20 Disposals and a goal

[Mr Meow]

Its kinda sad that another thread that starting well about players who have achieved a cool (but ultimately fairly meaningless) statistical mark has turned into the same stupid s**t fight. You could delete 90% of this thread and it would be a massive improvement.

Technically Aker "only" achieved it 3 times. Brisbane's midfield was stacked enough that he could spend a little more time forward (or even the backline!) some years. The Bulldogs needed him forward more.

Of his "non 20/1" seasons he had:

-19.9 + 1.8
-19.6 + 1.8
-19.5 + 0.7
-18.6 + 1.1
-18.3 + 2.3
-18.1 + 1.1
-17.2 + 2.0
-15.7 + 1.0
-15.6 + 1.5
-14.7 + 1.2

Coupled with his impressive assist numbers and the lower disposal averages of players in a bunch of these seasons, I'd say most of these are as impressive (or close) as a strict 20/1.

 

[Cleansweep17]

Technically Aker "only" achieved it 3 times. Brisbane's midfield was stacked enough that he could spend a little more time forward (or even the backline!) some years. The Bulldogs needed him forward more.

Of his "non 20/1" seasons he had:

-19.9 + 1.8
-19.6 + 1.8
-19.5 + 0.7
-18.6 + 1.1
-18.3 + 2.3
-18.1 + 1.1
-17.2 + 2.0
-15.7 + 1.0
-15.6 + 1.5
-14.7 + 1.2

Coupled with his impressive assist numbers and the lower disposal averages of players in a bunch of these seasons, I'd say most of these are as impressive (or close) as a strict 20/1.

You know nobody is saying if you don’t get 20 and 1 you aren’t elite. But if you do it over your career/many seasons it means you are. You are actually arguing with nobody.

 

[Mr Meow]

You know nobody is saying if you don’t get 20 and 1 you aren’t elite. But if you do it over your career/many seasons it means you are. You are actually arguing with nobody.

I'm bringing up other players who've achieved some very good markers (including 20/1 and some other variations).

Or is the rule that it HAS to be Martin discussion, and Martin only? I also don't fancy another 30 back and forth posts dealing with your inane drivel and moaning.

 

[Noidnadroj]

Re-read the thread if you can't actually remember the details. When a player has basically not featured in anyone's rolling team all year (nor after the squad announcement), it is commonsense that their position in the initial squad was not "a lock". It wasn't going to be a controversial decision either way. Whereas, judging by people's best 22, Martin in the final side would've been. You thought he missed by a whisker and was unlucky. Which is why "initial squad" has now become the ultimate achievement.

Oh … so because ‘most people (not all)’ didn’t have him in their final 22 it means they were by default critical of his selection in the squad… if people were critical of his squad selection, then after the squad was announced there’d have been comments galore criticising the decision … which there wasn’t.

C’mon Fonzie …. You can do it. I was wrrrr .. wrrrrrrrrrr



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Cleansweep17]

I'm bringing up other players who've achieved some very good markers (including 20/1 and some other variations).

Or is the rule that it HAS to be Martin discussion, and Martin only? I also don't fancy another 30 back and forth posts dealing with your inane drivel and moaning.

Wtf are you on about? I’m saying the complete opposite.

 

[Mr Meow]

Oh … so because ‘most people (not all)’ didn’t have him in their final 22 it means they were by default critical of his selection in the squad… if people were critical of his squad selection, then after the squad was announced there’d have been comments galore criticising the decision … which there wasn’t.

C’mon Fonzie …. You can do it. I was wrrrr .. wrrrrrrrrrr



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

"Dusty should make the AA side" - a year long campaign that convinced nobody and was justly ignored by the AA selection committee.

How many AA rants have you made about players from various teams since then? This is becoming a lifelong obsession.

 

[Mr Meow]

Wtf are you on about? I’m saying the complete opposite.

You're getting lost again. You're demanding I speak about Martin again when I've moved onto talking about other players.

You do this in most threads.

 

[Cleansweep17]

You're getting lost again. You're demanding I speak about Martin again when I've moved onto talking about other players.

You do this in most threads.

How did you get that from my comment? Are you ok?

All I said was that you don’t have to get 20 and 1 to be elite. But if you do you are elite like the others in the OPs list. You have a problem with that champ?

