Jimmy Bartel

[Copernicus]

The reason this thread pops up every year is because there is a lot of truth to it

Perhaps to delusional people.

 

[PenAndPaper]

I rate Bartel a lot!! Honestly more than Selwood when Bartel was in his prime.

 

[Copernicus]

Only on Bigfooty can we have a 15 page argument on Bartel being a good player. if I went to my friends and said, "Bartel is a good footballer" every single one would agree with me because really, its like declaring the sky is blue. Its not even worth arguing about.

But are any of them Hawks supporters? They're a special breed of deluded.

 

[PenAndPaper]

But are any of them Hawks supporters? They're a special breed of deluded.

Yep I am, Bartel is a gun!

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Ps. Jimmy was fantastic in all our 3 flags. Brilliant in 2007. Wouldn't have won 2009 without his shutdown on a champion player. Might not have won 2011 without his contributions. So HP even if you erroneously believe anyone can win a premiership medal and that doesn't necessarily link to achievements, in Bartels' case it did. In spades.

Correct weight. Top three in the B&F in each of the premiership years and named in the best players in each of the premiership sides. Just along for the ride.

 

[PatrickBateman]

Whatever role he plays he hasn't been that good for a while now. 2000 Koutoufides, 2007 Chad Cornes, 2010 Brendon Goddard, were all star utilities so there's no reason why Bartel can't do the same.

And it's not as if his performances are overlooked by everyone but the coach. If that was the case he would have won a best and fairest by now since he doesn't miss a lot of games. Or he would've gotten more votes from his coach in the AFLCA award.

You're playing a lone hand here champ.

Obviously Bartel (by factor of age) is likely past his best. We're supposed to judge his 2013 against your aforementioned players in their greatest years? Check out Bartel's stats from 2007, or watch footage. Koutoufides? Who basically played one good season then fell from the face of the earth? I'll take Bartel's career over all of the players you've mentioned. Goddard has the ability to perform in the biggest games too, but has consistently had his colours lowered in the midfield on the rare occasions he's played on the ball and can't control his emotions. Never goes there.

Feel free to keep beating on about him not winning a B&F. Why not go and see how consistent he's performed in the award, always in the top handful.

We're all waiting for you to tell us that his 2011 Grand Final performance was pure fluke yeah? Didn't just kick the important goals but led the comeback from the front physically, while the Pies were on top. Hasn't been good for a while now hey? How long exactly is that?

And with regards to Jeremy Howe.. Please.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

We're all waiting for you to tell us that his 2011 Grand Final performance was pure fluke yeah? Didn't just kick the important goals but led the comeback from the front physically, while the Pies were on top.

podgey believes Pendlebury was the deserving Norm Smith medallist from the 2011 GF.

 

[Hodgepodge]

You're playing a lone hand here champ.

No in terms of BigFooty I have my supporters and of course in terms of award voting, I have the support of the players and coaches and ex-players of the AFL.

Obviously Bartel (by factor of age) is likely past his best. We're supposed to judge his 2013 against your aforementioned players in their greatest years?

No, I haven't been judging him only on 2013, just his entire career as a supposed utility.

Check out Bartel's stats from 2007, or watch footage.

Bartel wasn't a utility in 2007.

Koutoufides? Who basically played one good season then fell from the face of the earth?

Error, his 2000 season was outstanding but he was a contested ball king for years after that.

I'll take Bartel's career over all of the players you've mentioned.

It's not about measuring careers, the point was that all those players had a profile and level of performance playing as a utility that Bartel just doesn't enjoy or hasn't shown. So the excuse that he's playing as a utility just doesn't measure up at all.

Feel free to keep beating on about him not winning a B&F. Why not go and see how consistent he's performed in the award, always in the top handful.

That's only on account of not missing many games. Almost every single BnF winner in 2011 for example was the club's first or equal first in games played for the year. This is no coincidence.

We're all waiting for you to tell us that his 2011 Grand Final performance was pure fluke yeah? Didn't just kick the important goals but led the comeback from the front physically, while the Pies were on top. Hasn't been good for a while now hey? How long exactly is that?

For quite a while, and I would say the same about other Norm Smith medal winners who haven't performed in recent years.

And with regards to Jeremy Howe.. Please.

If you can't admit that Howe is better overhead than Bartel, then there's something wrong with you.

 

[Hodgepodge]

Only on Bigfooty can we have a 15 page argument on Bartel being a good player. if I went to my friends and said, "Bartel is a good footballer" every single one would agree with me because really, its like declaring the sky is blue. Its not even worth arguing about.

I don't think anybody's arguing that Bartel isn't a 'good' footballer. You've made that up to avoid answering the actual charge that has been levelled against him.

 

[dymot]

I don't think anybody's arguing that Bartel isn't a 'good' footballer. You've made that up to avoid answering the actual charge that has been levelled against him.

