Opinion Top 10 players from 1987 to now?

[Bloods]

On what basis was Lockett a better footballer than Ablett or Carey?

Certainly, Lockett could never match the athleticism of Carey or Ablett. Lockett was obviously a champion, but he was pretty one-dimensional. I reckon Carey and Ablett were both more complete footballers.

Not as athletic I agree but you're underselling Lockett's athleticism. Have a look at Lockett pre '91, he was a lean, fast athlete. In '87 (the year he won the brownlow) he played plenty of footy at CHF and in the ruck. I also saw him play in the ruck for Victoria against SA and he was of the best players on the ground. He was a stay at home FF for the bulk of his career - basically because he was the best in the business and his fitness and asthma wouldn't allow him to play anywhere else. Baldock has always said that he was a better CHF but his asthma wouldn't allow him to play there for long enough. He was not one dimensional. Anyone as skilled, quick, strong and clean on the ground as he was is not one dimensional.

Lockett kicked 7 goals or more 72 times in his career and double-figures on 22 occasions. No-one has got anywhere near those numbers. I've never seen anyone dominate games like he did with often poor delivery and little assisstance from teammates. That's why he's the best footballer I've ever seen.

 

[gdfl_dynasty]

If you're calling him underrated then I think you're wrong. Most people would have him in the best 2 or 3 defenders this decade.

i agree totally, but he goes nearly unnoticed during games.
so many times this year i have thought he has been top 3 best on ground, but he is rarely in the bests at all.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Gunnar, I'm not going to bother going through all your points as I'm at work, only to say that you make good points.

But I still disagree with you.

Carey? A great player, one of the best.
Ablett? A freak, one of the very best.

But Tony Lockett's still the best player I ever saw.

1) He carried two teams his whole career. Without him there wasn't a chance in hell either of them would've been anywhere near the finals.
2) I haven't seen skills such as those he possessed on many other people. Take into account his size, he was a freak.
3) He had the single best kick for goal I've seen, with the most technically perfect kicking action I've seen.
4) He was lightning fast, leaving players in his wake who should've easily been able to keep up with him.
5) He was damn strong. Maybe not Dunstall strong, but he still possessed a brute strength which would still rival most of today's AFL. I can still remember the game Sydney played against the WCE at the WACA in the mid-to-late 90s when Lockett was out-muscled twice by Ashley McIntosh. No one in the crowd thought it was possible.

Those are enough for now.

Yeah - great. You're just repeating yourelf as though that's sufficient.

You're just banging on about how great Lockett was. Everyone knows he was great. But you need to demonstrate why he was a better footballer than Carey or Ablett. You haven't done that.

Bottom line, Ablett and Carey were both better athletes and more complete footballers.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Not as athletic I agree but you're underselling Lockett's athleticism. Have a look at Lockett pre '91, he was a lean, fast athlete. In '87 (the year he won the brownlow) he played plenty of footy at CHF and in the ruck. I also saw him play in the ruck for Victoria against SA and he was of the best players on the ground. He was a stay at home FF for the bulk of his career - basically because he was the best in the business and his fitness and asthma wouldn't allow him to play anywhere else.

So how am I under-selling his athleticism?

You concede he wasn't fit enough to play anywhere other than FF.

Lockett was incredibly strong, and was very quick off the mark. Those were the physical traits he needed to succeed at FF.

But as an all-round athlete, he was hardly top tier. Nowhere near Ablett and Carey, who were basically complete packages.

 

[jsd09]

Just a possibility of a very very talented footballer , Tim Watson.

 

[UpForGrabs]

Yeah - great. You're just repeating yourelf as though that's sufficient.

You're just banging on about how great Lockett was. Everyone knows he was great. But you need to demonstrate why he was a better footballer than Carey or Ablett. You haven't done that.

Bottom line, Ablett and Carey were both better athletes and more complete footballers.

How the hell do you want me to demonstrate? Stick figures? Ballet? Impressionist paintings?

I gave my reasons as to why Lockett is, in my opinion, the best player from 1987 to now. I don't need to say why he was better than your favourites simply for the fact that you need someone to argue with.

But since you asked... Ablett and Carey were great players in much better teams. They had teammates at their disposal far and above the quality of those Lockett ran out onto the field with. Put him in a team anywhere near the level of Geelong from 1989-95 or North from 93-99 and he would've kicked at least 200 goals more in his career. And that's at a bare minimum.

