The 500 club

[Guardian Hawk]

Fevola would be on par with Franklin if he hadn't missed last year. Would be above him had he not moved clubs. For the time period you chose they have the same goals per game average of 3.6

The game is also different now, which makes Franklin's effort more impressive in some aspects, but makes th 30% difference less impressive.

And Mark Jackson (3.8) has a higher goals per game average than LLoyd (3.4)and would be ahead of him if not for similar petulance and disclinplanary reasons as Fevola. The point being, Fevola had serious flaws, was let go twice and is not up there with Franklin as a result (just like Jacko comes nowhere near Lloydy). You cannot play 'what if', otherwise I could argue Laurence Angwin would have been better than James Hird if he wasn't an idiot. Fevola's mental flaws are no less significant than any physical or skill based flaw that any player has. 'What if Schoenmakers was as strong as Jakovich? - he'd be the best defender in the league. The facts remains that Franklin is 30% ahead over the last 5 years, regardless of what Fevola might have done had he been without his weaknesses.

The second part of your post is a little ambiguous so without further clarity I will not comment.

 

[Dazb86]

If he could kick straight he'd already have 500 goals.

 

[Guardian Hawk]

Even if we go into fantasy land and pretend Fevola didn't have his biggest weakness and therefore got a game last year...

Fevola went from 99 goals ('08) to 89 goals ('09) to 48 goals ('10) and would have had to somehow kick 115 goals last year to be 'on par' with Franklin, nearly 2.5 times the production of his last season. Can't see it happening. Now since we're playing what ifs with weaknesses, I might project Franklin's output with Cloke's marking ability

 

[calyam]

One thing always needs to be remembered when talking all-time. That is, quite simply, different eras are different. Thus, comparing goal tallies from today (and possessions similarly) to the past is insufficient as the game has drastically shifted. As such, you can only compare a player's statistical measures to that of their contemporaries.

People can say Ablett, Modra, etc were so much better than Buddy because they kicked 257,000 goals or whatever but hauls of this kind were not unusual. Lockett did it regularly, Dunstall did it regularly, Ablett did it regularly, Modra did it semi-regulalry. Hell, even Sav Rocca's hauls made all current players look pedestrian. Not one of these great players, with all their goals, were clearly distinguishing themselves ahead of their contemporaries (emphasising how 'do-able' these feats were at the time).

A closer look at Franklin, highlight something different. Over the last half decade ('07-'12), these are the goalkicking leaders:

1. Lance Franklin 410 goals
2. Jonathan Brown 310
3. Brendan Fevola 295
4. N.Riewoldt 269
5. S.Johnson/S.Milne 259

Lance Franklin is 100 goals ahead of his nearest rival and more relevantly, has 30% more goals than that player.

As Far as I'm aware, those aforementioned greats (Lockett, Dunstall, etc) were never 30% ahead of the field, let alone over a 5-6year period.

Furthermore, goalkicking tallies lately indicate how hard it is to back up (many players having gone close to the Coleman then falling away the next). Franklin has kicked 64 + goals in each of the last 5 seasons. Brown has managed it 3 times, Fevola and Riewoldt twice. No other player has managed it more than once. Add to this how much more of the ball Franklin is getting than his nearest rivals (contemporaries not past) and it further emphasises how much ahead of the pack he is.

I think being more than 30% better than any other player over a 5 year period already enters Franklin into discussions without being dismissed by 'but look how many goals (insert player here) kicked 25 years ago'.

Or alternatively it just shows that there is a dearth of great goalkickers over the past decade. Lockett should not be thought of as less impressive because of Dunstall and vice-versa. That your list includes two centre half forwards and two forward pocket / half forward types reinforces this view.