 

[Noidnadroj]

Technically Aker "only" achieved it 3 times. Brisbane's midfield was stacked enough that he could spend a little more time forward (or even the backline!) some years. The Bulldogs needed him forward more.

Of his "non 20/1" seasons he had:

-19.9 + 1.8
-19.6 + 1.8
-19.5 + 0.7
-18.6 + 1.1
-18.3 + 2.3
-18.1 + 1.1
-17.2 + 2.0
-15.7 + 1.0
-15.6 + 1.5
-14.7 + 1.2

Coupled with his impressive assist numbers and the lower disposal averages of players in a bunch of these seasons, I'd say most of these are as impressive (or close) as a strict 20/1.

Totally agree. The 20/1 is nothing except a nice ‘round’ number combo (and makes sense to look at ‘goal a game’ players, not 0.80 of a goal a game players).

Any combo that is not commonly achieved so logic says difficult to do is worth a mention IMO, whether it be 18/1.4, 32 / 0.7 or 20 / 1. Any combo you choose that is uncommon will quickly establish the elite players in those positional roles. I’d suggest a 16-18 disposal with decent goal tally will bring to the surface the likes of Aker, Stevie J, Hird, Chapman, Brad Johnson. Daicos, Greene, KB, Lethal and Buckenara … all stars of their position and era. An ‘average’ player might spike a season achieving difficult metrics, but it will be rare.

You can then dig into other achievements within each season from there.



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[PhatBoy]

In fairness, the people who complain most about threads derailing into Dustin Martin focussed threads are the people who post the most in the Dustin Martin focussed threads.

Richmond supporters passion to push their man up and boast about his achievements is probably understandable, given he was the key figure in turning Tiger supporters annual humiliation into 4-years of footy following heaven. Albeit of course we are a touch obsessive (I put my hand up high here).

Geelong and Collingwood supporters obsessiveness to get involved in Dustin Martin related threads with an obsession they don’t show to their own team or players is a little harder to understand. Particularly when those comments and replies to Martin posts are followed up with complaints of all the Martin related posts … of which they’ve made the majority ….

Just weird.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

I’ll give you an example of what I see when I look at the first page of the thread:

I actually found the OP interesting and I appreciated the disclaimer and thought it was genuine.

I also understood the ‘here we go…..’ posts because they were presumably in reference to a pretty obvious path - and yes I’m fully across my involvement in it - that the thread might veer towards.

When someone comes in who is a known shitposter in the large sequence of threads that DO get derailed in that direction pushing the barrow, it’s gonna get pointed out

 

[cliffdrabble]

Don’t look for refuge here after copping it from the Carlton v Collingwood thread. You’re the clown of BF. Made another Sportsbet bet mate? Daisy Thomas is offering good deals I hear

If Fadge is the clown, you are the whole bloody circus!

 

[Noidnadroj]

There’s been some debate around the most optimal position to play in order to secure coaches votes. Some basic analysis shows it’s without question playing as a centre square midfielder.

Using the cut-off of averaging 1+ centre clearance per game (equates to a min. of 7+ CBA’s average per game) this is the number of players in the top-20 of coaches votes each year who were NOT frequent CBA midfielders:

2012: 3.
2013: 4
2014: 3
2015: 4
2016: 4
2017: 2
2018: 3
2019: 1
2020: 2
2021: 0
2022: 4
2023: 1 (Toby Greene

4

Toby Greene

Age

30

Ht

182cm

Wt

85kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

22.7

5star

K

12.5

5star

HB

10.2

5star

M

4.8

5star

T

3.0

5star

G

1.2

4star

D

17.5

4star

K

9.5

4star

HB

8.0

4star

M

4.8

4star

T

1.0

2star

G

2.3

5star

D

26.6

5star

K

12.4

5star

HB

14.2

5star

M

4.8

5star

T

3.6

5star

G

0.0

1star

the only one … and even he averaged 4.6 CBA’s and 0.9 CC).

Those in the list above were often Buddy and J Cameron.

So make sure you attend as many CB as possible if you want to gobble up coaches votes.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Cleansweep17]

I’ll give you an example of what I see when I look at the first page of the thread:

I actually found the OP interesting and I appreciated the disclaimer and thought it was genuine.

I also understood the ‘here we go…..’ posts because they were presumably in reference to a pretty obvious path - and yes I’m fully across my involvement in it - that the thread might veer towards.

