Mega Thread Nick Daicos - Can he be the GTWEB? Part 2

[ferball]

Brownlow top10 of 2025

Rowell, Daicos, B.Smith, Dawson, A.Brayshaw, Bont, Serong, Anderson, Gawn, NWM

Brownlow top10 of 2024

Cripps, Daicos, Serong, Heeney, Butters, T.Green, Rowell, Treloar, Gulden, Newcombe

Brownlow top10 of 2023

Neale, Bont, Daicos, Butters, Gulden, Petracca, J
viney, Gulden, Cripps, Anderson

Pretty solid list really Daicos and Serong only two to be top10 in all 3 seasons, and both have 3 AA jumpers.

Brownlow top10 of 2025

Rowell, Daicos, B.Smith, Dawson, A.Brayshaw, Bont, Serong, Anderson, Gawn,
NWM

Coaches award top10 of 2025

Rowell, Daicos, B.Smith, Dawson, A.Brayshaw, Bont, E.Richards, Anderson, Gawn, NWM

Serong for E.Richards is the only difference.

Copeland trophy has strange voting system. It isn't simply who was best on ground.

Each coach is asked to award votes to every player in the game’s 23-player team. Each player will receive a vote 0 – 4 on the following four categories; 1. Pressure, 2. Fight, 3. Territory, 4. Role / Impact.

Copeland trophy 2023 he came 2nd to Josh, and Josh had 5 extra games to get votes.

2025, he came 2nd to Cameron.

Cameron back up his second in the 2024 Copeland with a first, the coaches clearly rate his importance to the system especially territory piece with his behind the ball marking.

So none of that really puts him in GOAT discussions does it.

Especially if you consider the top five players in the original post at the start of this thread have one Brownlow between them and that went to the guy with the least claim to be a top five player of the lot of them. But for some reason his performance in that metric now proves he is a GOAT candidate.

Can he be...

Yeah there is a chance, pretty slim chance ... but if he improves, turns around his trajectory after his second season and maintains that for the rest of his career then he's a chance.

You playing your imaginary what if the Dogs beat a team they lost to is quality stuff though.

It fits the tone of the thread perfectly.

 

[Fadge]

We've seen your list. Its ludicrous. (Especially the bit about ticking players off as he passes them.) Keith Greig isn't even on it and he had two Brownlows by the time he was Nick's age. (And that was back when the award had some credibility.) He'll never beat that.

Is he better than Dangerfield yet?

What about Cousins?

What did you glean from watching Jack Dyer that you'll be able to compare to young Nick as his career progresses.

What does he have to do to be considered a better player than your top five?

Not sure how many times I have to repeat myself, but given both Dangerfield and Cousins are in my top 50, and Nick is not yet in there, I'd hope you would be able to draw the conclusion that I still rate both players ahead of Daicos.

As with any list, there is a lot of personal opinion taken into account, and no, Keith Greig didn't make the cut. Nor did numbers 3, 4 and 5 of North Melbourne's 10 greatest players as announced at North's 150 year celebrations - Dench, Aylett and Harvey. But i did include Malcolm Blight, for the fact i believe he has one of the best highlight reels of anyone to play the game - he was a superstar, and in my opinion, better than Keith Greig.

I have also read enough about the likes of Jack Dyer (who is widely regarded as Richmond's best ever player) as well as the likes of Coleman, Reynolds, Hutchison, Whitten and the like, to be confident in my ranking of them.

Where will Daicos end up by the time his career is done? Will be an intriguing watch.

 

[ferball]

I remember the 33-14 free kick count had the biggest influence

LOL.

I think everyone who doesn't support Collingwood can agree he's in line for the all time GOAT umpires pet award.

 

[sr36]

Seen the thread title?

It's just standard optimism about a young player. The difference is where the ceiling is. For some young players, the optimistic opinion is becoming a senior regular. For others it's becoming a star.

Nick is already a star and one of, or the best player in the game. If his body holds up, he's going to be a hall of famer - that's not even optimistic - the only really question is how high he ends up being rated amongst the pantheon of the games greats.

What level do you think is optimistic for Nick Daicos?

 

[Muddiemoose]

Not sure how many times I have to repeat myself, but given both Dangerfield and Cousins are in my top 50, and Nick is not yet in there, I'd hope you would be able to draw the conclusion that I still rate both players ahead of Daicos.