Most of the key forwards in the game have some fatal flaw that stops them from being elite goalkickers (though they can still be elite players), whether it be kicking (Buddy, Cloke, Riewoldt), injuries (Brown), size / consistency (Milne, Betts etc), or stupidity (Fevola). The differences between these guys and the likes of Lockett and Dunstall, and even someone like Lloyd if you want a more recent example is that these three were built to kick goals, they were great marks, they were strong in the contest and they were very accurate kicks at goals.

Furthermore, if you're going to do a statistical analysis at least compare apples with apples. Fevola has been out of the game since 2010, while Riewoldt and Brown have had significant injury issues. While Fevola's problems might be self-created (or more accurately media-created), injuries are largely a completely random occurrence. Your post lacks context and unfortunately context is incredibly important for such comparisons and without them your analysis is misleading and largely non-factual.

 

[IllBeTheJudge]

Or alternatively it just shows that there is a dearth of great goalkickers over the past decade. Lockett should not be thought of as less impressive because of Dunstall and vice-versa. That your list includes two centre half forwards and two forward pocket / half forward types reinforces this view.

Most of the key forwards in the game have some fatal flaw that stops them from being elite goalkickers (though they can still elite players), whether it be kicking (Buddy, Cloke, Riewoldt), injuries (Brown), size / consistency (Milne, Betts etc), or stupidity (Fevola). The differences between these guys and the likes of Lockett and Dunstall, and even someone like Lloyd if you want a more recent example is that these three were built to kick goals, they were great marks, they were strong in the contest and they were very accurate kicks at goals.

Furthermore, if you're going to do a statistical analysis at least compare apples with apples. Fevola has been out of the game since 2010, while Riewoldt and Brown have had significant injury issues. While Fevola's problems might be self-created (or more accurately media-created), injuries are largely a completely random occurrence. You post lacks context and unfortunately context is incredibly important for such comparisons and without them your analysis is misleading and largely non-factual.

Just what I was going to say
You're a mind reader calyam

 

[Guardian Hawk]

Or alternatively it just shows that there is a dearth of great goalkickers over the past decade. Lockett should not be thought of as less impressive because of Dunstall and vice-versa. That your list includes two centre half forwards and two forward pocket / half forward types reinforces this view.

Most of the key forwards in the game have some fatal flaw that stops them from being elite goalkickers (though they can still be elite players), whether it be kicking (Buddy, Cloke, Riewoldt), injuries (Brown), size / consistency (Milne, Betts etc), or stupidity (Fevola). The differences between these guys and the likes of Lockett and Dunstall, and even someone like Lloyd if you want a more recent example is that these three were built to kick goals, they were great marks, they were strong in the contest and they were very accurate kicks at goals.

Furthermore, if you're going to do a statistical analysis at least compare apples with apples. Fevola has been out of the game since 2010, while Riewoldt and Brown have had significant injury issues. While Fevola's problems might be self-created (or more accurately media-created), injuries are largely a completely random occurrence. Your post lacks context and unfortunately context is incredibly important for such comparisons and without them your analysis is misleading and largely non-factual.

You make some well though out points but seem to have missed the direction of my post to a large extent. I was not suggesting that Lockett was less of a player because Dunstall was around. Both are clearly legends and Dunstall is my all time favourite player. My obvious point was that it is foolish to dismiss the goalkicking feats of today's players by saying "but (insert player here) had more goals in less games 25 years ago". My argument was that the game has changed, elite players are no longer able to kick as many goals and therefore, tallies (e.g. goals, possessions, etc) should be reserved for contemporaries. This is played out by the fact that not only Lockett but Dunstall, Modra, Ablett, Rocca and many others would all be clearly superior to any player produced in the last decade. This is a fallacy. Spearheads were used far more, flooding was far less common, more often space to lead into, more 1 on 1's, etc. I grew up watching Dunstall and his ability to get on a quick lead into space resulted in hundreds upon hundreds of goals. If Buddy could lead into space and take chest marks all the time, I have no doubt he would be topping 100 goals far more often.

