Traded #26 Luke Parker

[Kennedy Parker]

Luke Parker
Luke Parker

26

Luke Parker

Age

32

Ht

183cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

24.2

5star

K

12.6

5star

HB

11.6

5star

M

3.8

4star

T

5.6

5star

CL

5.8

5star

D

22.1

5star

K

12.3

5star

HB

9.9

5star

M

3.9

4star

T

5.0

5star

CL

5.5

5star

D

21.2

5star

K

11.4

4star

HB

9.8

5star

M

2.0

3star

T

8.0

5star

CL

5.2

5star

has plenty of football ahead and has already compiled a resume packed with impressive achievements. Since landing at the Sydney Swans via the 2010 AFL Draft, he has won a 2012 premiership medal, earned All Australian selection and won two Bob Skilton medals. In 2015, he was added to the club’s leadership group at the age of just 22, and has led the team as a co-captain alongside Josh Kennedy and Dane Rampe

24

Dane Rampe

Age

34

Ht

187cm

Wt

89kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

17.0

4star

K

10.6

4star

HB

6.4

4star

M

4.9

5star

T

2.5

4star

MG

358.8

5star

D

14.1

3star

K

9.0

4star

HB

5.1

3star

M

3.4

3star

T

1.5

2star

MG

284.5

4star

D

10.6

3star

K

7.2

3star

HB

3.4

3star

M

2.4

3star

T

1.4

4star

since 2019. While Parker is among the league’s elite midfielders, his strong marking and expert game awareness make him a genuine threat when rotating through the forward line.

Luke Parker

26

Luke Parker

Age

32

Ht

183cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

24.2

5star

K

12.6

5star

HB

11.6

5star

M

3.8

4star

T

5.6

5star

CL

5.8

5star

D

22.1

5star

K

12.3

5star

HB

9.9

5star

M

3.9

4star

T

5.0

5star

CL

5.5

5star

D

21.2

5star

K

11.4

4star

HB

9.8

5star

M

2.0

3star

T

8.0

5star

CL

5.2

5star

DOB: 25 October 1992
DEBUT: 2011
DRAFT: #40, 2010 National Draft
RECRUITED FROM: Langwarrin (Vic)/Dandenong U18

Luke Parker | AFL

Follow Luke Parker's progress through AFL

www.sydneyswans.com.au

 

[LukeParkerno1]

what nonsense.

He's not worth much to us. But he's been a good and loyal servant. Thank him for his service and look at the next player. Its not unders. We arent going to offer him a new contract. Its a years service as a fringe player. thats about 45-rookie.

A 4th rounder is huge unders sorry but it is. 44 is about right and we'd be fine with that, 25 was the pipe dream. What did we give the Pies for Taylor Adams again? 44 with a swap next year to suit both sides.

 

[Kbroome]

Yep which is why I'd reluctantly accept it. 3 picks before a Cochran bid not that I rate Cochran much. On basic terms we'd have 19, 21, 44, then Cohran. We'd have to delist one more (probably Jacob Konstanty I wouldn't but think that's what they do)

With some basic bid matching in place we will have 22, 25 , 39 and Cochran by trading Parker and delisting Konstanty. I think thats a pretty good draft hand whilst also having potential to trade the 39 out to acquire points for next year

 

[LukeParkerno1]

With some basic bid matching in place we will have 22, 25 , 39 and Cochran by trading Parker and delisting Konstanty. I think thats a pretty good draft hand whilst also having potential to trade the 39 out to acquire points for next year

I'd keep the 39 this year, purely as the new rules come in next year with trading two years in advance. 39 this year is a mid 20's next year. I have to say uless it massively improves next year looks an abysmal draft and I'm being kind. Would not even take a live pick at all next year.

 

[SM]

what nonsense.

He's not worth much to us. But he's been a good and loyal servant. Thank him for his service and look at the next player. Its not unders. We arent going to offer him a new contract. Its a years service as a fringe player. thats about 45-rookie.

Aren't we?

If we ended up keeping him and he played 15-20 games and was injury free I don't see why we wouldn't offer him a new contract. We offered Rampe a two year deal didn't we? It'd be on reduced money but that's pretty obvious.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Aren't we?

