Scott Pendlebury - Standing in the game?

[carlton_99]

From 2000 onwards imo:
1. Gary Ablett Jnr
2. Lance Franklin
3. Chris Judd
4. Scott Pendlebury

10

Scott Pendlebury

Age

36

Ht

191cm

Wt

86kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

26.5

5star

K

13.2

5star

HB

13.3

5star

M

4.1

4star

T

4.9

5star

CL

4.9

5star

D

25.1

5star

K

12.3

5star

HB

12.9

5star

M

3.4

3star

T

2.3

3star

CL

3.6

4star

D

12.4

4star

K

7.6

3star

HB

4.8

4star

M

5.8

5star

T

2.6

4star

 

[OniAu]

Pendlebury was top 3 in the comp in GAJ and Franklins better years. Says enough to me.

No real glaring weaknesses in his game.

Was a ripper draft.

Murphy Thomas Ellis Pendlebury Kennedy




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

In the 2000s

1 - GAJ
2 - Judd
3 - Buddy
4 - Hodge
6 - Dusty
7 - Voss
8 - N Reiwoltd
9 - Selwood
10 - Pavlich
11 - Pendles

 

[Mr Meow]

See Dusty threads for exhibit 2.

Yes, the Dusty thread is the same thing. Cleany, MR and Noidy (RIP) denigrating every other champion to place Martin higher. It is a sad approach to respecting your club legends, trying to throw all others under the bus.

I don't see a massive amount of difference between Pendlebury and Martin, they both have strength and weaknesses. Ultimately you would love to have both in the team. Pendles the conductor, orchestrating everything and then Dusty the destroyer as an ultra attacking mid who can rotate forward.

Pendles has consistency and more elite seasons, Dusty at his peak was more damaging and has a better peak 4 year block of finals.

 

[Fadge]

In the 2000s

1 - GAJ
2 - Judd
3 - Buddy
4 - Hodge
6 - Dusty
7 - Voss
8 - N Reiwoltd
9 - Selwood
10 - Pavlich
11 - Pendles

Did you intentionally exclude a #5 to ensure Pendlebury was outside your top 10?

Any reason why you have Voss as the only player to have debuted well before 2000?

If you have Hodge as your #4, you must be able to see why many rate Pendlebury as their #4, given you're in the minority when rating Hodge ahead of Pendlebury?

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

Did you intentionally exclude a #5 to ensure Pendlebury was outside your top 10?

Any reason why you have Voss as the only player to have debuted well before 2000?

If you have Hodge as your #4, you must be able to see why many rate Pendlebury as their #4, given you're in the minority when rating Hodge ahead of Pendlebury?

It's a personal opinion, no need to get upset

 

[BomberManU]

Just a fantastic player and a real joy to watch him play. Not sure if one great game this year is 'turning back the clock', but he has runs on the board, so no reason why he wouldn't produce more games like that. Even if he has a mediocre season, he'd be first picked in their finals lineup, I reckon.

 

[BF Tiger]

Yes, the Dusty thread is the same thing. Cleany, MR and Noidy (RIP) denigrating every other champion to place Martin higher. It is a sad approach to respecting your club legends, trying to throw all others under the bus.

I don't see a massive amount of difference between Pendlebury and Martin, they both have strength and weaknesses. Ultimately you would love to have both in the team. Pendles the conductor, orchestrating everything and then Dusty the destroyer as an ultra attacking mid who can rotate forward.

Pendles has consistency and more elite seasons, Dusty at his peak was more damaging and has a better peak 4 year block of finals.

It’s almost like you have no self-awareness.

 

[Cyclops]

How do you rate "best"? Has to be some mix of quality and quantity. If the algorithm favours quantity then Pendles has had few games below 8/10, and is among the top handful this century. If quality matters more, Dusty has a couple of finals series where he moved the Earth.

Its the Buckley vs Hird argument all over again. You could say Hirds best was 11/10 (I know it makes no sense, neither did his ability) but you have to stack up his injured periods and quiet games. Buckley played less quiet quarters than Hird played quiet games, his best was 9/10 but his average was 8.9/10.

Ablett Jnr had rare consistency and rare skill. Pendles and Bont have something like that balance, Pendles not as brilliant, Bont not as consistent.

Pendles doing it across three decades so far is pretty extraordinary though. Approaching Buckley levels of greatness as a Pie, and thankfully more luck with flags.

