Traded #26 Luke Parker

Remove this Banner Ad

d05af3810baa11138a15ef8d759b18c8


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

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Honestly waiting for North to do something dump just to get Parker over the line.

44 or F3 is the easiest deal but watch them hand over something extra late
 
I can understand why people see it as a "if it doesn't happen, it doesn't happen" case. Parker remains a Swan and him playing his 300th game in red & white is back on. Happy days.

But I think there is actually quite a lot riding on this, mainly for Parker himself. We are clearly in a very different position to North. If Parker gets squeezed out of the best 22 next year and ends up in the VFL, at 33 by the end of the year, he'd be lucky to even get a new contract with us, let alone with North or anyone else. They're unlikely to come knocking again by that point. We'd have literally robbed a stalwart of the chance to extend his career and secure his playing future for another 2 years... all over an 18-pick difference in the draft.
He fought tooth a nail for the fourth year in his contract, and I suspect on decent coin.

If it was someone like Rampe, I would be far more sympathetic to your reasoning.
 
Honestly waiting for North to do something dump just to get Parker over the line.

44 or F3 is the easiest deal but watch them hand over something extra late
Sounds like they’re about to trade 25 to Dogs for Caleb Daniel so they’re doing business and they’ll likely come at last minute and say 62 - yeah or nah?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Parker should be getting his agent to push North to provide a reasonable offer, and gently indicating that if the trade does not land then the details of the North offer and discussions between Parker and North will come out.

North will look far stupider than Sydney if the trade doesn’t come off. They also went after a contracted player, it’s on them to make it come off.
 
He fought tooth a nail for the fourth year in his contract, and I suspect on decent coin.

If it was someone like Rampe, I would be far more sympathetic to your reasoning.
I just don't understand why this infamous 'extra year' on his contract matters. I didn't like it at the time but he also didn't hold a gun to the club's head to make it happen. So is that one unnecessary year worth depriving a longtime servant of the club a chance to secure his playing future for up to two years? Are we that petty and offended over a contract that WE agreed to?
 
Of course, but there's a lot of 'could's there. From Parker's perspective it is very easy to see why he doesn't want to take that chance with us and would prefer the security of a deal he knows North will offer him here and now.

That's fine but he's still contracted to us. It's not disrespectful from the club if we're holding out for a better deal. He signed until end of 2025. He didn't have to take that deal from us. The club is trying to accommodate his future while still under contract with us.
 
I just don't understand why this infamous 'extra year' on his contract matters. I didn't like it at the time but he also didn't hold a gun to the club's head to make it happen. So is that one unnecessary year worth depriving a longtime servant of the club a chance to secure his playing future for up to two years? Are we that petty and offended over a contract that WE agreed to?
i don't think that's the point. Parker wouldn't re-sign until we gave him the extra year and now he is trying to dump that extra year so he can go to Norf. It is a problem of his own making, and I'm sure if he had signed for a year less then he would be free to go wherever he chooses now.

The whole issue is one that Parker made himself. Yes, he is a club champion who the club should honour and respect, but also that is the very reason he got that extra year in the first place, so he is reaping the consequences of playing hard ball a few years ago.
 
I just don't understand why this infamous 'extra year' on his contract matters. I didn't like it at the time but he also didn't hold a gun to the club's head to make it happen. So is that one unnecessary year worth depriving a longtime servant of the club a chance to secure his playing future for up to two years? Are we that petty and offended over a contract that WE agreed to?
It’s probably just me, but I really don’t like it when players leak stories publicly to up their deal. There is a salary cap, so those antics usually end up taking money and/or job security from their team mates who don’t push as hard and don’t create as much noise for the club.

Longmire did the same for his last coaching extension as well, if I recall directly, and now we lack depth in our coaching ranks (also due to soft cap as well).

The bit that bothers me the most, is it is often the people who are most well remunerated who push the hardest for their deals. It is not as if the Parkers, Longmires, etc need to worry about their financial future. They can literally afford to put the team first.

You are 100% right that Sydney chose to sign the deal and is also responsible. But I also think that if Sydney would prefer keep Parker than take pick 62, then Sydney is not responsible for Parker’s concerns about his possible contract with North and his career longevity. This just feels like karma coming back to bite him.
 
How are we gonna complain that Luke Parker was hard done by and disrespected by the club, and now that he requests a trade, say we hope he stays? I think it would be a bigger disrespect by keeping him a Swan.
 
i don't think that's the point. Parker wouldn't re-sign until we gave him the extra year and now he is trying to dump that extra year so he can go to Norf. It is a problem of his own making, and I'm sure if he had signed for a year less then he would be free to go wherever he chooses now.

The whole issue is one that Parker made himself. Yes, he is a club champion who the club should honour and respect, but also that is the very reason he got that extra year in the first place, so he is reaping the consequences of playing hard ball a few years ago.

It’s probably just me, but I really don’t like it when players leak stories publicly to up their deal. There is a salary cap, so those antics usually end up taking money and/or job security from their team mates who don’t push as hard and don’t create as much noise for the club.

Longmire did the same for his last coaching extension as well, if I recall directly, and now we lack depth in our coaching ranks (also due to soft cap as well).

The bit that bothers me the most, is it is often the people who are most well remunerated who push the hardest for their deals. It is not as if the Parkers, Longmires, etc need to worry about their financial future. They can literally afford to put the team first.

You are 100% right that Sydney chose to sign the deal and is also responsible. But I also think that if Sydney would prefer keep Parker than take pick 62, then Sydney is not responsible for Parker’s concerns about his possible contract with North and his career longevity. This just feels like karma coming back to bite him.
These are both great comments that make a whole lot of sense.
 
He fought tooth a nail for the fourth year in his contract, and I suspect on decent coin.

If it was someone like Rampe, I would be far more sympathetic to your reasoning.

I just don't understand why this infamous 'extra year' on his contract matters. I didn't like it at the time but he also didn't hold a gun to the club's head to make it happen. So is that one unnecessary year worth depriving a longtime servant of the club a chance to secure his playing future for up to two years? Are we that petty and offended over a contract that WE agreed to?
Didn't he literally hold a gun to our head for the extra year? Refused to sign without it?

I love Luke as much as the next fan but all this is his own making.
 
If he stays I assume no Curtis Taylor, only so many list spots.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Didn't he literally hold a gun to our head for the extra year? Refused to sign without it?

I love Luke as much as the next fan but all this is his own making.
Ahhh… that must be explain the “no guns at work” policy the club introduced in 2021.

Damn bestniks made the club soft I tells ya, soft! It’s been all down hill from there!
 
If Luke wants to go, take 62 and be done with it. It's a salary we don't pay next year.
Doubt they'll offer 44.

Long-time servant of the club, I don't want him going out like ROK.
 
Didn't he literally hold a gun to our head for the extra year? Refused to sign without it?

I love Luke as much as the next fan but all this is his own making.
Well he didn't LITERALLY hold a gun to our head. If he had I suspect instead of a 3 year deal he'd be looking at a serious firearms charge and a potentially lengthy prison sentence.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Traded #26 Luke Parker

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top