Lance Franklin is inconsistent & has done nothing since 2008 and other messages from Uranus

[QuietB]

The only player who has kicked more goals than Buddy over the last 2 years is Jono Brown (another half the flogs on big footy would have you believe is an overrated hack) with 138 and Fev with 137 goals to Buddy's 131. Next best is Mark Lecras (massively underrated also) with 121 goals. Not bad to be third when you have apparently been "inconsistent & has done nothing since 2008"

 

[gO_bOmBeRz]

Buddy will be a star 'nuff said.

 

[eldorado]

Kudos to you for looking beyond what 99 percent of your fellow Hawthorn supporters put it down to : ''The umpires hate Buddy and they hate Hawthorn''

Kudos to you for managing to mention Hawthorn in a post without derision.




Oh, oops, sorry, my mistake...

 

[lewigie]

You left a few rounds out in your graph in the OP..

 

[eldorado]

You left a few rounds out in your graph in the OP..

They would have been games he missed? (injury, suspension)

 

[Crow-mo]

I actually wonder how much football some of you guys watch, because there are a lot of blatant lies people post and try and pass off as fact. Franklin is the hardest worker in our side without a doubt. He covers so much ground and that's the reason he averaged nearly 18 touches, 3.6 goals and over 3 tackles a game last year, lining up as a high half forward. Nick Riewoldt has never and will probably never get close to those numbers playing in a similair position.

The amount of shite people speak is bordering on absurd on this site atm.

I'm not sure I am persuaded by an argument so lacking in real content.

there is nothing about 18 touches and 3 tackles a game that evidences that he is the hardest worker in your team.

I'd also suggest you have an adult explain what my post was actually saying before going off next time. the irrelevant riewoldt segue is just odd

 

[Crow-mo]

I have explained to Ricmel and several others multiple times, that Buddys 2010 is better than Nick Riewoldts best ever season for possessions per game, goals per game and tackles per game. But they don't listen.

Look I think he's probably the best player in the game, he's certainly the most gifted.

but seriously, are you really trying to make a statistical argument in this day and age, using ONLY possessions, goals and tackles?

the thing is, I get you're a fanboi, he's your fav player, and he plays for your team but that doesn't mean you can't discuss his pros and cons sensibly

 

[David the Cat]

Look I think he's probably the best player in the game, he's certainly the most gifted.

but seriously, are you really trying to make a statistical argument in this day and age, using ONLY possessions, goals and tackles?

the thing is, I get you're a fanboi, he's your fav player, and he plays for your team but that doesn't mean you can't discuss his pros and cons sensibly

Uhmm..he's a Hawthorn supporter. They don't do that.

 

[lewigie]

They would have been games he missed? (injury, suspension)

Ahh of course. Thought he was a bit selective with his facts. But all good

 

[Paddywhackers]

Suffers for his own brilliance, as like Carey was, his best is head and shoulders above everybody else.

Carey was far more consistently brillliant. He also stood up nearly every time the game was in the balance. Franklin not in the same ballpark, unless repeat his 2008 season about five more times, and actually better his 08 season by being there when the game needs to be one, looking like a man amongst kids as Carey appeared.

 

[winty]

Many people haven't paid much respect to Geelong's forwards, despite their stats. Guys like Mooney, Johnson, Varcoe and Stokes have had the luxury of playing forward of a dominant midfield and receive wonderful supply, usually from Geelong mids streaming forwards of centre, well in the clear and with plenty of time to kick to their forward's advantage. From 2007-2010, the Geelong forwards have received gilt-edged chance after chance after chance and usually wind up burning most of their opportunities and finishing with only 2 or 3 goals.

It's interesting how the forward lines are perceived. Everyone thinks that because Buddy and Roughead kick more goals than SJ and Moons, that they're the better forwards, but the goals contributed (goals kicked plus goal assists) stat tells a different story.

Since 2007, SJ has kicked 205 goals and assisted in 99, while Mooney has kicked 201 and assisted 108. Combined, they've kicked 406 goals and assisted in 207, for a combined total of contribution in 613 Geelong goals.

