Past #23 Buddy Franklin - Thanks Buddy

How long will Buddy play for Sydney?

  • Total voters
    161
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

Reader mode
Buddy-Franklin-has-hit-300-games.-Photo-via-Fox-Footys-Facebook-page..jpg


Lance Franklin
Lance Franklin is a giant of the game. The star Sydney Swans forward has played 300 AFL games, won two premierships with Hawthorn, is the seventh-greatest goal-kicker in VFL/AFL history, is one of just five men with eight All Australian blazers and is the most recent player to have kicked 100 goals in a season. The Western Australian is also one of just two players in the game’s history, along with former Swan and Saint Tony Lockett, to have booted 300 goals for two clubs. Franklin was added to a leadership group for the first time in his career ahead of season 2020, joining co-captains Josh Kennedy, Luke Parker and Dane Rampe, as well as Callum Mills. But the 33-year-old, who was named captain of the 2018 All Australian team, has long been considered an exceptional unofficial leader, so great is his impact on Will Hayward, Nick Blakey, Ben Ronke and the rest of Sydney’s young forwards.

Lance Franklin
DOB: 30 January 1987
DEBUT: 2005
DRAFT: #5, 2004 National Draft
RECRUITED FROM: Dowerin (WA)/Perth (WAFL)/Hawthorn

www.sydneyswans.com.au

Lance Franklin | AFL

Follow Lance Franklin's progress through AFL
www.sydneyswans.com.au www.sydneyswans.com.au
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Log in to remove this ad.

Apologies but I couldn't find the long bomb kicking strategy post but looks like some reporters are reading our threads ;)

a recent trend for some teams to encourage their players to launch more long bombs on goal may well have its roots on the hard courts of the US.
The same statistical analysis that has made three pointers in basketball the vogue go to shot is being deployed to inform contemporary footy wisdom.
Buddy Franklin and LeBron James may have more in common than just their physically imposing physiques.

HPNFooty's analysis shows that AFL teams can improve their efficiency by maximising their "layups and three-pointers" at the expense of midrange shots. Of course, for the strategy to be effective, clubs need to have an arsenal of long-kicking players.

"Having a guy who can kick goals on the run from 55 metres like Paul Seedsman, who plays more midfield than forward, is a real weapon to have higher up the ground," says his forward line coach at the Crows, Josh Francou.

"We also have guys in attack who can do it like Tex Walker and young Darcy Fogarty."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-...earning-from-the-nba-kicking-accuracy/9831994

I :D having Franklin and Le Bron in the same sentence :rolleyes:



kpf-chart-1.png

http://www.hpnfooty.com/?p=29844

Many have commented on how Lance is losing the penetration in his kicking, but he cannot have spent many hours training since round 1 with managing his heel injury.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I personally think the comparison doesn't hold because you don't get extra points for kicking a goal outside 50.

EDIT: they do acknowledge that in the article.

DOUBLE EDIT: It is advantageous as it would open up the forward 50. Opposition teams would have to defend the particular player higher up leaving more players open inside 50. Which is the equivalent of spacing in Basketball.
 
Last edited:
SwansProudly said:
Apologies but I couldn't find the long bomb kicking strategy post but looks like some reporters are reading our threads ;)

a recent trend for some teams to encourage their players to launch more long bombs on goal may well have its roots on the hard courts of the US.
The same statistical analysis that has made three pointers in basketball the vogue go to shot is being deployed to inform contemporary footy wisdom.
Buddy Franklin and LeBron James may have more in common than just their physically imposing physiques.

HPNFooty's analysis shows that AFL teams can improve their efficiency by maximising their "layups and three-pointers" at the expense of midrange shots. Of course, for the strategy to be effective, clubs need to have an arsenal of long-kicking players.

"Having a guy who can kick goals on the run from 55 metres like Paul Seedsman, who plays more midfield than forward, is a real weapon to have higher up the ground," says his forward line coach at the Crows, Josh Francou.

"We also have guys in attack who can do it like Tex Walker and young Darcy Fogarty."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-...earning-from-the-nba-kicking-accuracy/9831994

I :D having Franklin and Le Bron in the same sentence :rolleyes:



kpf-chart-1.png

http://www.hpnfooty.com/?p=29844

Many have commented on how Lance is losing the penetration in his kicking, but he cannot have spent many hours training since round 1 with managing his heel injury.
Click to expand...
Apologies for the intrusion - but the above argument doesn't stack up at all IMO because there is a flaw in the comparison.

