AFL Player # 3: Darcy Parish

[Beerfish]

Contract Status: Unrestricted free agent 2028 or 2029
My Boy Draft 2024: Pick 18, doug85

 

[Yoda_]

Agree. We all complain we don’t have a pure mid. Well here he is! Needs to build his tank but given he’s still a young fella should build over next few years

I get a bit fed up with this “build a tank” argument. It’s not like he is 18/19 anymore, he is 23 in his 5th year at AFL level. He was a mid at junior level so obviously has the ability to gut run.

We are wasting him, simple as that. Career lows for disposals, marks and tackles. Might not tell the overall story but Parish is what he is now.

Thought his game against GC was one of his better efforts for the year, was given some freedom to get the ball.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Yoda_]

So while everyone wants to trade him for something probably not as good he’s continuing to put a pretty good year together, a couple of really smart, well crafted inside 50s to set up goals to go with good contested work. That snap would have capped his night well.

Developing into a really nice player, set and forget IMO.

You swap out Parish in a FP for Fantasisa or even a Stringer and the output for the forward group improves significantly.

Whilst he is performing solidly, a natural forward playing the same role would give us a greater impact on the functionality of the forward group.

We’ve been trying to fit this round peg in a square hole for some time now, it’s carving into what we want it to be but it’s taking some time


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[eth-dog]

He's an undersized inside mid in a midfield full of undersized inside mids. We have 5 of them at the moment and we can't put them all in the middle otherwise we get beat up around the ball like we did against the Dogs.

 

['51 Bewick]

He's an undersized inside mid in a midfield full of undersized inside mids. We have 5 of them at the moment and we can't put them all in the middle otherwise we get beat up around the ball like we did against the Dogs.

Certainly not arguing with you eth, but why do we then put Tippa in the guts when we have plenty of small mids?

 

[eth-dog]

Certainly not arguing with you eth, but why do we then put Tippa in the guts when we have plenty of small mids?

Because we're stupid

 

[Bunk Moreland]

We cannot keep giving this bloke’s midfield minutes to Smith.

But we will.

 

[Seagrave_Holmes]

He's an undersized inside mid in a midfield full of undersized inside mids. We have 5 of them at the moment and we can't put them all in the middle otherwise we get beat up around the ball like we did against the Dogs.

Needs to pack at least another 2+ kilograms onto his frame.

 

[brutus76]

A ********* tough nugget.

Need to pack on about 4 kegs - but bugger me has a crack.

Sign this boy long term.

 

[Yoda_]

More evidence of what he can do when given a good run at it on the ball. Feel he is playing the role that Shiel would be best suited to (second/third reciever) and then exiting the stoppage. Parish was good yesterday and showed some real midfield craft. imho, close to his best game for the club as a midfielder.

 

['51 Bewick]

Shocked a lot of people on here want to trade him. He's not big but he's by far our best inside midfielder.
Heaps of people saying we need inside mids, then wanting to let go the only decent one we have.
McGrath is good, but see him more as outside/inside.

 

[eth-dog]

Shocked a lot of people on here want to trade him. He's not big but he's by far our best inside midfielder.
Heaps of people saying we need inside mids, then wanting to let go the only decent one we have.
McGrath is good, but see him more as outside/inside.

No, he isn't. McGrath, Shiel and Merrett are all better, as is Heppell, depending on how he returns.

 

[Oh Tayteridge]

No, he isn't. McGrath, Shiel and Merrett are all better, as is Heppell, depending on how he returns.

Disagree. Merrett does not play inside at all anymore - more of an outside receiver role (despite us Essingtoning him into an absolute butcher). McGrath and Shiel no doubt play inside/outside roles but are nowhere near as clean as Parish. His hands below his knees are the best we have and his tenacity when the ball is on the ground is un-Essington. Heppell I agree with to a certain extent as despite public perception his inside work is very clean and he's sadly our biggest body, but I'm not sure how well that argument stands right now.

Parish makes a noticeable difference on the inside when he starts in our midfield. I don't think any of the others are even close to him in terms of extracting the ball in tight.

 

[Yoda_]

No, he isn't. McGrath, Shiel and Merrett are all better, as is Heppell, depending on how he returns.

He is better than McGrath and currently better than Shiel. Merret is our best at the moment


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[NAB777]

No, he isn't. McGrath, Shiel and Merrett are all better, as is Heppell, depending on how he returns.

McGrath & Merrett are not inside mids in the true sense. They should be running & connecting players.

 

[eth-dog]

He is better than McGrath and currently better than Shiel. Merret is our best at the moment


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is he? He's basically the same player as he was in 2016. averaging 20-odd possessions (if you extrapolate the extra time), 3 clearances a game midfielder that occassionally kicks a goal. This is McGrath's first year as an inside mid and he's averaging 23 disposals, 5 clearances a game in reduced gametime, and better than Shiel? Give me a break, he isn't even in the same ballpark.