You then suggest every single one of today's players have some 'fatal flaw' that stops them matching the great goalkickers of the past. To use one of your examples - if Travis Cloke had the goalkicking accuracy of Tony Lockett, he would have 309 career goals (from 153 games). That would not put him at the Simon Minton-Connell level of the past. Too far back? Well, Cloke kicking at Lockett style accuracy would make him roughly equivalent to Kent Kingsley in terms of goalkicking. Face it, kicking goals in the current era is a different kettle of fish. Heck, take Buddy's year last year - no player came within a dozen goals of him. Go back 15 years to 1996 and he would not have been top 5, needing 40 more goals (or 50% more) to top the chart. Do you really think players of 15 years ago were all about 50% better and were flawless?? (including the flawless Matthew Richardson who kicked 91 goals that year?)

Finally, you suggest I'm not comparing 'apples with apples' and cite a bunch of reasons why other players have not matched Franklin, suggesting I was being largely non-factual. Probably an unfair criticism as all I did was present the facts. I simply looked up who has kicked the most goals over the last 5 years. I did not only include injured players, CHF's, pockets, whatever - it was every single player in the AFL. Hell, If someone had more than Franklin you would argue he is a CHF who spends plenty of time through the middle so they can't be compared. The fact remains, it is very difficult to consistently produce high numbers in today's game, as played out by the fact that really only Franklin has been able to do so (and even then, nowhere near the numbers of the past). The 'contextual' reasons for this are multifaceted, bang/crash style takes a severe toll (see Brown), dominant players are double/triple teamed next time round (see J.Roo, etc) and perhaps the most significant is that coaches can change an entire set up and game style to counter these players. Franklin has had to adjust his game a couple of times now to cope with, for example, having two on him and someone in front - he used to simply lead to the ball, then tried 'Buddy's box", then tried to bulk up and play 'stay at home', now he pushes up the ground and leads back into the 50 - all necessary adjustments to counter the way coaches use an entire defence (or whole side) to nullify his influence.

To leave with a parting comment, Lockett kicked 10+ goals 22 times, Dunstall 15 times, Ablett 14 times, Modra 5 times, Rocca 5 times, etc. No current player has been able to do it more than once.

 

[IllBeTheJudge]

To leave with a parting comment, Lockett kicked 10+ goals 27 times, Dunstall 15 times, Ablett 14 times, Modra 5 times, Rocca 5 times, etc. No current player has been able to do it more than once.

How insane is that??

 

[Guardian Hawk]

How insane is that??

Yep, he was amazing (although I made an error - it was 22 times, which is still incredible).

 

[Ricmel]

Or alternatively it just shows that there is a dearth of great goalkickers over the past decade. Lockett should not be thought of as less impressive because of Dunstall and vice-versa.

That is more the point. Lockett and Ablett were freaks. Dunstall was an exceptional player that played in probably the most dominant team ever put together on the park.

No doubt we will probably never see a Lockett/Dunstall/ Ablett combination again but we will see individual players come along from time to time and consistently kick 100.

After McKenna, Hudson and Wade left, there was a long period in the game where we did not see regular 100s until Lockett, Ablett, Dunstall.

We are in a similar cycle now but no doubt that freakish players will come along again.

 

[lamaros]

One thing always needs to be remembered when talking all-time. That is, quite simply, different eras are different. Thus, comparing goal tallies from today (and possessions similarly) to the past is insufficient as the game has drastically shifted. As such, you can only compare a player's statistical measures to that of their contemporaries.

People can say Ablett, Modra, etc were so much better than Buddy because they kicked 257,000 goals or whatever but hauls of this kind were not unusual. Lockett did it regularly, Dunstall did it regularly, Ablett did it regularly, Modra did it semi-regulalry. Hell, even Sav Rocca's hauls made all current players look pedestrian. Not one of these great players, with all their goals, were clearly distinguishing themselves ahead of their contemporaries (emphasising how 'do-able' these feats were at the time).

