From my count, ~43% of Riewoldt voters in that poll (currently 28/26/19 for Riewoldt/Hawkins/Kennedy, which I actually think is a pretty fair result - could really go any of the three ways IMO) are from the same club.The poll in the draft thread has Riewoldt ahead of Hawkins and Josh Kennedy.
We have a greater % of smalls fwds kicking goals compared to the cats via the handball chains.
I’ve added up every goal kicked by a Geelong ‘tall’ player since the start of 2017.
Hawkins, Cameron, Stanley, Taylor, Ratugolea, Blicavs, Henderson, Darcy Fort: 32 per cent of our goals have come from them.
In the same period, ONLY counting Riewoldt, Lynch, Nankervis and Chol, they have kicked….. 32 per cent of Richmond’s goals.
Who knows, maybe you do have a larger percentage of ‘small’ forwards kicking goals. But even without really going through the minutiae of your goal kickers and their heights over the last 6 seasons (I don’t know the heights of all your players but if you threw players like McIntosh, Soldo etc in there it takes the percentage well above Geelong’s), you sure as hell don’t have a lower percentage of tall forwards kicking them.
What height have you chosen as ‘tall’? Also Soldo has kicked f all goals since 2019, he’s a non factor.
It's not just neutrals in the poll though.From my count, ~43% of Riewoldt voters in that poll (currently 28/26/19 for Riewoldt/Hawkins/Kennedy, which I actually think is a pretty fair result - could really go any of the three ways IMO) are from the same club.
This poll (currently 170/79 for Hawkins/Riewoldt) is designed for neutrals.
I guess there is no reason both cannot be true.
It is just that for them both to be true you are saying it is easier for key forwards to score:
a) when they play in weak teams with weaker forwards around them, and
b) when their teams are way too good for the opposition.
And presumably it is harder for them to score:
a) when their teams are competitive with the opposition, and
b) when they play in stronger forward lines.
But do you actually believe that is true? To me it seems a complicated construction totally reliant on the odd forward from a lower ranking team who plays in a weak forward line winning or finishing high in the Coleman, and the unsupported proclamation that lower ranking teams don’t tend to have gun forwards.
A quick glance at this years’ ladder and Coleman standings in instructive. If what you are saying is true, Kennedy, Larkey, Wright, Lewis, Walker, Marshall, Mihocek should be dominating the Coleman, and those with stronger alternative targets like Daniher, Hawkins, Cameron, Lynch, Riewoldt, Bolton, Chuck Cameron, McKay and Curnow should be struggling to match them.
View attachment 1430674
22 of the 30 listed here also have at least one team-mate in the top 30.
The exceptions are:
Fritsch and Wright =8th
T Marshall =11th
Larkey and Walker =23rd
A young Jack Riewoldt on his way to a 78 goal Coleman Medal season in the second bottom would be sitting well clear on about 47 goals amongst that lot right now. If that was happening now do you think people would be saying he is benefitting from being the only target? They have been showing figures recently showing Max King is the most targetted forward in the AFL. Some people think he is killing it and plenty think he is destined for greatness. Yet he sits on 35 goals.
I don’t think the argument you are making stacks up.
If I were to look at the negatives of Hawkins it would be he gives away a lot of free kicks, he can't get far off the ground and he is next to useless when the ball hits the ground.
He’s actually not - he’s not as good at ground level as Riewoldt and plenty of other key forwards like Cameron and Buddy etc but since his back got better he’s been more than adequate, like it’s not a major handicap for him anymore. It’s a fair point in comparing the two, though as Jack is easily better in that respect
I think if his name was Greg he wouldn’t get called junktime Greg, it is only the alliterative nature of it that leads people to believe this.
I don’t know how many ‘junktime’ goals he’s kicked but I do know he leads the ‘first goal of the game’ stat by so far it isn’t funny. If the first 5 minutes of the game is junktime then play on.
Not trying to start an argument - I’m fairly neutral on the subject, natural bias would probably make me choose Tom but there are multiple arguments you can make the other way.
Just prompted by a comment in the Hawkins 700 goals thread
The key is that the forward has to actually be good, and their team not utter trash. Most teams average a similar amount of goals per game, unless they're unusually good or bad. Most of the forwards you've named simply aren't great forwards (or in Kennedy's case, isn't anymore).
Fewer goal kickers, means more goals to individual players from the same share of goals.
Better teams tend to produce a wider variety of goal kickers, because it's harder to defend multiple targets.
When a team is unusually good, kicking an unusually high number of goals (e.g. Hawthorn 2013) you can have a very high scoring KPF and multiple avenues to goal, but it's unusual to have a team kicking drastically more goals than any opposition side across an entire season.
You're too smart to pretend Mihocek is in the same stratosphere as a Reiwoldt or Hawkins, let's not be disingenuous here.
Personally I reckon they are different types of players ever so slightly.and yet when non-Richmond or Geelong fans say "Hawkins" it doesn't count as apparently we are biased against Richmond or something.