Player Watch #37 Matthew Parker - Returned home to WA effective immediately

Remove this Banner Ad

THE THIN MAN said:
It was a most excellent display against GWS, it would be fantastic if he could carve up the Saints this weekend!
Click to expand...
Think he needs to play this week especially with that factor in mind

Will come in with a chip on his shoulder and want to show them that letting him go was a mistake
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Said it before but but I love MP's attitude. Works hard, doesn't give up, hard at the contest. Solid game on Sunday. I'm more positive about him than some here. His disposal was very good on the weekend and I am a believer that people can get better. Maybe he has worked on this and got better or knows his limitations better and chooses better options. Either way people saying he is not best 22 are taking too much of a fixed mindset, he can always improve and maybe that's what we saw on Sunday.
 
Jack5 said:
Said it before but but I love MP's attitude. Works hard, doesn't give up, hard at the contest. Solid game on Sunday. I'm more positive about him than some here. His disposal was very good on the weekend and I am a believer that people can get better. Maybe he has worked on this and got better or knows his limitations better and chooses better options. Either way people saying he is not best 22 are taking too much of a fixed mindset, he can always improve and maybe that's what we saw on Sunday.
Click to expand...


I've had a theory for a while that he really benefits from not having to focus on being a goalsneak who needs to be constantly aware of where his teammates are and how he can hit the scoreboard.

Playing high simplifies all that for him - he just needs to focus on burning opponents with his pace, winning contests in the air and at ground level, getting the ball forward quickly by foot or linking up with others who are running and spreading.

See ball, get ball, do something useful with it.

Under those conditions I reckon he'll thrive. :thumbsu:
 
Rayzorwire said:
I've had a theory for a while that he really benefits from not having to focus on being a goalsneak who needs to be constantly aware of where his teammates are and how he can hit the scoreboard.

Playing high simplifies all that for him - he just needs to focus on burning opponents with his pace, winning contests in the air and at ground level, getting the ball forward quickly by foot or linking up with others who are running and spreading.

See ball, get ball, do something useful with it.

Under those conditions I reckon he'll thrive. :thumbsu:
Click to expand...
High HF is definitely his best position

Now he has his confidence up and playing against the Aints will have him inspired
expecting him to play his best game

13 kicks 8 handballs 5 marks 4 tackles 3 goals
 
I liked what he produced against the Saints- a bit of everything, including hitting the scoreboard.

Ok he’s not going to produce this type of performance every week but I think he could become a permanent medium forward. His defensive pressure is very good, just needs to direct his aggression to the right areas.

Cons are his kicking can be iffy and can give away some frees but reckon he offers more variety, scoring potential (and brings the same defensive capabilities) than a couple of underperforming small forwards.
 
Charlie Pannam said:
I liked what he produced against the Saints- a bit of everything, including hitting the scoreboard.

Ok he’s not going to produce this type of performance every week but I think he could become a permanent medium forward. His defensive pressure is very good, just needs to direct his aggression to the right areas.

Cons are his kicking can be iffy and can give away some frees but reckon he offers more variety, scoring potential (and brings the same defensive capabilities) than a couple of underperforming small forwards.
Click to expand...
Agree he’s probably always going to be around that 20th player selected in the team each week but he certainly Has a crack

Will be prone to some down games but he definitely showcased his upside against the saints
 
Muddiemoose said:
Agree he’s probably always going to be around that 20th player selected in the team each week but he certainly Has a crack

Will be prone to some down games but he definitely showcased his upside against the saints
Click to expand...
👍
Although not young he is inexperienced in AFL games played, so still learning the ropes.
At 188cm he’s a difficult match up too. Bit of a hybrid type, who can play tall/small forward or mid/wing.
As you say not one of the first you are going to pick each week but enough tricks to be in the 22.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

If we are not going to contend, then the reality is, he is not part of our plans moving forward... So why continue to play him.

I would prefer a Cumberland type get a go up forward if that's what he's being asked to play or a RCD/Browne type to part of a midfield group, even if it's not the exact role Parker is currently playing.
 
