Opinion Dustin Martin is better than Dangerfield

[DarkSaint]

How come people don't rate Hodge aside Ablett when he won september?

Pendlebury/Selwood/Fyfe/Mitchell/Hodge all better players than Martin over their careers.

Hodge was a very good player, what sets him apart was his leadership. However in terms of performances he is not in the same league as the players mentioned. I'd have Simon Black ahead of Hodge in terms of performances.

 

[Show Pone]

Hodge was a very good player, what sets him apart was his leadership. However in terms of performances he is not in the same league as the players mentioned. I'd have Simon Black ahead of Hodge in terms of performances.

Hodge is very much like Martin. Both players not top 10 for nearly decade of their careers then in september turn into superman. Hodge imo better than Mitchell in September and Martin>Danger in September. But otherwise most of careers behind main pack

 

[DarkSaint]

Hodge is very much like Martin. Both players not top 10 for nearly decade of their careers then in september turn into superman. Hodge imo better than Mitchell in September and Martin>Danger in September. But otherwise most of careers behind main pack

Not top 10? Martin has 2 Brownlow medals and 2 Norm Smith's hanging off his neck. Career wise he has been fantastic so far. Started off slower than the rest, but his impact the last 3 or 4 years has been the highest. The only player over the last 10 or so years that is above them all is Ablett.

 

[kozi]

Dusty BOG in 7 of the last 9 finals (including 2 Grand Finals) while Danger went missing when it mattered (2nd half of Prelim) again this year.

Time for a new thread.

 

[Grrr]

How come people don't rate Hodge aside Ablett when he won september?

Pendlebury/Selwood/Fyfe/Mitchell/Hodge/Swan all better players than Martin over their careers.

Well the players you mention besides Fyfe all have had or had very long careers. Fyfe due mainly to injury and starting a bit slower has not had a better career, although an equal as a player no doubt. Martin is 16th (Fyfe 18th) in the all time Brownlow voting and has another 4-5 more years of football in him. Fyfe and Martin are the same age 28. (I know the Brownlow is not the true measure of a player, but an indicator of a good career.)
By the time both Martin and Fyfe finish their careers they will be above all those players you mention, Pendelbury as a player is about equal perhaps and Hodge due to his leadership.

 

[juss]

Ur a funny guy not that smart tho. Figures.

I don't really find factual statements that funny but I'm glad you enjoyed it

 

[Calcium Man]

LeBron is famous for underperforming and losing in the finals

Losing yes but underperforming no, especially as he matured (like Dusty)

He has been to Finals 8 years straight, sure with heat it was easier, but some of those Cavs teams were bog average and he ripped through the eastern conference with that team. That’s an incredible effort in its own right given that it adds 2-3 months to your season.

He, unfortunately, came up against a historically great team with the 2nd and 3rd best players in the world, who also had Klay Thompson (a guy who can score 37 points in a quarter) and Draymond green ( a perennial DPOY candidate). And they awarded the finals MVP in 2015 to the player who kept him to 36 points, 14 rebounds and 9 assists per game.

3 x finals MVP when they won them too. I’m a Warriors fan but Lebron was other worldly. I was being kind to Dusty to even making the comparison, although basketball is easier to dominate an an individual.

 

[Mr Unbelievable]

If you understand football, you’ll see nuances in Martin’s game that put him ahead of Dangerfield.

He is next-to impossible to tackle, he reads the ball unbelievably well both in the air and off hands, and his disposal is brilliant. He knows when to go and when to hang back, instinctively. And despite his rough exterior he is one of the most refined, nuanced, beautifully balanced and uncannily skilled players of all time.

Dangerfield is a bull at a gate. A very good one, but nowhere as gifted as Martin in the actual art of the game.

Great Post .... Dusty's reading of the play is the best I have seen.
The last sentence is a perfect summation.

 

[Surely Paul]

How come people don't rate Hodge aside Ablett when he won september?

