Adam Goodes and the best player in the AFL debate

[Industrial Fan]

Industrial Fan, you really don't get this, do you?

If Franklin misses 8 shots on goal, but still kicks 8, then he is still the dominant forward. The difference between O'Loughlin in the GF and Franklin is that while Franklin misses a lot of shots on goal, he also kicks a lot. O'Loughlin wasn't the dominant forward in the GF, because he didn't have any real impact, because he missed his shots. Franklin has an impact, because even though he misses a lot of goals, he is so good at getting shots at goal that he doesn't need to take every opportunity to still kick 8 goals in a match.

No I dont get it at all.

If you want to say a player had a great game because they earnt 15 shots on goal regardless of how many of those they kicked then that is up to you.

Franklin is inconsistent. He has good games where he kicks 6,7,8 goals. He has awful games where he kicks 1.7. I am disputing the fact that he ranks amongst Hird, Voss, etc, etc because he misses so many chances. If you want to lump him in with great players and use him as a model of consistency then you are a fool (albeit your perogative).

I used O'Loughlin as an example to show that earning kicks on goal does nothing if you dont kick them.

To put it another way, a midfielder doesn't have a great game just because they have 40 possessions. It depends on what they do with the ball. ie, Kerr had a better game than Cousins last year, despite the fact he had half the disposals.

[Industrial Fan]

No, its the goals he kicks that he's being rated on. From 15 shots he might kick 6 goals but that is still above average for the best forwards to have played the game.

My whole point was that you cant say he has a great game if he has 15 shots and kicks 2-3 goals which was being suggested earlier in the thread.

[Lohengrin]

If you want to say Franklin has a great game when he misses 12 shots on goal, then that's fine. I dont agree.

If you say Franklin has a great game because he could have kicked 15 goals, then I say O'Loughlin had a great game by earning 6 shots on goal in 05. I dont think either point is true.

I don't think that was being suggested. The comment about Franklin was on his overall performance whereas you are focussing on a single game. As I quoted, "he is still kicking enough goals", which is the case for most games and thus the season.

As it is, he is currently having about 10-11 shots per game and converting nearly half. In some games he might kick 1.7 which is not a great game, but he's only done that twice and his overall performance, despite his fairly poor kicking, still makes him the dominant forward in the competition, which was BSA5's point.

[Kanga]

Judd has been consistent. Franklin and Ablett are each having a stellar year (but then Goodes had two ).

Boomer is having a pretty good year too......... not far off a superstar.

[AnnieH]

Boomer is having a pretty good year too......... not far off a superstar.

Kanga's back.

Did you find out when ***Wayne "King" Carey*** played for Sydney??

[Jewels]

Boomer is having a pretty good year too......... not far off a superstar.

I'd certainly rate him as such, he is a joy to watch and while he has been excellent all year he has lifted another notch recently.

[Industrial Fan]

I'm not saying he's not a dominant forward in most cases.

But you can't say he's consistent, or group him with great players at this stage. He has too many games where his kicking is all over the place.

Looking at his stats this year he's had games where he's kicked 1.7, 1.3, 1.6, 4.7. That doesn't take into account the shots that either go OOBOTF or dont make the distance - and he has plenty of both.

Dominant forward, yes. Consistent player, no. Potentially great player, yes.

[BSA5]

No I dont get it at all.

If you want to say a player had a great game because they earnt 15 shots on goal regardless of how many of those they kicked then that is up to you.

Franklin is inconsistent. He has good games where he kicks 6,7,8 goals. He has awful games where he kicks 1.7. I am disputing the fact that he ranks amongst Hird, Voss, etc, etc because he misses so many chances. If you want to lump him in with great players and use him as a model of consistency then you are a fool (albeit your perogative).

I used O'Loughlin as an example to show that earning kicks on goal does nothing if you dont kick them.

To put it another way, a midfielder doesn't have a great game just because they have 40 possessions. It depends on what they do with the ball. ie, Kerr had a better game than Cousins last year, despite the fact he had half the disposals.

That isn't what I said at all. Have you been reading anything I wrote? I said Franklin is a great forward because he kicks so many goals per game (almost 5, in fact, at least this year)! My exact point is that the number of shots at goal he has is irrelevant! Who cares if he is missing almost as many as he kicks. He is still kicking more goals than any other forward.

And I don't believe I ever used him as a model for consistency. Nor did I lump him with Hird or Voss (he is far too young yet, although he definitely has that potential).

