Moved Thread Neutral fans: Hawkins or Riewoldt?

[Falcon3518]

Nope.

It tells you which player kicked the most goals in the H&A season.

As we've discussed, it doesn't tell you who the better forward was.

Reiwoldt has the same number of Coleman medals as Dunstall and Ablett Snr, yet isn't on the same planet of them when discussing all-time best forwards.

You want to make a simplistic argument, don't get upset when people tell you it's a simplistic argument.

Bruh you have to analyse the rest of their CV too are you this thick? GAS had 250 more goals and 8 AAs compared to 3.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Except where he expressly made the claim;





He's kicked marginally more goals, with marginally less goal assists. Their career stats are almost identical, in 2 of the years Reiwoldt won a Coleman Hawkins was within 3-4 goals, which across 22 games is an insubstantial margin and is close enough so as to come down to luck as much as anything else. In one of those years Reiwoldt won the Coleman and didn't make the AA team whilst Hawkins did.

As I said, we're not talking the gap between Lockett and Reiwoldt or Hawkins here. It's 0.13 goals / game.

He is answering another poster’s suggestion that Riewoldt kicked more goals because his team targetted him more given Richmond’s lack of alternative targets, with the perfectly reasonable point that if this was the case then surely he is more easily defended.

The original contention would rely upon it being easier to score goals in a weaker forward line than in a stronger forward line. Something the objective facts over the years don’t seem to support.

I agree there is nothing to choose statistically between Riewoldt and Hawkins over their whole careers in key areas. What BFT has shown is Riewoldt has kicked a higher % of his team’s score. And similarly what has also been shown on the thread is Riewoldt has achieved strikingly similar overall career statistics to Hawkins, whilst playing in a substantially weaker team in terms of % of games won.

Perhaps you nail your colours to the mast on that point. Is it easier for a key forward to achieve those career figures in a weaker team, or in a stronger team? And why?

And what do you make of Riewoldt’s 3.2 goal + goal assist average in finals v teams finishing top 4 versus Hawkins 1.9 goals + goal assists average in finals v teams finishing top 4?

 

[owen87]

Bruh you have to analyse the rest of their CV too are you this thick? GAS had 250 more goals and 8 AAs compared to 3.

No Premierships though right? That's what you keep bringing up.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

In fact, open questions to everyone on the thread….

Is it easier for a key forward to achieve those career figures(ie those of Riewoldt and Hawkins) in a weaker team, or in a stronger team? And why?

And what do you make of Riewoldt’s 3.2 goal + goal assist average in finals v teams finishing top 4 versus Hawkins 1.9 goals + goal assists average in finals v teams finishing top 4?

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Careful analysis of both players, their strengths and weaknesses, their skill set, their numbers, their consistency, a whole bunch of things. If you use those measures and form an opinion I don’t really care what your opinion is I can appreciate it.

If it’s measures like one statistical data set and no others, or coleman medals or All Australian jerseys or whatever I think it’s a laughable means of arriving at a conclusion.

Fwiw I agree with your statement.

But overall taking the best points made in favour of both players, which do you find the most telling?

 

[owen87]

Perhaps you nail your colours to the mast on that point. Is it easier for a key forward to achieve those career figures in a weaker team, or in a stronger team? And why?

Weaker, within reason. Good teams generally have more avenues to goal in the modern game, and teams don't have enormous disparities in goals scored each week. It's uncommon for really bad teams to have a really good FF though.

And what do you make of Riewoldt’s 3.2 goal + goal assist average in finals v teams finishing top 4 versus Hawkins 1.9 goals + goal assists average in finals v teams finishing top 4?

He played well in finals? I don't recall ever arguing Reiwoldt was a bad player. Just that Colemans are a terrible way of arguing it's clear Reiwoldt has been better than Hawkins.

 

[tenderwarrior]

Jack, he was a crucial part of Richmond's flags, Geelong would have won theirs without Hawkins

What part of neutral is confusing to you?

 

[Corn Cobbers]

In fact, open questions to everyone on the thread….

Is it easier for a key forward to achieve those career figures(ie those of Riewoldt and Hawkins) in a weaker team, or in a stronger team? And why?

And what do you make of Riewoldt’s 3.2 goal + goal assist average in finals v teams finishing top 4 versus Hawkins 1.9 goals + goal assists average in finals v teams finishing top 4?

1. Easier in a stronger team
2. Riewoldt is better in big games

Pretty obvious that Riewoldt is better than diving flopping Hawkins

 

[Falcon3518]

No Premierships though right? That's what you keep bringing up.

I even said on this thread not long ago to only analyse individual awards/stats. If they are the exact same which they never are you can use flags as a tie breaker. This fair enough?

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Weaker, within reason. Good teams generally have more avenues to goal in the modern game, and teams don't have enormous disparities in goals scored each week. It's uncommon for really bad teams to have a really good FF though.



He played well in finals? I don't recall ever arguing Reiwoldt was a bad player. Just that Colemans are a terrible way of arguing it's clear Reiwoldt has been better than Hawkins.

Why do you think Riewoldt has played better in finals against the best opponents than Hawkins?

Who do you think is the better player over their careers?

And if it is easier for a quality forward to kick more goals in a weaker forward line than it is for them to do so in a stronger forward line, would it then follow that the best forwards would have their best output in the seasons their teams score less overall?

 

[STPer18]

Poll is anonymous so there's probably a heap of benny accounts.

I'm up to about 10 so far. Just doing my part to get big Tommy the win here.

 

[PhatBoy]

Fwiw I agree with your statement.

But overall taking the best points made in favour of both players, which do you find the most telling?

