Do we judge personal abilities more if they have team success?

[Farm Boy]

There were still a lot of kangaroo all time greats in that team, wasn’t like it was Gold Coast circa 2018 with him added in.

Schwass, Longmire, Allison, Grant, Harvey, Stevens, McKernan, Martyn, Archer, King etc all top class players

Probably not a top 4 side without Carey though. A great side with Carey, a good side without him. Not a good enough side to get close without him IMO. When Carey played he dragged that side over the line. Players just rose another level. That is why I make Carey the exception in regards to judging personal abilities higher because of team success. It was not just physical with Carey, he had such a presence. Take nothing away from Schwass and co, they were solid contributors in their own right.

 

[Scotland]

Except many players have roles which are all about the team, not the individual. Like HFF who contest marks to spoil the ball for the small forwards to scoop up and kick goals.

No stats yet instrumental in scoring.

BP players who sit on these small forwards to reduce their impact around contests.

Half the players on the list are doing non flashy team things which we dont seem to rate but coaches love.

This has nothing to do with team success, though.

There are flashy vs non flashy players in every team. One of the most thankless jobs in footy is playing in defence for a s**t team. Stephen May could've easily taken the spot of David Astbury or Kyle Hartigan in the GF, instead he held together the Gold Coast defence while they copped 11 losses by more than 5 goals. It's not a knock on Astbury, it's credit to his club for using the players they have to best effect.

Corey Enright and Josh Gibson are both 2 x B&F winners in premiership sides and neither have ever been top 5 or top 10 players in the comp. These sort of guys get plenty of dues. I think Jordan Lewis won it in 2014. So you have two teams winning 3 flags each and 5 of the 6 B&Fs were won by guys who aren't all that flashy when you have Ablett Jr, Stevie J, Hodge, Franklin etc. who are seen as the big stars.

 

[HairyO]

Corey Enright and Josh Gibson are both 2 x B&F winners in premiership sides and neither have ever been top 5 or top 10 players in the comp. These sort of guys get plenty of dues. I think Jordan Lewis won it in 2014. So you have two teams winning 3 flags each and 5 of the 6 B&Fs were won by guys who aren't all that flashy when you have Ablett Jr, Stevie J, Hodge, Franklin etc. who are seen as the big stars.

I would suggest that the best player in the best team is probably in the top 10 of the comp. The problem lies with how outsiders rate players compared to how coaches rate players.

Flash vs substance. Looking good vs doing what's required.

 

[Scotland]

I would suggest that the best player in the best team is probably in the top 10 of the comp. The problem lies with how outsiders rate players compared to how coaches rate players.

Flash vs substance. Looking good vs doing what's required.

Except that the B&F winner is not necessarily the best player in a team. Enright is better than Ablett? Gibson is better than Franklin? Not a chance. Beau Waters and Nic Naitanui made the 2012 AA side and not the top 10 in or B&F. Miss 1 or 2 games and kills you in a lot of voting systems.

It's a team game. On 2017 form Dustin Martin is the best player in the comp. He plays for the best team in the comp and was even best on ground in the GF. He kind of ruins any debate by virtue of winning everything except the Coleman Medal or Spud Frawley's fist thing.

Go back a year and the Dogs the flag, Johannisen the Norm Smith and Bontempelli the Dogs B&F. Danger was still the best player in the comp.

For the sake of comparison if we win the second test is AB de Villiers performance downgraded? Tough batting conditions for both sides on a slow pitch and he rolls out an unbeaten hundred striking at 86. We're 5/180 and 41 ahead with two days to go. From here to be any chance we really need Marsh or Paine to make a big score but we won the first test without anyone hitting triple figures with 4 50s and a couple of 20s and 30s. Starc took 9 but each bowler also contributed. A pretty even performance all round. 3 guys making 50 is still the same amount of runs as one making 140 and two making 5 and that applies to footy. Hawthorn won with Franklin kicking 100 and without him at all. We won with a star centre square rotation. Sydney won the year before against our star midfield with a midfield nobody rated. Richmond won with a team nobody rated. Etc.

 

[HairyO]

Except that the B&F winner is not necessarily the best player in a team. Enright is better than Ablett? Gibson is better than Franklin? Not a chance. Beau Waters and Nic Naitanui made the 2012 AA side and not the top 10 in or B&F. Miss 1 or 2 games and kills you in a lot of voting systems.

