Luke Parker

[older saint]

Things have hit a bit of a road block at Sydney. They have cap issues and he wants $700k a season which they aren't coming to the party with. He is 28 and free agent /out of contract.

With hannebry re negotiating and Carlisle off the books i think this is the type of player we need - a good ball user who can kick goals from the midfield.

Based on where Sydney sit with him and salary cap I would think first round pick and say a Long for Parker would be a great get .

I actually think they will find a way for him to stay, but still ??

[saynta]

Why a pick and a player?

"Geelong's Cam Guthrie, St Kilda's Seb Ross and Sydney's Luke Parker headline the remaining unrestricted free agents currently out of contract for 2022."

Can get him for nothing.

[sainterinsydney]

He can go any club

[saynta]

He can go any club

Yep, sure can.

[older saint]

Why a pick and a player?

"Geelong's Cam Guthrie, St Kilda's Seb Ross and Sydney's Luke Parker headline the remaining unrestricted free agents currently out of contract for 2022."

Can get him for nothing.

Obviously if we can great, but IF we had to trade and may need to for Cap flexibility moving forward and or other reasons that would be why. He is a gun IMO and exactly what we need. Easily worth first round pick and while many rate long i dont and feel he hasn't really found a role at Stkilda, apart from the corridor of hurt, change could be good for both and frees up some cash space too

[saynta]

I can't for the life of me see any reason we would ever have to trade for an unrestricted free agent, which Parker is.

You will need to explain just what you mean by "Cap flexibility moving forward and or other reasons."

[B.M]

If we gave up a first rounder for a 29yo

I would immediately cease supporting the club!!!

[saynta]

If we gave up a first rounder for a 29yo

I would immediately cease supporting the club!!!

Yep. won't have to though, and won't.

[older saint]

I can't for the life of me see any reason we would ever have to trade for an unrestricted free agent, which Parker is.

You will need to explain just what you mean by "Cap flexibility moving forward and or other reasons."

You wouldn't have to however you may. If you sign a free agent your are locked in to the contract you offer - Buddy 10 year deal cannot be renegotiated at any time, and swans may lose Parker due to it. Let's say we sign Parker Free agency and offer $700 per year for 4 years. We must pay him exactly that . There is no ability say as in Hannebery case to renegotiate a contract due to injury, or say the dream of some here, Ben King says I want to come and we need to find cap space.

Dangerfield is the prime example of this and gave Geelong flexibility to recruit others , such as Cameron.

Look it is not something which will often happen and getting someone for nothing is preferable but a big picture position may occasionally see it happen. What I proposed was IF this was the case what would he be worth.

[roskilde]

Aging Swan past his prime?????

Snap him up. 5 year deal. What could possibly go wrong!

[saynta]

I can't for the life of me see any reason we would ever have to trade for an unrestricted free agent, which Parker is.

You will need to explain just what you mean by "Cap flexibility moving forward and or other reasons."

You wouldn't have to however you may. If you sign a free agent your are locked in to the contract you offer - Buddy 10 year deal cannot be renegotiated at any time, and swans may lose Parker due to it. Let's say we sign Parker Free agency and offer $700 per year for 4 years. We must pay him exactly that . There is no ability say as in Hannebery case to renegotiate a contract due to injury, or say the dream of some here, Ben King says I want to come and we need to find cap space.

Dangerfield is the prime example of this and gave Geelong flexibility to recruit others , such as Cameron.

Look it is not something which will often happen and getting someone for nothing is preferable but a big picture position may occasionally see it happen. What I proposed was IF this was the case what would he be worth.

OK. Thanks mate.

[damienc]

Aging Swan past his prime?????

Snap him up. 5 year deal. What could possibly go wrong!

What on earth do you base this op on? Luke Parker is elite in almost every thing he does on the footy field. He would be a serious loss to Sydney and a huge windfall for us. He's neither aging nor past his prime

[roskilde]

Aging Swan past his prime?????

Snap him up. 5 year deal. What could possibly go wrong!