I think analysing every statistical measure as well as having watched a lot of both players (more of Tom admittedly) I think that the best argument anyone can make for Jack isn’t that he has scored a greater percentage of his teams points or anything like that: all that could mean is that his team’s plans revolves around him more for all anyone really knows - is that for a long time he was one of the few elite players in his team and played often a lone hand aside from Cotchin and Rance in a mediocre side.
I think the best argument for Tom is that he has a slightly more rounded skill set and that in an era where Geelong (2012 onwards) had an ever diminishing number of great players after he started in a team stacked with them, he himself has been one of the precise reasons his side has stayed near the top. Not many people seem to have brought that into the argument - for the majority of his elite period, he’s had Selwood and Danger there, and maybe Duncan and more recently Kelly and Stewart and obviously now Cameron. I think the fact that we’ve still stayed competitive owes a lot to tom himself and the part he’s played in that.
And yes it’s very easy and correct to also say that Jack has played a big part in Richmond being as good as they have been from 2017 onwards as well.

As I said if someone is taking all that stuff into consideration and nominates one over the other, I don’t really care which side of the argument they fall on.

 

[Falcon3518]

Weaker, within reason. Good teams generally have more avenues to goal in the modern game, and teams don't have enormous disparities in goals scored each week. It's uncommon for really bad teams to have a really good FF though.



He played well in finals? I don't recall ever arguing Reiwoldt was a bad player. Just that Colemans are a terrible way of arguing it's clear Reiwoldt has been better than Hawkins.

Well everything else is very similar. We are using Coleman’s as the tie breaker as they are the most important award and it is the biggest variance between the two.

 

[PhatBoy]

1. Easier in a stronger team
2. Riewoldt is better in big games

Pretty obvious that Riewoldt is better than diving flopping Hawkins

View attachment 1430567
View attachment 1430568

Oh well if there’s a photo of Riewoldt taking a good pack mark there’s unquestionable proof that Hawkins has never done it.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Oh well if there’s a photo of Riewoldt taking a good pack mark there’s unquestionable proof that Hawkins has never done it.

For Hawkins to take a mark like that would have required the services of a crane that was strongly pegged to the ground to lift him into position. Otherwise, not possible.

 

[Corn Cobbers]

Oh well if there’s a photo of Riewoldt taking a good pack mark there’s unquestionable proof that Hawkins has never done it.

You call that a "good pack mark"?!

It was just about the best mark in history

Hawkins would have flopped 15 metres short of that pack, screaming for a free kick

 

[PhatBoy]

You call that a "good pack mark"?!

It was just about the best mark in history

Hawkins would have flopped 15 metres short of that pack, screaming for a free kick

Of course he would have mate.

 

[owen87]

Why do you think Riewoldt has played better in finals against the best opponents than Hawkins?

He's played better in some of them, his team has demolished their opponent in others.

Who do you think is the better player over their careers?

They're very similar, so it comes down to preference. Hawkins as a more typical big FF presence that has added the ability to dominate F50 ruck stoppages, Reiwoldt better at ground level and a bit smarter.

And if it is easier for a quality forward to kick more goals in a weaker forward line than it is for them to do so in a stronger forward line, would it then follow that the best forwards would have their best output in the seasons their teams score less overall?

Not necessarily.

 

[banzai]

As I said if someone is taking all that stuff into consideration and nominates one over the other, I don’t really care which side of the argument they fall on.

I think that's exactly where most should be at. Can add Kennedy to the mix as well. All 3 will be in the Hall Of Fame and Buddy will be the legend.

 

[owen87]

Well everything else is very similar. We are using Coleman’s as the tie breaker as they are the most important award and it is the biggest variance between the two.

But they're a poor tie breaker, as we've discussed.

In 2012 Reiwoldt won the Coleman averaging 0.13 goals / game more than Hawkins.

In 2018 Reiwoldt won the Coleman averaging 0.18 goals / game more than Hawkins.

The margin is so narrow as to come down to chance.

You keep making simplistic arguments, you keep failing.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

He's played better in some of them, his team has demolished their opponent in others.



They're very similar, so it comes down to preference. Hawkins as a more typical big FF presence that has added the ability to dominate F50 ruck stoppages, Reiwoldt better at ground level and a bit smarter.



Not necessarily.

Ok so it seems you think it is easier for a quality forward to kick goals in a lower scoring team than a higher scoring team…until you get to finals against the strongest opponents, when it suddenly becomes easier for a quality forward to kick more goals in a higher scoring team than a lower scoring team.

Hmmmm.

You may need to explain that a bit further.

By the way, Riewoldt has 16 goals + goal assists in his 4 losing finals against teams finishing top 4 post finals, at the massive average of 4 per game.

 

[Jazny]

This thread is humiliating for those conspiracy theoriest who think STPer18 and I are the same person. I wouldnt like to be Starburns_ zackah right now... or ever because they are horrible serial welchers anyway!

It's still TRIPLE premiership player Jack Riewoldt!

 

[Dewyyyyy]

Tom's the better overall player. Still seems to have a fair bit to go. Hurts as a Hawks fan but he's a jet.

 

[owen87]

Ok so it seems you think it is easier for a quality forward to kick goals in a lower scoring team than a higher scoring team…until you get to finals against the strongest opponents, when it suddenly becomes easier for a quality forward to kick more goals in a higher scoring team than a lower scoring team.

Hmmmm.

You may need to explain that a bit further.

By the way, Riewoldt has 16 goals + goal assists in his 4 losing finals against teams finishing top 4 post finals, at the massive average of 4 per game.

It's fairly evident that you're misrepresenting what I've written, I generally regarded you as a decent poster but you're rapidly descending to Richmond nuffie status alongside Falcon3518 right now.

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

I'm up to about 10 so far. Just doing my part to get big Tommy the win here.

Wayne Carey said Jack is better so I'll go with that.