 

[Mr Meow]

It’s almost like you have no self-awareness.

Luckily we have you for such insightful observations (commenting on comments, rather than having actual opinions - that has always been your go to), and that you are definitely not blind to the inflammatory troll efforts of your peers. Ablett (either), Pendlebury, Carey, Franklin, Judd, Voss and dozens of others - none have been safe from the slinging of ridiculous insults by the posters I mentioned in an effort to elevate Martin. It is pathetic and has warranted every bit of pushback it has received.

 

[Mr Meow]

How do you rate "best"? Has to be some mix of quality and quantity. If the algorithm favours quantity then Pendles has had few games below 8/10, and is among the top handful this century. If quality matters more, Dusty has a couple of finals series where he moved the Earth.

Its the Buckley vs Hird argument all over again. You could say Hirds best was 11/10 (I know it makes no sense, neither did his ability) but you have to stack up his injured periods and quiet games. Buckley played less quiet quarters than Hird played quiet games, his best was 9/10 but his average was 8.9/10.

Ablett Jnr had rare consistency and rare skill. Pendles and Bont have something like that balance, Pendles not as brilliant, Bont not as consistent.

Pendles doing it across three decades so far is pretty extraordinary though. Approaching Buckley levels of greatness as a Pie, and thankfully more luck with flags.

Exactly.

In that respect Martin has been more like Hird. And Buckley more like an Ablett or Bontempelli. Pendlebury has been like Selwood in remarkable top level consistency, but perhaps never being in the best couple of players in the comp.

 

[Gavin Excell]

How do you rate "best"? Has to be some mix of quality and quantity. If the algorithm favours quantity then Pendles has had few games below 8/10, and is among the top handful this century. If quality matters more, Dusty has a couple of finals series where he moved the Earth.

Its the Buckley vs Hird argument all over again. You could say Hirds best was 11/10 (I know it makes no sense, neither did his ability) but you have to stack up his injured periods and quiet games. Buckley played less quiet quarters than Hird played quiet games, his best was 9/10 but his average was 8.9/10.

Ablett Jnr had rare consistency and rare skill. Pendles and Bont have something like that balance, Pendles not as brilliant, Bont not as consistent.

Pendles doing it across three decades so far is pretty extraordinary though. Approaching Buckley levels of greatness as a Pie, and thankfully more luck with flags.

Longevity and performing for a high level over a period of time must come into it

 

[Mr Meow]

It’s almost like you have no self-awareness.

As a reminder of my actual opinion, in case you want to comment on how you see it differently rather than making a lazy personal attack with no comment on footballing matters whatsoever:

I don't see a massive amount of difference between Pendlebury and Martin, they both have strength and weaknesses. Ultimately you would love to have both in the team. Pendles the conductor, orchestrating everything and then Dusty the destroyer as an ultra attacking mid who can rotate forward.

Pendles has consistency and more elite seasons, Dusty at his peak was more damaging and has a better peak 4 year block of finals.

 

[Mr Meow]

Longevity and performing for a high level over a period of time must come into it

This is where most disagreements come, oddly it it is usually between Richmond supporters and everyone else.

One side says the number of elite seasons and being in the best players in the comp counts, the other says that only who played at the very highest level in their best couple of seasons counts.

There is surely some room for nuance at landing in the middle.

 

[Fadge]

It's a personal opinion, no need to get upset

Who's upset?

All I saw is the fact I was pointing out some errors and inconsistencies in your post.

 

[Mr Meow]

Who's upset?

All I saw is the fact I was pointing out some errors and inconsistencies in your post.

"Here is a bullet point verdict with no explanation"

"Would you care to elaborate? It could be an interesting discussion"

"Hahahahaha! You salty flog!!! You cannot handle the heat I bring. My devastating post has left you in tatters"

"Okay"

 

[Madblue]

Pendles has been a great player no doubt but clearly should have retired after last years GF win. Its sad to see great players go on one season too many

 

[Gavin Excell]

Pendles has been a great player no doubt but clearly should have retired after last years GF win. Its sad to see great players go on one season too many

Really?

 

[Pies No 1]

Most are touching on his playing ability. But how about his leadership and public image. Has there ever been one bad word said against this guy?