Compare that to Franklin, who has kicked 317 and assisted in 45, and Roughead had kicked 219 and assisted in 38. Collectively, that's 536 goals kicked and 87 assisted, or a contribution to 619 Hawthorn goals.

Just because Geelong have only had a handful of players to kick a bag of 6 goals or more, it doesn't mean the forward line burnt most of their chances just because we don't have someone listed as kicking a bag in the paper on Monday morning. After all, the night we kicked 35 goals against Richmond in 2007, the leading goalkickers for Geelong only had 4 goals beside their name, while in 1993 when Ablett kicked 14 goals against Essendon, the whole side kicked 19 in total. Which was the more effective forward line?

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

I see where you're going Winty, but I'm guessing Geelong scored a few more goals during that period?

I realise that's the point of the game, but when segmenting one particular section, 613/900 is much less than 619/800.

 

[Ricmel]

This sums up how people mark Buddy relatively harshly.

Buddy averaged more goals and possessions than J Riewoldt yet you mark his season as superb and Buddy's only as good.

Arguments can obviously be made for relative teams strengths and positions played but on face value you contradict yourself.

Further, on averages per game Buddy had a better season than St Nick has ever had and people rate him a champion. You don't become a champ by only having good seasons.

I rate Franklin highly. He is easily in my top 10...where in the top 10 not so sure.

But this selective statistical quoting by Hawks supporters should stop.

Riewoldt averages more marks per game year on year than any other player in the AFL and holds the record (possies 1 and 2) for the most marks ever taken in a season I believe.

That is what you want a KPF to do, draw a contest. Riewoldt takes usually 2 opposition defenders up the ground every time he leads...and go to a Saints game and see how many times he leads. These things are not in stats but they are crucial in determining his value.

Now I am not using this to argue Riewoldt is better than Buddy or vice versa. Just that selective stats are useless.

But if you want to understand why so many non Hawthorn supporters don't have Buddy rated so highly it is because,

1. He does not dominate in the air and
2. Whether this is fair or not, he sometimes looks to be disinterested and turns it on in spurts.

 

[HeHateMe]

buddy is by far the hardest working hawthorn player and covers more ground then any one at hawthorn, so its not out of the realms of possibility he covers more then nick.

i as a hawthorn supporter get annoyed at the fact people don't acknowledge this he is one of the best gut runners in the comp but still gets labeled lazy.

both nick and buddy are 2 of the best key forwards in the comp, both have there strengths and weaknesses, both are in the top 10 afl players and both work harder or as hard as any other afl player in the game i would like buddy to at least get acknowledge for that.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

The top midfielders don't face the same scutiny for their defensive efforts that the forwards do. When Buddy gets beaten in a one-on-one contest, you'll hear all about from the crowd and commentators. However when Judd or Ablett roll the dice and let their man run to one side of the ground, while they jog towards another part of the ground, how many people even pick up on it when they get caught out?

Surely you've heard this plenty of times over the last couple of years. Think back to the Hawks v Sydney game, O'Keefe was tagging Hodge, ended up running off and kicking 4 goals for the Swans. Commentators, general public, everyone was commenting on how bad Hodge was.

Yeah, you're spot on.

Unfortunatley, the majority of the general and football public are stupid. They like to get on BF and post about things they have no or very little knowledge about. Not only that, but they do so in such an arrogant and ignorant manner. Very sad

Yes, I read some of Chewy's posts too

 

[Guardian Hawk]

He was top 10 last season when he "couldn't break a tag".

Calm down tiger I wouldn't go that far.

Sigh...so the 16 AFL coaches rated Hodge the 2nd best player in the comp, the 600+ AFL players rated Hodge the second best player in the comp, the AA panel chose him as the AA captain and the experts/commentators/journalists rated him 2nd in "The Age", "Herald Sun" and every other media award I can remember viewing.

But of course, you, an anonymous internet poster, know that not only was Hodge not the 2nd best player in the comp, but not even top 10 in '10 - thank you for enlightening us.