A closer look at Franklin, highlight something different. Over the last half decade ('07-'12), these are the goalkicking leaders:

1. Lance Franklin 410 goals
2. Jonathan Brown 310
3. Brendan Fevola 295
4. N.Riewoldt 269
5. S.Johnson/S.Milne 259

Not really that impressive.

Lloyd 1997-2001 - 434 goals
Lloyd 1998-2002 - 418 goals
Lloyd 1999-2003 - 441 goals
Lloyd 2000-2004 - 450 goals
Lloyd 2001-2005 - 400 goals

Was anyone else anywhere near him for ANY of those five years, let alone the 9?

If you take Lynch, for example, then in his BEST stretch 2000-2004, you get 318 goals. In every over five years Lloyd is far far ahead.

What about Tredrea? His BEST stretch was 2001-2005. 305 goals only.

Richardson? His BEST? Nowhere near it.

Neitz? Nope. 2002-2006? 323.

Cherry picking a stretch doesn't show a whole lot, given injures and how careers overlap anyhow. But Lloyd is clearly ahead of any other forward in the 'modern' game. Franklin needs to do it for another four years still.

 

[hawkman]

That is more the point. Lockett and Ablett were freaks. Dunstall was an exceptional player that played in probably the most dominant team ever put together on the park.

Only for half his career. He kicked 100 goals 4 times after the last premiership in 1991

 

[lamaros]

Also, was anyone in the league near Fev between 2005-2009? 380 goals he kicked then. Don't think anyone else was close to that.

Franklin's 399 from 207-2011 is impressive, but it's still worse than Lloyd averaged in any five consecutive years between 1997 and 2005.

 

[calyam]

You make some well though out points but seem to have missed the direction of my post to a large extent. I was not suggesting that Lockett was less of a player because Dunstall was around. Both are clearly legends and Dunstall is my all time favourite player. My obvious point was that it is foolish to dismiss the goalkicking feats of today's players by saying "but (insert player here) had more goals in less games 25 years ago". My argument was that the game has changed, elite players are no longer able to kick as many goals and therefore, tallies (e.g. goals, possessions, etc) should be reserved for contemporaries. This is played out by the fact that not only Lockett but Dunstall, Modra, Ablett, Rocca and many others would all be clearly superior to any player produced in the last decade. This is a fallacy. Spearheads were used far more, flooding was far less common, more often space to lead into, more 1 on 1's, etc. I grew up watching Dunstall and his ability to get on a quick lead into space resulted in hundreds upon hundreds of goals. If Buddy could lead into space and take chest marks all the time, I have no doubt he would be topping 100 goals far more often.

You then suggest every single one of today's players have some 'fatal flaw' that stops them matching the great goalkickers of the past. To use one of your examples - if Travis Cloke had the goalkicking accuracy of Tony Lockett, he would have 309 career goals (from 153 games). That would not put him at the Simon Minton-Connell level of the past. Too far back? Well, Cloke kicking at Lockett style accuracy would make him roughly equivalent to Kent Kingsley in terms of goalkicking. Face it, kicking goals in the current era is a different kettle of fish. Heck, take Buddy's year last year - no player came within a dozen goals of him. Go back 15 years to 1996 and he would not have been top 5, needing 40 more goals (or 50% more) to top the chart. Do you really think players of 15 years ago were all about 50% better and were flawless?? (including the flawless Matthew Richardson who kicked 91 goals that year?)