If we ended up keeping him and he played 15-20 games and was injury free I don't see why we wouldn't offer him a new contract. We offered Rampe a two year deal didn't we? It'd be on reduced money but that's pretty obvious.

Personally a pick in the 60's is worth zilch we get nothing out of it. Could just keep him as the sub and play his 300th for us if that's the value. Pick 44 is probably worth it to trade (allows us options to trade it, flip it, or take the selection)

 

[Kbroome]

I'd keep the 39 this year, purely as the new rules come in next year with trading two years in advance. 39 this year is a mid 20's next year. I have to say uless it massively improves next year looks an abysmal draft and I'm being kind. Would not even take a live pick at all next year.

Need as much as we can get to match the academy boys next year so an F2 would be a great deal for pick 39

 

[bedford]

I'd keep the 39 this year, purely as the new rules come in next year with trading two years in advance. 39 this year is a mid 20's next year. I have to say uless it massively improves next year looks an abysmal draft and I'm being kind. Would not even take a live pick at all next year.

Your wasting draft posts on here with your mate

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Need as much as we can get to match the academy boys next year so an F2 would be a great deal for pick 39

We can do that with 2026 and 2027 picks too. I'm taking the pick in the MUCH better draft which is this year.

 

[Superstar swan]

IMO the club is putting up a fight in regards to the trade out of respect for Luke . Trying to appear they still value him highly and not being thrown away like a piece of rubbish

 

[Kbroome]

We can do that with 2026 and 2027 picks too. I'm taking the pick in the MUCH better draft which is this year.

Okay and what happens with the current 3 players in the 2026 draft class are they just not going to be available to us. Given the Tassie entry as well it will be hard to trade back into drafts in the future. So much rather trade out of 2024.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Okay and what happens with the current 3 players in the 2026 draft class are they just not going to be available to us. Given the Tassie entry as well it will be hard to trade back into drafts in the future. So much rather trade out of 2024.

We can make decisions then, I'll be blunt and kind, I actually don't rate next year's draft one single bit, now this might change but at this stage that's my call. Tassie will want more picks, they are ripe for fleecing go GC style.

Feel we want 3 live picks this year

 

[giantsully]

I'm quite happy to reward a faithful warrior with a sweetheart deal. The part that galls me is Clarkson outrageously calling this out mid-season and still getting his wish - he really is a piece of work.

 

[bedford]

I'm quite happy to reward a faithful warrior with a sweetheart deal. The part that galls me is Clarkson outrageously calling this out mid-season and still getting his wish - he really is a piece of work.

A very clever piece of work and he wins grand finals

 

[Kiama Chris]

44 might give us 3 picks before the Cochran bid who should not be bidded on before 50 plus

I doubt we want 4 in the draft, especially in the forties.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I doubt we want 4 in the draft, especially in the forties.

The one in the 40’s will come in to the late 30’s.

Could take 3 live then Cochran

 

[caesar88]

I feel like Parker would want to go to North more than North would want to get Parker. So I really don't think we have much bargaining power here and out of respect to Parker should just accept whatever we can get to help get the deal done.

 

[hairy biker]

I feel like Parker would want to go to North more than North would want to get Parker. So I really don't think we have much bargaining power here and out of respect to Parker should just accept whatever we can get to help get the deal done.

Clarkson publicly identified Luke as a target mid-season.
They've offered him a 3 year deal.
NM have constantly failed to bring anyone of note into their club.

Given that you really think they are going to walk away from the deal?

A pick in the 60s should not get it done when you are offering a contracted player a 3 year deal, unless his current club is pushing him out (eg Darling- WCE).

 

[RedBloodBlackSwan]

So pretty clear that North are being the cheap arses then.

Sydney should run it right down to the wire. If North don’t blink, they’ll have to explain to Luke and the North members that while they offered a 3-year contract, Luke somehow wasn’t worth a third rounder. Have fun with that.

Sydney can simply say to Luke that they are not giving him for a junk pick. He is more valuable to Sydney than that and he is contracted. Luke then has to play his guts out next year to prove he is worthy of an extension with Sydney or a new contract elsewhere.

