AFL Player # 3: Darcy Parish

Remove this Banner Ad

Reader mode
03 - parish.jpg
Contract Status: Unrestricted free agent 2028 or 2029
My Boy Draft 2024: Pick 18, doug85
 
Last edited by a moderator:
carloss said:
As a half forward or midfielder?
Click to expand...
Maybe depends on who we draft? Are any of our prospects AFL ready? O'Driscoll to Parish as first receiver with the quick hands and vision? Or as the big body to allow Parish to be first in? I wouldn't have thought any of the draftees would be thrown straight in, so maybe we're talking trajectory of development. Both hf and mid then?
 
DP3 being taken at 5 and Francis at 6 is a good example of why we shouldn’t expect picks 6, 7 & 8 to immediately save all our woes. Sure Parish will have a serviceable career, but it’s hardly team transformational stuff. Yes we could get lucky and you hope that at least one in 3 might be something more than good. But it’s far from a shoe in. To win this off season we have to turn up someone who can have a bigger impact than Dunkley would have. I reckon that’s 50/50 at best.
 
fairbump_playon said:
DP3 being taken at 5 and Francis at 6 is a good example of why we shouldn’t expect picks 6, 7 & 8 to immediately save all our woes. Sure Parish will have a serviceable career, but it’s hardly team transformational stuff. Yes we could get lucky and you hope that at least one in 3 might be something more than good. But it’s far from a shoe in. To win this off season we have to turn up someone who can have a bigger impact than Dunkley would have. I reckon that’s 50/50 at best.
Click to expand...

Two someone’s actually, and that would be between this and next year.

We have many holes, if we fill them with players at a minimum standard of Parish (eg a 200 game AFL player) then we’ll be in a much better position.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

owen87 said:
Two someone’s actually, and that would be between this and next year.

We have many holes, if we fill them with players at a minimum standard of Parish (eg a 200 game AFL player) then we’ll be in a much better position.
Click to expand...
Maybe - but using pick 5 (or 678) to get an average player who might play a lot of games isn't a good outcome tbh. We'll have our very own Shaun Atley on our hands...
 
Schnitzengruben said:
Maybe - but using pick 5 (or 678) to get an average player who might play a lot of games isn't a good outcome tbh. We'll have our very own Shaun Atley on our hands...
Click to expand...


We have our own Shaun Atleys. 3 of them.
 
fairbump_playon said:
DP3 being taken at 5 and Francis at 6 is a good example of why we shouldn’t expect picks 6, 7 & 8 to immediately save all our woes. Sure Parish will have a serviceable career, but it’s hardly team transformational stuff. Yes we could get lucky and you hope that at least one in 3 might be something more than good. But it’s far from a shoe in. To win this off season we have to turn up someone who can have a bigger impact than Dunkley would have. I reckon that’s 50/50 at best.
Click to expand...

If anything, Darcy and Aaron Francis shows exactly where the EFC is lacking and that is through development more than drafting. Darcy was the most well rounder & impressive (albeit vanilla) midfielder in his draft class. To see guys like Clayton Oliver, Josh Dunkley as midfielders who have gone on to dominant some parts of there careers whilst Darcy is meandering along in 3rd is as much to do with development as it is about Darcy himself.
 
owen87 said:
Two someone’s actually, and that would be between this and next year.

We have many holes, if we fill them with players at a minimum standard of Parish (eg a 200 game AFL player) then we’ll be in a much better position.
Click to expand...
This is why I said we need to unearth one proper gun with our picks. If we get two soldiers that are at best quite good, then that’s a loss compared to using two picks to get Dunkley IMO.

Two more Parishes won’t get us into the top 4. Yes we have gaps but there are ways to get pretty good but not great players in. Eg what would it cost a club to bring Francis across if he wanted to go? Pick 30?

Not opposed to us having chosen the draft path btw... just trying to establish that I reckon the pass mark is to unearth one absolute star. Solid isn’t enough.
 
fairbump_playon said:
This is why I said we need to unearth one proper gun with our picks. If we get two soldiers that are at best quite good, then that’s a loss compared to using two picks to get Dunkley IMO.