Most professional basketball players can comfortably shoot a ball the length of the court (75 feet). When taking a shot from the 3 point range, the amount of physical effort required to make the distance is minimal (although the skill required to make the shot consistently is the beauty of it).

Kicking a ball 55m and clearing 3m in height so the ball cannot be touched as it goes over the line is about the kicking limit of even the longest kickers in the AFL. In all honesty I'd only trust guys like McKenzie, Buddy & Sicily to make the distance everytime if they hit the ball sweet. Expecting a good goal scoring % when kicking from that far out is crazy considering how hard the ball has to be kicked.

In addition, the other flaw in the argument is that the 3 point shot is worth 50% more points compared to a regular field goal. There are no bonus points for kicking a goal from 50m plus, so taking shots from further out where you are more likely to either not make the distance, or the ball has more time to move out of the line of the goals doesn't make sense if a shot can be taken closer from goal.
 
Why are we talking like “he’s lost this” and “he can’t do that anymore”. It’s been like three weeks since he came back from an injury that I still suspect he’s recovering from properly. He’s still kicked seven goals in those three matches and it’s been well documented that his training load has been lighter than usual, so he’s obviously just not fully fit. Just over two months ago he kicked eight goals, some of them were freakish. You don’t just lose that in the blink of an eye.
 
caesar88 said:
Why are we talking like “he’s lost this” and “he can’t do that anymore”. It’s been like three weeks since he came back from an injury that I still suspect he’s recovering from properly. He’s still kicked seven goals in those three matches and it’s been well documented that his training load has been lighter than usual, so he’s obviously just not fully fit. Just over two months ago he kicked eight goals, some of them were freakish. You don’t just lose that in the blink of an eye.
Click to expand...
Even if Bud isn't kicking them, the opposition has to put so much work into him that it frees up others, so I'd happily have him out there with a Zimmer frame!
 
Im just sick of Buddy not reeling in his marks.

If he cannot learn to extend his arms by a few feet or instantly change direction to move multiple metres in a second to take marks from our midfield, then what good is he
 
SilentHunter_ said:
I personally think the comparison doesn't hold because you don't get extra points for kicking a goal outside 50.

EDIT: they do acknowledge that in the article.

DOUBLE EDIT: It is advantageous as it would open up the forward 50. Opposition teams would have to defend the particular player higher up leaving more players open inside 50. Which is the equivalent of spacing in Basketball.
Click to expand...
Yep. Spreading the floor/field is a bloody good strategy.

You either want the defence to be:

- too high up, worried about the long range shot & allowing space behind them in deep fwd 50 (allowing it to get over the back).

- sagging off, concerned about that space behind them & allowing those long range shots (either deliberately or not).

- caught in no mans land where they are trying to cover/zone off the fwd 50 and get stuck in two minds wether to push up on the arc, zone back into the traditional defence or push hard to get back to prevent the ball getting over the top.

With Buddy we have a really really good ability to utilise his accurate long range goal kicking ability combined with Heeney/Parker marking ability deep foward with Paps/Ronke crumbing.

Once Reidy is back he can take that deep marking target a bit more I reckon freeing up Heens & Luke to push further up field.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Holy Rioli said:
Apologies for the intrusion - but the above argument doesn't stack up at all IMO because there is a flaw in the comparison.

Most professional basketball players can comfortably shoot a ball the length of the court (75 feet). When taking a shot from the 3 point range, the amount of physical effort required to make the distance is minimal (although the skill required to make the shot consistently is the beauty of it).

Kicking a ball 55m and clearing 3m in height so the ball cannot be touched as it goes over the line is about the kicking limit of even the longest kickers in the AFL. In all honesty I'd only trust guys like McKenzie, Buddy & Sicily to make the distance everytime if they hit the ball sweet. Expecting a good goal scoring % when kicking from that far out is crazy considering how hard the ball has to be kicked.

In addition, the other flaw in the argument is that the 3 point shot is worth 50% more points compared to a regular field goal. There are no bonus points for kicking a goal from 50m plus, so taking shots from further out where you are more likely to either not make the distance, or the ball has more time to move out of the line of the goals doesn't make sense if a shot can be taken closer from goal.
Click to expand...
No need to apologise at all. Great post.