As with any list, there is a lot of personal opinion taken into account, and no, Keith Greig didn't make the cut. Nor did numbers 3, 4 and 5 of North Melbourne's 10 greatest players as announced at North's 150 year celebrations - Dench, Aylett and Harvey. But i did include Malcolm Blight, for the fact i believe he has one of the best highlight reels of anyone to play the game - he was a superstar, and in my opinion, better than Keith Greig.

I have also read enough about the likes of Jack Dyer (who is widely regarded as Richmond's best ever player) as well as the likes of Coleman, Reynolds, Hutchison, Whitten and the like, to be confident in my ranking of them.

Where will Daicos end up by the time his career is done? Will be an intriguing watch.

I wouldn’t say Dyer being Richmond’s goat is unanimous by any stretch Heart and Bartlett both have just as many people backing them and that’s before we start including modern peers like Martin or even Cotch

If we are using the goat tag intangibles that aren’t recognised on their own stat stat sheet come into play like

Leadership where guys like Cotchin don’t have the individual awards in his later years because he sacrificed his own individual and selfish style of play in order to chase team success and actively make the players around them better

“
Trent Cotchin has openly acknowledged and embraced the idea that he had to
sacrifice his personal playing style and statistics for the overall success of the Richmond Football Club. This strategic shift was a key component of the team's cultural transformation, which led to three premiership victories.
Key aspects of Cotchin's sacrifice include:

• Role Change: Early in his career, Cotchin was known as a high-possession, outside midfielder. However, as the team developed other star midfielders like Dustin Martin and Dion Prestia, Cotchin shifted to a more selfless, team-oriented, and combative inside role, often involving defensive work and covering for teammates' runs.
• Prioritizing the Team: He became the team's "spiritual leader" and "enforcer," focusing on setting a courageous and selfless standard on the field, which included putting his body on the line in contests. Teammates and observers noted that while this meant his personal stats might have been lower than his potential, his influence on the team's success was profound.
• Vulnerability and Connection: Off the field, Cotchin dropped his guard and embraced vulnerability, which helped foster a strong sense of connection and brotherhood within the playing group — a culture he credits as essential to their success.
• Public Acknowledgment: Cotchin has reflected on this, stating that he knew his role was to "make sure everyone had a really good feeling about them leading into the game" and that the team's success was a result of every player fulfilling their specific role, regardless of individual accolades.
• Recognition: His selfless leadership was widely recognized by peers and coaches, with many viewing it as a defining characteristic of his decorated career.

In essence, Cotchin's narrative became the embodiment of putting the team first, a philosophy that transformed Richmond from a struggling side to a triple-premiership dynasty”


In fact you could easily make a comparison with Daicos with early Cotch in terms of that outside style of play that often gets criticised for looking for stats and individual glory

 

[Fadge]

I wouldn’t say Dyer being Richmond’s goat is unanimous by any stretch Heart and Bartlett both have just as many people backing them and that’s before we start including modern peers like Martin or even Cotch

If we are using the goat tag intangibles that aren’t recognised on their own stat stat sheet come into play like

Leadership where guys like Cotchin don’t have the individual awards in his later years because he sacrificed his own individual and selfish style of play in order to chase team success and actively make the players around them better

“
Trent Cotchin has openly acknowledged and embraced the idea that he had to
sacrifice his personal playing style and statistics for the overall success of the Richmond Football Club. This strategic shift was a key component of the team's cultural transformation, which led to three premiership victories.
Key aspects of Cotchin's sacrifice include:

• Role Change: Early in his career, Cotchin was known as a high-possession, outside midfielder. However, as the team developed other star midfielders like Dustin Martin and Dion Prestia, Cotchin shifted to a more selfless, team-oriented, and combative inside role, often involving defensive work and covering for teammates' runs.
• Prioritizing the Team: He became the team's "spiritual leader" and "enforcer," focusing on setting a courageous and selfless standard on the field, which included putting his body on the line in contests. Teammates and observers noted that while this meant his personal stats might have been lower than his potential, his influence on the team's success was profound.
• Vulnerability and Connection: Off the field, Cotchin dropped his guard and embraced vulnerability, which helped foster a strong sense of connection and brotherhood within the playing group — a culture he credits as essential to their success.
• Public Acknowledgment: Cotchin has reflected on this, stating that he knew his role was to "make sure everyone had a really good feeling about them leading into the game" and that the team's success was a result of every player fulfilling their specific role, regardless of individual accolades.
• Recognition: His selfless leadership was widely recognized by peers and coaches, with many viewing it as a defining characteristic of his decorated career.