People have this idea in their head that he has to be better because we play him as a forward for parts of games when the reality is that he got bumped out of there because the others are better.

 

[eth-dog]

McGrath & Merrett are not inside mids in the true sense. They should be running & connecting players.

McGrath and Merrett are better as inside mids, but because they have an outside game (unlike Parish) people overrate Parish's inferior inside work because of McGrath and Merrett being better on the outside. The truth is that they're better midfielders both inside and outside the contest.

Parish is the same player he was in 2016

 

[citizen-erased]

trading him is a mistake.
We don't have many pressure players and he's one of them.

he's also a good kick on goal (who else from our midfield hits the scoreboard) and when not having to rush kicks can be quite good by foot.

suffering as a result of our style of play. Which is panicky and reactive.

 

[cobra land]

trading him is a mistake.
We don't have many pressure players and he's one of them.

he's also a good kick on goal (who else from our midfield hits the scoreboard) and when not having to rush kicks can be quite good by foot.

suffering as a result of our style of play. Which is panicky and reactive.

I would keep also, just needs to tidy up his kicking around the ground and handball less which you could say about 3 quarters of the team..
He and McGrath have a bad habit of handballing as soon as they take possession to players who are in a worse position.

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

People want to trade Parish because he is good, you don't get quality without giving up quality in return. Parish probably gets the trade bait nomination over McGrath because he's seemingly below him on the pecking order.

Simple truth is that McGrath, Merrett, Shiel and Parish have a lot of similarities between them, we're not using them effectively (Darcy in particular) and by playing them all we're left with an unbalanced team.

 

[Runk]

trading him is a mistake.
We don't have many pressure players and he's one of them.

he's also a good kick on goal (who else from our midfield hits the scoreboard) and when not having to rush kicks can be quite good by foot.

suffering as a result of our style of play. Which is panicky and reactive.

Spot on. Spot. On.

trading him, whilst value would be sizeable, would be a terrible move.

 

[owen87]

Spot on. Spot. On.

trading him, whilst value would be sizeable, would be a terrible move.

The problem is, of this group who are all about the same size and type that get midfield minutes, who gets traded for the inside player we're crying out for?

• Shiel
• Merrett
• Parish
• McGrath
• Smith

If you bring in a genuine inside midfielder then you push one or more of those guys out of the middle.

Smith could play HFF.
McGrath could play HBF and defend a man.
Merrett might be able to play a HBF / Wing type role, basically the role McKenna was doing but without any real defensive accountability.

Parish is aggressive and combative through the middle, would be great in a side with more inside protection, and has currency. I wouldn't want to lose him, but I also think we're misusing him a lot of the time, and short of pushing Smith / Merrett / McGrath elsewhere and finding a way to play a starting midfield of (say) Shiel, Parish, <Insert 6'4" Midfielder> then he does have genuine currency for a side like Geelong or Melbourne who have the big bodies and need that kind of player.

 

[calyam]

People want to trade Parish because he is good, you don't get quality without giving up quality in return. Parish probably gets the trade bait nomination over McGrath because he's seemingly below him on the pecking order.

Simple truth is that McGrath, Merrett, Shiel and Parish have a lot of similarities between them, we're not using them effectively (Darcy in particular) and by playing them all we're left with an unbalanced team.

Correct take.

If we aren't willing to trade talent for pieces that fit our structure better then we will remain on a treadmill to nowhere. Essendon has a tonne of talent - high quality midfielders and defenders and forwards - most of whom would be easily best 22 at other clubs. However, the talent doesn't fit well together.

If we want to get better then we will need to trade players that have talent and value, such as Parish, for players that make more sense for our structure. The player we receive may not have as much raw talent but could make the team better overall. Will Brodie from the Suns is an obvious example of a trade you'd try to make - a big-bodied, clearance winning, midfielder who is being underutilised up north (but showed plenty in the middle last season).

Now I'm not arguing that you'd trade Parish for just a second round pick or something of that nature. But you'd be silly to simply hoard talent - as Dodoro traditionally has - in the hope that something will change.

 

[eth-dog]

People want to trade Parish because he is good, you don't get quality without giving up quality in return. Parish probably gets the trade bait nomination over McGrath because he's seemingly below him on the pecking order.

Simple truth is that McGrath, Merrett, Shiel and Parish have a lot of similarities between them, we're not using them effectively (Darcy in particular) and by playing them all we're left with an unbalanced team.

Finally, someone understands. And of those four, Parish is the most expendable to me.

 

[citizen-erased]

I'd entertain trading Parish assuming it's a known quantity coming in.
Trading him for a late 1st in a compromised draft seems to be high risk with unknown reward.

We don't have the depth to risk losing a quality mid on a gambit at the draft.

 

[Howard Moon]

I think the trade call will be taken out of our hands when he requests a trade to Geelong

That's when dodo folds his arms and flat out refuses a swap of constable and pick, let's it drag til stumps and gets nothing but a jilted player waiting for fa