Finally, you suggest I'm not comparing 'apples with apples' and cite a bunch of reasons why other players have not matched Franklin, suggesting I was being largely non-factual. Probably an unfair criticism as all I did was present the facts. I simply looked up who has kicked the most goals over the last 5 years. I did not only include injured players, CHF's, pockets, whatever - it was every single player in the AFL. Hell, If someone had more than Franklin you would argue he is a CHF who spends plenty of time through the middle so they can't be compared. The fact remains, it is very difficult to consistently produce high numbers in today's game, as played out by the fact that really only Franklin has been able to do so (and even then, nowhere near the numbers of the past). The 'contextual' reasons for this are multifaceted, bang/crash style takes a severe toll (see Brown), dominant players are double/triple teamed next time round (see J.Roo, etc) and perhaps the most significant is that coaches can change an entire set up and game style to counter these players. Franklin has had to adjust his game a couple of times now to cope with, for example, having two on him and someone in front - he used to simply lead to the ball, then tried 'Buddy's box", then tried to bulk up and play 'stay at home', now he pushes up the ground and leads back into the 50 - all necessary adjustments to counter the way coaches use an entire defence (or whole side) to nullify his influence.

To leave with a parting comment, Lockett kicked 10+ goals 27 times, Dunstall 15 times, Ablett 14 times, Modra 5 times, Rocca 5 times, etc. No current player has been able to do it more than once.

None of this really disproves that there is not a dearth of great goalkickers in the game today. Being the best of a poor bunch (not in talent, but in in pure goalkicking ability) should not be considered a badge of honour.

As for my fatal flaw argument, I think it stands up. All of these players do have flaws that stop them from being elite goalkickers. You use Cloke as any example but make the mistake of comparing his entire career. In 2011, had he kicked with Lockett / Lloyd type accuracy he would've kicked around 80 goals. How does that stand up to the best CHF of tall time? Pretty well. But due to his poor kicking he falls quite a bit short of the 80 goal mark. As for Richo he was a decent kick for goal back then, in 1995 prior to a knee injury he was kicking at 90 per cent accuracy; his problems came later so that comparison does not work.

The difference between the best goalkickers or today and the best of yesteryear would be markedly reduced if todays best forwards were better kicks for goal. Furthermore, as I mention the game today lacks any great full forwards. Jack Riewoldt is probably the best pure full forward in the league and I don't think anyone would argue that he's a world beater. Guys like Brown, Cloke and Franklin are all great CHFs (although obviously Buddy spent most of 2008 at FF). Most of those guys compare fairly favourably with the best CHFs of all time but none of these guys are great pure goalkickers.

At the end of the day, Buddy will be remembered as a great CHF and not necessarily a great goalkicker. He may very well become the most prolific goalkicking CHF of all time (nothing to sneeze out) but there are very valid reasons why he is unlikely to have a 120+ season. He's simply not built to regularly kick bags due to inconsistent accuracy and the fact that he's not a great contested mark. He'll never be a great goalkicker like Lockett or Dunstall, and that's fine; he gets to be a great CHF instead and they get remembered just fine.

 

[Ricmel]

At the end of the day, Buddy will be remembered as a great CHF and not necessarily a great goalkicker..

Do you think so? Great CHFs to me are Carey, Brereton, Brown, Riewoldt, Cloke etc. Players that take big pack marks or break big packs open. Buddy's one major weakness is his marking and for a KPF it's a pretty big weakness.

If this thread is about Buddy then I think the reason he does not kick more goals is he does not lead forward to space a lot like the great full forwards. He seems to spend a lot of time trying to take his opponent under the ball and then running back toward goal....more like a small forward like Stephen Milne would play.

 

[IllBeTheJudge]

We are in a similar cycle now but no doubt that freakish players will come along again.

The way the game is played now has to count for something in regards to this I think.

In the 90's there were 13 100+ goal seasons by players (not individual players, I mean 100+ goals in total)

In the 2000's, 4 with the last one being in 2008

So whilst I agree that the number of superb quality forwards is not as good now as it was then, the days of having one player average 4-5 goals per game are not currently with us (I refuse to say "gone forever". I think big power forwards are coming back)

 

[Ricmel]

The way the game is played now has to count for something in regards to this I think.