(Maybe you only saw his worst game of the year - vs Sydney?)

 

[Guardian Hawk]

Interesting to note that for goals kicked from 2007-2010 in the AFL, the top 10 looks like;

1.Lance Franklin 317
2. B.Fevola 295
3. J.Brown 285
4. M.Pavlich 228
5. N.Riewoldt 224
6. J.Roughead 219
7. S.Johnson 205
8. C.Mooney 201
9. B. Hall 196*
10. M.LeCras 180*

Pretty staggering he comfortably leads the AFL given he has was 19-23 y.o. in this period whilst most of the others were in their prime (and apparently Franklin has been out of form for half that time ).

What this highlights is that if Franklin continues at his current output for 2011, there will be only 1 player in the entire AFL within 100 goals of Franklin over a 5 year period (all by the age of 24).


* It's quite unlikely but there may be a player I have missed who fills these last couple of spots (who is no longer regularly kicking goals) as I only researched players who i thought would've been up there. I did check the likes of Bradshaw, Lloyd, Didak, J.Riwoldt, Green, etc - all of whom did not make top 10

 

[Hens Hall]

I rate Franklin highly. He is easily in my top 10...where in the top 10 not so sure.

But this selective statistical quoting by Hawks supporters should stop.

Riewoldt averages more marks per game year on year than any other player in the AFL and holds the record (possies 1 and 2) for the most marks ever taken in a season I believe.

That is what you want a KPF to do, draw a contest. Riewoldt takes usually 2 opposition defenders up the ground every time he leads...and go to a Saints game and see how many times he leads. These things are not in stats but they are crucial in determining his value.

Now I am not using this to argue Riewoldt is better than Buddy or vice versa. Just that selective stats are useless.

But if you want to understand why so many non Hawthorn supporters don't have Buddy rated so highly it is because,

1. He does not dominate in the air and
2. Whether this is fair or not, he sometimes looks to be disinterested and turns it on in spurts.

Ric, I'm not sure what your point is?

The intent of my previous post was just to highlight how you marked him harshly relative to other performers last year.

Remember, this thread was started to show that Buddy has been consistently at the the pointy end of the comp since 2008 (and I reckon you could even say since 2007) and not some flighty inconsistent forward some people make him out be.

You rate him in your top ten which means you would agree with this.

 

[INSANE]

I reckon he's the second best player in the comp just behind Gaz, but would take him 1st every time if I could pick anyone to play for West Coast.

Has the athletic side covered, is remarkably consistent for a forward in a team that has been struggling a bit lately and he backs it up with a work-rate the equal of Riewoldt.

 

[Ricmel]

Ric, I'm not sure what your point is?

The intent of my previous post was just to highlight how you marked him harshly relative to other performers last year.

Remember, this thread was started to show that Buddy has been consistently at the the pointy end of the comp since 2008 (and I reckon you could even say since 2007) and not some flighty inconsistent forward some people make him out be.

You rate him in your top ten which means you would agree with this.

I haven't rated him harshly. In fact quite the opposite, I think people look at 65 goals and say bad year....I say good year...(not superb).

But people should accept he is not a Dunstall or a Lockett and kicking a 100 is going to be exceptional rather than his average.

I have consistently said he is in my top 10 players, and on 2008 form he is 1 or 2.

But the reason I don't think it is fair to compare him to Riewoldt (and vice versa) is that they are completely different players and are judged by different criteria.

Like about 10 players in the AFL at the moment, Buddy has the potential to be rated number 1 by the end of the year.

 

[Guardian Hawk]

I haven't rated him harshly. In fact quite the opposite, I think people look at 65 goals and say bad year....I say good year...(not superb).

But people should accept he is not a Dunstall or a Lockett and kicking a 100 is going to be exceptional rather than his average.

I have consistently said he is in my top 10 players, and on 2008 form he is 1 or 2.

But the reason I don't think it is fair to compare him to Riewoldt (and vice versa) is that they are completely different players and are judged by different criteria.