What on earth do you base this op on? Luke Parker is elite in almost every thing he does on the footy field. He would be a serious loss to Sydney and a huge windfall for us. He's neither aging nor past his prime

Let's put it this way he'd be 29 before he played his first game for St. Kilda and would eat up a large chunk of our salary cap. Too often St. Kilda thinks short term not long term. The thinking behind signing him would be the exact same thinking behind signing HIll and Hannebery -- Hill's been serviceable and Hanners has been an utter disaster.

We keep thinking we're closer than we are and just a few pieces of the puzzle away from dominance and it blows up in our face.

[nostalgicsaint]

Aging Swan past his prime?????

Snap him up. 5 year deal. What could possibly go wrong!

What on earth do you base this op on? Luke Parker is elite in almost every thing he does on the footy field. He would be a serious loss to Sydney and a huge windfall for us. He's neither aging nor past his prime

Let's put it this way he'd be 29 before he played his first game for St. Kilda and would eat up a large chunk of our salary cap. Too often St. Kilda thinks short term not long term. The thinking behind signing him would be the exact same thinking behind signing HIll and Hannebery -- Hill's been serviceable and Hanners has been an utter disaster.

We keep thinking we're closer than we are and just a few pieces of the puzzle away from dominance and it blows up in our face.

Posted this in the pendles thread but applies here too.

I dont understand why people on this forum think it is rare, dangerous or unusual to recruit from other clubs.

Yes doing so often means one or multiple of

Paying more
Them coming with some sort of baggage (injury, behaviour or otherwise)
Them being older


Here are some examples of these recruits for you using this year's finalists
Ben Brown (multiple here didn't want him)
Chad Wingard
Isaac Smith
Shaun Higgins
Mitch Robinson
Josh Bruce
Lance Franklin
Shane Mumford
Jake Stringer

All pretty unique pick ups at various stages of the clubs builds towards success.

The alternative is to be passive, take your four draft picks a year and assume you have the best talent ID and development system in the AFL. Even then you need to be super patient as reforming your list will take 10 years.

It isnt just a good idea to trade and look for value opportunities such as this one (or Ryder if you want another old over the hill example) it's crucial.

[roskilde]

Aging Swan past his prime?????

Snap him up. 5 year deal. What could possibly go wrong!

What on earth do you base this op on? Luke Parker is elite in almost every thing he does on the footy field. He would be a serious loss to Sydney and a huge windfall for us. He's neither aging nor past his prime

Let's put it this way he'd be 29 before he played his first game for St. Kilda and would eat up a large chunk of our salary cap. Too often St. Kilda thinks short term not long term. The thinking behind signing him would be the exact same thinking behind signing HIll and Hannebery -- Hill's been serviceable and Hanners has been an utter disaster.

We keep thinking we're closer than we are and just a few pieces of the puzzle away from dominance and it blows up in our face.

Posted this in the pendles thread but applies here too.

I dont understand why people on this forum think it is rare, dangerous or unusual to recruit from other clubs.

Yes doing so often means one or multiple of

Paying more
Them coming with some sort of baggage (injury, behaviour or otherwise)
Them being older


Here are some examples of these recruits for you using this year's finalists
Ben Brown (multiple here didn't want him)
Chad Wingard
Isaac Smith
Shaun Higgins
Mitch Robinson
Josh Bruce
Lance Franklin
Shane Mumford
Jake Stringer

All pretty unique pick ups at various stages of the clubs builds towards success.

The alternative is to be passive, take your four draft picks a year and assume you have the best talent ID and development system in the AFL. Even then you need to be super patient as reforming your list will take 10 years.

It isnt just a good idea to trade and look for value opportunities such as this one (or Ryder if you want another old over the hill example) it's crucial.

I actually saw your post and wanted to comment but just didn't get around to it.

So just to clarify I'm not saying you shouldn't ever recruit from other clubs -- that would be insane. I'm saying that our thinking is short term and that recruiting players in their advancing years is incredibly risky and not wise for teams who are thinking long term. How many elite seasons at his best does Luke Parker have? 1? 2? (Talking on average here who knows he could turn out to be a Rob Harvey/Other Harvey freak who can compete at elite level well into his mid 30's.) Following on from that how many of our own players are denied opportunities to move toward becoming elite by the recruitment of aging stars?