North has far more to lose (assuming Sydney hasn’t already spent the savings from Parker’s last year, in which case Sydney would need to fold at the very very last moment).

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

So pretty clear that North are being the cheap arses then.

Sydney should run it right down to the wire. If North don’t blink, they’ll have to explain to Luke and the North members that while they offered a 3-year contract, Luke somehow wasn’t worth a third rounder. Have fun with that.

Sydney can simply say to Luke that they are not giving him for a junk pick. He is more valuable to Sydney than that and he is contracted. Luke then has to play his guts out next year to prove he is worthy of an extension with Sydney or a new contract elsewhere.

North has far more to lose (assuming Sydney hasn’t already spent the savings from Parker’s last year, in which case Sydney would need to fold at the very very last moment).

I get that but nobody is on our side here nor on trade radio.

 

[RedBloodBlackSwan]

I feel like Parker would want to go to North more than North would want to get Parker. So I really don't think we have much bargaining power here and out of respect to Parker should just accept whatever we can get to help get the deal done.

Respectfully, and appreciating this issue is not black and white - a hard disagree from me.

Sydney has been too soft with its players. I was glad to hear that Harley was working through the GF tape with Longmire and then players who didn’t do the simple things they were supposed to do were being put on the spot to account for their actions.

In Parker’s case, he stretched out his last contract negotiation to the absolute limit, with his manager likely being the one putting out leaks about the possibility of Parker signing with other teams. That was Parker’s right and Sydney chose to sign the 4 year contract. Now Parker’s form does not guarantee a starting position and Sydney have likely even encouraged him to look for other options. The club he has found is offering a junk pick for his services.

If Sydney decides this is not in it’s interests, then no way in hell should Sydney give him away. Now if Sydney thinks Parker’s salary could ultimately go to better uses, then of course Sydney should ultimately relent - but Sydney is well within its rights to drag this out. North is the party offering unders.

 

[RedBloodBlackSwan]

I get that but nobody is on our side here nor on trade radio.

Who cares?

We should be about winning premierships, not friends.

 

[TheGoatBaron]

Who cares?

We should be about winning premierships, not friends.

And we can’t do either

 

[Kiama Chris]

So pretty clear that North are being the cheap arses then.

Sydney should run it right down to the wire. If North don’t blink, they’ll have to explain to Luke and the North members that while they offered a 3-year contract, Luke somehow wasn’t worth a third rounder. Have fun with that.

Sydney can simply say to Luke that they are not giving him for a junk pick. He is more valuable to Sydney than that and he is contracted. Luke then has to play his guts out next year to prove he is worthy of an extension with Sydney or a new contract elsewhere.

North has far more to lose (assuming Sydney hasn’t already spent the savings from Parker’s last year, in which case Sydney would need to fold at the very very last moment).

100% this

 

[caesar88]

Clarkson publicly identified Luke as a target mid-season.
They've offered him a 3 year deal.
NM have constantly failed to bring anyone of note into their club.

Given that you really think they are going to walk away from the deal?

A pick in the 60s should not get it done when you are offering a contracted player a 3 year deal, unless his current club is pushing him out (eg Darling- WCE).

I could see them doing so, yes.

Not saying they should. As I above ^ I think he is probably automatically a top five player in their team if he was to play for them. But I think they are a rebuilding club, and, truthfully, a mediocre club. So I can easily see them deciding to go back to the draft well and using their full suite of picks on another bunch of kids rather than use a pick - even in the 40s - on someone they think won't be part of their future premiership team.

 

[SM]

I could see them doing so, yes.

Not saying they should. As I above ^ I think he is probably automatically a top five player in their team if he was to play for them. But I think they are a rebuilding club, and, truthfully, a mediocre club. So I can easily see them deciding to go back to the draft well and using their full suite of picks on another bunch of kids rather than use a pick - even in the 40s - on someone they think won't be part of their future premiership team.

Who would you rate as their best 5, out of interest? You and Millky seem to be going down this line of reasoning without seemingly knowing much about their list. They have a very good young group, they're just all quite young.