When someone comes in who is a known shitposter in the large sequence of threads that DO get derailed in that direction pushing the barrow, it’s gonna get pointed out

Explain how I did that buddy. Besides pointing out the obvious that he’s close to the record and then you had a fit.

 

[Cleansweep17]

There’s been some debate around the most optimal position to play in order to secure coaches votes. Some basic analysis shows it’s without question playing as a centre square midfielder.

Using the cut-off of averaging 1+ centre clearance per game (equates to a min. of 7+ CBA’s average per game) this is the number of players in the top-20 of coaches votes each year who were NOT frequent CBA midfielders:

2012: 3.
2013: 4
2014: 3
2015: 4
2016: 4
2017: 2
2018: 3
2019: 1
2020: 2
2021: 0
2022: 4
2023: 1 (Toby Greene

4

Toby Greene

Age

30

Ht

182cm

Wt

85kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

22.7

5star

K

12.5

5star

HB

10.2

5star

M

4.8

5star

T

3.0

5star

G

1.2

4star

D

17.5

4star

K

9.5

4star

HB

8.0

4star

M

4.8

4star

T

1.0

2star

G

2.3

5star

D

26.6

5star

K

12.4

5star

HB

14.2

5star

M

4.8

5star

T

3.6

5star

G

0.0

1star

the only one … and even he averaged 4.6 CBA’s and 0.9 CC).

Those in the list above were often Buddy and J Cameron.

So make sure you attend as many CB as possible if you want to gobble up coaches votes.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Great stats, but unfortunately they won’t be persuaded. They will never acknowledged areas that Dusty excels in. I wouldn’t even bother.

 

[Cleansweep17]

If Fadge is the clown, you are the whole bloody circus!

Yeah you’re right I own him.

 

[The 747]

Stop feeding the troll team

 

[KissKiss]

Totally agree. The 20/1 is nothing except a nice ‘round’ number combo (and makes sense to look at ‘goal a game’ players, not 0.80 of a goal a game players).

Any combo that is not commonly achieved so logic says difficult to do is worth a mention IMO, whether it be 18/1.4, 32 / 0.7 or 20 / 1. Any combo you choose that is uncommon will quickly establish the elite players in those positional roles. I’d suggest a 16-18 disposal with decent goal tally will bring to the surface the likes of Aker, Stevie J, Hird, Chapman, Brad Johnson. Daicos, Greene, KB, Lethal and Buckenara … all stars of their position and era. An ‘average’ player might spike a season achieving difficult metrics, but it will be rare.

You can then dig into other achievements within each season from there.



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Yeah 20+1 does sound cleaner - bit like the quadruple double (10 kicks, 10 handballs, 10 marks and 10 tackles) in its just a round nice round number that sounds cool. But some of the guys falling just short of the measure are still playing incredibly well - really interesting seeing guys like Aker above who have those multiple seasons of 18/19 touches but 1.5/2 goals

 

[Noidnadroj]

"Dusty should make the AA side" - a year long campaign that convinced nobody and was justly ignored by the AA selection committee.

How many AA rants have you made about players from various teams since then? This is becoming a lifelong obsession.

C’mon Arthur … it’s not hard… wrrrr….wrrrrrrr


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[PhatBoy]

Explain how I did that buddy. Besides pointing out the obvious that he’s close to the record and then you had a fit.

Congrats

 

[Guardian Hawk]

Weighing in to this seemingly never ending debate...

I personally don't think AA squad selection counts as an elite season on it's own. It requires further context for me. If we are looking at some of the greats of all time, being adjudged one of the best 45 odd players in the comp - which is chosen by position - meaning some will be close to the 60th or 70th best player in the comp, is NOT elite. That's too wide a net for me.

Rather, you need to contextualise the AA squad selection with other relevant details about the season in question. For example, in 1993, Jason Dunstall was not selected All Australian (and if the squad existed, I'm sure would have been in that). However, he kicked 123 goals that year, was the reigning MVP, won his club best and fairest and finished 3rd in the Brownlow. Using another example from my club as I know it best, in 2012 Sam Mitchell easily won the best and fairest of the team that finished top of the ladder. He also won the Brownlow and several media awards. He did not make the AA team but had an elite season as a squad selection.