Obviously you have to find a balance and you can't just play all kids all the time but the whole Hannebery experience has left a bad taste in my mouth.

Also I reject the notion of taking draft picks and developing your own talent as 'passive'. Finding the best talent possible and turning them into elite players must be done and it's anything but a passive strategy. I just don't want St. Kilda to be a destination club for players in the twilight of their career who are paid a bucket load.

That having been said I would have recruited a guy like Treloar in a second. Young player with years in front of him. This isn't a rejection of recruiting from other clubs it's a plea that we be sensible and a little more discerning.

[Sanctorum]

Luke Parker is certainly a gun and would be a terrific addition to the St Kilda list, but at 29 I feel he is past the age where he can dominate the game in the way he has at the Swans and his price tag is bound to put pressure on the salary cap which I understand is not flash as it is.

If the list manager wants to bring in an experienced mid I would look at Brad Crouch's brother Matt who has a lot less miles on the clock and not break the bank, as I'm sure he'd relish the prospect of reuniting with Brad and helping the Saints climb the ladder in 2022, unlike the Crows.

[nostalgicsaint]

Aging Swan past his prime?????

Snap him up. 5 year deal. What could possibly go wrong!

What on earth do you base this op on? Luke Parker is elite in almost every thing he does on the footy field. He would be a serious loss to Sydney and a huge windfall for us. He's neither aging nor past his prime

Let's put it this way he'd be 29 before he played his first game for St. Kilda and would eat up a large chunk of our salary cap. Too often St. Kilda thinks short term not long term. The thinking behind signing him would be the exact same thinking behind signing HIll and Hannebery -- Hill's been serviceable and Hanners has been an utter disaster.

We keep thinking we're closer than we are and just a few pieces of the puzzle away from dominance and it blows up in our face.

Posted this in the pendles thread but applies here too.

I dont understand why people on this forum think it is rare, dangerous or unusual to recruit from other clubs.

Yes doing so often means one or multiple of

Paying more
Them coming with some sort of baggage (injury, behaviour or otherwise)
Them being older


Here are some examples of these recruits for you using this year's finalists
Ben Brown (multiple here didn't want him)
Chad Wingard
Isaac Smith
Shaun Higgins
Mitch Robinson
Josh Bruce
Lance Franklin
Shane Mumford
Jake Stringer

All pretty unique pick ups at various stages of the clubs builds towards success.

The alternative is to be passive, take your four draft picks a year and assume you have the best talent ID and development system in the AFL. Even then you need to be super patient as reforming your list will take 10 years.

It isnt just a good idea to trade and look for value opportunities such as this one (or Ryder if you want another old over the hill example) it's crucial.

I actually saw your post and wanted to comment but just didn't get around to it.

So just to clarify I'm not saying you shouldn't ever recruit from other clubs -- that would be insane. I'm saying that our thinking is short term and that recruiting players in their advancing years is incredibly risky and not wise for teams who are thinking long term. How many elite seasons at his best does Luke Parker have? 1? 2? (Talking on average here who knows he could turn out to be a Rob Harvey/Other Harvey freak who can compete at elite level well into his mid 30's.) Following on from that how many of our own players are denied opportunities to move toward becoming elite by the recruitment of aging stars?

Obviously you have to find a balance and you can't just play all kids all the time but the whole Hannebery experience has left a bad taste in my mouth.

Also I reject the notion of taking draft picks and developing your own talent as 'passive'. Finding the best talent possible and turning them into elite players must be done and it's anything but a passive strategy. I just don't want St. Kilda to be a destination club for players in the twilight of their career who are paid a bucket load.

That having been said I would have recruited a guy like Treloar in a second. Young player with years in front of him. This isn't a rejection of recruiting from other clubs it's a plea that we be sensible and a little more discerning.

It all depends on where you think we're at I guess.

I think it is entirely reasonable to aim for the below.

