Opinion Ranking the greatest players of the last 50 years.

[Mr Meow]

I am not saying Dusty is better than Matthews or anyone else on that type of level. I never have said that.

I am saying with Dusty's big game record, combined with his total career performance, he can look anybody in the eye. There is not one known player with a demonstrable claim to having out-performed Dusty in big games. And there is likely nobody with a demonstrable claim to having performed near his level or had his level of influence on so many big games.

Being the best known finals performer in history and being instrumental in winning 9 crucial finals that led to 3 flags in 4 years for a club that has otherwise won 2 finals in 43 years is not some novelty level achievement. Nobody can match that. Of course plenty of players have achieved things Dusty can't match. But you have to ask which achievements are more valuable.

He played excellent finals for a 4 year period and had no good finals aged 18-25 or in his 30s. "Best finals peak" - sure. But he never showed a high level in finals outside of the period where Richmond were the dominant finals team in the comp.

 

[Partridge]

It's funny how guys like Kouta, Brereton and Daicos get lauded as legends by the AFL media, yet none of these guys were at their peak for as long as Fyfe.

Fair comment. Brereton for a start isn't close to the conversation. For consistent output from a centre half forward - from exactly the same era - Steve Kernahan easily outpoints him. Just doesn't have the media presence and gigantic ego.

To me Fyfe would definitely be in discussions with Martin and Dangerfield if not for injury. His best was absolutely as good as either. Due to injury and where he was, Fyfe didn't really get the amount of finals the other two did.

 

[Partridge]

Dangerfield only has 4 BandFs and he's been far less injured than Fyfe. Heck, Dusty has only won 2. Also, rating players on accumulated statistics over their career (like clearances or goal assists for example) is not a good measuring stick on how good they were. If that was the case guys like Michael Tuck or Boomer Harvey would be rated higher than they are.

It's a terrible measuring stick. It suits arguments for current players very well which is nice for insecure supporters desperate to include their favourites (he must be the best, because I saw him!). But half the metrics didn't even exist twenty years ago, or were ignored as not important. Even taking players from the '70s and '80s and comparing output to now is really difficult. Players were never rotated off the bench let alone "managed". So naturally players from previous eras got more game time and more chances to get touches / kick goals.

 

[Chronz]

Matthews was a great player. He was voted the best player of the 20th century for good reasons. And a terrific finals player. He also played in essentially 3 different very strong teams that won flags. 1971 - 1976 & 1978 - 1983. His team won a flag 8 years before he debuted and won 4 in 6 seasons after he retired. So he had certain advantages over Dusty there. He also played in only 3 seasons where the Hawks had a negative w/l ratio in the matches where he played, and each time it was marginal, average -1.33 wins per season. Dusty played in 6 seasons where Richmond had a negative w/l ratio, these averaged -6 wins. So while we have to recognise great players like these can have significant direct influence over their teams performances, we also need to recognise that Matthews on average played in better teams, which is helpful to any player's career achievements.

Matthews was also a full time footballer playing against 90% part time players who had other full time jobs. So that was a further advantage he enjoyed along with players like Bartlett, Quinlan and quite a few other great players of that era.

The other thing with Matthews goal kicking feats in finals, they were in much higher scoring matches so you have to factor that in. It was simply easier to score goals. From memory I think Matthews finals averaged 27 goals, Dusty's about 22. It would be fair to say Dusty would likely have scored about 30% more goals in finals if he played in the games Matthews played in, or Matthews would have score substantially less if he played in the finals Dusty played in. But I am pretty sure if we isolate Dusty's best 4 finals years and Matthews best 4 finals years that gap will be larger.

There was also the lopsided finals structure where a team could be playing its second final and be fresh in a Grand Final v a team playing its 4th final in 4 weeks that no doubt worked more in Matthews favour than against him.

Another factor to make the comparison fair is Dusty played 4 finals that were 80% game time. He scored 7 goals in those matches, and in all likelihood it would have been around 9 in full length matches. So if you just adjusted for that and the lower scoring nature of the games you are adding 30-35% to Dusty's goals kicked.

Yet another factor is goal assists. In Matthews era they didn't really exist the way they are now. Then if a player was within goal range he had a shot. Now, players pass the ball. If you see all of Dusty's finals goals very few come from other players passing to him in a better position. They just got it somewhere near his contest and let him do the rest. So mostly the modern style of football worked against Dusty scoring more goals. However, in finals he averaged over 1.1 goal assists per game, which is a very large amount.