I see where you are coming from but IMO it's more about creating opportunities & "playing the defence".

E.g. if you have a matchup where a defender doesn't really have a tank & they use zoning off to cover players as they push upfield then by spreading the scoring range from 40m to 55m allows that extra room & space to perhaps create seperation or time in transition from one defender to the next picking the player up.

Of course there's a balance with regards to cost/benefit (i.e. scoring accuracy etc) however it's not always about actually kickimg the goal. Having a ping then really focusing on locking it in your fwd 50 after a point is something I like seeing. High pressure from the midfield after a point & on the kick in. Partly availible because the whole field has been pushed further back up toward defence as the fwd 50 is extended (flow on effect) hopefully dragging their defenders out of their def50 (meaning less options to kick in to).
 
Holy Rioli said:
Apologies for the intrusion - but the above argument doesn't stack up at all IMO because there is a flaw in the comparison.

Most professional basketball players can comfortably shoot a ball the length of the court (75 feet). When taking a shot from the 3 point range, the amount of physical effort required to make the distance is minimal (although the skill required to make the shot consistently is the beauty of it).

Kicking a ball 55m and clearing 3m in height so the ball cannot be touched as it goes over the line is about the kicking limit of even the longest kickers in the AFL. In all honesty I'd only trust guys like McKenzie, Buddy & Sicily to make the distance everytime if they hit the ball sweet. Expecting a good goal scoring % when kicking from that far out is crazy considering how hard the ball has to be kicked.

In addition, the other flaw in the argument is that the 3 point shot is worth 50% more points compared to a regular field goal. There are no bonus points for kicking a goal from 50m plus, so taking shots from further out where you are more likely to either not make the distance, or the ball has more time to move out of the line of the goals doesn't make sense if a shot can be taken closer from goal.
Click to expand...
Teams that do have a McKenzie, Lance or Sicily would have the advantage over their opponents.
 
It's in the stats thread and I can't recommend enough reading it.

Clearly there are differences between footy and basketball, but what they do is look at the average points. Scored for each type of shot once the ball gets into the scoring zone of around 60 m etres out. So for shots that are marked in the goal square it would be close to 6, etc.

What they find is that having a shot from 50 plus metres doesn't necessarily go for a goal more Often than a mark in 50 for example, but that a kick hoping to find a mark in 50 doesnt result in that high quality option as often as your you'd like. The ball is more as likely to rebound out, or hit the deck and have a stoppage, or result in a snapped shot - as it is to be marked. And those things are about as likely as a shot from outside 50.

So it's making the argument for a tactical change that we may see occur to start favouring more shots from outside 50. So much like in the nbl we now see a lot more specialist 3 point shooters than we did, in 10 15 years we may see a lot more forwards playing like buddy or Tex.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Deccas said:
It's in the stats thread and I can't recommend enough reading it.

Clearly there are differences between footy and basketball, but what they do is look at the average points. Scored for each type of shot once the ball gets into the scoring zone of around 60 m etres out. So for shots that are marked in the goal square it would be close to 6, etc.

What they find is that having a shot from 50 plus metres doesn't necessarily go for a goal more Often than a mark in 50 for example, but that a kick hoping to find a mark in 50 doesnt result in that high quality option as often as your you'd like. The ball is more as likely to rebound out, or hit the deck and have a stoppage, or result in a snapped shot - as it is to be marked. And those things are about as likely as a shot from outside 50.

So it's making the argument for a tactical change that we may see occur to start favouring more shots from outside 50. So much like in the nbl we now see a lot more specialist 3 point shooters than we did, in 10 15 years we may see a lot more forwards playing like buddy or Tex.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app
Click to expand...
Thanks - I'm not sure I am allowed to link to another BF posting? so may I ask the moderators to move my Tuesday posting to the appropriate form, please?
 
Borough Blood said:
Sorry if it’s been discussed already but he’s pretty much bang on halfway through his contract. Crazy.
Click to expand...

Starting to think he may actually get through his contract.

Yes he has had the heel injury this year, but heel injuries are more just bad luck on a difficult playing surface, it isn't like he is getting groin or hamstring injuries.
 
Bonz said:
Starting to think he may actually get through his contract.

Yes he has had the heel injury this year, but heel injuries are more just bad luck on a difficult playing surface, it isn't like he is getting groin or hamstring injuries.
Click to expand...


not saying you will be wrong but the first half of the contract will always be easier than the second half.

