Scott Parker, what does he do?

[Spurs_Bear]

Sandro's better.

At what?

 

[punkisback]

Do you have the same opinion of Sandro? Because if Parker isn't in the side then he is the natural replacement as they play similar styles. Parker is the perfect foil for Modric, closing down, tackling, solid passing game. Who in your opinion would you want in there? Remembering the fact Parker has lost one EPL game whilst playing for us.

I think that Sandro is a better pure defensive midfielder. He also has the technique and physicality to become a Vieira type player. However in terms of passing and fluidity I think Parker is ahead. Sandro also can pick his moments very well when it comes to getting forward, Walker's goal against arsenal is an example of good intelligence on Sandro's part.

 

[Spurs_Bear]

I think that Sandro is a better pure defensive midfielder. He also has the technique and physicality to become a Vieira type player. However in terms of passing and fluidity I think Parker is ahead. Sandro also can pick his moments very well when it comes to getting forward, Walker's goal against arsenal is an example of good intelligence on Sandro's part.

So you've answered your own question then.

 

[southlondonyiddo]

Why are people even getting into this discussion

Taxi

 

[donny1013]

I think that Sandro is a better pure defensive midfielder. He also has the technique and physicality to become a Vieira type player. However in terms of passing and fluidity I think Parker is ahead. Sandro also can pick his moments very well when it comes to getting forward, Walker's goal against arsenal is an example of good intelligence on Sandro's part.

Right so is it more a case of you just rating Sandro ahead of Parker? If so that's your opinion. The fact is whichever of those two plays with Modric they are the perfect insurance for him and we are immensely lucky to have to players in the mould. You only have to go back 3 years when we had a CM midfield of Thudd and JJ. Parker has improved us.

 

[gibbospurs]

At what?

Table tennis?? Heard he is lovin a bit of ping pong.:grin:

 

[#1 Spur]

Tackles aren't they only barometer to look at when discussing a defensive player. Reading of the game, interceptions, ball retention, pass success. He carries the ball forward as well, though gets a bit confused when the white sticks come into view.

His impact can't be overstated.

 

[#1 Spur]

Interestingly, Kaboul said that Parker was the quietest player in the changing room, which leads me to believe that he does his job inside the changing room just like a manager. He's certainly the manager on it.

 

[double0]

At what?

Samba

 

[jurgen]

 

[Capocrimini]

The tackling statistic is misleading, no. of tackles means very little. A good football team doesnt need to make many tackles. I sound like an idiot right? Think about it we usually have over 50% of possession most games. When we lose the ball the only players making lunging tackles should be our front 4 and our back four. Our centre mids most important job is positioning, they need to hustle and stay in the correct part of the pitch to A intercept and B mount a counter. When you go in for a tackle, you risk going out of position, your comitted so getting back is going to be harder, do that in the CM role its suicide. Watch Makelele,Davids, Keane and Viera in their haydays. A DM job is to sweep up the defence and maintain position to allow the rsst of the team to shine. Parker does that brilliantly, he has looked lethargic in the last few games, but his importance remains the same. Second name on the teamsheet, after our King of course.

 

[Ionman34]

What does he offer? That should be obvious, but I'll explain....

On the ball he keeps it simple most of the time and retains possession well, he'll look to give it to the likes of Modric etc and if a certain pass isn't on he'll look for one which is on in order to keep possession. His distribution is effective and he has an incisive pass in his locker as well. He's intelligent with his positioning and he understands what's required of him.

Off the ball he will harry and chase, close down the space and press the ball when required. He reads the game very well and mopping up comes easy to him.

His commitment is there for all to see, he simply wants to win and his attitude is excellent...clearly it rubs off on others around him.

Gonna rep you for this Mr Pink. I've read through the thread to this point and you are the first to actually offer a valid response rather than harangue the OP who went to a fair bit of effort to back up his claim.

I happen to agree with the consensus that the OP is miles away from being right, but the effort alone deserved the respect of a decent reply.

 

[Ionman34]

The tackling statistic is misleading, no. of tackles means very little. A good football team doesnt need to make many tackles. I sound like an idiot right? Think about it we usually have over 50% of possession most games. When we lose the ball the only players making lunging tackles should be our front 4 and our back four. Our centre mids most important job is positioning, they need to hustle and stay in the correct part of the pitch to A intercept and B mount a counter. When you go in for a tackle, you risk going out of position, your comitted so getting back is going to be harder, do that in the CM role its suicide. Watch Makelele,Davids, Keane and Viera in their haydays. A DM job is to sweep up the defence and maintain position to allow the rsst of the team to shine. Parker does that brilliantly, he has looked lethargic in the last few games, but his importance remains the same. Second name on the teamsheet, after our King of course.

I wonder what the combined tally of Red cards is between that lot.


I hasten to add that I agree with what you are saying though.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Punkisback

Firstly you have gone some way to answering your question when you correctly said that Sandro is a more defensive midfielder.

The mistake people seem to make often is assuming that Parker is merely a defensive midfielder. He has always been more dynamic than this, more of a box to box player. Last season playing for a shit side he scored and assisted more than Modric for example.