Pendlebury/Selwood/Fyfe/Mitchell/Hodge/Swan all better players than Martin over their careers.

LOL

 

[Surely Paul]

Funnily enough, Danger despite his putrid second half in the PF outperformed Dustin in most key areas over the course of the whole game. CD rated his game slightly better.

+10 contested possesions
+5 possessions
+3.1% disposal efficiency
+4 tackles
+5 clearances

Dusty had 150 more meters gained, 6 more score involvements and 1 more goal

LOL

 

[Surely Paul]

If you understand football, you’ll see nuances in Martin’s game that put him ahead of Dangerfield.

He is next-to impossible to tackle, he reads the ball unbelievably well both in the air and off hands, and his disposal is brilliant. He knows when to go and when to hang back, instinctively. And despite his rough exterior he is one of the most refined, nuanced, beautifully balanced and uncannily skilled players of all time.

Dangerfield is a bull at a gate. A very good one, but nowhere as gifted as Martin in the actual art of the game.

Wow. Someone on BF who actually knows footy. Brilliant post.

 

[queensberryrules]

Danger is Bishop Berkely to Martin's Wittgenstein.

No comparison really. One stands a giant amongst mortals, the other a pretender.


On SM-G955F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Wojcinski]

LOL

LOL

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Danger is Bishop Berkely to Martin's Wittgenstein.

No comparison really. One stands a giant amongst mortals, the other a pretender.


On SM-G955F using BigFooty.com mobile app

Dangerfield is a god botherer?

 

[Elton Johns Wig]

Funnily enough, Danger despite his putrid second half in the PF outperformed Dustin in most key areas over the course of the whole game. CD rated his game slightly better.

+10 contested possesions
+5 possessions
+3.1% disposal efficiency
+4 tackles
+5 clearances

Dusty had 150 more meters gained, 6 more score involvements and 1 more goal

Thats the thing. I know the DE are quite similar, but Dusty bites off more risk wise by foot. This leads to "clangers" but also breaks games open.

Danger breaks games open with his body, he's a beast. But his damage is often less because he is an average kick, at best.

If Danger (or Fyfe) kicked like Dusty it wouldn't even be a conversation, they'd be ahead. But they don't, so they're not.

 

[Richo83]

If Richardson in his prime was available in today's open market and you had Martin available now, Richardson would be worth a lot more and would get Franklin-like offers as he was a freakish talent like very few we ever saw for his size.

So what? Yes, if Richardson played today he'd be similar to Franklin. To be honest though, I'd pick Martin at the peak of his powers to those players anyway. Franklin can be shut down with a decent defender, Martin has been attempted to be shut down for a while now and teams have failed. Plays well in the midfield and forwardline.

Same would be said for Ablett Snr or Wayne Carey.
Those guys played in an era where it was back and forth and the only way to succeed was to be dominant in the air and on the ground.

Martin is pretty great in the air and the ground. If you stuck Martin in the AFL 20 years ago, he'd still dominate.

As great as what Martin is, and I'm a massive fan of his, I think it's easy to forget what Ablett Junior accomplished because for a long period of time (07-14), he averaged 31 disposals (13.5 were contested), 5.5 clearances, 0.7 assists, 1.3 goals, won 2 Brownlow medals, 2 premierships, 5 MVP's, 5 B&F's, 8 All Australian's and is widely regarded as the greatest midfielder of all time.

I agree that junior and senior are better than Martin. But a cats poster said that Martin's 2017 season is inferior to hundreds of players' seasons.

 

[Richo83]

How come people don't rate Hodge aside Ablett when he won september?

Pendlebury/Selwood/Fyfe/Mitchell/Hodge/Swan all better players than Martin over their careers.

In what way? Martin is as decorated, even more decorated than some of these players. Two flags, two Norm Smiths, one brownlow medal. How many of those have all three? I think a lot of these players have just merely played for longer.

 

[Bazzar]

has dusty ever taken a speccy?

Might have, might not have, whats your point?