I remember mid 2013 ironically when the collingwood crowd incident happened Goodes still looked like a brownlow contending type player and thinking he will be a star forever, although he kept playing beyond all that his body started to let him down. Maybe some mental fatigue.

but 2014 and 15 he was not the same, the end can come quick
 
The King! said:
not saying you will be wrong but the first half of the contract will always be easier than the second half.

I remember mid 2013 ironically when the collingwood crowd incident happened Goodes still looked like a brownlow contending type player and thinking he will be a star forever, although he kept playing beyond all that his body started to let him down. Maybe some mental fatigue.

but 2014 and 15 he was not the same, the end can come quick
Click to expand...

I think when we signed him, 7 years was the realistic expectation with the hope that he could possibly make the 9 years.
So at this point it's fair to say he'll get to 7 years & as you say, anything can happen both physically & mentally.
No doubt apart from Buddy being an on ground star, one of the big reasons we signed him was the draw card factor to keep us relevant in the non traditional AFL market. He has done that.
I'm calling he'll be done after year 7 & perhaps year 8 but year 9 he may be a fair way off where he will need to be.
Just my opinion.
 
Tedeski said:
I think when we signed him, 7 years was the realistic expectation with the hope that he could possibly make the 9 years.
So at this point it's fair to say he'll get to 7 years & as you say, anything can happen both physically & mentally.
No doubt apart from Buddy being an on ground star, one of the big reasons we signed him was the draw card factor to keep us relevant in the non traditional AFL market. He has done that.
I'm calling he'll be done after year 7 & perhaps year 8 but year 9 he may be a fair way off where he will need to be.
Just my opinion.
Click to expand...


I think he plays the 9 years but yeah whether he is still elite/one of our best who knows.

but basically he is worth 2 -3 million a year now so he is just collecting money owed
 
The King! said:
not saying you will be wrong but the first half of the contract will always be easier than the second half.

I remember mid 2013 ironically when the collingwood crowd incident happened Goodes still looked like a brownlow contending type player and thinking he will be a star forever, although he kept playing beyond all that his body started to let him down. Maybe some mental fatigue.

but 2014 and 15 he was not the same, the end can come quick
Click to expand...

I would argue Goodes was in our 3 best players in both of our last games for the 14 and 15 seasons.

But the key to Buddy's longevity will be how Horse plays him. I think Bud's got no chance if we keep leaving him deep forward with two or three opponents hanging off him like a coat-rack. Everybody knows Buddy is best up the ground, around the arcs. It's more beneficial to both the team and Bud's body
 
caesar88 said:
I would argue Goodes was in our 3 best players in both of our last games for the 14 and 15 seasons.

But the key to Buddy's longevity will be how Horse plays him. I think Bud's got no chance if we keep leaving him deep forward with two or three opponents hanging off him like a coat-rack. Everybody knows Buddy is best up the ground, around the arcs. It's more beneficial to both the team and Bud's body
Click to expand...



Yeah didn’t say Goodes was usless or didn’t play good games, but his last 2 years he was no longer elite, far from it
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SwansProudly
  • Locked
Game Day 2023 Round 24 Swans v Demons @ 3:30 @ SCG. Thanks Buddy
32 33 34 35 36
Replies
897
Views
10K
SwansProudly
SwansProudly
mhill
Toast Buddy Love
Replies
17
Views
424
mhill
mhill
scaryness
POTY Round 23 vs Adelaide
Replies
19
Views
898
scaryness
scaryness
SwansProudly
  • Locked
Game Day 2023 Round 23 - Crows v Swans - 7:40pm @ Adelaide
32 33 34 35 36
Replies
880
Views
11K
GotTheGoodes
GotTheGoodes
Grand Uncle Horace
  • Locked
Preview Ins and Outs v a promising EDFL club - RD 10, 23
17 18 19 20 21
Replies
500
Views
10K
SwansProudly
SwansProudly
Heeney2Franklin
Autopsy Thankgod for our kicking boots Swans by 11 to keep season alive!
12 13 14 15 16
Replies
390
Views
10K
caesar88
caesar88
Membling
  • Locked
Preview Gold Coast Swans vs Sydney Swans 7PM AEDT 18 Mar 23 @ Heritage Bank Stadium
8 9 10 11 12
Replies
281
Views
8K
SwansProudly
SwansProudly
Back
Top