Two more Parishes won’t get us into the top 4. Yes we have gaps but there are ways to get pretty good but not great players in. Eg what would it cost a club to bring Francis across if he wanted to go? Pick 30?

Not opposed to us having chosen the draft path btw... just trying to establish that I reckon the pass mark is to unearth one absolute star. Solid isn’t enough.
Click to expand...

To be fair, this is my beef with Dodoro and his drafting. Yes we have always brought in decent enough players but hardly a star. Is this more down to development though?

Look at Port's thrice draft of Duursma, Butters & Rozee, that's not just luck with picks 5, 9 & 12, it is as much about development to not only nail them but identify there strengths and utilise them to the teams benefits.
 
Yoda_ said:
If anything, Darcy and Aaron Francis shows exactly where the EFC is lacking and that is through development more than drafting. Darcy was the most well rounder & impressive (albeit vanilla) midfielder in his draft class. To see guys like Clayton Oliver, Josh Dunkley as midfielders who have gone on to dominant some parts of there careers whilst Darcy is meandering along in 3rd is as much to do with development as it is about Darcy himself.
Click to expand...
It’s so hard to know how true this is. Feels like there’s something to it. You can think of it as a gap in one on one development (ie development coaching) but it could also be an overall cultural issue of average standards across the playing group.

But was Parish ever going to be better than Dunkley? Or was he just an early developer who looked ready made at 18 and didn’t have as much ceiling as the others?

I like Parish and think he is best 22.. but not a game breaker.
 
Schnitzengruben said:
I don't get the "more picks = we fill more gaps" logic. Have Francis or Parish actually filled a single gap?
Click to expand...
More picks = better % of getting an AFL standard player. Times that by 3 and we are all hoping we can get at least one top quality player. If we can get 3 then we could be set up for 15 years.
 
fairbump_playon said:
It’s so hard to know how true this is. Feels like there’s something to it. You can think of it as a gap in one on one development (ie development coaching) but it could also be an overall cultural issue of average standards across the playing group.

But was Parish ever going to be better than Dunkley? Or was he just an early developer who looked ready made at 18 and didn’t have as much ceiling as the others?

I like Parish and think he is best 22.. but not a game breaker.
Click to expand...

Without derailing the thread, a better example of this is Aaron Francis. Most people absolutely agreed he was one of, if not the most talented player in the draft. To then see Dunkley, Harry McKay, Jacob Weitering, Clayton Oliver go streets ahead of Aaron makes me question our development more than our drafting.

I remember people like Knightmare had Jayden Laverde at 4/5 in his early phantom drafts, people were bemused how we got him at pick 20 behind stars like Blaine Boekhurst, Jarrod Garlett and Paul Ahearn. Injury? sure, but its more about development imho.
 
Yoda_ said:
More picks = better % of getting an AFL standard player. Times that by 3 and we are all hoping we can get at least one top quality player. If we can get 3 then we could be set up for 15 years.
Click to expand...
Obviously adjusting for a dozen other variables like talent drop-off's after pick X, but I get your point.

IMO, getting "3 standard AFL players" won't set us up for anything. We have about 35~ of them currently and we've never looked so bad.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Schnitzengruben said:
Obviously adjusting for a dozen other variables like talent drop-off's after pick X, but I get your point.

IMO, getting "3 standard AFL players" won't set us up for anything. We have about 35~ of them currently and we've never looked so bad.
Click to expand...
Richmond's recent success has given me hope that we don't need 8 - 10 superstars but a small sprinkle, a number of role players and an exceptional system.

As you mention, we have the role players sorted by the bus load, now time to fill in the other two ingredients to this recipe for success.
 
Yoda_ said:
Richmond's recent success has given me hope that we don't need 8 - 10 superstars but a small sprinkle, a number of role players and an exceptional system.

As you mention, we have the role players sorted by the bus load, now time to fill in the other two ingredients to this recipe for success.
Click to expand...
Oh and ahh...what's his name? Oh yeah. Dustin ******* Martin. He'd probably help your premiership tilt.

