He's too old. A Superannuant wanting an easy payout. Washed up has-been etc etc etc.
None of those comments about Ryder aged very well.
And that is an understatement.
Just saying.
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
It's interesting that you mention Matt Crouch.Sanctorum wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 5:54pm 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.
Ryder is not on 700k per season and didnt ask for a 4 year contract! Parker is being greedy thats why Sydney would be prepared to let him go! There is no doubt he would be a solid player, but our list is not that far advanced. If we are going to pay that money target younger OOC players like Hopper.damienc wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 9:08pm A lot of people on this thread are recycling the kinds of comments towards Luke Parker that were made when we recruited Paddy Ryder.
He's too old. A Superannuant wanting an easy payout. Washed up has-been etc etc etc.
None of those comments about Ryder aged very well.
And that is an understatement.
Just saying.
![]()
I think if Seb and Josh leave it won't have anything to do with Luke Parker coming to the Saints.Impatient Sainter wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 9:25pmRyder is not on 700k per season and didnt ask for a 4 year contract! Parker is being greedy thats why Sydney would be prepared to let him go! There is no doubt he would be a solid player, but our list is not that far advanced. If we are going to pay that money target younger OOC players like Hopper.damienc wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 9:08pm A lot of people on this thread are recycling the kinds of comments towards Luke Parker that were made when we recruited Paddy Ryder.
He's too old. A Superannuant wanting an easy payout. Washed up has-been etc etc etc.
None of those comments about Ryder aged very well.
And that is an understatement.
Just saying.
![]()
Havent we learnt anything from the Hannebrey & Hill examples? Their own clubs dont want to pay them their asking salary so they squeeze them out. Just like what will happen with Seb Ross & most likely Josh Battle if Parker moves.
That's true. But how much longer does Paddy have? And who do we have to replace him? No-one except from Heath who may or not turn out to be okay.damienc wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 9:08pm A lot of people on this thread are recycling the kinds of comments towards Luke Parker that were made when we recruited Paddy Ryder.
He's too old. A Superannuant wanting an easy payout. Washed up has-been etc etc etc.
None of those comments about Ryder aged very well.
And that is an understatement.
Just saying.
![]()
st.byron wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 9:35pmThat's true. But how much longer does Paddy have? And who do we have to replace him? No-one except from Heath who may or not turn out to be okay.damienc wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 9:08pm A lot of people on this thread are recycling the kinds of comments towards Luke Parker that were made when we recruited Paddy Ryder.
He's too old. A Superannuant wanting an easy payout. Washed up has-been etc etc etc.
None of those comments about Ryder aged very well.
And that is an understatement.
Just saying.
![]()
How much money will Parker want?
Maybe 3 - 4 years left as a quality, influential mid. Maybe.
Do we pay him heaps and give him a spot in the team, keeping a potentially developing player out, then to be left with a hole in 3 years?
No guarantee any of this will happen, just speculating. I'd just be careful about offering 28 - 29 year olds big deals. If his bill is not expensive, then okay.
If we're going to stretch the salary cap with another high priced recruit, then I'd prefer someone who's got another 6 years plus in them. Someone coming into or in their prime, not in the last 30% of their career.
How much salary cap space do you think we have? If we are to pay Parker 700k per year something has to give!damienc wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 9:35pmI think if Seb and Josh leave it won't have anything to do with Luke Parker coming to the Saints.Impatient Sainter wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 9:25pmRyder is not on 700k per season and didnt ask for a 4 year contract! Parker is being greedy thats why Sydney would be prepared to let him go! There is no doubt he would be a solid player, but our list is not that far advanced. If we are going to pay that money target younger OOC players like Hopper.damienc wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 9:08pm A lot of people on this thread are recycling the kinds of comments towards Luke Parker that were made when we recruited Paddy Ryder.
He's too old. A Superannuant wanting an easy payout. Washed up has-been etc etc etc.
None of those comments about Ryder aged very well.
And that is an understatement.
Just saying.
![]()
Havent we learnt anything from the Hannebrey & Hill examples? Their own clubs dont want to pay them their asking salary so they squeeze them out. Just like what will happen with Seb Ross & most likely Josh Battle if Parker moves.
