Yeo and Warerman will finish higher in the B&F in 2026….

Some serious cherry picking here, Hewett played 20 games, Kelly played 20 games.

There certainly wasn’t a situation where a senior player played 12 games and made it over young players that played 15, 19, 20, 21.

Massive cliff approaching for the Tiges.

 

[ShereKhan]

Some serious cherry picking here, Hewett played 20 games, Kelly played 20 games.

There certainly wasn’t a situation where a senior player played 12 games and made it over young players that played 15, 19, 20, 21.

Massive cliff approaching for the Tiges.

Jack Graham finished 4th in your B&F having missed 5 games. I've got no idea how that can happen as Graham is genuinely pretty sh*t. Graham played 20 games for Tigers in each of the 2022 and 2023 seasons.....not in top-10 either season. Misses 5 x games for the Eagles and finishes 4th. Tells you all you need to know.

 

[Shueygod]

Jack Graham finished 4th in your B&F having missed 5 games. I've got no idea how that can happen as Graham is genuinely pretty sh*t.

The same Graham that came 2nd in the tigers B&F?

It’s okay, you’ll get assistance in two years time and start to claw your way back up.

Probably compete for a premiership in a decade.

 

[Obeanie1]

Jack Graham finished 4th in your B&F having missed 5 games. I've got no idea how that can happen as Graham is genuinely pretty sh*t. Graham played 20 games for Tigers in each of the 2022 and 2023 seasons.....not in top-10 either season. Misses 5 x games for the Eagles and finishes 4th. Tells you all you need to know.

He's finally getting his opportunity?

Oh.....I know.

The older established mids at Richmond got first crack and Graham had to play as a HFF?

So what? No-one is disputing that Taranto, Hopper and Prestia aren't decent mids. That's why the Tigers won more games than the Eagles in 2025.

 

[Morro]

Any Richmond supporter care to explain why 11 game Lalor won best first year player, whilst 21 gamer Trainor(who was far more impressive IMO) couldn't get a look in?

Trainor completely robbed.

Lalor had 2 standout games, a few average ones and a couple where he went missing.

Trainor seemed very consistent across the whole season and ended up playing twice as many games.

Highlighted where you went wrong

 

[HBFlanker]

All three of these clubs are in better positions than Essendon.

 

[Morro]

It’s fine you can just admit your kids are trash, all the kids in our top 10 bar Ginbey missed a fair few games. If it was on a per game basis we’d have more kids in the top 10.

Richmond’s best and fairest results are very concerning.

I dont think finishing top 10 in the worst team on record is anything to gloat about it.

 

[Shueygod]

I dont think finishing top 10 in the worst team on record is anything to gloat about it.

as opposed to not cracking the top 12 over 12 game Prestia and Mcintosh? Kids at Tigers must be ****ing shit

 

[ShereKhan]

The same Graham that came 2nd in the tigers B&F?

It’s okay, you’ll get assistance in two years time and start to claw your way back up.

Probably compete for a premiership in a decade.

bahaha...he came 2nd wayyyyyy back in 2021. The year many of our team missed loads of games and we finished 12th.

Graham: 22 games (zero games missed)

I wonder how the B&F would've looked on average votes per game in 2021:

Prestia
Lambert
Martin
Grimes
Broad
Bolton
Lynch
eq: Baker
eq: GRAHAM

There he is...a very creditable equal 8th on average B&F votes per game.

And no, we won't embarrass ourselves by asking for assistance. If we do I'll be ashamed.

 

[Shueygod]

bahaha...he came 2nd wayyyyyy back in 2021. The year many of our team missed loads of games and we finished 12th.

Graham: 22 games (zero games missed)

I wonder how the B&F would've looked on average votes per game in 2021:

Prestia
Lambert
Martin
Grimes
Broad
Bolton
Lynch
eq: Baker
eq: GRAHAM

There he is...a very creditable equal 8th on average B&F votes per game.

And no, we won't embarrass ourselves by asking for assistance. If we do I'll be ashamed.

I guarantee you the tigers ask for assistance when they’re bottom 2 in 2 years time, I’d prepare to be ashamed.

 

[ShereKhan]

as opposed to not cracking the top 12 over 12 game Prestia and Mcintosh? Kids at Tigers must be ****ing shit

We beat the Eagles by 10-goals on their home track in the first year of a proper rebuild, a year after we traded out 4 of our best players. We won 5 games to 1. Many of our elite youngsters barely played.

Meanwhile, in the strongest draft on record the Eagles picked Bo Allan .....bahahhaha.

 

[Morro]

as opposed to not cracking the top 12 over 12 game Prestia and Mcintosh? Kids at Tigers must be ****ing shit

When you look at how many games most of them played due to injury, yeah.