Hank Heavenly said:
If we are not going to contend, then the reality is, he is not part of our plans moving forward... So why continue to play him.

I would prefer a Cumberland type get a go up forward if that's what he's being asked to play or a RCD/Browne type to part of a midfield group, even if it's not the exact role Parker is currently playing.
Click to expand...
I think it's been well shown that the culture that gets bred by playing kids over others who are performing better (and well) can destroy clubs for years. Would be a bit different if he was over 30 but to put a line through him because of age is the wrong move in my mind
 
Profop said:
I think it's been well shown that the culture that gets bred by playing kids over others who are performing better (and well) can destroy clubs for years. Would be a bit different if he was over 30 but to put a line through him because of age is the wrong move in my mind
Click to expand...
It's a balancing act right.

I'd also argue that it's been shown that topping up and playing mid ranged guys with limited upside can leave a club sitting in no mans land mediocrity for a long time too. Not bottoming out, but never really contending for success.

IMO we have list problems if Parker is best 22, said that all along and it's showing this year.

The midfield isn't good enough if Parker is one of the better performing players. And it's only a matter of time before he regressess to the mean.

The sooner someone like Stack, Banks, Martyn, RCD comes on as a young player to shuffle around the mids, or Prestia, Lambert, Dusty all return from injury and we don't need to play him the better.
 
Hank Heavenly said:
If we are not going to contend, then the reality is, he is not part of our plans moving forward... So why continue to play him.

I would prefer a Cumberland type get a go up forward if that's what he's being asked to play or a RCD/Browne type to part of a midfield group, even if it's not the exact role Parker is currently playing.
Click to expand...
Not sure what is so wrong with Parker. For a bloke that supposedly can't kick he kicked 3 good goals and hit some nice field passes as well. He is tough, had 25 pressure acts, marked the ball and played a very good game. Who is to say that that game won't give him the confidence to go to another level.

The club is still in the process of winning games, I doubt very much that they have thrown in the towel just yet.
 
Hank Heavenly said:
If we are not going to contend, then the reality is, he is not part of our plans moving forward... So why continue to play him.

I would prefer a Cumberland type get a go up forward if that's what he's being asked to play or a RCD/Browne type to part of a midfield group, even if it's not the exact role Parker is currently playing.
Click to expand...
I like what he brings. We already have a gulf of decent players aged between 22-26. He's bringing more to the table than Castagna and Aarts. Ideally Stack and Cumberland force their way into the team.
 
Hank Heavenly said:
If we are not going to contend, then the reality is, he is not part of our plans moving forward... So why continue to play him.

I would prefer a Cumberland type get a go up forward if that's what he's being asked to play or a RCD/Browne type to part of a midfield group, even if it's not the exact role Parker is currently playing.
Click to expand...
He’s only 26 still plenty of footy left in him and if he plays consistently around the level of the last 2 weeks no reason why he couldn’t play for us for a number of years
 
SouthernStripes said:
One of our best on the weekend, Kicked 3 goals, over 20% of our total score and we should drop him? Weird
Click to expand...


Been comfortably in our top-10 both his games, not sure what more people want from him.

If he drops significantly from that standard or gets forced out by younger players tearing up the VFL, so be it.
 
Profop said:
I think it's been well shown that the culture that gets bred by playing kids over others who are performing better (and well) can destroy clubs for years. Would be a bit different if he was over 30 but to put a line through him because of age is the wrong move in my mind
Click to expand...

Grrr said:
Not sure what is so wrong with Parker. For a bloke that supposedly can't kick he kicked 3 good goals and hit some nice field passes as well. He is tough, had 25 pressure acts, marked the ball and played a very good game. Who is to say that that game won't give him the confidence to go to another level.

The club is still in the process of winning games, I doubt very much that they have thrown in the towel just yet.
Click to expand...

tiger_tough said:
I like what he brings. We already have a gulf of decent players aged between 22-26. He's bringing more to the table than Castagna and Aarts. Ideally Stack and Cumberland force their way into the team.
Click to expand...