The issues relating to them have more to do with our current list.
Being realistic, it is more likely than not that Sydney will find a way to keep him.
But I think I am on pretty strong grounds in saying that if Luke Parker were to come to the Saints he would instantly make us a much better team in the same way Paddy Ryder has.
He is an A grade midfielder. One of the very best in the AFL. Elite in just about every category you can name.
In fairness a decent chunk of those missed games weren't related to his age at all.
I have some jousting sticks for saledamienc wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 9:42pmst.byron wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 9:35pmThat's true. But how much longer does Paddy have? And who do we have to replace him? No-one except from Heath who may or not turn out to be okay.damienc wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 9:08pm A lot of people on this thread are recycling the kinds of comments towards Luke Parker that were made when we recruited Paddy Ryder.
He's too old. A Superannuant wanting an easy payout. Washed up has-been etc etc etc.
None of those comments about Ryder aged very well.
And that is an understatement.
Just saying.
![]()
How much money will Parker want?
Maybe 3 - 4 years left as a quality, influential mid. Maybe.
Do we pay him heaps and give him a spot in the team, keeping a potentially developing player out, then to be left with a hole in 3 years?
No guarantee any of this will happen, just speculating. I'd just be careful about offering 28 - 29 year olds big deals. If his bill is not expensive, then okay.
If we're going to stretch the salary cap with another high priced recruit, then I'd prefer someone who's got another 6 years plus in them. Someone coming into or in their prime, not in the last 30% of their career.
Luke Parker is the type of player who would help us win a premiership.
Not in six years but in two years or less.
I don't think I am the only one who thinks that.
I might be the only one on this thread who thinks it but I can live with that consequence.![]()
How about being in no position to make a play for Treloar coz we already had Hannebery and Hill.nostalgicsaint wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 10:06pm Can those of you complaining about his potential salary point me in the direction of a player we've lost due to salary cap pressure?
From what I can gather we have room to make exactly this sort of play, our alternative is to overpay someone or multiple people as we have in the past (billings, dunstan)
The only knock which makes sense to me is he will be taking a younger developing players spot, which would make sense if we weren't about to let Ross and Dunstan go...
Parker will be a pretty bloody good player to learn from too i would have thought.
Ouch.st.byron wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 10:16pmHow about being in no position to make a play for Treloar coz we already had Hannebery and Hill.nostalgicsaint wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 10:06pm Can those of you complaining about his potential salary point me in the direction of a player we've lost due to salary cap pressure?
From what I can gather we have room to make exactly this sort of play, our alternative is to overpay someone or multiple people as we have in the past (billings, dunstan)
The only knock which makes sense to me is he will be taking a younger developing players spot, which would make sense if we weren't about to let Ross and Dunstan go...
Parker will be a pretty bloody good player to learn from too i would have thought.
I am with you. Parker is a gun. Wins games. We lack a player who wins tight games for us. I think the chance of getting Parker is close to zero unless he is great mates with Dan and Zac. He is a genuine star like our captain.damienc wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 9:42pmst.byron wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 9:35pmThat's true. But how much longer does Paddy have? And who do we have to replace him? No-one except from Heath who may or not turn out to be okay.damienc wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 9:08pm A lot of people on this thread are recycling the kinds of comments towards Luke Parker that were made when we recruited Paddy Ryder.
He's too old. A Superannuant wanting an easy payout. Washed up has-been etc etc etc.
None of those comments about Ryder aged very well.
And that is an understatement.
Just saying.
![]()
How much money will Parker want?
Maybe 3 - 4 years left as a quality, influential mid. Maybe.
Do we pay him heaps and give him a spot in the team, keeping a potentially developing player out, then to be left with a hole in 3 years?
No guarantee any of this will happen, just speculating. I'd just be careful about offering 28 - 29 year olds big deals. If his bill is not expensive, then okay.
If we're going to stretch the salary cap with another high priced recruit, then I'd prefer someone who's got another 6 years plus in them. Someone coming into or in their prime, not in the last 30% of their career.
Luke Parker is the type of player who would help us win a premiership.
Not in six years but in two years or less.
I don't think I am the only one who thinks that.