 

[Mootsy]

Might have, might not have, whats your point?

He could try

 

[Bazzar]

He could try

I still dont understand what you're getting at. Why should he want to try and take some spekies?

 

[BF Tiger]

He could try

Why? He just beats them when the ball comes to ground.

 

[Daka]

The Brownlow is really just a measure of player's standout BOG performances. Umpires, fans and media favour the flashy types. For Richmond, that's Dusty and Bachar.

Best and Fairest awards are a more accurate measure of a player's season because all the players are graded for every game they play. Not just the 1 or 2 best players. The Richmond coaches award every player between zero and five votes after every game, including finals. Every Geelong player receives a score out of 15 after each game. So good games are counted, average games are counted and bad games are counted.

You hit the nail on the head about roles - the coaches know the role they've asked of each player. Those who don't perform their role get marked down. Umpires and fans aren't always privy to this. They mostly judge players by the stats. They mainly focus on the stars like Dusty and Danger. The coaches have a much better idea about the value of each player's contribution. The coaches and assistant coaches are the only true experts. Light years ahead of everyone else.

e.g. I ignore Shane Edwards getting zero Brownlow votes and Grimes getting only 3.. Pfft.. Whatever...
Hardwick and co voted them as Richmond's 2nd and 3rd best for 2019 which i think is a far more accurate assessment of their seasons.

Rich: 1) Prestia, 2) Edwards, 3) Grimes, 4) Vlastuin, 5) Lynch, 6) Martin, 7) Lambert, 8) Houli, 9) Astbury
Geel: 1) Dangerfield, 2) Kelly, 3) Stewart, 4) Hawkins, 5) Blicavs, 6) Dahlhaus, 7) Ablett, 8) Duncan, 9) Selwood

------------------------------------------------------------------

Let's not forget: Dangerfield finished 2nd in the AFLCA Coaches award with 90 votes. He polled votes in 14 of 21 games.
Martin finished 11th with 71 votes. He polled votes in 11 of 20 games.

Even if we include the votes from finals matches for the Gary Ayres award, Danger still finished ahead of Dusty.
Dangerfield: 97 votes (polled in 15 of 24 games); Martin: 90 votes (polled in 13 of 23 games)

Dusty ended the year on a high with the ultimate team success. He grabbed all the September glory, but he didn't clearly have the better individual season. Pretty close, I reckon. Danger just in front if we take all games into account.

Dusty at 6th in our best & fairest didn't make sense fair enough it's what Hardwick and the coaches say but you can't tell me with a straight face he was our 6th best player.. Dion deserved 1st no doubt but I would've had Martin 2nd.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Dusty at 6th in our best & fairest didn't make sense fair enough it's what Hardwick and the coaches say but you can't tell me with a straight face he was our 6th best player Dion deserved 1st no doubt but I would've had Martin 2nd.

It makes sense, when you consider that Dusty doesn't seem to want, like or need the accolades. As such, he may be often overlooked by those that know him, because he prefers it that way, and it sorta works better for everyone.

 

[Daka]

It makes sense, when you consider that Dusty doesn't seem to want, like or need the accolades. As such, he may be often overlooked by those that know him, because he prefers it that way, and it sorta works better for everyone.

I know but even B&F voting can be a bit iffy because if you miss games it can hurt your place significantly I know Dusty & Houli missed a few games during the year both finished outside the top 5.

 

[Royce Hafey]

Danger is Bishop Berkely to Martin's Wittgenstein.

No comparison really. One stands a giant amongst mortals, the other a pretender.


On SM-G955F using BigFooty.com mobile app

'After we came out of the church, we stood talking for some time together of Bishop Berkeley's ingenious sophistry to prove the nonexistence of matter, and that every thing in the universe is merely ideal. I observed, that though we are satisfied his doctrine is not true, it is impossible to refute it. I never shall forget the alacrity with which Johnson answered, striking his foot with mighty force against a large stone, till he rebounded from it -- "I refute it thus."'