As for your athletes claim, since when has that got to do with s**t? Shane Crawford was a better athlete than Greg Williams, yet he isn't one tenth the footballer Diesel was.

You probably don't care about any of that because it looks like you're just looking for someone to agree with you. Funny, I thought this was an 'Opinion' thread.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

How the hell do you want me to demonstrate? Stick figures? Ballet? Impressionist paintings?

Make an argument that actually compares Lockett to Ablett and Carey as footballers, instead of just banging on about how great Lockett was in siolation.

My argument is that Ablett and Carey were better athletes and more complete footballers.

Where does Lockett get in front?

It's inadequate to limit your argument to Lockett playing in supposedly worse teams, with the corollary that he is therefore a better player.

I gave my reasons as to why Lockett is, in my opinion, the best player from 1987 to now.

Yeah - and I responded to them directly. They were fatuous.

But since you asked... Ablett and Carey were great players in much better teams. They had teammates at their disposal far and above the quality of those Lockett ran out onto the field with.

But I've already addressed this.

Lockett had some very good team-mates at St Kilda, and he made a GF in Sydney. Harvey, Winmar, Leowe, Burke, Frawley, Kelly, Creswell, Maxfield. It's not like Lockett was surrounded by duds his whole career.

Besides, I think this whole approach of marking a player up because he played in a lesser side is a bit rich.

According to that approach, Matthew Richardson must be one of the all-time greats. In reality, the fact that he's played for ordinary Richmond sides doesn't necessarily mean he deserves more props than Jon Brown or Matty Lloyd or whoever.

You still have to assess footballers as individuals. You can't just fall back on the fact that one played in a worse team than another, so therefore must be considered a better player. That's absurd.

As for your athletes claim, since when has that got to do with s**t? Shane Crawford was a better athlete than Greg Williams, yet he isn't one tenth the footballer Diesel was.

It's relevant in this case because it underpins Lockett being a one-dimensional footballer.

His inferior athleticism meant he was never as complete a player as Ablett or Carey.

 

[UpForGrabs]

Make an argument that actually compares Lockett to Ablett and Carey as footballers, instead of just banging on about how great Lockett was in siolation.

My argument is that Ablett and Carey were better athletes and more complete footballers.

Where does Lockett get in front?

It's inadequate to limit your argument to Lockett playing in supposedly worse teams, with the corollary that he is therefore a better player.

You're a very selective reader. There's nothing in my posts to suggest I only had one reason for favouring Plugger.

The fact he was in s**t teams is one reason. His strength is another. His skill level is another. He was a better character. His utter domination was another (unlike Carey, who struggled against Jakovich... there wasn't a FB who Plugger didn't ream).

All of those are reasons. All valid. And I don't see why I have to compare him against only two others simply because you seem to want to sniff their used jocks. Ablett was a Wing/Flank/Full Forward/Wherever the hell he wanted to play, while Carey was a CHF. Plugger was a Full-Forward solely. Why don't I just go and compare Plugger to Steven Hocking and explain to you why I think the former is better than the latter??

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

You're a very selective reader. There's nothing in my posts to suggest I only had one reason for favouring Plugger.

Well, that's the one you've given the most emphasis to.

The only point of comparison you've really pushed is that Plugger played in worse teams.

The fact he was in s**t teams is one reason.

Totally bogus - I've already addressed this.

His strength is another. His skill level is another.

Do you think he was more skillful than Ablett or Carey?

Do you think, physically, he had more going for him than Ablett or Carey?

Who were the more complete foootballers?

He was a better character.

Pffffttt... utterly irrelevant.

The fact that he avoided off-field scandal doesn't make Plugger a better player. Surely you understand that.

Besides, if you want to talk about personalities, what made Carey a tool off the field made him even more of a champion on the field. If you want to talk about personalities, and how it enhances or diminishes a player, Carey's presence was second-to-none.

His utter domination was another (unlike Carey, who struggled against Jakovich... there wasn't a FB who Plugger didn't ream).

Demonstrate that he was more dominant than Carey or Ablett.

You're carrying on as though Plugger kicked 10 goals every week. He didn't. He got beaten from time-to-time just like every other player.

All of those are reasons. All valid.