I might be the only one on this thread who thinks it but I can live with that consequence.![]()
Good call, although were we even keen?st.byron wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 10:16pmHow about being in no position to make a play for Treloar coz we already had Hannebery and Hill.nostalgicsaint wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 10:06pm Can those of you complaining about his potential salary point me in the direction of a player we've lost due to salary cap pressure?
From what I can gather we have room to make exactly this sort of play, our alternative is to overpay someone or multiple people as we have in the past (billings, dunstan)
The only knock which makes sense to me is he will be taking a younger developing players spot, which would make sense if we weren't about to let Ross and Dunstan go...
Parker will be a pretty bloody good player to learn from too i would have thought.
They're identified as the best players by that measure yes.Impatient Sainter wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 11:41pm These are the players that win you games and its no coincidence that all of them apart from (Steele) were drafted by the club they have excelled at. Steele was a 20 year old when he was traded to St Kilda.
AFLCA Champion Player of the Year Award - Top 10
114 Clayton Oliver MELB
101 Marcus Bontempelli WB
101 Ollie Wines PORT
100 Jack Steele STK
97 Touk Miller GCFC
92 Sam Walsh CARL
91 Zach Merrett ESS
86 Christian Petracca MELB
81 Darcy Parish ESS
74 Rory Laird ADEL
Look at the players Richmond targetted Lynch, Prestia and Houli all with years and games ahead of them. Parker last made the All Australian side or top 10 in Coaches Award.
Oh ye of little faith. Especially in our recruiters. I thought they were pretty smart in picking Sharman who literally came from nowhere.Impatient Sainter wrote: ↑Fri 27 Aug 2021 1:02am The issue with Parker is he doesnt address our lack of midfield leg speed. Its ok if we have the ball, but 50% of the the time the opposition are in possession and he is not a huge pressure player. In fact Dunstan has averaged more tackles per game than him.
Then knowing St Kilda as we do, if they get Parker as a UFA. They will get smart at the draft and reach to pick up some KPP donkey in a midfielders draft with our first round pick.
Ouch what? Sorry Treloar is not worth 900K. Even if we had no Hannebery or Hill and we had the money, he is still not worth 900K. Those were his terms whichever club took him. That is the point I would have thought.Wayne42 wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 10:20pmOuch.st.byron wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 10:16pmHow about being in no position to make a play for Treloar coz we already had Hannebery and Hill.nostalgicsaint wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 10:06pm Can those of you complaining about his potential salary point me in the direction of a player we've lost due to salary cap pressure?
From what I can gather we have room to make exactly this sort of play, our alternative is to overpay someone or multiple people as we have in the past (billings, dunstan)
The only knock which makes sense to me is he will be taking a younger developing players spot, which would make sense if we weren't about to let Ross and Dunstan go...
Parker will be a pretty bloody good player to learn from too i would have thought.
What you are selling I ain't buying.st.byron wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 10:14pmI have some jousting sticks for saledamienc wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 9:42pmst.byron wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 9:35pmThat's true. But how much longer does Paddy have? And who do we have to replace him? No-one except from Heath who may or not turn out to be okay.damienc wrote: ↑Thu 26 Aug 2021 9:08pm A lot of people on this thread are recycling the kinds of comments towards Luke Parker that were made when we recruited Paddy Ryder.
He's too old. A Superannuant wanting an easy payout. Washed up has-been etc etc etc.
None of those comments about Ryder aged very well.
And that is an understatement.
Just saying.
![]()
How much money will Parker want?
Maybe 3 - 4 years left as a quality, influential mid. Maybe.
Do we pay him heaps and give him a spot in the team, keeping a potentially developing player out, then to be left with a hole in 3 years?
No guarantee any of this will happen, just speculating. I'd just be careful about offering 28 - 29 year olds big deals. If his bill is not expensive, then okay.
If we're going to stretch the salary cap with another high priced recruit, then I'd prefer someone who's got another 6 years plus in them. Someone coming into or in their prime, not in the last 30% of their career.
Luke Parker is the type of player who would help us win a premiership.
Not in six years but in two years or less.
I don't think I am the only one who thinks that.
I might be the only one on this thread who thinks it but I can live with that consequence.![]()