But I do agree with the sentiment. The point I'm getting at is we don't have a Dustin Martin whilst we do have a resemblance of the other pieces. I highly doubt we'll draft him at 678. But if the recruitment team reckon (just an example) that Hollands is the real deal. He's the next Dusty. Then I'd be using those picks to go and get him.

Just like we need a great young KPF. Brand/Eyre could be anything. But if the recruitment team thought that (again, example) McDonald was the right kid for us - then I'd be doing that.
 
Schnitzengruben said:
Oh and ahh...what's his name? Oh yeah. Dustin ******* Martin. He'd probably help your premiership tilt.

But I do agree with the sentiment. The point I'm getting at is we don't have a Dustin Martin whilst we do have a resemblance of the other pieces. I highly doubt we'll draft him at 678. But if the recruitment team reckon (just an example) that Hollands is the real deal. He's the next Dusty. Then I'd be using those picks to go and get him.

Just like we need a great young KPF. Brand/Eyre could be anything. But if the recruitment team thought that (again, example) McDonald was the right kid for us - then I'd be doing that.
Click to expand...
I never said we couldn't do with a superstar. Not once, nor did I detract Richmonds succes was not in part due to Dusty's role in there system.



Fwiw, I would trade up to 2 and (should Logan McDonald go at #1 many are starting to predict), then we still attempt moving to #2 and grabbing Hollands.
Not just as a midfielder but we have always lacked a dynamic medium forward. Fantasia was that man in 2017 but have hardly seen it without that.
 
Yoda_ said:
More picks = better % of getting an AFL standard player. Times that by 3 and we are all hoping we can get at least one top quality player. If we can get 3 then we could be set up for 15 years.
Click to expand...
100% we could. Or if we get Parish, Francis and Parish-Francis nothing changes.

Fingers crossed. Would be so great to have a draft year we would all look back on in four or five years as we celebrate a flag.

While we are crossing fingers maybe let’s hope Parish continues to improve and Francis shakes 2020 off and gets back on the improvement trajectory he was on across 2018/19
 
Yoda_ said:
Without derailing the thread, a better example of this is Aaron Francis. Most people absolutely agreed he was one of, if not the most talented player in the draft. To then see Dunkley, Harry McKay, Jacob Weitering, Clayton Oliver go streets ahead of Aaron makes me question our development more than our drafting.

I remember people like Knightmare had Jayden Laverde at 4/5 in his early phantom drafts, people were bemused how we got him at pick 20 behind stars like Blaine Boekhurst, Jarrod Garlett and Paul Ahearn. Injury? sure, but its more about development imho.
Click to expand...
And maybe Alex Morgan would be approaching game 100 off a half back flank if we developed him better.

I think Laverde’s injuries are the dominant story. Francis.. his homesickness, depression and lack of tank held him up a lot. Agree he is a good example because pre draft we must have known some of his challenges and backed ourselves to build his endurance quickly and make him feel at home in Melb. Didn’t pull that off so you could say our development approach failed him.

Parish and Langford have both had a proper good run at it.. could they have been developed much better? Maybe but I don’t think there is a huge gap between potential and reality.
 
fairbump_playon said:
And maybe Alex Morgan would be approaching game 100 off a half back flank if we developed him better.

I think Laverde’s injuries are the dominant story. Francis.. his homesickness, depression and lack of tank held him up a lot. Agree he is a good example because pre draft we must have known some of his challenges and backed ourselves to build his endurance quickly and make him feel at home in Melb. Didn’t pull that off so you could say our development approach failed him.

Parish and Langford have both had a proper good run at it.. could they have been developed much better? Maybe but I don’t think there is a huge gap between potential and reality.
Click to expand...

The fact both Parish and Langford have found a niche at AFL level bottles down to the continuity they have been afforded at AFL level. I'm sure most guys would find a role if they were given that luxury.
 
fairbump_playon said:
This is why I said we need to unearth one proper gun with our picks. If we get two soldiers that are at best quite good, then that’s a loss compared to using two picks to get Dunkley IMO.