Bartel's probably one of the best footballers out of his draft along with Swan, Ablett and Judd. Only Judd has attained the career trifecta other than Bartel of a flag, Norm Smith and Brownlow. Bartel has performed well for a no 7 draft pick and has achieved much more than the no 1 and no 2 that year did. There is only one player in the year Bartel was drafted in the top 10 who has had a more successful career and that is Judd.

 

[Hodgepodge]

Bartel's probably one of the best footballers out of his draft along with Swan, Ablett and Judd.

He just doesn't fit amongst those names except for the fact that he happened to be in the same draft.

Only Judd has attained the career trifecta other than Bartel of a flag, Norm Smith and Brownlow.

So? That's not a solid measure of career performance at all. It's like saying Michael Tuck is the only player in history to win 7 flags. Except it's not even as unique as that.

If you want to judge solid performance then you go by AAs, BnFs, AFLCA awards, MVPs, and so on.

Bartel has performed well for a no 7 draft pick and has achieved much more than the no 1 and no 2 that year did.

But that's only by virtue of the team that he's played in. Again, this doesn't relate properly to player performance either.

Hodge has more of the recognised individual awards than Bartel has, so your statement is just completely wrong.

There is only one player in the year Bartel was drafted in the top 10 who has had a more successful career and that is Judd.

Again this has nothing to do with the subject of performance.

 

[Sttew]

Hodgepodge are you living out a Psychology 101 bet - to see how many BF posters you can annoy and for as long as possible by being obtuse, deliberately argumentative, vague, inconsistent, belligerent, incommodious, and convoluted?

 

[LongBomb]

Never argue with a fool - they will drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.

 

[dymot]

I love how vague he is about things and using comments like by virtue of the team he played in. I guess it was easier for Bartel to stand out in an elite team of champions then it was for Hodge to stand out in cellar dwellars in 2005 for example.

 

[Hodgepodge]

I love how vague he is about things and using comments like by virtue of the team he played in. I guess it was easier for Bartel to stand out in an elite team of champions then it was for Hodge to stand out in cellar dwellars in 2005 for example.

It's not vague at all. Team awards obviously shouldn't be counted. Premierships or total wins are the only way by which Bartel is a more successful player than a player like Hodge, not individual performance based awards.

So in the discussion over Bartel's merits as a player the team achievements are really completely irrelevant.

If Bartel IS the most successful player in the Top 10 of the 2001 draft then you should have no problem basing this only on individual awards.

 

[dymot]

It's not vague at all. Team awards obviously shouldn't be counted. Premierships or total wins are the only way by which Bartel is a more successful player than a player like Hodge, not individual performance based awards.

So in the discussion over Bartel's merits as a player the team achievements are really completely irrelevant.

If Bartel IS the most successful player in the Top 10 of the 2001 draft then you should have no problem basing this only on individual awards.

So when you say team awards you are referring ti awards only able to be won by a particular team like best and fairests. In that case the only league wide individual awards Hodge has more of is AAs. Bartel on the other hand has a Brownlow which most would argue is harder to win.

 

[Hodgepodge]

So when you say team awards you are referring ti awards only able to be won by a particular team like best and fairests.

BnFs aren't won by teams, but by individual players.

In that case the only league wide individual awards Hodge has more of is AAs.

But it isn't the case so the point is moot. BnFs, AAs, as well as MVP and AFLCA award voting, etc. Bartel trails Hodge and Judd out of the top 10 in the 2001 draft in all of these awards.

Bartel on the other hand has a Brownlow which most would argue is harder to win.

That's rarity of achievement again, which doesn't correlate to level of performance.

If we go by the logic that the Brownlow indicates level of performance proportionate to the difficulty of achievement, then Bartel and Adam Cooney should've absolutely romped in their club BnF award in the same year. Woewodin would've been the AA captain in 2000 instead he was completely excluded.

So yes, the Brownlow does go to less than 1% of the player population, but it's completely absurd to say that Brownlow winners are in the top 1% of players.

If you want to adjudge the best players the most reliable method is by MVP voting, AFLCA voting, BnFs and AAs. Champion players present well in these categories.

 

[dymot]

BnFs aren't won by teams, but by individual players.



But it isn't the case so the point is moot. BnFs, AAs, as well as MVP and AFLCA award voting, etc. Bartel trails Hodge and Judd out of the top 10 in the 2001 draft in all of these awards.



That's rarity of achievement again, which doesn't correlate to level of performance.

If we go by the logic that the Brownlow indicates level of performance proportionate to the difficulty of achievement, then Bartel and Adam Cooney should've absolutely romped in their club BnF award in the same year. Woewodin would've been the AA captain in 2000 instead he was completely excluded.

So yes, the Brownlow does go to less than 1% of the player population, but it's completely absurd to say that Brownlow winners are in the top 1% of players.

If you want to adjudge the best players the most reliable method is by MVP voting, AFLCA voting, BnFs and AAs. Champion players present well in at least 2-4 of these categories.