In essence, Cotchin's narrative became the embodiment of putting the team first, a philosophy that transformed Richmond from a struggling side to a triple-premiership dynasty”


In fact you could easily make a comparison with Daicos with early Cotch in terms of that outside style of play that often gets criticised for looking for stats and individual glory

Hard to believe there's such a long post about Cotchin in this thread, where we're talking about the greatest players of all time.

The glaring difference between Cotchin and Daicos is that Cotchin was accumulating stats in a team that hadn't won a final in the first 8 or so years of his career, whilst Daicos is clearly influencing games with his ball use, as illustrated by a flag and two other years in premiership contention, in his 4 year career thus far.

Having joined a team that finished 17th in his draft year.

If you can't see the difference between Daicos' possessions and Cotchin's possessions early in his career, you're not watching the game.

 

[Fadge]

I wouldn’t say Dyer being Richmond’s goat is unanimous by any stretch Heart and Bartlett both have just as many people backing them and that’s before we start including modern peers like Martin or even Cotch

Dyer as Richmond's greatest ever may not be unanimous, but it is certainly the majority view based on what I've read.

I have KB as number 2. Longevity is important, and unfortunately Hart (like Coleman) doesn't have that.

 

[Muddiemoose]

Hard to believe there's such a long post about Cotchin in this thread, where we're talking about the greatest players of all time.

The glaring difference between Cotchin and Daicos is that Cotchin was accumulating stats in a team that hadn't won a final in the first 8 or so years of his career, whilst Daicos is clearly influencing games with his ball use, as illustrated by a flag and two other years in premiership contention, in his 4 year career thus far.

Having joined a team that finished 17th in his draft year.

If you can't see the difference between Daicos' possessions and Cotchin's possessions early in his career, you're not watching the game.

It once again brings up the debate about where the respective teams were at when the player was drafted

Was Daicos lucky to be drafted at the right team into a strong team that had an outlier year?

If he was drafted to North he wouldn’t have had the same start to his career in terms of premiership success unless you firmly believe that Collingwood only made finals and won because of him

If Cotchin was drafted into a side under similar circumstances to Diacos he could of just as easily won a flag in his first handful of seasons

 

[Do the Dew]

Brownlow votes, AA awards, disposal numbers are all objective measures, none are influenced by personal feelings or opinions

Daicos has gone 3 for 3 in AA awards in 23, 24 and 25 (only two others have done that Serong and Bont).

Daicos despite playing for a dour low disposal, low rating team also Pies dominant player in PlaYA RatIngs anyway. Best performance for the year, and Pies best in finals in 2025.

Whatever objective measure you use, it is clear that since Daicos second season when he elevated his game he has been top few in terms of performance as a 20, 21 and 22 year old...he ain't even meant to hit is peak yet!!

Did you really just say brownlow votes and AA awards are objective measures? Do you know the difference between objective and subjective??

There's a baseline to even having a discussion, and not knowing the difference between those two doesn't meet it.

 

[Fadge]

Did you really just say brownlow votes and AA awards are objective measures? Do you know the difference between objective and subjective??

There's a baseline to even having a discussion, and not knowing the difference between those two doesn't meet it.

Highest average number of Brownlow votes for 21st century players, acknowledging the trend of increased number of Brownlow votes for the superstars compared to 20 years ago, and longevity has reduced the average for players like GAJ, Danger, Selwood and Pendlebury:
Daicos - 1.24
Cripps - 0.91
Bont - 0.87
Neale - 0.84
Rowell - 0.82
Fyfe - 0.81
Judd - 0.80
GAJ - 0.79
Danger - 0.79
Swan - 0.78
Mitchell - 0.75
D. Martin - 0.74

Pretty good representation of the elite midfielders of the 21st century.

Who is in that group that shouldn't be?

Who isn't there that should be?

The number 1.24 is OBJECTIVE, even if the means to arriving at that number is subjective. (Umpires' collective view of the game)

If we can only use objectivity to analyse a player's ability, I guess we're restricted to FooTYWiRe STaTZ.