In the 90's there were 13 100+ goal seasons by players (not individual players, I mean 100+ goals in total)

In the 2000's, 4 with the last one being in 2008

So whilst I agree that the number of superb quality forwards is not as good now as it was then, the days of having one player average 4-5 goals per game are not currently with us (I refuse to say "gone forever". I think big power forwards are coming back)

No doubt the last 3 years (2009 - 2011) has been difficult for forwards with the "press". But the game is ever evolving and even this year it is opening up much more.

And when you look at modern day advantages to forwards - dry grounds, hands in the back rule, chopping the arms rule, improved delivery, faster ball movement into the forward line - versus the modern day disadvantages - the press, double teaming, longer kicking - then they just about even out.

 

[estibador]

The difference between the best goalkickers or today and the best of yesteryear would be markedly reduced if todays best forwards were better kicks for goal.

I think a lot of that is down to how the game is played these days.

How much would Dunstall or Lloyd's accuracy have suffered if they had to run down to CHB 30 times a game to form part of the zone and then sprint back 150 metres every time their team got the ball?

I won't even mention Lockett because he would have been subbed off at half time every game if those sort of running requirements were placed on him.

Conversely how much more accurate would a fresh Buddy or Riewoldt be if they just sat in the square and did nothing until that 30m burst to take the mark?

You only have to look at how much current players are heaving for breath while they're lining up for goal compared to the old school forwards who looked like they were on a Sunday stroll to see how much of an impact fatigue must have on accuracy.

 

[Ricmel]

I think a lot of that is down to how the game is played these days.

How much would Dunstall or Lloyd's accuracy have suffered if they had to run down to CHB 30 times a game to form part of the zone and then sprint back 150 metres every time their team got the ball?

I won't even mention Lockett because he would have been subbed off at half time every game if those sort of running requirements were placed on him.

Conversely how much more accurate would a fresh Buddy or Riewoldt be if they just sat in the square and did nothing until that 30m burst to take the mark?

You only have to look at how much current players are heaving for breath while they're lining up for goal compared to the old school forwards who looked like they were on a Sunday stroll to see how much of an impact fatigue must have on accuracy.

Not even sure todays forwards are less accurate.

Lockett and Lloyd were probably two of the most accurate of all time and Riewoldt and Franklin and Cloke are probably 3 of the most inaccurate of all time. Take them out of it and I don't think there would be much in it.

 

[Guardian Hawk]

If this thread is about Buddy then I think the reason he does not kick more goals is he does not lead forward to space a lot like the great full forwards. He seems to spend a lot of time trying to take his opponent under the ball and then running back toward goal....more like a small forward like Stephen Milne would play.

The reason for this is simple - there is no space anymore to lead into. In 2008, Buddy lead plenty and kicked plenty - he was a great exponent at it. This is part of the reason I highlighted why comparing today's players to that of yesteryear is flawed. Dunstall would burst into space on the lead and take chest marks again and again and again. He was doing it in 1985 and still able to keep doing it in 1998. He would have literally kicked over 1000 goals this way. Today's game - with presses, zones, flooding, etc has continued to evolve to prevent players and sides dominating in the way that Dunstall was able to. Send Buddy back to the early nineties and I'm sure he would kick more using his athleticism into space. Put Dunstall into a game like West Coast v Hawthorn last week (with about 30 players within 15m of him) and he won't be notching up 17 goals.

 

[Guardian Hawk]

Not really that impressive.

Lloyd 1997-2001 - 434 goals
Lloyd 1998-2002 - 418 goals
Lloyd 1999-2003 - 441 goals
Lloyd 2000-2004 - 450 goals
Lloyd 2001-2005 - 400 goals

Was anyone else anywhere near him for ANY of those five years, let alone the 9?

If you take Lynch, for example, then in his BEST stretch 2000-2004, you get 318 goals. In every over five years Lloyd is far far ahead.

What about Tredrea? His BEST stretch was 2001-2005. 305 goals only.

Richardson? His BEST? Nowhere near it.

Neitz? Nope. 2002-2006? 323.