To use your midfielder analogy, Franklin is like a midfielder who AVERAGES 40 disposals a game, but has an efficiency of 60%, thereby averaging 24 effective disposals per game. Compare that to Gary Ablett this year. He averages 27.93 possessions per game, disposing at 74.05%, for an average of 20.68 effective disposals per game. Now, of course, effective disposals are not the be all and end all of how good a midfielder is (far from it), but this is an analogy. Can you see the point I'm making?

[Industrial Fan]

If you want to say a player had a great game because they earnt 15 shots on goal regardless of how many of those they kicked then that is up to you.

My exact point is that the number of shots at goal he has is irrelevant! Who cares if he is missing almost as many as he kicks. He is still kicking more goals than any other forward.

Now that is funny.

We are on different tangents (I am happy with my lot, you are in a spiral of despair regarding the state of humanity).

Your suggestion is that given the number of times he kicks for goal, the number he will inevitably kick ensures he is a dominant player. My assertion is that the misses are also relevant.

If Franklin kicks 8 goals, great game. Good luck to him. It is not a great game if he kicks 3 from 15 shots. That is a 20% goal return on I50's (from the contests that he wins...). Hence my example of O'Loughlin in 05 GF. In the context of that game he had twice as many shots than the next forward, but that doesn't mean he had a great (or even good game). There is an opportunity cost to those missed shots (in the same way the midfielder example). ie, if the ball is directed to another forward who kicks the goal.

Either way, the original point was Franklin,Judd, Ablett - consistent. Goodes, inconsistent. Franklin has had some great games. He's leading the Coleman. However, he misses a ridiculous amount of goals, and he's inconsistent.

Look at the Geelong game - he kicked 4.5, put at least another two OOBOTF, and at least one didn't make the distance. He missed goals at critical times and I would say his kicking went a long way towards losing the game for the hawks.

[johnno]

Is that it? Is the argument over? Is Buddy crap or is he a star? Was O'loughlin robbed of a norm Smith? Will we ever learn the truth.

[Industrial Fan]

Yes.

No.

Not yet.

No.

Yes / No.

[BSA5]

Now that is funny.

We are on different tangents (I am happy with my lot, you are in a spiral of despair regarding the state of humanity).

Your suggestion is that given the number of times he kicks for goal, the number he will inevitably kick ensures he is a dominant player. My assertion is that the misses are also relevant.

If Franklin kicks 8 goals, great game. Good luck to him. It is not a great game if he kicks 3 from 15 shots. That is a 20% goal return on I50's (from the contests that he wins...). Hence my example of O'Loughlin in 05 GF. In the context of that game he had twice as many shots than the next forward, but that doesn't mean he had a great (or even good game). There is an opportunity cost to those missed shots (in the same way the midfielder example). ie, if the ball is directed to another forward who kicks the goal.

Either way, the original point was Franklin,Judd, Ablett - consistent. Goodes, inconsistent. Franklin has had some great games. He's leading the Coleman. However, he misses a ridiculous amount of goals, and he's inconsistent.

Look at the Geelong game - he kicked 4.5, put at least another two OOBOTF, and at least one didn't make the distance. He missed goals at critical times and I would say his kicking went a long way towards losing the game for the hawks.

You still don't get it, do you? I'm not saying Buddy is not inconsistent. I'm not saying Buddy doesn't miss a lot of shots. I'm saying, that despite that, he has still kicked an average of 4.8 goals per game this year, and he still creates goals for his teammates on a regular basis. This year, he has been by far the best spearhead in the competition.

That's the difference between Buddy and O'Loughlin. If O'Loughlin had kicked 5 goals in the grand final from 8 shots (roughly what Buddy averages per game), THEN you can draw the comparison with Buddy. He didn't, which is why your analogy is just plain stupid.

[connolly]

That's the difference between Buddy and O'Loughlin. If O'Loughlin had kicked 5 goals in the grand final from 8 shots (roughly what Buddy averages per game), THEN you can draw the comparison with Buddy. He didn't, which is why your analogy is just plain stupid.

So Franklin has more misses and is therefore more inconsistent than Magic. But is a better player. Is there a flaw in this logic? Bad kicking is bad footy. Period.

[Lohengrin]

So Franklin has more misses and is therefore more inconsistent than Magic. But is a better player. Is there a flaw in this logic? Bad kicking is bad footy. Period.

Would you rather a guy kick 2 goals from 3 shots or 5 goals from 10 shots? The latter's team does better because they score more goals and have created more opportunities.

[connolly]

Would you rather a guy kick 2 goals from 3 shots or 5 goals from 10 shots? The latter's team does better because they score more goals and have created more opportunities.

If the player missed fifty percent of his shots and that represented, for example eighty percent of all shots at goal by his team then obviously the former.