 

[Fadge]

The other way you could look at it is who are the best of the eras, and for example if you look at 1990 to 2005 you have the likes of G. Williams, N. Buckley, S. Black, R. Harvey, M. Voss and A. Goodes, though they are all averaging circa 0.60 votes per game.

Again, a pretty good representation of the best midfielders of the era.

 

[Purple Suit]

Highest average number of Brownlow votes for 21st century players, acknowledging the trend of increased number of Brownlow votes for the superstars compared to 20 years ago, and longevity has reduced the average for players like GAJ, Danger, Selwood and Pendlebury:
Daicos - 1.24
Cripps - 0.91
Bont - 0.87
Neale - 0.84
Rowell - 0.82
Fyfe - 0.81
Judd - 0.80
GAJ - 0.79
Danger - 0.79
Swan - 0.78
Mitchell - 0.75
D. Martin - 0.74

Pretty good representation of the elite midfielders of the 21st century.

Who is in that group that shouldn't be?

Who isn't there that should be?

The number 1.24 is OBJECTIVE, even if the means to arriving at that number is subjective. (Umpires' collective view of the game)

If we can only use objectivity to analyse a player's ability, I guess we're restricted to FooTYWiRe STaTZ.

Fyfe use to get those sort of numbers as he came on the scene when Freo were rising and had a good period while we contended around the 2010-2015 period. Then the team drops and you can't sustain it because 40 touches when your team gets flogged doesn't mean much and shouldn't attract votes, especially the way Little Nicky racks them up demanding the ball. Pies having a very weak midfield with not many others to take votes off him has helped too.

Wait till the Pies fall off the cliff and your whole units of measure and arguments will go up in smoke. I assume it will be this year.

 

[doppleganger]

Did you really just say brownlow votes and AA awards are objective measures? Do you know the difference between objective and subjective??

Yes.

Brownlow votes are factual, as are coaches votes, and AA awards, and even the player ratings. They are all verifiable facts, data points and hold true for everyone.

So yes, somebody could say they think Daicos has been the best player of the last three years and support their position using Brownlow votes, AA awards, and stats.

Someone else could say Bont has been the best because in their opinion he has the most impact on games.

To help you out, the later is subjective.

 

[Fadge]

Fyfe use to get those sort of numbers as he came on the scene when Freo were rising and had a good period while we contended around the 2010-2015 period. Then the team drops and you can't sustain it because 40 touches when your team gets flogged doesn't mean much and shouldn't attract votes, especially the way Little Nicky racks them up demanding the ball. Pies having a very weak midfield with not many others to take votes off him has helped too.

Wait till the Pies fall off the cliff and your whole units of measure and arguments will go up in smoke. I assume it will be this year.

LOLOLOL.

2019 - Fyfe wins the Brownlow with 33 votes.

Fremantle finish 13th win 9 wins...

Also, maybe you should watch Collingwood play, and see who's been getting the most first possessions and clearances for the team for the past two years...

 

[RUNVS]

Highest average number of Brownlow votes for 21st century players, acknowledging the trend of increased number of Brownlow votes for the superstars compared to 20 years ago, and longevity has reduced the average for players like GAJ, Danger, Selwood and Pendlebury:
Daicos - 1.24
Cripps - 0.91
Bont - 0.87
Neale - 0.84
Rowell - 0.82
Fyfe - 0.81
Judd - 0.80
GAJ - 0.79
Danger - 0.79
Swan - 0.78
Mitchell - 0.75
D. Martin - 0.74

Pretty good representation of the elite midfielders of the 21st century.

Who is in that group that shouldn't be?

Who isn't there that should be?

The number 1.24 is OBJECTIVE, even if the means to arriving at that number is subjective. (Umpires' collective view of the game)

If we can only use objectivity to analyse a player's ability, I guess we're restricted to FooTYWiRe STaTZ.

Brownlow is a super pointless award. I am not sure what you do for a living but imagine you are asked to do that, in a high pressure situation, and then randomly you are asked to see how many birds you see while you are doing that job, and if you get the amount of birds you count wrong it doesn't matter that much, so you spend most of your time doing your actual job. That is like that for umpires, they are so busy trying to officiate a game they likely are barely noticing who is playing well and who isn't, and they tend to only notice players around them, so midfielders.

