Moved Thread Who was/is the better player. Gary Ablett jnr or Dustin Martin?

[doppleganger]

Nathan Buckley

True, one of the elite few that have won Norm Smiths in losing teams.

 

[Falcon3518]

Cable never won a norm smith either right?

And?

 

[Lingsface]

And?

That’s a weird answer.

Martin averages 1 tackle a grand final as well another stat.

 

[PhatBoy]

The record is times voted BOG, stats are irrelevant. If you are BOG you are BOG, doesn’t matter how you do it. Also I previously said only him and Barry cable have averaged 20+ disposals and 2+ goals in 3 GFs. That’s essentially breaking another record, especially since it’s the same as another legend. No other player apart from these two have done it including GAJ, says a lot.

Sorry but it’s not irrelevant.

Answer the question: who has had a better grand final, the guy who doesn’t win the medal and kicks 5 goals and has 20 touches but a teammate had 6 and 21, or the guy who has 20 and 2 and wins the medal.

It’s not a difficult question. Who has played the better grand final?

 

[Daka]

I might get shut down for this but I feel like as good Ablett was he dominated in era where their wasn't much competition.
Like Fyfe comes around knocks him off his throne straight away Danger knocks Fyfe off Dusty knocks Danger off.

Where Ablett was clearly number #1 their were no other great contenders of his spot.

like Selwood, Mitchell, Swan, Pendlebury were all around and clearly a notch below.

I feel like that it's gone back a bit to that now with Fyfe, Danger, Dusty lil bit past their best . no one really putting hand up as the clear best player in the competition

theirs Petracca, Oliver, Neale, Cripps, Bontempelli but neither of them taking it.

 

[Falcon3518]

That’s a weird answer.

Martin averages 1 tackle a grand final as well another stat.

Yeah and 0 hitouts in the ruck. It’s almost like he isn’t told to do that or something

 

[doppleganger]

B&Fs are a always mentioned when assessing a players career it enhances his reputation. I have no issues with his AAs which is why I didn’t mention them. People voted him MVP because he was obviously the biggest MVP in the league as he was only veteran player of a whole club. Any greats of the game would win it too. It’s “the most valuable player” award not best player award.

Gaz Jnr has won 6 BnFs, of which 2 were in premiership seasons.

Dusty just 2 BnFs, only 1 for a premiership season.

Gaz Jnr 3 time AFL coaches best player of the year and 4 other times top5.

Dusty 1 time AFL coaches best player of the year and just 1 other top5 finish.

Gaz simply was better for longer, it is what elevates him ahead of guys like Dusty and Dane Swan who didnt sustain their peak like Gaz was able to.

 

[Lingsface]

Yeah and 0 hitouts in the ruck. It’s almost like he isn’t told to do that or something

Yeah defence is over rated.

Jimmy bartels stats in our 3 winning grand finals- 24.3 possesions 7.7 tackles 1.7 goals. Not a bad 2 way player.

 

[PhatBoy]

I might get shut down for this but I feel like as good Ablett was he dominated in era where their wasn't much competition.
Like Fyfe comes around knocks him off his throne straight away Danger knocks Fyfe off Dusty knocks Danger off.

Where Ablett was clearly number #1 their were no other great contenders of his spot.

like Selwood, Mitchell, Pendlebury were all around and clearly a notch below.

I feel like that it's gone back a bit to that now with Fyfe, Danger, Dusty lil bit past their best . no one really putting hand up as the clear best player in the competition

theirs Petracca, Oliver, Neale, Cripps, Bontempelli but neither of them taking it.

That’s a better more reasoned argument than most and deserves analysis - there was a guy called Franklin who was pretty good at the time though, to be fair, and another who played for West Coast and Carlton that was pretty handy.

Others like Swan and Pendlebury for a time looked capable of challenging.

I’d say also in that era, the game was probably more geared around key forwards than it is now. Routinely among the ‘best players in the game’ discussion were Riewoldt, Pavlich, Franklin, Brown for a little while, even Cloke briefly had that sort of aura just for a little while. Roughead was another one.

 

[Falcon3518]

Sorry but it’s not irrelevant.

Answer the question: who has had a better grand final, the guy who doesn’t win the medal and kicks 5 goals and has 20 touches but a teammate had 6 and 21, or the guy who has 20 and 2 and wins the medal.

It’s not a difficult question. Who has played the better grand final?

Not sure if you realise but all the major awards are based on being BOG in games (Bar MVP and Coleman). This is because it’s actually about influence in the game which is all that matters, nobody cares about raw numbers.

To answer your last question, whoever wins the medal is BOG, means they are better. Maybe the other guy got 6 junktime goals or something idk, all these things are factored into the decisions. Is your example real players or hypothetical?

 

[doppleganger]

Sorry but it’s not irrelevant.