Muddiemoose said:
He’s only 26 still plenty of footy left in him and if he plays consistently around the level of the last 2 weeks no reason why he couldn’t play for us for a number of years
Click to expand...
I am happy to see the other side of the argument, and at a certain point in time, might not disagree with it tbh...

But we are talking about a bloke who is at his second club, shown what his ceiling is, which is average at best and little to no room for improvement and effectively was the last bloke taken on our list here.
Is he serviceable, hard worker, good effort etc... then yes he is, but is that going to help us go through the process of being the kings, to dropping out and then back to contending again, then the answer to that is no...

So I can see why people are happy to keep persisting with him, and to be fair, it wouldn't be a horrible result, but where we are at right now, it's not in our long term best interests. Again this is based on us basically saying this year is not for us (which is hard to do at round 4).

If we try to rebuild on the run, then what we are actually weighing up is the following:

Known commodity - Matt Parker - little to no improvement left

Unknown commodity - RCD, Cumberland, MRJ, Browne, Sonsie, Biggie even Miller etc.. - potentially massive improvement from at least 1 or two of those

And that's what we need to find out, we know what we get with Parker if we keep him on, but we need to know is it worth persisting with these kids or delisting them and starting again. At worst case, I would guess that one of these kids would, at the very least, be the same value as parker to the team.
 
Hank Heavenly said:
I am happy to see the other side of the argument, and at a certain point in time, might not disagree with it tbh...

But we are talking about a bloke who is at his second club, shown what his ceiling is, which is average at best and little to no room for improvement and effectively was the last bloke taken on our list here.
Is he serviceable, hard worker, good effort etc... then yes he is, but is that going to help us go through the process of being the kings, to dropping out and then back to contending again, then the answer to that is no...

So I can see why people are happy to keep persisting with him, and to be fair, it wouldn't be a horrible result, but where we are at right now, it's not in our long term best interests. Again this is based on us basically saying this year is not for us (which is hard to do at round 4).

If we try to rebuild on the run, then what we are actually weighing up is the following:

Known commodity - Matt Parker - little to no improvement left

Unknown commodity - RCD, Cumberland, MRJ, Browne, Sonsie, Biggie even Miller etc.. - potentially massive improvement from at least 1 or two of those

And that's what we need to find out, we know what we get with Parker if we keep him on, but we need to know is it worth persisting with these kids or delisting them and starting again. At worst case, I would guess that one of these kids would, at the very least, be the same value as parker to the team.
Click to expand...
I think he has potential for more improvement. Absolute worse case he puts pressure on guys like Aarts and Castagna which can only be a good thing.
 
Hank Heavenly said:
I am happy to see the other side of the argument, and at a certain point in time, might not disagree with it tbh...

But we are talking about a bloke who is at his second club, shown what his ceiling is, which is average at best and little to no room for improvement and effectively was the last bloke taken on our list here.
Is he serviceable, hard worker, good effort etc... then yes he is, but is that going to help us go through the process of being the kings, to dropping out and then back to contending again, then the answer to that is no...

So I can see why people are happy to keep persisting with him, and to be fair, it wouldn't be a horrible result, but where we are at right now, it's not in our long term best interests. Again this is based on us basically saying this year is not for us (which is hard to do at round 4).

If we try to rebuild on the run, then what we are actually weighing up is the following:

Known commodity - Matt Parker - little to no improvement left

Unknown commodity - RCD, Cumberland, MRJ, Browne, Sonsie, Biggie even Miller etc.. - potentially massive improvement from at least 1 or two of those

And that's what we need to find out, we know what we get with Parker if we keep him on, but we need to know is it worth persisting with these kids or delisting them and starting again. At worst case, I would guess that one of these kids would, at the very least, be the same value as parker to the team.
Click to expand...
I think you selling him a bit short at the moment. You can only be judged on what you are doing, not because he is at a second club, not because you don't think he is much chop, those opinions don't count if he is putting runs on the board. He has been very good two weeks in a row. If it was round 10 not round 4 and we were travelling poorly as a side I might agree with you, but it is just 3 rounds in and the season is still very much alive, so go with your strongest side.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top