2022- Top 8 finish
2023- Top 6 finish
2024- Top 4 finish

Parker in this scenario offered a 4 year contract would be and to answer the question on the quality of the footy too.

2022- 29- A Grade player (best 10 on our list for sure with arguement for best 5)
2023- 30- B+ Grade player (Best 10 on our list)
2024- 31- B Grade (best 18)
2025- who knows.

Salary wise- we have lose no one to pressure here and I'm confident we manage this well- part of my frustration with people abusing Hanners and Hill is we haven't lost anyone due to their pay packets- so why is everyone so obsessed with how much they're paid?

Your point regarding the draft is fair- we're not giving up a pick here though, the cost would be a late selection we don't take due to not having space on the list. (unlikely given the amount of free spots we have)

[Ghost Like]

The additional aspect to getting Parker is that Hannebery is likely gone after 2022, unless he wants to play for match fees. Another year of games into Bytel, Byrnes, Gresham, Higgins & 2021 Draft first round draft pick. Another front ended deal.

Parker would complement Steele & Crouch. If we need to win a clearance late in a match, I'd like to see Ryder, Steele, Parker and Crouch in there with Jones & DMac off a wing and Hill & Sinclair off the back half.

[B.M]

It’s a no from me X

[B.M]

Jones and Gresham are seen as inside Mids

I would like to see
Crouch, Steele and Gresham

[skeptic]

Dunstan is gone
Ross is possibly going
Hannebery will be cut end of 2022

If rd1 2023 sees those 3 out and Parker in… I think that’s a win

[Impatient Sainter]

If Parker was 25-26 everyone would be in raptures with the chance of recruiting him. I'm like others where I dont see us challenging for a flag for 3 or 4 years and would rather be looking at bringing in younger quality players to ensure some sustained sucess.

To offer a 29 yo a 4 contract on big dollars is the sort of stuff that has crippled our club for decades.

Watch Sydney in the finals, he will play well but he wont win them a flag. It will be their younger brigade coming through that will get the there in years to come. Those whom they will be able to keep together because stupid clubs like ours insist on being their players superannuation policy.

So it's a huge no from me!!!

[shanegrambeau]

Parker is an out and out star..
Walk up starting player in any team
Had another good year

Would be a great addition…

SuperCoach Price 588K after Rnd 23

Seb (no offence) 370K

Moreover, he’s had broken bones and compartment syndrome but I don’t see a history of hammies like our other Sydney recruits.

Needless to say, we won’t get him…but just because Hanners didn’t work out and Jones is still a 50/50, it does t mean Parker wouldn’t be great IMO

[st.byron]

Aging Swan past his prime?????

Snap him up. 5 year deal. What could possibly go wrong!

What on earth do you base this op on? Luke Parker is elite in almost every thing he does on the footy field. He would be a serious loss to Sydney and a huge windfall for us. He's neither aging nor past his prime

Let's put it this way he'd be 29 before he played his first game for St. Kilda and would eat up a large chunk of our salary cap. Too often St. Kilda thinks short term not long term. The thinking behind signing him would be the exact same thinking behind signing HIll and Hannebery -- Hill's been serviceable and Hanners has been an utter disaster.

We keep thinking we're closer than we are and just a few pieces of the puzzle away from dominance and it blows up in our face.

Agree with you. Long term strategy needs to be foremost. That said Parker would be a good get.

[Wayne42]

If Parker was 25-26 everyone would be in raptures with the chance of recruiting him. I'm like others where I dont see us challenging for a flag for 3 or 4 years and would rather be looking at bringing in younger quality players to ensure some sustained sucess.

To offer a 29 yo a 4 contract on big dollars is the sort of stuff that has crippled our club for decades.

Watch Sydney in the finals, he will play well but he wont win them a flag. It will be their younger brigade coming through that will get the there in years to come. Those whom they will be able to keep together because stupid clubs like ours insist on being their players superannuation policy.

So it's a huge no from me!!!

I agree with your thoughts, we don't need another superannuant, especially whilst we are carrying a couple of others.