Answer the question: who has had a better grand final, the guy who doesn’t win the medal and kicks 5 goals and has 20 touches but a teammate had 6 and 21, or the guy who has 20 and 2 and wins the medal.

It’s not a difficult question. Who has played the better grand final?

Who played the better GF

Player A
20 kicks, 5 HBs, 11 marks, 5 tackles 1 goal

Player B
14 kicks, 15HBs, 1 mark, 1 tackle, 2 goals

 

[Falcon3518]

Who played the better GF

Player A
20 kicks, 5 HBs, 11 marks, 5 tackles 1 goal

Player B
14 kicks, 15HBs, 1 mark, 1 tackle, 2 goals

Refer to my response to PB I explained it.

 

[PhatBoy]

Everyone gets sick of my analogies I know but sometimes it’s the easiest way I can explain myself or the logic I see being used or not used.

When I think about the most memorable knocks I’ve seen in cricket, it’s not hard to pinpoint the absolute cream of the crop:

• Lara at Jamaica and Bridgetown in 99
• Stokes at Headingley
• Clarke in SA
• Gilchrist in Hobart along with Langer
• Atherton at the Wanderers

Etc etc etc

The one that perhaps stands above all of them is VVS Laxman at Eden Gardens. Series on the line, home record on the line, australia 16 test wins in a row, India follows on 260 runs behind mighty Australia.

Rightly, after the game Laxman is named man of the match. 21 years later, the name Laxman and the number 281 are forever linked and still talked about in awe.

Meanwhile for the duration of that innings, another guy at the other end made 180, under just as much pressure, in the same circumstances, against the same champion team, and while obviously people remember it, he didn’t get a man of the match award despite playing one of the all time great innings.

Then we turn around and a guy like David Warner can get a man of the match award for a still good innings making 110 in a run chase against Bangladesh, but it’s not half the performance of Dravid, is it? Yet he walks away with an award.

Would anyone try and argue after that Warner’s effort was superior because he was man of the match?

 

[PhatBoy]

Who played the better GF

Player A
20 kicks, 5 HBs, 11 marks, 5 tackles 1 goal

Player B
14 kicks, 15HBs, 1 mark, 1 tackle, 2 goals

On paper at least, the first guy. You’d need to actually see both though realistically

 

[kreglze]

I still maintain, Ablett is the best I have ever seen live. A couple of years at Metricon we're a joy to watch him go around.

 

[Falcon3518]

Yeah defence is over rated.

Jimmy bartels stats in our 3 winning grand finals- 24.3 possesions 7.7 tackles 1.7 goals. Not a bad 2 way player.

Good for him that was his role. Good thing you are not a coach, you’d be wasting dustys talents in defence and lose us games which is what we did prior to 2017 where he played mid/HB if you didn’t realise. Should’ve moved him fwd earlier could’ve had 5 flags.

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

He didn’t have record breaking finals

Did he have any finals where he kicked more goals, had more possessions, goal assists, tackles etc than anyone else? If He did I haven’t been made aware of it.

He had 3 good games that game him arbitrary one match recognition.

Does Martin’s 4 goal effort in 2020 to win the game for his side after they trailed by 20 points or whatever it was, get made better than Steve Johnson’s 4 goal performance to win the game over Collingwood after we trailed by 18 points in 2011?

Does Martin’s medal for 2020 factor in that ‘hang on, Johnson played just as well BUT he lost votes to Hawkins who ripped the game apart in the third term and Jimmy Bartel who had 27 touches and 3 goals and ultimately won the award?


I’m not saying that this applies to Martin but imagine a player who is clearly his team’s best, plays 3 grand finals in a row, and all 3 games are utter s**t. Virtually everyone onfield bottles it, can’t hit a target, can’t take a mark.
In each of those years, the same player kicks 2 goals and has 20 touches. It’s good enough to get him 3 norm smith medals.

Another player a few years earlier or later plays in 3 grand finals.

In the first, he has 25 touches and kicks three goals but one of his small forward teammates has 5 goals and 5 tackles inside 50 and wins the medal.

A year later he plays as a permanent forward and kicks 4 goals, but one of his teammates kicked 4 from the midfield as well and kicks the sealer in the last quarter. It’s enough to win him the medal.
In the third year he teams up with his fellow tall forward, he kicks 5 and his teammate kicks 6 and wins the medal.


No which player has performed better in grand finals. The guy with 3 norm smith medals? Or the guy with none?

If Martin doesn't play in the 2020 GF, I don't think we win.

Goal 1 :We were 4 goals down in the second quarter. An incredible show of strength agility and skilll.

Goal 2: Puts us in front in the 3rd quarter by roving the ball and kicking a bouncing bananna from 35m.

Goal 3: Ices the game by breaking a tackle and kicking a 60m scrubbing torpedo.