But there is the other side of the coin. IN 2022 for example, Tom Papley

11

Tom Papley

Age

27

Ht

177cm

Wt

77kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.1

4star

K

9.1

4star

HB

5.0

4star

M

3.7

4star

T

3.2

5star

G

1.5

5star

D

12.3

3star

K

8.9

4star

HB

3.4

2star

M

4.5

4star

T

1.5

2star

G

2.4

5star

D

13.4

4star

K

8.0

3star

HB

5.4

4star

M

3.4

4star

T

3.4

5star

G

1.6

5star

somehow made the AA squad. He missed 6 games that year and playing as an exclusive small forward, finished equal 46th in the Coleman medal, with just 26 goals. He averaged 15 touches and didn't do much without the ball either, ranked 336th for tackles. There were a number of small forward (and lots of other players) that significantly outperformed him not selected. Definitely not an elite season despite being selected in the AA squad. There are many more examples similar.

In short, AA or AA squad selection is one tool but needs to be further contextualised with Coaches votes, Bronlow votes, Coleman placing, B&F result, etc to truly gauge whether the season was elite or not. In and of itself, AA squad selection is not enough to be classed as elite.

 

[Cleansweep17]

Weighing in to this seemingly never ending debate...

I personally don't think AA squad selection counts as an elite season on it's own. It requires further context for me. If we are looking at some of the greats of all time, being adjudged one of the best 45 odd players in the comp - which is chosen by position - meaning some will be close to the 60th or 70th best player in the comp, is NOT elite. That's too wide a net for me.

Rather, you need to contextualise the AA squad selection with other relevant details about the season in question. For example, in 1993, Jason Dunstall was not selected All Australian (and if the squad existed, I'm sure would have been in that). However, he kicked 123 goals that year, was the reigning MVP, won his club best and fairest and finished 3rd in the Brownlow. Using another example from my club as I know it best, in 2012 Sam Mitchell easily won the best and fairest of the team that finished top of the ladder. He also won the Brownlow and several media awards. He did not make the AA team but had an elite season as a squad selection.

But there is the other side of the coin. IN 2022 for example, Tom Papley

11

Tom Papley

Age

27

Ht

177cm

Wt

77kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.1

4star

K

9.1

4star

HB

5.0

4star

M

3.7

4star

T

3.2

5star

G

1.5

5star

D

12.3

3star

K

8.9

4star

HB

3.4

2star

M

4.5

4star

T

1.5

2star

G

2.4

5star

D

13.4

4star

K

8.0

3star

HB

5.4

4star

M

3.4

4star

T

3.4

5star

G

1.6

5star

somehow made the AA squad. He missed 6 games that year and playing as an exclusive small forward, finished equal 46th in the Coleman medal, with just 26 goals. He averaged 15 touches and didn't do much without the ball either, ranked 336th for tackles. There were a number of small forward (and lots of other players) that significantly outperformed him not selected. Definitely not an elite season despite being selected in the AA squad. There are many more examples similar.

In short, AA or AA squad selection is one tool but needs to be further contextualised with Coaches votes, Bronlow votes, Coleman placing, B&F result, etc to truly gauge whether the season was elite or not. In and of itself, AA squad selection is not enough to be classed as elite.

I get your point but top 5% in anything means you are elite. Even top 10% if you want to double it to top 80. And let’s be honest the AA squad/team selectors know than us about footy.

Not sure if you are a vic person but if you get a 90+ ATAR (top 10%) in year 12 that’s uber elite and usually means you are close to a genius. Same with sport.

 

[Fadge]

Not sure if you are a vic person but if you get a 90+ ATAR (top 10%) in year 12 that’s uber elite and usually means you are close to a genius. Same with sport.

More absolute tripe.

Where do you pull this garbage from?

Then again, I guess everything is relative....

 

[Guardian Hawk]

I get your point but top 5% in anything means you are elite. Even top 10% if you want to double it to top 80. And let’s be honest the AA squad/team selectors know than us about footy.

Not sure if you are a vic person but if you get a 90+ ATAR (top 10%) in year 12 that’s uber elite and usually means you are close to a genius. Same with sport.

Personally disagree - especially if we are debating about the greatest players of all time. Top 80 in a season is not elite. That's a good season, maybe even very good, but not elite. An elite season is that you are in the top 10 (maybe 20) players in the comp or top few in your role.