This dynamism and multi-functionality is also reflected in his passing stats. He passes the ball at a rate of 1 every 1.6 minutes. Modric every 1.5. Modric averages 59 passes a game. Parker 55. Parker has a success rate of 89%, Modric 86%.

But the thing I really have a problem with is your selective choice of game analysis to try and suggest Parker isn't pulling his weight defensively. The fact is that this season Parker has contested 68 and won 48 tackles in 1497 mins. Modric is 32 with 21 won in 1686 mins.

Clearly this season Parker puts in at least double the tackles per time on pitch than Modric does, whilst nearly matching his pass output, and giving the ball away less. Now his passing isn't as expansive as Modric's and these bare stats don't tell the whole story, but some of that story cuts Parker's way too because what stats don't tell you is the countless times Parker doesn't get a tackle in but chases and harries, or tracks a man into our box to make sure he doesn't go unmarked, instead of standing and watching.

That is what he has brought. Box to box dynamism, almost as much ball retention (helping us retain possession as a team) as Modric, twice the tackles per game on average, leadership by example and verbal. He is a very good combination of a ball playing cm with very little defensive compromise.

The other point you made was shouldn't we be building our team round Modric, which is a strange comment, as Parker playing has in no way effected Modric's role under Redknapp. Redknapp has even played Parker, Sandro and Modric in the same midfield, giving Modric even more freedom than as one of a cm2 in a 4 man midfield.

Personally I have more issue with Modric playing in CM at times than I do with Parker. Especially in a cm2/4 man midfield, particularly away from home or tough games.

 

[jonathanhotspur]

Parker, a brilliant motivator. A Lieutenant capable of bringing tears to the eyes of his fellow players in half time speeches, according to Carlton Cole. But for all his chest thumping is he actually half the player that Spurs fans and pundits are led to believe? In any case can we take the football writers player of the year award seriously, given that a lot of football fans slate journalists for not knowing anything about football or showing clear bias; a lot of journalists have strong west ham leanings.

I myself genuinely believe that Parker is a detriment to the team. Yes we may be doing better this season, but I believe that this is due to us having an outlet up front. Our problem wasn't in central midfield, it was in not having an effective striker who could also hold up the play and link well with the midfield.

Firstly Harry identified Parker as someone who could add steel and bite to the midfield; In his first few games he did just that. However recently he seems to have shirked his defensive role and this had led to a detriment in our results. His tackling statistics have been lower than Modric and Sandro's in his most recent games. Given that his job is primarily to win the ball back and lay it square to more creative players he seems to be unable to put a tackle in at all.

These are chalkboards comparing his tackling to his CM partners in recent games

You can clearly see that he is either shirking his responsibilities or is not good enough to keep up with the pace of the premier league. It says something when Modric is putting in more tackles than him. Modric is the person we should be building our team on, he is the creative fulcrum and our possession master yet Parker seems to be getting Modric to do the dirty work for him recently. Given that he offers relatively nothing in attack this is counterproductive and places limits on our best player.

Further to this in the game against wolves, Parker seemed to be further forward that Modric. Again I don't know if this was due to Harry's instructions but we did struggle in breaking them down. Perhaps if the more creative of the two CMs was playing further forward we would have fashioned out better chances? This has been happening in recent games too. Please see the passing heatmaps below to gain a general idea of each persons average position on the pitch.

As you can see Modric comes very deep to collect the ball, surely that comes within Parker's remit to collect the ball from the CBs and to distribute it to the more attacking players. Instead against wolves Parker spent a lot of this time on the right wing, where we already had Lennon and Walker. If he showed more discipline he could have stayed in CM and let Modric do the creating further forward. His lack of discipline was one of the factors in our poor performance. The like is also evident against Swansea.

Compare this performance to Livermore at Everton and you can see that due to Livermore holding his deep position, he gave Modric license to go forward and we won the game and controlled possession. Its doubtless that in CM Modric is our most important player, Parker should be doing his water carrying instead of the opposite way round.

For a player who's main job is to defend and provide a solid base for our creative players to do that,he doesn't seem to be doing his job. If he isn't defending and he isn't creating what does he do?

I have just been checking a sample of the stats you have provided and I believe they are completely misleading. A closer examination of Guardian's Chalkboards reveals that Luka Modric did not make 5 tackles against Wolves-the four blue dots refer to four take-ons he won, the red dot represents a take-on he lost. According to FourFourTwo's STATS ZONE app, Modric didn't make any tackles.

According to the same app, Parker made one tackle (successful, as it happens). This tackle is referenced in your diagram. The other two dots (one red, one blue) refer to one successful take-on and one unsuccessful take-on.

 

[jonathanhotspur]

Far from making 8 tackles against Swansea, Modric made 1. Everything else in that particular diagram refers to successful or unsuccessful take-ons.

 

[Spurger King]

Ffs

 

[fortworthspur]

he's been pretty good, maybe a little better than Palacios at his best. I think Sandro is better, but he's been injured and I appreciate Parker's contributions. However, if a player is English, he's almost always over-rated here. Just look at Dawson, for example.

 

[SpursSince1980]

What a fantastic topic. You're a credit to your family.

Too funny!

 

[#1 Spur]

What is a take-on defined as?