Cherry picking a stretch doesn't show a whole lot, given injures and how careers overlap anyhow. But Lloyd is clearly ahead of any other forward in the 'modern' game. Franklin needs to do it for another four years still.

Here's the thing - Lloyd is a champion player and deserves to be discussed with the others - just like Buddy. He stood out in his era and as such, is right up there, regardless of whether players from a different era had a much higher goals per game average than Lloyd.

Obviously Buddy is not just a FF and does things that Lloyd never (or more accurately rarely) did. This is not a slight on Lloyd as he was a champion FF and did not need to do anything else.

In terms of Buddy needing to do it for longer - yes, absolutely. I'm not claiming him to be best ever or any nonsense like that - just pointing out the fallacy in comparing goal tallies between players who played 25 years apart.

 

[lamaros]

Obviously Buddy is not just a FF and does things that Lloyd never (or more accurately rarely) did. This is not a slight on Lloyd as he was a champion FF and did not need to do anything else.

That's mostly because Buddy is an oversized medium forward. He is neither a FF or a CHF. Even still over his career the only thing he does differently to Lloyd, apart from the style of his game, is a few more tackles. And a heap more behinds.

The fact is that if Franklin was a decent kick for goal he would be kicking a heap every year, just like those other forwards did. He is not missing them for any reason other than he is an average set shot and they were all excellent.

 

[Ricmel]

The reason for this is simple - there is no space anymore to lead into. In 2008, Buddy lead plenty and kicked plenty - he was a great exponent at it. .

Watch Riewoldt and Cloke, constantly lead up the ground to space. Even Podsialey, who plays a bit more like Franklin, seems to me to lead up more but I can't claim to watch a lot of him.

I think one difference is that Riewoldt and Cloke see a lot more balls go over their head than they perhaps would have in the past.

There is probably less space today, although the footy I remember from the 70s and 80s was lots of packs at the kick and the landing, but players are much better at pinpointing their kicks so not as much space is required.

 

[NetworkNerd]

Different Era's. Champion FF's like Plugger/Dunstall could wrestle the full-back and lead into space.
These days you cant really wrestle and your lead will be blocked off/intercepted by a Nick Maxwell type loose man back.....

 

[Guardian Hawk]

None of this really disproves that there is not a dearth of great goalkickers in the game today. Being the best of a poor bunch (not in talent, but in in pure goalkicking ability) should not be considered a badge of honour.

As for my fatal flaw argument, I think it stands up. All of these players do have flaws that stop them from being elite goalkickers. You use Cloke as any example but make the mistake of comparing his entire career. In 2011, had he kicked with Lockett / Lloyd type accuracy he would've kicked around 80 goals. How does that stand up to the best CHF of tall time? Pretty well. But due to his poor kicking he falls quite a bit short of the 80 goal mark. As for Richo he was a decent kick for goal back then, in 1995 prior to a knee injury he was kicking at 90 per cent accuracy; his problems came later so that comparison does not work.

The difference between the best goalkickers or today and the best of yesteryear would be markedly reduced if todays best forwards were better kicks for goal. Furthermore, as I mention the game today lacks any great full forwards. Jack Riewoldt is probably the best pure full forward in the league and I don't think anyone would argue that he's a world beater. Guys like Brown, Cloke and Franklin are all great CHFs (although obviously Buddy spent most of 2008 at FF). Most of those guys compare fairly favourably with the best CHFs of all time but none of these guys are great pure goalkickers.

At the end of the day, Buddy will be remembered as a great CHF and not necessarily a great goalkicker. He may very well become the most prolific goalkicking CHF of all time (nothing to sneeze out) but there are very valid reasons why he is unlikely to have a 120+ season. He's simply not built to regularly kick bags due to inconsistent accuracy and the fact that he's not a great contested mark. He'll never be a great goalkicker like Lockett or Dunstall, and that's fine; he gets to be a great CHF instead and they get remembered just fine.