To continue your "real life" analogy (even though I think the link is tenuous), I (and probably you too) would be in the top 10% on a global scale for wealth (most of Australia - certainly middle class and up - fit that category). Am I (and you) in the elite as far as wealth goes? Definately not.

I am a bigger guy and a regular gym goer and would be in the top 10% for strength on a global scale. Am I an elite powerlifter? I'm not even close to those guys.

Even your ATAR example - many of my friends and my wife got ATAR's in the 90's. They're just regular smart people - certainly not a genuis or 'elite level minds'.

But I personally don't think real world global examples are all that applicable to an AFL environment anyway.

 

[Cleansweep17]

Personally disagree - especially if we are debating about the greatest players of all time. Top 80 in a season is not elite. That's a good season, maybe even very good, but not elite. An elite season is that you are in the top 10 (maybe 20) players in the comp or top few in your role.

To continue your "real life" analogy (even though I think the link is tenuous), I (and probably you too) would be in the top 10% on a global scale for wealth (most of Australia - certainly middle class and up - fit that category). Am I (and you) in the elite as far as wealth goes? Definately not.

I am a bigger guy and a regular gym goer and would be in the top 10% for strength on a global scale. Am I an elite powerlifter? I'm not even close to those guys.

Even your ATAR example - many of my friends and my wife got ATAR's in the 90's. They're just regular smart people - certainly not a genuis or 'elite level minds'.

But I personally don't think real world global examples are all that applicable to an AFL environment anyway.

Hmm fair enough

 

[Noidnadroj]

Weighing in to this seemingly never ending debate...

I personally don't think AA squad selection counts as an elite season on it's own. It requires further context for me. If we are looking at some of the greats of all time, being adjudged one of the best 45 odd players in the comp - which is chosen by position - meaning some will be close to the 60th or 70th best player in the comp, is NOT elite. That's too wide a net for me.

Rather, you need to contextualise the AA squad selection with other relevant details about the season in question. For example, in 1993, Jason Dunstall was not selected All Australian (and if the squad existed, I'm sure would have been in that). However, he kicked 123 goals that year, was the reigning MVP, won his club best and fairest and finished 3rd in the Brownlow. Using another example from my club as I know it best, in 2012 Sam Mitchell easily won the best and fairest of the team that finished top of the ladder. He also won the Brownlow and several media awards. He did not make the AA team but had an elite season as a squad selection.

But there is the other side of the coin. IN 2022 for example, Tom Papley

11

Tom Papley

Age

27

Ht

177cm

Wt

77kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.1

4star

K

9.1

4star

HB

5.0

4star

M

3.7

4star

T

3.2

5star

G

1.5

5star

D

12.3

3star

K

8.9

4star

HB

3.4

2star

M

4.5

4star

T

1.5

2star

G

2.4

5star

D

13.4

4star

K

8.0

3star

HB

5.4

4star

M

3.4

4star

T

3.4

5star

G

1.6

5star

somehow made the AA squad. He missed 6 games that year and playing as an exclusive small forward, finished equal 46th in the Coleman medal, with just 26 goals. He averaged 15 touches and didn't do much without the ball either, ranked 336th for tackles. There were a number of small forward (and lots of other players) that significantly outperformed him not selected. Definitely not an elite season despite being selected in the AA squad. There are many more examples similar.

In short, AA or AA squad selection is one tool but needs to be further contextualised with Coaches votes, Bronlow votes, Coleman placing, B&F result, etc to truly gauge whether the season was elite or not. In and of itself, AA squad selection is not enough to be classed as elite.

Totally agree. I’d even argue AA team isn’t auto-elite, as ATEOTD, being in the team or the squad is a subjective decision … Libba or Viney could’ve easily been picked over Serong, so does that mean they are ‘auto-elite’ and Serong isn’t??

I’d suggest if a player has a good combo of AA, coaches votes (for their position), Brownlow votes (for position), good B&F result (might be top-6 in a top-team, top-3 in a bottom team), good stats in comparison to players in similar positions, then you can start to build a picture whether the player was in the best 5% or so in their position, or if they were ‘back in the pack’.

For some things like winning coaches voting it’s auto-elite, irrespective of other metrics. For others like making AA squad or a podium finish in B&F, you’d need other data points to confirm (or deny) your case for elite status.



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com