No idea on Enright vs Ablett as I dont watch every Geelong game. But yes, in the 2013 Gibbo won the B&F he was more important than Buddy. Which makes sense because Clarko didnt know if Buddy was staying or going so changed the way Buddy was used. And changed the way other players were used. Buddy kicked his least amount of goals since 2006 in that year.

In 2015 for sure again even though they were in different teams that year. Buddy played 17 games that year, having missed the entire finals series with mental health issues. Gibbo didnt miss a game that year and had an insanely good year. Just dominated.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

Dustin Martin was a far better player when he did what was required for Richmond to win in 2017 than when he kick-chased across half back in 2016 and inflated his stats with ineffective play that helped Supercoach teams win.

As reflected in his Supercoach scores.

 

[Scotland]

No idea on Enright vs Ablett as I dont watch every Geelong game. But yes, in the 2013 Gibbo won the B&F he was more important than Buddy. Which makes sense because Clarko didnt know if Buddy was staying or going so changed the way Buddy was used. And changed the way other players were used. Buddy kicked his least amount of goals since 2006 in that year.

In 2015 for sure again even though they were in different teams that year. Buddy played 17 games that year, having missed the entire finals series with mental health issues. Gibbo didnt miss a game that year and had an insanely good year. Just dominated.

Having two B&Fs in a premiership winning team next to your name doesn't make you a better player than someone who doesn't. Gibson might have 'dominated' 2015, but he didn't dominate it the way Franklin dominated 2008 or Martin 2017 or Ablett 2010.

At best those two guys I mentioned are in contention for half back/back pocket spots in a team of the 2000s which is great, but they aren't as good as Franklin, Ablett, Judd etc.

 

[HairyO]

Having two B&Fs in a premiership winning team next to your name doesn't make you a better player than someone who doesn't. Gibson might have 'dominated' 2015, but he didn't dominate it the way Franklin dominated 2008 or Martin 2017 or Ablett 2010.

At best those two guys I mentioned are in contention for half back/back pocket spots in a team of the 2000s which is great, but they aren't as good as Franklin, Ablett, Judd etc.

You just changed the rules. Now Gibbo has to be better than Buddy's 2008?

In 2013 Gibbo was better than Buddy in 2013. In 2015 Gibbo was better than Buddy in 2015. That's the discussion.

You seem to be struck by midfielder limelight. Its understandable. Its all the media cares about.

As for Martin, his 2017 was brilliant. His 2016 was far less potent when he accumulated heaps of ineffective possessions. But again I dont think we are comparing year against year?

Or I could go back to Leigh Matthews in the 70s when he averaged near on 30 possessions and 3 goals per game some years.

 

[Scotland]

You just changed the rules. Now Gibbo has to be better than Buddy's 2008?

In 2013 Gibbo was better than Buddy in 2013. In 2015 Gibbo was better than Buddy in 2015. That's the discussion.

You seem to be struck by midfielder limelight. Its understandable. Its all the media cares about.

As for Martin, his 2017 was brilliant. His 2016 was far less potent when he accumulated heaps of ineffective possessions. But again I dont think we are comparing year against year?

Or I could go back to Leigh Matthews in the 70s when he averaged near on 30 possessions and 3 goals per game some years.

You're the one making it year to year and focusing on specifics. B&F is one accolade and winning it doesn't make you your team's player. It certainly doesn't make you better than another team's best player. I mentioned it because two recently retired players are dual B&F winners in premiership teams and neither are their teams best player from the era. It's a pretty impressive accolade but there are still better players running around now and were then.

If given the choice to pick 5 players from the 2000s most people would come up with the same selections. Buddy, Ablett, Judd, maybe Voss or Black depending if they are older than 20. If you want to pick Gibson or Enright then by all means go ahead but you won't have much company. Good footballers, but not absolute superstars. That is the discussion.

Midfielder limelight? Pffft. Give me Franklin or Kennedy or Nick Riewoldt over a couple of half back flankers any day.

 

[HairyO]

You're the one making it year to year and focusing on specifics. B&F is one accolade and winning it doesn't make you your team's player. It certainly doesn't make you better than another team's best player. I mentioned it because two recently retired players are dual B&F winners in premiership teams and neither are their teams best player from the era. It's a pretty impressive accolade but there are still better players running around now and were then.

If given the choice to pick 5 players from the 2000s most people would come up with the same selections. Buddy, Ablett, Judd, maybe Voss or Black depending if they are older than 20. If you want to pick Gibson or Enright then by all means go ahead but you won't have much company. Good footballers, but not absolute superstars. That is the discussion.