 

[Fadge]

Brownlow is a super pointless award. I am not sure what you do for a living but imagine you are asked to do that, in a high pressure situation, and then randomly you are asked to see how many birds you see while you are doing that job, and if you get the amount of birds you count wrong it doesn't matter that much, so you spend most of your time doing your actual job. That is like that for umpires, they are so busy trying to officiate a game they likely are barely noticing who is playing well and who isn't, and they tend to only notice players around them, so midfielders.

What a ridiculous analogy.

They know they are responsible for selecting the best players on the ground, and generally do a pretty good job of it.

How else do you explain the consistency between the two major awards - the Coaches Award and the Brownlow?

Are the Coaches just guessing too?

 

[RUNVS]

What a ridiculous analogy.

They know they are responsible for selecting the best players on the ground, and generally do a pretty good job of it.

How else do you explain the consistency between the two major awards - the Coaches Award and the Brownlow?

Are the Coaches just guessing too?

Yes, but they also know their job is not on the line for ****ing up the brownlow vote, but their job is on the line for screwing up in game umpiring decisions. In that position what would you focus on more?

 

[Fadge]

Yes, but they also know their job is not on the line for ****ing up the brownlow vote, but their job is on the line for screwing up in game umpiring decisions. In that position what would you focus on more?

So what.

There are more howlers of results in the algorithm that is used for Player Ratings, than there is for Brownlow votes.

Are we meant to just completely ignore any OBJECTIVE data points that are available, and just use 'the vibe' to support our conclusions?

 

[RUNVS]

So what.

There are more howlers of results in the algorithm that is used for Player Ratings, than there is for Brownlow votes.

Are we meant to just completely ignore any data point that is available, and just use 'the vibe' to support our conclusions?

What do you mean so what? My point I would have thought is pretty obvious, that the Brownlow is not a serious award because the people asked to do the marking are much more focused on something else.

 

[Fadge]

What do you mean so what? My point I would have thought is pretty obvious, that the Brownlow is not a serious award because the people asked to do the marking are much more focused on something else.

Yet, they generally do a pretty good job at picking the best players for the match.

If they're pretty well aligned with the Coaches Award, do you have a knock on that as well?

Players MVP?

 

[Corn Cobbers]

Yet, they generally do a pretty good job at picking the best players for the match.

If they're pretty well aligned with the Coaches Award, do you have a knock on that as well?

Players MVP?

Any award where Daicos has an elite presence is pointless, so that's all of them

 

[RUNVS]

Yet, they generally do a pretty good job at picking the best players for the match.

If they're pretty well aligned with the Coaches Award, do you have a knock on that as well?

Players MVP?

Do they though? If they did why are only midfielders the best players in the competition? Also I think we can all name some very dubious Brownlow medal winners.

 

[Mynamesinuse]

Hard to believe there's such a long post about Cotchin in this thread, where we're talking about the greatest players of all time.

The glaring difference between Cotchin and Daicos is that Cotchin was accumulating stats in a team that hadn't won a final in the first 8 or so years of his career, whilst Daicos is clearly influencing games with his ball use, as illustrated by a flag and two other years in premiership contention, in his 4 year career thus far.

Having joined a team that finished 17th in his draft year.

If you can't see the difference between Daicos' possessions and Cotchin's possessions early in his career, you're not watching the game.

Hard to work out if you’re serious.
Far harder to come into a young rebuilding side.

 

[Fadge]

Do they though? If they did why are only midfielders the best players in the competition? Also I think we can all name some very dubious Brownlow medal winners.

The coaches also think the midfielders are the best players in the competition.

The players, too. Though they usually have one key forward in their top 5.

Midfielders are clearly going to be more consistent pollers in any award than key forwards or backs, because they are more regularly in more games.

It's simple common-sense.

 

[doppleganger]

Do they though? If they did why are only midfielders the best players in the competition? Also I think we can all name some very dubious Brownlow medal winners.

The players MVP is normally a midfielder.
The coaches award is normally a midfielder.

The modern game doesn't have forwards kicking 100+ goals anymore.

The best players in modern day football ARE midfielders.

Use one of your own players, Heeney.

He elevated his game in 2024, when he finally pushed into the midfield and started winning clearances, more disposals and contested possessions whilst still impacting on the scoreboard.