Player Watch Most overrated players (current & retired) part 2

[iameviljez]

This. How do people not make that connection when comparing eras?

Could you imagine what Ablett Sr could have done if he had trained full-time and had access to mental health support?*

*Let's conveniently forget the amount of overbearing attention enforced by a 24/7 news cycle for the moment

 

[HoneyBadger35]

The media overrate Rance. Bigfooty have over corrected and underrate him. If the media did their job, they'd credit some of the good defenders out there.

As a general rule though, I think most defenders are overrated now. It's easier being a defender in this era with defences being more organised, working in teams and with teams playing more defensive than in the past. In the 90s you saw a lot of one-on-ones with Carey, not so much anymore. On the flipside, we underrate forwards, especially key forwards.

Counterpoint - you can’t chop the arms, you can’t even think about making any sort of early body contact, you can’t nudge your forward under the flight of the ball, you can’t make front on contact even if you’re going for the mark. Defending now is harder than ever with the way the game is adjudicated and the (usual) skill level of the modern footballer.

The umpires are so sensitive when it comes to defensive free kicks - half the s**t defenders get pulled up for would be play on if the forward did it.

I’m sick of how much the media overrate Rance, but if he played in an era where you could just wrap your guy up and strike him in the forearm who knows how highly regarded he could be.

 

[Yamu]

Christian Petracca - has potential but so far has not been close to delivering

 

[citizen-erased]

Christian Perracca - has potential but so far has not been close to delivering

I haven't seen a better under 18 kid since Judd but he hasn't come on the way I thought he would

 

[Bardo State]

This. How do people not make that connection when comparing eras?

It does make things a tad awkward when comparing current players. Most current stars would absolutely dominate if you plonked them into 80s footy. So you kind of have to imagine a world where they're a fair bit worse than they actually are. Seems a bit pointless and not all that fair.

But then people seemingly don't want to just look at how a player performs relative to their peers. Because if that was the standard, then someone like Franklin blows Gaz Sr, Lockett, Dunstall and Carey out of the water. There's a much bigger gap between Franklin and whoever you consider the fourth best forward of the last decade than there is between whoever you pull out from those four to be first and fourth best forward of the 90s.

So player comparisons across eras always seem to break down because no one seems to be comfortable with a standard for comparison that makes sense.

 

[PhatBoy]

It does make things a tad awkward when comparing current players. Most current stars would absolutely dominate if you plonked them into 80s footy. So you kind of have to imagine a world where they're a fair bit worse than they actually are. Seems a bit pointless and not all that fair.

But then people seemingly don't want to just look at how a player performs relative to their peers. Because if that was the standard, then someone like Franklin blows Gaz Sr, Lockett, Dunstall and Carey out of the water. There's a much bigger gap between Franklin and whoever you consider the fourth best forward of the last decade than there is between whoever you pull out from those four to be first and fourth best forward of the 90s.

So player comparisons across eras always seem to break down because no one seems to be comfortable with a standard for comparison that makes sense.

I do see your logic but I don't think the gap is as big as you think.
Franklin, Riewoldt, Pavlich and Kennedy would be the logical 4 best forwards IMO over the last decade. I don't see there being a massive gap between those 4.
Ablett, Lockett, Dunstall, and I guess Carey (different style obviously to the other 3 and came along a little later).

I'd say, with some bias but also some reasoning, that Franklin and Ablett would be the same sort of players they were/are, no matter what era you put them in. They aren't players that a system or a structure or a tactic can really shut down.

 

[Tap Tap Tapperoo]

Christian Perracca - has potential but so far has not been close to delivering

Hard to disagree. He is a solid contributor, but he is no more than that.

His first few rounds were really good this year, and I was ready for him to take that next step, but he has dropped off since.

 

[Mitchell54]

I haven't seen a better under 18 kid since Judd but he hasn't come on the way I thought he would

I'd say he's pretty impressive.

 

[captain cotch 9]

Tom Hawkins and Marc Murphy are current day players that are over rated imo.

 

[charcoalchicken]

Tom Hawkins and Marc Murphy are current day players that are over rated imo.