Like about 10 players in the AFL at the moment, Buddy has the potential to be rated number 1 by the end of the year.

I agree with pretty much all you said except one glaring point...your notion that because Buddy only kicked 65 goals (from 17 odd games) rather than 100, he only had a good year (and then going on to make comparisons to Lockett and Dunstall).

The fact of the matter is, Franklin was not playing full forward all year (despite kicking the most goals per game). He spent most of his time as a roaming CHF with stints on the wing and even bobbing up in the back half (and was named AA CHF - surely a clue). As a point of comparison, Nick Riewoldt kicked 67 goals in 2004 (from more games) and you and I both know he had a 'superb' (certainly better than 'good') year. To emphasise this further, neither Lockett nor Dunstall (true FF's who barely left the square) averaged even 12 posessions/game whilst Franklin was getting 18 possessions/game (Lockett laid 1 tackle every 2 matches, Buddy 4 a game in 2010). Too many ignorant posters look solely at his goal tally and assess him on that when he hasn't played FF since 2008. It's like saying Carey, Riewoldt, Treadrea, Pavlich, etc did not have great years (when they were kicking 60-70 goals) because they weren't kicking 100 - there's a lot more to the game than that.

 

[Scotland]

Buddy is the Anti-Judd.

Both are brilliant footballers capable of things that others aren't, and both also regularly do the routine things.

If Judd has a 20 disposal game or receives the ball in space and kicks to a teammate the commentators will gush over him, whereas unless Franklin kicks a big bag or nails goal of the year he'll barely rate a mention in comparison.

 

[Hens Hall]

Buddy is the Anti-Judd.

Both are brilliant footballers capable of things that others aren't, and both also regularly do the routine things.

If Judd has a 20 disposal game or receives the ball in space and kicks to a teammate the commentators will gush over him, whereas unless Franklin kicks a big bag or nails goal of the year he'll barely rate a mention in comparison.

That's because Judd has the NKE going for him and Buddy doesn't.

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

I agree with pretty much all you said except one glaring point...your notion that because Buddy only kicked 65 goals (from 17 odd games) rather than 100, he only had a good year (and then going on to make comparisons to Lockett and Dunstall).

The fact of the matter is, Franklin was not playing full forward all year (despite kicking the most goals per game). He spent most of his time as a roaming CHF with stints on the wing and even bobbing up in the back half (and was named AA CHF - surely a clue). As a point of comparison, Nick Riewoldt kicked 67 goals in 2004 (from more games) and you and I both know he had a 'superb' (certainly better than 'good') year. To emphasise this further, neither Lockett nor Dunstall (true FF's who barely left the square) averaged even 12 posessions/game whilst Franklin was getting 18 possessions/game (Lockett laid 1 tackle every 2 matches, Buddy 4 a game in 2010). Too many ignorant posters look solely at his goal tally and assess him on that when he hasn't played FF since 2008. It's like saying Carey, Riewoldt, Treadrea, Pavlich, etc did not have great years (when they were kicking 60-70 goals) because they weren't kicking 100 - there's a lot more to the game than that.

You're far too logical and intelligent for the MB

 

[sainter35]

I'm not sure I am persuaded by an argument so lacking in real content.

there is nothing about 18 touches and 3 tackles a game that evidences that he is the hardest worker in your team.

I'd also suggest you have an adult explain what my post was actually saying before going off next time. the irrelevant riewoldt segue is just odd

Good post.

Buddy fanboi aka Hyperdonk doesnt quite understand that "Lance" plays FF......N Riewoldt plays CHF EVERY WEEK and its well known which role is considered toughest in the modern game.

Fanboi's logic would have us compare goals kicked Dunstall V Brereton on that basis.

It aint hard but for some.....sheesh.

Lance is a gifted player who goes AWOL more than Riewoldt in terms of sheer consistency (Lance can go AWOL for weeks before having a big game). Riewoldt does not. That is the difference betwen "gifted" players (aka flashy) and consistent champions.

Im sure Lance is a nice guy.