I just don't see how every single player in the entire AFL has a 'fatal flaw' that prevents them being half as prolific (as players from yesteryear) and has nothing to do with the way the game is played now. We're talking every single player here.

Again, if Franklin had the accuracy of Lockett - he would go from 3.2 goals per game to 3.7. This is not counting how many goals Franklin kicks in a manner Lockett never really did (i.e. along the ground from the boundary). This is still well short of a bunch of players from 'that' era. Again, it is more about the nature of the game today that prevents Franklin kicking 1200 odd goals than his accuracy.

I suspect if Dunstall was playing today, the reason you would be telling me he is averaging 3.5 goals instead of nearly 5 per game is because of a fatal flaw - such as endurance or not KPF height.

Not saying that the players you mentioned don't have weaknesses or that there isn't a dearth of great goalkickers - just that the way the game is played is more influential on restricting individual goal tallies at the moment. That's why I used Simon Minton-Connell as an example (there are many, many, many more) who had a tonne of weaknesses (was offloaded a couple of times and then delisted) but has a similar or better goals per game ratio than today's premier forwards.

 

[calyam]

I just don't see how every single player in the entire AFL has a 'fatal flaw' that prevents them being half as prolific (as players from yesteryear) and has nothing to do with the way the game is played now. We're talking every single player here.

Again, if Franklin had the accuracy of Lockett - he would go from 3.2 goals per game to 3.7. This is not counting how many goals Franklin kicks in a manner Lockett never really did (i.e. along the ground from the boundary). This is still well short of a bunch of players from 'that' era. Again, it is more about the nature of the game today that prevents Franklin kicking 1200 odd goals than his accuracy.

I suspect if Dunstall was playing today, the reason you would be telling me he is averaging 3.5 goals instead of nearly 5 per game is because of a fatal flaw - such as endurance or not KPF height.

Not saying that the players you mentioned don't have weaknesses or that there isn't a dearth of great goalkickers - just that the way the game is played is more influential on restricting individual goal tallies at the moment. That's why I used Simon Minton-Connell as an example (there are many, many, many more) who had a tonne of weaknesses (was offloaded a couple of times and then delisted) but has a similar or better goals per game ratio than today's premier forwards.

Ok. So Buddy kicks more accurately and averages 3.7 goals per game (across his career; his peak would be much higher). That would put him in the top 20 of all time based on goals per game. There's a big difference between a forward averaging 3.2 goals per game and 3.7 goals per game.

I don't know why you're using Simon Minto-Connell as an example. He had two seasons with over 60 goals in two of the worst teams of all time. Yes, players can score a lot of goals in a poor team. However, there is not a single average player who has averaged 4 goals per game over the course of his career.

The fact remains that Buddy is not designed to be an elite goalkicker. He is not a very good contested mark, he's an incredibly inconsistent kick for goal. As a result he's more valuable running around the half-forward line and running up and down the field. Guys like Lockett and Dunstall are perfectly designed to be a full forward and quite frankly it would not matter what generation they played in they would have been among the very best goalkickers of all time. I suspect this because generations always overlap; for example, a 33 year old, broken down, Tony Lockett was a better goalkicker than a 20 year old Matthew Lloyd. He wasn't necessarily a better player but he was a better goalkicker. Matthew Lloyd went on to be the best goalkicker of his generation, kicked the century twice and finished with 90ish goals on two other occasions. By extension, Lockett would have more than likely have been a much better goalkicker than Lloyd even if he had begun played in the late 1990s and played throughout 2000s.

In much the same way that Lloyd would never have been a better goalkicker than Lockett regardless of what generation they played the same is more than than likely true of Buddy. But that's okay since kicking goals is not his only function, whereas it was for the likes of Lockett, Dunstall and Lloyd. I should make it clear that I am absolutely not saying that Buddy is a worse player than the dominant goalkickers, merely pointing out that he is not as good a goalkicker as these guys. I like most people think that Buddy is the best forward in the league today and one of the very best players running around.