Goal 4: Anticipates and intercepts a handball , breaks a Dangerfield tackle on the boundary and snaps from 25m.

Just a dominant match winning performance.

 

[Lingsface]

I might get shut down for this but I feel like as good Ablett was he dominated in era where their wasn't much competition.
Like Fyfe comes around knocks him off his throne straight away Danger knocks Fyfe off Dusty knocks Danger off.

Where Ablett was clearly number #1 their were no other great contenders of his spot.

like Selwood, Mitchell, Swan, Pendlebury were all around and clearly a notch below.

I feel like that it's gone back a bit to that now with Fyfe, Danger, Dusty lil bit past their best . no one really putting hand up as the clear best player in the competition

theirs Petracca, Oliver, Neale, Cripps, Bontempelli but neither of them taking it.

Hodge Franklin Bartel are just a couple of players that come to mind that are as good as it gets.

Hodge 4 premierships 2 norm smiths amazing captain.
Franklin- 1000 plus goals/ in the argument for best player of our generation and along way ahead of Dustin Martin.
Bartel- 3 premierships Brownlow norm smith

 

[Falcon3518]

Gaz Jnr has won 6 BnFs, of which 2 were in premiership seasons.

Dusty just 2 BnFs, only 1 for a premiership season.

Gaz Jnr 3 time AFL coaches best player of the year and 4 other times top5.

Dusty 1 time AFL coaches best player of the year and just 1 other top5 finish.

Gaz simply was better for longer, it is what elevates him ahead of guys like Dusty and Dane Swan who didnt sustain their peak like Gaz was able to.

All these awards are for H&A. Finals are a thing in AFL.

 

[PhatBoy]

Not sure if you realise but all the major awards are based on being BOG in games (Bar MVP and Coleman). This is because it’s actually about influence in the game which is all that matters, nobody cares about raw numbers.

To answer your last question, whoever wins the medal is BOG, means they are better. Maybe the other guy got 6 junktime goals or something idk, all these things are factored into the decisions. Is your example real players or hypothetical?

You would be the only person in the world who would think that.
The example is hypothetical but probably real anyway without having bothered to look at any examples.

In what world can someone be considered to have played a BETTER game than someone else in a different match, SOLELY because he won an award?


I would classify Bachar Houli’s grand final performance in 2017 as better than Steve Johnson’s 10 years earlier any day of the week.

Which one of the two has a norm smith medal to show for it?

 

[Lingsface]

Good for him that was his role. Good thing you are not a coach, you’d be wasting dustys talents in defence and lose us games which is what we did prior to 2017 where he played mid/HB if you didn’t realise. Should’ve moved him fwd earlier could’ve had 5 flags.

That’s beyond stupid you play attacking midfielder you don’t have to tackle…

 

[PhatBoy]

All these awards are for H&A. Finals are a thing in AFL.

Yes and unfortunately you don’t get awards for being best on ground in preliminary finals and regularly among the best in grand finals. Pity as it obviously means Ablett was hopeless in finals

 

[Falcon3518]

If Martin doesn't play in the 2020 GF, I don't think we win.

Goal 1 :We were 4 goals down in the second quarter. An incredible show of strength agility and skilll.

Goal 2: Puts us in front in the 3rd quarter by roving the ball and kicking a bouncing bananna from 35m.

Goal 3: Ices the game by breaking a tackle and kicking a 60m scrubbing torpedo.

Goal 4: Sharks a loose ball, breaks a Dangerfield tackle on the boundary and snaps from 25m.

Just a dominant match winning performance.

Maybe just personal opinion but I don’t think GAJ had the flair Dusty has. Dusty could do freak things. On the other hand GAJ was impressive because of sheer volume.

 

[Falcon3518]

Yes and unfortunately you don’t get awards for being best on ground in preliminary finals and regularly among the best in grand finals. Pity as it obviously means Ablett was hopeless in finals

He’s only quoting H&A records though which is why I said it. Just disregarded everything Dusty did in finals which is dumb.

 

[Daka]

That’s a better more reasoned argument than most and deserves analysis - there was a guy called Franklin who was pretty good at the time though, to be fair, and another who played for West Coast and Carlton that was pretty handy.

Others like Swan and Pendlebury for a time looked capable of challenging.

I’d say also in that era, the game was probably more geared around key forwards than it is now. Routinely among the ‘best players in the game’ discussion were Riewoldt, Pavlich, Franklin, Brown for a little while, even Cloke briefly had that sort of aura just for a little while. Roughead was another one.

Yeah you could throw Franklin in there but I was probably talking more from a midfield perspective if Danger,Fyfe, Dusty came 5 years earlier towards more of Ablett their would have been a lot more competition for being the greatest player in the game. Also some awards don't mean much like MVP like players today vote for different person every year even though it's not what majority of what fans think around competition.