Two more Parishes won’t get us into the top 4. Yes we have gaps but there are ways to get pretty good but not great players in. Eg what would it cost a club to bring Francis across if he wanted to go? Pick 30?

Not opposed to us having chosen the draft path btw... just trying to establish that I reckon the pass mark is to unearth one absolute star. Solid isn’t enough.
Click to expand...

I think people have way too high an expectation of a draftee, Parish is absolutely a success, he'll be a 200 game AFL player even if never an outright star.

If you have a team full of Parish standard players (e.g. 200 gamers) then you're looking at a fairly consistent finals level side. Add a handful of guys at the next level to that, and you're a top four level side.

We have holes across the park, one Dunkley isn't going to fill the myriad of holes we have, and it would be negligent to give up 2 x top 10 selections to take a player who isn't in his current sides best midfield rotation. I rate Dunkley very highly as a player, and think playing for us he'd see the genuine midfield time needed to be an AA level player, but he's also a guy who missed a chunk of this season through injury which shows you're still reliant on that one player getting on the park and performing at a level that we've only seen glimpses of.

We desperately need a Parish level KPF, someone who will turn up for 200 AFL games at AFL standard. Even better if they're a level above that. We're hoping Jones & Eyre can be the 200 game AFL standard types, and if we trade up for McDonald it's because they're hoping he's a future AA level KPF.

Dunkley is one player, the pass mark isn't finding a single player better than Dunkley, if you get 2 x 200 gamers out of those selections then that's still a pass.
 
fairbump_playon said:
DP3 being taken at 5 and Francis at 6 is a good example of why we shouldn’t expect picks 6, 7 & 8 to immediately save all our woes. Sure Parish will have a serviceable career, but it’s hardly team transformational stuff. Yes we could get lucky and you hope that at least one in 3 might be something more than good. But it’s far from a shoe in. To win this off season we have to turn up someone who can have a bigger impact than Dunkley would have. I reckon that’s 50/50 at best.
Click to expand...


There is always going to be a risk but at the end of the day it is abject failure not to be able to turn a top 10 pick into a 200 game star for any reason other than injury or the Stringer-type fall out scenario that isn't related to recruiting.

A good club lands 3 guns with these picks and nothing less can be acceptable.

They're actually perfectly placed picks in this regard. Not high enough to get caught up in the "head*" of the top 5 which is where the dodgy drafts tend to go most wrong.
 
owen87 said:
I think people have way too high an expectation of a draftee, Parish is absolutely a success, he'll be a 200 game AFL player even if never an outright star.

If you have a team full of Parish standard players (e.g. 200 gamers) then you're looking at a fairly consistent finals level side. Add a handful of guys at the next level to that, and you're a top four level side.

We have holes across the park, one Dunkley isn't going to fill the myriad of holes we have, and it would be negligent to give up 2 x top 10 selections to take a player who isn't in his current sides best midfield rotation. I rate Dunkley very highly as a player, and think playing for us he'd see the genuine midfield time needed to be an AA level player, but he's also a guy who missed a chunk of this season through injury which shows you're still reliant on that one player getting on the park and performing at a level that we've only seen glimpses of.

We desperately need a Parish level KPF, someone who will turn up for 200 AFL games at AFL standard. Even better if they're a level above that. We're hoping Jones & Eyre can be the 200 game AFL standard types, and if we trade up for McDonald it's because they're hoping he's a future AA level KPF.

Dunkley is one player, the pass mark isn't finding a single player better than Dunkley, if you get 2 x 200 gamers out of those selections then that's still a pass.
Click to expand...
I think we can safely say we are crumbling this cookie in opposite ways.

Your argument is logical but omits the idea that the top tier class you need to compete for flags should come from draft opportunities like this.

You can’t do it with solid role players alone. We actually DO need an inside midfielder of Dunkley’s class or above - and can’t wait another 3 years. You can’t chuck a midfield of reliable types together and hope to win when it matters.

The thing we both have in common I’m sure is that we nail this draft by getting a couple of total weapons in.