A lot of other players in these lists mentioned above have had their name's dirtied for various reasons. Even Judd with the eye poke incidents. Can't name a time Pendles has ever had any dirt on him. The man is Saintly and this should be taken into account in terms of where he is ranked. He's old school.. reminds me of a 1950's player in his mental, a genuine, nice person.. Not like these man baby party boys.

 

[Fadge]

Really?

Carlton use list spots for the likes of the perennially injured Cunningham, Marchbank, Martin, etc., but Collingwood are wasting a list spot by carrying Pendlebury (without whom I reckon we'd be 4 wins, 6 losses as opposed to 6.5/3.5.

Wowee.

 

[Back One Out]

In the 2000s

1 - GAJ
2 - Judd
3 - Buddy
4 - Hodge
6 - Dusty
7 - Voss
8 - N Reiwoltd
9 - Selwood
10 - Pavlich
11 - Pendles

Sam Mitchell, one of the best ball users ever, a midfield genius like Diesel Williams.

5 best and fairests (10 x Top 3) in a talent-stacked team which lived in the top 4 for close to a decade.
4 premierships (captain '08)
Brownlow Medal (3rd most Brownlow votes ever behind Ablett and Danger)
Unlucky not to win 2 Norm Smiths (r/up in 2014, 2015)

Mitchell and Hodge were the driving forces behind the Hawks domination during Clarkson era
Thery were a pair of onfield coaches, leading the way and directing teammates.

All the other players you listed 'looked' better than Mitchell - quicker, better athletes, etc... Sammy was slow as treacle, but he had eyes in the back of his head and was rarely tackled, pivoting with ease off either foot and surgically spearing lace-out passes inside fifty off the left or right foot onto the chest of Buddy, Roughie, Gunston, Breust, Cyril, Poppy, etc.

It mystifies me why Sam Mitchell ALWAYS gets overlooked when people discuss the modern-day greats.

 

[Cam Payne]

He's the most important basketballer to ever play our game.

 

[Fadge]

Sam Mitchell, one of the best ball users ever, a midfield genius like Diesel Williams.

5 best and fairests (10 x Top 3)
4 premierships (captain '08)
Brownlow Medal (3rd most Brownlow votes ever behind Ablett and Danger)
Unlucky not to win 2 Norm Smiths (r/up in 2014, 2015)

Mitchell and Hodge were the driving forces behind the Hawks domination during Clarkson era
Thery were a pair of onfield coaches, leading the way and directing teammates.

All the other players you listed 'looked' better than Mitchell - quicker, better athletes, etc... Sammy was slow as treacle, but he had eyes in the back of his head and was rarely tackled, pivoting with ease off either foot and surgically spearing lace-out passes inside fifty off the left or right foot onto the chest of Buddy, Roughie, Gunston, Breust, Cyril, Poppy, etc.

Makes me laugh how Sam Mitchell ALWAYS gets overlooked in threads like these...

Great player, but who would you have him ahead of from the list you quoted?

 

[Mr Meow]

Sam Mitchell, one of the best ball users ever, a midfield genius like Diesel Williams.

5 best and fairests (10 x Top 3) in a talent-stacked team which lived in the top 4 for close to a decade.
4 premierships (captain '08)
Brownlow Medal (3rd most Brownlow votes ever behind Ablett and Danger)
Unlucky not to win 2 Norm Smiths (r/up in 2014, 2015)

Mitchell and Hodge were the driving forces behind the Hawks domination during Clarkson era
Thery were a pair of onfield coaches, leading the way and directing teammates.

All the other players you listed 'looked' better than Mitchell - quicker, better athletes, etc... Sammy was slow as treacle, but he had eyes in the back of his head and was rarely tackled, pivoting with ease off either foot and surgically spearing lace-out passes inside fifty off the left or right foot onto the chest of Buddy, Roughie, Gunston, Breust, Cyril, Poppy, etc.

It mystifies me why Sam Mitchell ALWAYS gets overlooked when people discuss the modern-day greats.

Not by me, but it is a good way to sort out people with no idea from the rest.

Mitchell is one of the best midfielders this century has seen so far.

 

[beerbandit]

It's a personal opinion, no need to get upset

He was just pointing out you didn’t name a number #6 in your list and then put Pendles at #11 so in actual fact he would be a top 10 player for you, unless now you will just add another player to stir the pot?

Don’t think it’s really meant to be that sort of thread Walshy.