Midfielder limelight? Pffft. Give me Franklin or Kennedy or Nick Riewoldt over a couple of half back flankers any day.

And Frawley regularly beats Franklin and Kennedy.

Superstars are the ones the media decide to hype. Easiest done with possession counts and goals scored. Not so easy with most other positions. Doesnt mean they arent brilliant players. Just that you cant quantify it in a 5 second soundbite.

 

[Scotland]

Frawley might keep Kennedy or Franklin to a goal or two, but switch ends and he's not going to kick a bag on them. All Rance needs to do is punch the ball over the boundary half a dozen times and fans gush over him.

I don't need stats to tell me how good Judd and Ablett were. I would assume that over the course of his career Judd averaged about 25 touches which is pretty standard for a 2000s midfielder (22.9 as it turns out). An accumulator like Matt Priddis maybe, but he's not at the same level.

Tony Lockett is the GOAT FF because he kicked 1300 goals. That's one big important stat. From memory Carey kicked about 700 odd but again I don't need stats to know how dominant he was. And I don't need stats to know that at his peak Jakovich could take him on 1 on 1 and keep him to a handful of touches and no impact.

 

[Captivating]

Except many players have roles which are all about the team, not the individual. Like HFF who contest marks to spoil the ball for the small forwards to scoop up and kick goals.

No stats yet instrumental in scoring.

BP players who sit on these small forwards to reduce their impact around contests.

Half the players on the list are doing non flashy team things which we dont seem to rate but coaches love.

Hence why everyone on the team during the year should be awarded the premiership million as they have all contributed on away or other to the team's success. Silly to only reward the 25 selected for the last game

 

[HairyO]

Hence why everyone on the team during the year should be awarded the premiership million as they have all contributed on away or other to the team's success. Silly to only reward the 25 selected for the last game

Nah I dont think it needs to be watered down that much. Everyone on the day is fine. Being the guy who played one game where you got 3 touches then dropped shouldnt give you a medal.

 

[SterlingArcher]

Hence why everyone on the team during the year should be awarded the premiership million as they have all contributed on away or other to the team's success. Silly to only reward the 25 selected for the last game

Or clubs can make their own medals for the lovey dovey feel good contributor s**t and let the AFL hand out the medals to the real winners.

 

[Randy Campbell]

It is a team game.
Not who has the best individuals.

 

[Cdog71]

Winning teams get more Brownlow votes but having said that a good example is Nathan Jones
Probably more highly rated with less talent around him in past years than now when there's a bit more success and expectation...

 

[Engimal v3]

Team success should not impact individual worth. Rating someone higher than another because they're a premiership player/captain/Norm Smith medallist isn't fair, given that not everyone is given equal opportunity to achieve one.

 

[jackenny]

You telling me if you replaced Burchill with Bob Murphy then suddenly Hawthorn don’t win 4 flags?

Weren't the Bulldogs able to win a flag without Bob Murphy?

 

[Captain_Bender]

Frawley might keep Kennedy or Franklin to a goal or two, but switch ends and he's not going to kick a bag on them. All Rance needs to do is punch the ball over the boundary half a dozen times and fans gush over him.

I don't need stats to tell me how good Judd and Ablett were. I would assume that over the course of his career Judd averaged about 25 touches which is pretty standard for a 2000s midfielder (22.9 as it turns out). An accumulator like Matt Priddis maybe, but he's not at the same level.

Tony Lockett is the GOAT FF because he kicked 1300 goals. That's one big important stat. From memory Carey kicked about 700 odd but again I don't need stats to know how dominant he was. And I don't need stats to know that at his peak Jakovich could take him on 1 on 1 and keep him to a handful of touches and no impact.

Still bitter over Rance's superiority over McGovern?

 

[dmc333]

Fans get carried away with their team's role players. Every player in the bottom half of the 22 gets overrated, and every player on the fringe becomes a potential star. Mitch Hallahan, Brent Prismall, Jed Lamb - simply being on the fringe of a good team doesn't make you a star player. Meanwhile Kyle Cheney couldn't crack a game at Melbourne then played at Hawthorn and Adelaide (6 top 5 finishes in a row, played every game in 2016). The reality is if you made a composite team of the premier and spoon winner each year it would be somewhere between 50/50 and 70/30. No room for Beams, Zorko, Rockliff... in the Richmond 22? Pfft.

IIRC Richmond was throwing big money at Bushy Copeland at one stage.