Alex Rance is more overrated than both of them

 

[carlton]

Alex Rance is more overrated than both of them

He is not overrated. Just a dirty diving cheat . The shame.

 

[carlton]

Easy. If he cannot throw he is useless.
Jackson Macrae.

 

[charcoalchicken]

Easy. If he cannot throw he is useless.
Jackson Macrae.

So patrick cripps you mean?

 

[carlton]

What. You cannot read.

Easy. If he cannot throw he is useless.
Jackson Macrae

 

[charcoalchicken]

What. You cannot read.

Easy. If he cannot throw he is useless.
Jackson Macrae

So patrick cripps? Ok thanks for letting the forum know

 

[carlton]

Chucker Macrae should not be mentioned in the same sentence as Cripps.

 

[docko911]

Rance can’t be overrated because no one rated Richmond a premiership chance and Rance was one of our best last year. Form isn’t as great this year but we are 9-3....

 

[sr36]

I do see your logic but I don't think the gap is as big as you think.
Franklin, Riewoldt, Pavlich and Kennedy would be the logical 4 best forwards IMO over the last decade. I don't see there being a massive gap between those 4.
Ablett, Lockett, Dunstall, and I guess Carey (different style obviously to the other 3 and came along a little later).

I'd say, with some bias but also some reasoning, that Franklin and Ablett would be the same sort of players they were/are, no matter what era you put them in. They aren't players that a system or a structure or a tactic can really shut down.

Sticks or Stewie Loewe are the contemporaries if the 3 stars.

 

[sr36]

The million dollar man - Tom Lynch

 

[Luv_our_club]

Patrick Dangerfield and Dustin Martin..... both are in their prime now, but they have had inconsistent careers before reaching their prime years. For example, Josh Kelly, Cripps and Oliver have achieved more at a younger age.

 

[sr36]

It does make things a tad awkward when comparing current players. Most current stars would absolutely dominate if you plonked them into 80s footy. So you kind of have to imagine a world where they're a fair bit worse than they actually are. Seems a bit pointless and not all that fair.

But then people seemingly don't want to just look at how a player performs relative to their peers. Because if that was the standard, then someone like Franklin blows Gaz Sr, Lockett, Dunstall and Carey out of the water. There's a much bigger gap between Franklin and whoever you consider the fourth best forward of the last decade than there is between whoever you pull out from those four to be first and fourth best forward of the 90s.

So player comparisons across eras always seem to break down because no one seems to be comfortable with a standard for comparison that makes sense.

Your comparison system doesn't work either. You can be born in an era where there is either a relative weakness or strength in your player type. Under your system, Michael Roach trumps Tony Lockett. Or to compare West Indian fast bowlers, Kemar Roach trumps Andy Roberts.

 

[Bardo State]

Your comparison system doesn't work either. You can be born in an era where there is either a relative weakness or strength in your player type. Under your system, Michael Roach trumps Tony Lockett. Or to compare West Indian fast bowlers, Kemar Roach trumps Andy Roberts.

Which is why comparing player strength across eras is so hard. No consistent standard is without its flaws.

 

[sr36]

Which is why comparing player strength across eras is so hard. No consistent standard is without its flaws.

The beauty of it is that there is no right answer, so we can talk endless rubbish about our favourites.

 

[Captain_Bender]

Patrick Dangerfield and Dustin Martin..... both are in their prime now, but they have had inconsistent careers before reaching their prime years. For example, Josh Kelly, Cripps and Oliver have achieved more at a younger age.

Dusty was better than all 3 at the same ages, more Brownlow votes and had kicked more goals than all 3 too

 

[Luv_our_club]

Dusty was better than all 3 at the same ages, more Brownlow votes and had kicked more goals than all 3 too

Interesting... most would say that those 3 are currently fulfilling their potential... whereas with Dusty there was always questions over his limitations and value to the team at that age. Thus his difficulty getting a good contract.

I knew my post would agitate a bit, considering Dusty and Danger are now superstars. Your post is pretty measured.