I'll say it again BandFs have no relevance as a measure of success to compare players between clubs as they are limiting in who can win it to their club. The criteria differs from club to club and sometimes the player seen as the best in terms of pure ability doesn't win it. Ablett at Geelong in 2010 is a good example. As for your other measures of "reliable" evaluation of a players performance, the AFLPA is canned as only a small percentage of players can win it and therefore doesn't give players the right to vote for or support the player they necessarily believe to be the best. Further players have taken it as a joke often and this has been documented. AAs have also come under fair criticism due to the biased and questionable nature of their selections. Last year choosing Natanui over Jacobs or Maric was a key example as was the choice to choose Brett Deledio on the interchange when there were players clearly seen as more worthy.

The value of the Brownlow is that it is largely varied between who votes on it, it is done weekly shortly after the match is completed and is open to all players to win.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

That's only on account of not missing many games. Almost every single BnF winner in 2011 for example was the club's first or equal first in games played for the year.

I love when you drag this one out, particularly since you know it is complete rubbish. Bartel has placed in the top six in Geelong's B&F every year since 2006. Only two out of eight winners in that time have played less games than him (Enirght in 2011 and Ablett in 2009) and four have played more games than him in the year they won it (Hawkins in 2012, Enright in 2009, Ablett in 2007 and Chapman in 2006).

 

[Hodgepodge]

I'll say it again BandFs have no relevance as a measure of success to compare players between clubs as they are limiting in who can win it to their club. The criteria differs from club to club and sometimes the player seen as the best in terms of pure ability doesn't win it. Ablett at Geelong in 2010 is a good example.

I think Ablett did win 2 BnFs at Geelong though. Over the long term, or even medium term in Ablett's case, a champion player will win one of them or he will feature heavily in other awards.

As for your other measures of "reliable" evaluation of a players performance, the AFLPA is canned as only a small percentage of players can win it and therefore doesn't give players the right to vote for or support the player they necessarily believe to be the best.

Again, usually the best 3 players from any club. It's a low bar to jump for a suposed champion player, even at a team like Geelong.

AAs have also come under fair criticism due to the biased and questionable nature of their selections. Last year choosing Natanui over Jacobs or Maric was a key example

Debate over decisions doesn't mean wrong decisions. I personally think Naitanui was a better ruckman in 2012 because he only had 6.3 fewer hitouts despite being in the ruck less often. He also kicked a lot more goals.

Furthermore Naitanui hasn't proven himself either, he only has one AA to his name and not much else. So his inclusion in the AA side doesn't even enter into the discussion since he doesn't answer the challenge I set out anyway.

 

[Hodgepodge]

. Only two out of eight winners in that time have played less games than him (Enirght in 2011 and Ablett in 2009)

That just proves my point, that it's so much harder to win a BnF with fewer games . . . not sure what your point is supposed to be here.

and four have played more games than him in the year they won it (Hawkins in 2012, Enright in 2009, Ablett in 2007 and Chapman in 2006).

What you have admitted here is that Bartel has played more or equal games to the BnF winner in half of the sample years that you have presnted. This is totally in keeping with what I said earlier, that he doesn't miss a lot of games.

 

[dymot]

I think Ablett did win 2 BnFs at Geelong though. Over the long term, or even medium term in Ablett's case, a champion player will win one of them or he will feature heavily in other awards.



Again, usually the best 3 players from any club. It's a low bar to jump for a suposed champion player, even at a team like Geelong.



Debate over decisions doesn't mean wrong decisions. I personally think Naitanui was a better ruckman in 2012 because he only had 6.3 fewer hitouts despite being in the ruck less often. He also kicked a lot more goals.

Furthermore Naitanui hasn't proven himself either, he only has one AA to his name and not much else. So his inclusion in the AA side doesn't even enter into the discussion since he doesn't answer the challenge I set out anyway.

Using that logic a champion player who finished 2nd or 3rd in the Brownlow many times should have won one as well. Fact is that doesn't always happen.

Was 2 until 2009. Geelong has so many they can chose from due to the evenness. Its funny how the players at the club joked about it even in 2007 when they were dominant. Shows you how seriously they took it as do other players like Jack Riewoldt who went off what the media said as their guide . Again Hodge was never goof enough to win one yet.

I guess using the All Australian Argument we can safely say that Matthews was inferior to Bartel as he has less Brownlows and less AAs.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

What you have admitted here is that Bartel has played more or equal games to the BnF winner in half of the sample years that you have presnted. This is totally in keeping with what I said earlier, that he doesn't miss a lot of games.

2006: Bartel equal 9th most games
2007: Bartel equal 10th most games
2012: Bartel equal 13th most games

 

[Hodgepodge]

2006: Bartel equal 9th most games
2007: Bartel equal 10th most games
2012: Bartel equal 13th most games

You're just playing with numbers now, for example even when Bartel was equal 10th, he was only 2 games off the leader.
When he was equal 9th, he was one game off the leader.

These are not substantial games played deficits.

 

[romeoh]

HP-all yr stuff is meaningless. Here is the detail that matters -If Bartel had been playing for you in the GF last year, Hawthorn would have won the flag. You get it?