We just disagree that if that didn’t happen then in this rare draft where we have 3 x top ten selections it would still be a win to get two more Parish quality players to meet list needs. I think that would be a total failure leading to years of mediocrity.
 
fairbump_playon said:
I think we can safely say we are crumbling this cookie in opposite ways.

Your argument is logical but omits the idea that teams need some top tier class to compete for flags. You can’t do it with solid role players alone. We actually DO need an inside midfielder of Dunkley’s class or above. You can’t chuck a midfield of reliable types together and hope to win when it matters.

The thing we both have in common I’m sure is that we nail this draft by getting a couple of total weapons in.

We just disagree that if that didn’t happen then in this rare draft where we have 3 x top ten selections it would still be a win to get two more Parish quality players to meet list needs. I think that would be a total failure leading to years of mediocrity.
Click to expand...

Depends where those players are, by Parish quality I mean guys who can play at AFL standard for 200 games, without necessarily being an AA player.

If we find a guy like that as a KPF, they'd go a long way to straighten us up.

Daniher was top-shelf talentwise but hasn't been on the park since 2017 (and is now gone) whilst we've relied on guys who aren't your AFL standard types in McKernan & Brown to be our KPF's and may have finally got Stewart fit again.

I'm trying to think who in the AFL is that kind of forward, maybe a guy like Jack Darling is a good analogy? Not likely to win a Coleman, but gives a reliable target up forward, and did manage to sneak in to the AA team once.

Otherwise a midfielder analogous with a Cunnington type.

Guys who are clearly AFL standard, but in a position of true need (e.g. not a 180ish cm / 80ish kg not quite inside, not quite outside midfielder) as opposed to being samey to what we've already got, or not really filling a hole.

Obviously we'd both love them to draft a young Lloyd / Hird / Watson combo if they could.
 
fairbump_playon said:
I think we can safely say we are crumbling this cookie in opposite ways.

Your argument is logical but omits the idea that the top tier class you need to compete for flags should come from draft opportunities like this.

You can’t do it with solid role players alone. We actually DO need an inside midfielder of Dunkley’s class or above - and can’t wait another 3 years. You can’t chuck a midfield of reliable types together and hope to win when it matters.

The thing we both have in common I’m sure is that we nail this draft by getting a couple of total weapons in.

We just disagree that if that didn’t happen then in this rare draft where we have 3 x top ten selections it would still be a win to get two more Parish quality players to meet list needs. I think that would be a total failure leading to years of mediocrity.
Click to expand...

Obviously two sub 182cm inside midfielders with poor skills wouldn't be a great outcome but one bigger (187cm+) and perhaps an outside(ish) mid would be a great outcome for mids.
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

VelvetSledge
  • Locked
Game Day Round 3 - Essendon v St Kilda, Marvel Stadium, Saturday 30/3/24, 4.20pm AEDST
19 20 21 22 23
Replies
551
Views
9K
Mr Bultitude
Mr Bultitude
Nuggs Bunny
  • Locked
MVP Round 3 MVP votes against the Saints
2
Replies
39
Views
885
eth-dog
eth-dog
silk
  • Locked
Preview Round 3: Essendon vs St Kilda, Marvel Stadium, Saturday 30/03/24 @ 4:20 PM
6 7 8 9 10
Replies
245
Views
10K
Lore
Lore
VelvetSledge
  • Locked
Game Day Round 2 - Sydney v Essendon, SCG, Saturday 23/3/24, 7.30pm AEDST
29 30 31 32 33
Replies
820
Views
11K
Beerfish
Beerfish
silk
  • Locked
Preview Round 7: Essendon vs Collingwood, MCG, Anzac Day, 25/04/24 @ 3:20 PM
8 9 10 11 12
Replies
290
Views
10K
VelvetSledge
VelvetSledge
VelvetSledge
  • Locked
Game Day Round 1 - Essendon v Hawthorn, MCG, Saturday 16/3/24, 1.45pm AEDST
25 26 27 28 29
Replies
703
Views
9K
Harlequin
Harlequin
J
News Dutton Automotive Group announced as co-major sponsor for the next 3 years - 13/11
2
Replies
44
Views
2K
Kong
Kong

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top