 

[Scotland]

Weren't the Bulldogs able to win a flag without Bob Murphy?

They were able to win a flag without Gary Ablett Sr, Wayne Carey, Leigh Matthews, John Coleman and Tom Swift too.

You can't tell me that Murphy in place of Biggs or Roberts or whoever doesn't make that team better.

Franklin is a good case. 2008 and 2013 with, 2014/15 without. Ablett the same. 2007 and 2009 with, 2011 without. At no stage would Chris Scott or Bomber Thompson have said 'yeah I'd rather not have Ablett, we're a better team without him' but they made do for a season.

 

[jackenny]

They were able to win a flag without Gary Ablett Sr, Wayne Carey, Leigh Matthews, John Coleman and Tom Swift too.

You can't tell me that Murphy in place of Biggs or Roberts or whoever doesn't make that team better.

Franklin is a good case. 2008 and 2013 with, 2014/15 without. Ablett the same. 2007 and 2009 with, 2011 without. At no stage would Chris Scott or Bomber Thompson have said 'yeah I'd rather not have Ablett, we're a better team without him' but they made do for a season.

I think ultimately good players become better with a good team around them. Bob Murphy was largely irrelevant until the Bulldogs formed as a cohesive unit. The rise of the Bulldogs is more greatly attributed to Beverage in my eyes, because it's not everyday you have a coach perceptive enough to use a tired, worn out midfielder like Matthew Boyd and recycle them into the backline (basically, turning a declining midfielder into one of your more damaging defenders due to their accuracy by foot). I also feel like Bob Murphy's 'legend' and value on the field has been over-inflated. The reality is that Bob Murphy is likeable, but ultimately the Bulldogs went on to make the Grand Final without him, and to ultimately win it without him. He played the first three rounds in 2016 before succumbing to injury, that's it.

I have a weaker spot for Dale Morris than I do Bob Murphy.

 

[RUNVS]

I think a good example is Cameron Mooney, who in his day I think most people would agree was a servicable key forward, but was he really more than that?

But if a person who does not know AFL looked at his stats, and saw that he won 3 premierships (very nearly 4 premierships) I think people would get the impression he was a once in a generation key forward. No, Mooney was a good player, but because he was drafted to North Melbourne at the right time, and then traded to Geelong at the right time is why he has those 3 premierships. Yes he contributed to them (well 2 of those premierships anyway) but no one is going to argue that Geelong would not have done just as well in those years if they had another middle of the road key forward instead of Mooney.

 

[Scotland]

I think ultimately good players become better with a good team around them. Bob Murphy was largely irrelevant until the Bulldogs formed as a cohesive unit. The rise of the Bulldogs is more greatly attributed to Beverage in my eyes, because it's not everyday you have a coach perceptive enough to use a tired, worn out midfielder like Matthew Boyd and recycle them into the backline (basically, turning a declining midfielder into one of your more damaging defenders due to their accuracy by foot). I also feel like Bob Murphy's 'legend' and value on the field has been over-inflated. The reality is that Bob Murphy is likeable, but ultimately the Bulldogs went on to make the Grand Final without him, and to ultimately win it without him. He played the first three rounds in 2016 before succumbing to injury, that's it.

I have a weaker spot for Dale Morris than I do Bob Murphy.

Murphy was an AA player in 2011 and a key member of the Bulldogs 2008-2010 sides that finished top 4 each year. Was a pretty handy player before Beveridge came along and will be remembered more fondly in years to come than some players from the 2016 GF.

Agree that the love in got out of control in the media and agree that Beveridge was a bigger factor in the team winning the flag, but Murphy did take over the captaincy for 2015 when the club had no captain or coach and Beveridge himself can't stop praising the influence he had on the group.

Ultimately as much as any Dogs fan loves Bob they love the 2016 flag more. They loved Johnno, Grant, West, Rohan Smith and plenty of others who played hundreds of games for the club but didn't win the flag, too. Freo fans love Pav, Saints fans love Roo. But they want to see their team win.

Dale Morris is a great player and highly underrated in an era where people would rather see defenders get 20 touches than shut down opponents. But again, is he better because one of his 241 games was a winning GF? Every team in the top 4 last year had at least one unheralded defender. Hartigan, Astbury, Corr, Tomlinson, Lonergan... these guys don't get a lot of press for the role they play but by the same token they aren't automatically better than players in weaker sides.

 

[Bard]

B&Fs are a better indicator surely? Also the most highly rated award amongst players are they not?