They're not valid at all.

You've just restated your case and attached some flattering adjectives to Plugger.

You've just said, "oh, he was stronger and more skillful", which is bullshit.

Lockett might possibly have been stronger one-on-one, but Ablett and Carey were more agile, better in the air, more versatile and more skillful. They were better athletes and more complete footballers.

And I don't see why I have to compare him against only two others simply because you seem to want to sniff their used jocks.

You have to compare, because you're saying that Lockett was better than them.

Do I really have to explain that?

Ablett was a Wing/Flank/Full Forward/Wherever the hell he wanted to play, while Carey was a CHF. Plugger was a Full-Forward solely. Why don't I just go and compare Plugger to Steven Hocking and explain to you why I think the former is better than the latter??

Are you serious?

No one is talking about Steven Hocking.

We're talking about the best players of the past 20-odd years, and we're comparing three candidates in Ablett, Carey and Lockett. All essentially forwards, of varying style, size and position.

Do you really not understand why a comparison between these three is more valid than a comparison that includes Steven Hocking?

Seriously?

 

[Smell The Glove]

complete foootballers

Please dont use this annoying cliche unless you are willing to define it first.

Lockett was just as good as Carey or Ablett because his influence and effect on the games he played, and generally in lesser sides, was just as great, if not moreso because he contributed more goals and was more intimidating. Its subjective, and I really dont give a s**t who disagrees with me.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Please dont use this annoying cliche unless you are willing to define it first.

I didn't think it really required defining. Isn't its meaning obvious?

A player is more complete if they have more strings to their bow.

To give you an idea, a player is more complete if they are good in the air, but also good below their knees; if they can win the ball on the lead, but also get it in traffic; if they are dangerous inside, but also dangerous outside; if they are strong in a marking contest near goals, but also agile enough to find the footy on the move further afield.

I'm sure there are other ways to gauge that versatility - or completeness - I don't imagine it's limited to what I've offered here.

Is that sufficiently defined?

 

[Smell The Glove]

I didn't think it really required defining. Isn't its meaning obvious?

A player is more complete if they have more strings to their bow.

To give you an idea, a player is more complete if they are good in the air, but also good below their knees; if they can win the ball on the lead, but also get it in traffic; if they are dangerous inside, but also dangerous outside; if they are strong in a marking contest near goals, but also agile enough to find the footy on the move further afield.

I'm sure there are other ways to gauge that versatility - or completeness - I don't imagine it's limited to what I've offered here.

Is that sufficiently defined?

So you define a cliche with a cliche?

Hmmm......

Footballers should be judged on how effectively they play their position ie. how well they can their job done and thus, how them doing their job affects how the rest of the game plays out. Using your criteria, I'd argue Kouta is/was the most complete footballer ever. Doesnt make him better than Ablett, Carey or Lockett though now does it?

 

[doppleganger]

OK - I'll have a shot.

9. Buckley - Super balance and just about a perfect kick. If he had more inside about his play, he'd be further up this list. Very damaging performer.

More inside????

Not sure what you mean??

N.Buckley in 2003 set the league record for clearances. When the pies made the GFs in 02,03 it was on the back of N.Buckley's great inside play.

He also averaged more tackles a game than Voss.

Buckley was the best inside/outside dual role midfielder of the last 20 years. Add to that he was able to pinch hit as a KP player!!

Wonder how much further you will push himup the list???!!!

 

[AlibiMonday]

Wonder how much further you will push himup the list???!!!

Half a spot

He was a super player. Full stop.

 

[UpForGrabs]

I give up. Gunnar you're a god and are so right.

When the thread said 'Opinion' I thought it meant mine, not everyone agreeing with yours.

I'll end with one more reason before I figure out how to put you on ignore;

Watching Tony Lockett made me think I was watching football at its purest, as though it was the way was always supposed to be played. As though the hundred or so years of the game to the point when he came along had been distilled into one player. Hell of cliche, I know, but who gives a s**t. I never wanted to be any other footballer except Tony Lockett.

Simple, but there you go. I admired the other 9 in my list, but I never wanted to play football like any of them.

Now piss off. God I hate Eagles supporters.

 

[doppleganger]

Half a spot

He was a super player. Full stop.

Might just add that Buckley's clearance record is better than any season Judd has managed!!