To illustrate this point further...

Matthews in finals scored 72 goals 63 behinds, and from my memory of the era and watching him play he would have had a negligible amount of goal assists, maybe something like 0.2 per final, but it is a guess. So in his 29 finals he had 135 shots at goal and maybe about 6 goal assists. 141 in total between goals, behinds and goal assists. About 4.5 per final. Dusty scored 27.12 and had 18 goal assists in essentially 15 whole finals. 3.8 shots or goal assists per final. Which when you adjust for the higher scoring nature of the finals Matthews played in, Dusty would be ahead if anything.

So from Mathews opportunities you might have 78 goals result for his team in 29 finals. 2.7 per final. It could have been a bit higher maybe 2.8 or 2.9 but would not have been above that. From Dusty's 15 whole finals we can see from his opportunities his team gets 45 goals or 3.0 per game. Then go a step further and adjust for the 25-30% higher scoring nature of the matches Matthews played in...

And that is before we look at when in finals they produced their best games.

Dusty's 6 best finals I would say:


QF 2017 Tigers not won a final for 16 years, playing a team they had not beaten for about a decade or more BOG v Cats
GF 2017 BOG
QF 2019 Interstate away v a team who finished higher on the ladder. Surgical display to kick a 1/4 of the goals in the match, many of them brilliant goals BOG
GF 2019 Easier match but scored or assisted 30% of all goals scored in the match BOG
PF 2020 Interstate away v a team who finished higher, kicks 2 amazing goals from 12 scored in the match, BOG
GF 2020 The last and probably greatest of all his great finals. Scores or assists 5 of 19 goals in the match, BOG

If you look at Matthews greatest finals performances they were quite skewed towards the first 2 weeks of finals. He did have a couple of terrific Grand Finals but I don't think was ever considered BOG.

Matthews did, as you say, perform to an exceptionally high standard in finals over about a 12 year span where Dusty didn't. But Matthews played in far superior teams at the start and end of his career, where Dusty had far fewer opportunities to shine in finals either end of his career. There would not be any reason whatsoever to believe that Dusty wouldn't have played well in finals throughout his career if he had similar opportunities to Matthews.

Matthews imo probably performed better week to week, despite Brownlow votes saying otherwise. Dusty's best 10 finals I would say are better than Matthew's best 10, particularly if you grade the finals in importance from the GF down, & especially if you allow for the advantages Matthews had over Dusty(played in better teams, was a pro against 90% p/t players, and played in a much higher scoring era or at least much higher scoring finals.)

Another great passage to add to the cult of Dusty's sacred tome.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

The 8 seasons (between 2012 and 2019) that he averaged more brownlow votes per game than any other player in the history of the game bar Hayden Bunton Senior count for nothing?

Avg Brownlow votes means fc k all in the modern game, players used to win the count with 20 votes

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

Fyfe will be a hall of fame player, I know that for sure.

Legit his peak was some of the best footy that has been played in 25 years.

Injuries let him down.

Fyfe ends up on a similar peg to players like Bontempelli, Luke Hodge, Pendlebury, Lenny Hayes, Paul Kelly, Dangerfield etc.. All fantastic players but not in the conversation for GOAT.

 

[Partridge]

Fyfe ends up on a similar peg to players like Bontempelli, Luke Hodge, Pendlebury, Lenny Hayes, Paul Kelly, Dangerfield etc.. All fantastic players but not in the conversation for GOAT.

Not even close. Bontempelli is the best of them but he doesn't make that list. Pendlebury and Hayes shouldn't even be remotely considered.

 

[Stan_Darsh72]

Not even close. Bontempelli is the best of them but he doesn't make that list. Pendlebury and Hayes shouldn't even be remotely considered.

Love Lenny, but agreed, St Kilda great and Hall of fame level player and a lock for one of the most loved players in the last 50 years.

In the last 50 years, Riewoldt, Lockett and Harvey are the ones in serious contention.

 

[Partridge]

Avg Brownlow votes means fc k all in the modern game, players used to win the count with 20 votes

Yep. Plus it was possible for players other than the anointed star midfielders to have a chance too.