So to top off his supremem inside game, he was also arguably the most damaging outside midfielder of his time.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

So you define a cliche with a cliche?

Hmmm......

That would be to ignore the paragraph that follows, in which a more detailed definition is provided.

I defined the term quite expansively. Don't be a clown.

Footballers should be judged on how effectively they play their position ie. how well they can their job done and thus, how them doing their job affects how the rest of the game plays out. Using your criteria, I'd argue Kouta is/was the most complete footballer ever. Doesnt make him better than Ablett, Carey or Lockett though now does it?

When it comes down to 2-3 outstanding candidates, with not much between them, it's a trait that elevates one or two above the others. It's more a tie-breaker than the primary criteria.

In this case, Carey, Ablett and Lockett were all wonderful players. All champions. All worthy inclusions on a list like this. No doubt. But when pressed to actually put them in an order, I look at who were the more complete players, versus who was one-dimensional. That versatility is what marks Carey and Ablett out as superior players.

As for Kouta, you don't need to persuade me. I reckon his best footy was as good as anyone's, mostly because he was so versatile. But he just didn't produce enough of his best footy to push into a list like this.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I give up. Gunnar you're a god and are so right.

When the thread said 'Opinion' I thought it meant mine, not everyone agreeing with yours.

I'll end with one more reason before I figure out how to put you on ignore;

Watching Tony Lockett made me think I was watching football at its purest, as though it was the way was always supposed to be played. As though the hundred or so years of the game to the point when he came along had been distilled into one player. Hell of cliche, I know, but who gives a s**t. I never wanted to be any other footballer except Tony Lockett.

Simple, but there you go. I admired the other 9 in my list, but I never wanted to play football like any of them.

Now piss off. God I hate Eagles supporters.

Your boyhood crush on Lockett does not make him a superior player.

You've really struggled in this thread, but this is probably your worst effort so far.

 

[OneEyedCat]

Greatest AFL/VFL Players **IMO** Since 1987 (in Order, as at 06/06/2009):

1. Gary Ablett, Senior
2. Michael Voss
3. Wayne Carey
4. James Hird
5. Tony Lockett
6. Greg Williams
7. Chris Judd
8. Andrew McLeod
9. Ben Cousins
10. John Platten

 

[UpForGrabs]

Your boyhood crush on Lockett does not make him a superior player.

You've really struggled in this thread, but this is probably your worst effort so far.

Honestly, there's nothing I could say to convince you Lockett was better, something I might add that I never felt I needed to do in the first place. You were always just looking for people to argue with. The joke's on me that I got sucked into your pathetic little game.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Honestly, there's nothing I could say to convince you Lockett was better, something I might add that I never felt I needed to do in the first place.

If you say so.

That's more a reflection on your faculties than on mine.

 

[Pykie]

I see you do this in every thread. You make ridiculous statements and then when people tell you they are stupid you use you arguing techniques saying things like "you are repeating yourself".

Seriously mate if you mention Glenn Archer in threads like this you are only making a fool of yourself. I think even North supporters would agree that while he was a solid player for 15 years he was never a star.

Since when has being courageous been enough to make you a star player. Why don't we just include Jake King in the top 10.

As for being a Norm Smith medalist one game doesn't make you a great player. I seem to remember LRT playing a blinder of a grand final.

Please get back to me when you have a valid argument and some statistics to back up Archer being even close to the top 10 players of the last 20 years. Oh, and a made up award such as Shinboner of the century doesn't count.

Im a North supporter, and I completely disagree with you.

It's clear to me your very young.


Glenn Archer was an athletic freak when he was younger.

Was quick for his size, although giving up a few inches, had a great verticle leap, and often not noticed was very dual footed, was a fantstic kick for a defender.


Archer didn't fluke the Norm Smith medal, as you said, he was All-Australian twice, in an era consisting of Ablett, Kernahan, Dunstall, Sumich, Lloyd, etc etc

He didn't win a best and fairest?


Thats your argument?

Gary Ablett Snr won 1 best and fairest.

1.


He is considered one of the best 3 players from that side in that era, in a side that won two premierships, played in 3 grand finals, and almost every preliminary final for the decade.

That is no fluke, and not just because he was "courageous"


He would be the perfect medium sized defender in the modern game, and makes a mokery of current ones like Campbell Brown and Dale Morris.