Nottingham Forest wasn't a loan spell. His first loan was MK Dons at age 19, as John83 says. (The stats of 18 in 37 were over two seasons though, mainly the second)Quote:
Originally Posted by CSAD
Printable View
Nottingham Forest wasn't a loan spell. His first loan was MK Dons at age 19, as John83 says. (The stats of 18 in 37 were over two seasons though, mainly the second)Quote:
Originally Posted by CSAD
Did Bamford not start his career at Forrest though? Realistically if Parrot was a Millwall or Ipswich player would a top half premier league club plump for him?Quote:
Originally Posted by CSAD
Without forensically moving a dial along their respective age profiles I’m of the opinion that Parrot is not showing anything like the form Bamford did or was about to do at a similar stage in Career.
And this is the caveat that should be set on all youth players. The reality is bar grealish and rice, who didn't even end up playing for us, we've had hype without any follow through almost all of the time. Not since robbie keane has anyone really lived up to the hype, making his debut at 17, and whatever hyped followed his debut he scored the same year so he was living up to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eirambler
He never got 18 goals, I don’t know where he got that number from. To say the majority were in his second season is and understatement.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
So he’s been compared to a 20-21 year old in his third season when he’s an 18-19 year old in his first loan spell...
He’s done more than Bamford did at the same age and Bamford got a top half move so yeah. Plus Parrott is already at a top half club so that irrelevant.Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_peepee
Bamford must have done a lot in those 12 minutes on the field to show he was far ahead of where Parrott was. Could you tell me what he did in those 12 minute as I’m not sure.
18 in 37 League One games is quoted on wiki and on soccerway. I'm not sure what figures you're looking at?Quote:
Originally Posted by CSAD
Parrott is on his second loan spell. Bamford - who was 20 years and 3 months when he left MK Dons, with 18 league goals under his belt - started regularly scoring in his second season, not his third. (If you want to count the 12 minutes at Forest - again, not a loan spell - as his first season, then you have to count Parrott's four games at Spurs at his first)Quote:
Originally Posted by CSAD
But yes, Parrott is now the age (just gone 19) when Bamford started on his first season with MK Dons, so let's see how it goes.
Not a loan?Quote:
Originally Posted by CSAD
Sort of; it's not wrong, it just combines two consecutive loan spells. It seems he was on loan at MK Dons from November 2012. Three assists in his debut sounds like big impact, but didn't start scoring for months, and in a decent team at that. Still, he impressed enough that he was loaned again for the beginning of the following season, which is when he started banging them in.Quote:
Originally Posted by CSAD
His first goal wasn’t until March 2013 making him 19 going on 20. His second loan spell in his first season. Bamford was onto his 3rd season... he scored 4 goal in his 2nd season. What Parrott was doing in his first 4 matches for Spurs was definitely better as Bamford was even paying at that point. At this points Parrott has 1560 minutes compared to 11 minutes for Bamford so I’d love to see where people get this idea that Bamford has done more.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Anyway I am more worried that some one said, he lacked pace. You need to be a pretty exceptional player ( especially a Forward ) if you lack pace. the defenders are just too good and too pacy if you can't test them with pace.
His name escapes me but didn’t that young fella that came from Arsenal to Scotland to Sunderland to loads of places have plenty of talent but lacked the pace for the top level == You gotta have pace or be very very good altogether !
So you compared an 18 year old with a 20 year old.Quote:
Originally Posted by John83
Comparing like for like Parrott has payed for 1560 minutes compared to Bamford who at the same point in his career had played 12 minutes.
I agree it's too early to properly compare the two, although Bamford did get three assists on his debut, which was at Parrott's current age, when he's been sent back with nothing really to show for his spell. But that's not enough data to judge him on.
But Bamford did score 18 in 37 league games for MK Dons, and if he's in his third season, then Parrott's in his second season. Bamford's first goal - which probably would have come earlier but for three months out with injury - was was at the age Parrott will be when the new season starts. Bamford then scored 21 (including cup goals) in the following nine months, before moving up a division.
It doesn't really matter of course if Parrott maps Bamford's career out to the game. But I think we can agree they're the baseline markers.
You are massively overthinking this.Quote:
Originally Posted by seanfhear
Anthony Stokes?Quote:
Originally Posted by seanfhear
I genuinely could not recall his name ( I am getting old ) but it goes to show that if you don’t make it ( at a decent level ) for what ever reasons you are soon forgotten.Quote:
Originally Posted by tetsujin1979
I’m pretty sure that Liam Brady said that if this Guy had some decent pace he could have been a player for the higher levels = = Pace is hugely important !
Parrot turned 19 in February, since which he's done shag-all at Ipswich and been sent home. Bamford turned 19 the September he was loaned to MK Dons, getting 3 assists on his debut and impressing sufficiently to for his loan to be extended to the end of the season, and then to be loaned again the following season. That's the point of comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by CSAD
They were in his second season. When Parrott got his first goal he just turned 19, at which point in Bamford’s career he was barely playing senior football.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
The majority of Bamford’s goals were scored when he was 20 and in his third season as a senior player. He was at the same age Parrott will be in two seasons. Parrott has actually scored compared to Bamford so is already ahead and based on paying minutes he’s significantly ahead. Bamford’s second season he scored 4 league goals, not exactly impressive is it or a high bar to hit.
The current baseline market is Parrott has 1560 minutes compared to Bamford’s 12 minutes and 1 goal & 1 assist to Bamford’s 0 on both fronts. And like it’s been said here it takes time for these mould of strikers to fully develop so making predictions now is pointless, from his matches he clearly has good ball control, movement and ability what he is lacking is confidence but that will come when he gets older and gets more games and once that happen the goals will follow.
He was 18 when he first went on loan this season. At this same point Bamford had played 12 minutes and you are hailing him like a god. Want to highlight that this was his second season? This season was Parrotts first and which he 1560 minutes compared to Bamford’s 12 minutes.Quote:
Originally Posted by John83
Being a tool is probably a bigger hinderance.Quote:
Originally Posted by seanfhear
Parrott was a world class youth player. He literally destroyed young defenders at the biggest clubs in the world. Incredibly impressive so I can see why people were very excited. He looks very average at senior level thus far, but he has just gone 19 and he was baptised as the great white hope of Irish football from about the age of 16. To be fair, even the English pundits were namechecking him as potentially outstanding.
I think he has it in his locker to be a good international class player in the Premier League but I see nothing to tell me he can be a world class senior player. Plenty of lads can't make the jump up and in some ways Troy is a lesson for me not to be overly excited of the Zefis and Fergusons of this world. Different players develop and decline at different ages and the gap between 16 and 18 or 19 is huge. 2 years ago, I would have said Jason Knight, Nathal Collins and Dara O'Shea would have a good chance of making it as professionals. Now, I think they will have long and successful careers in the Premier League.
What I would say is that confidence is key and a good loan spell to a continental team might be the makings of him.
Bamford's 4 goals were in 12 games because of injury. Really his season started in March. So that's quite respectable for a young striker I think.Quote:
Originally Posted by CSAD
"Minutes played" as a stat is largely meaningless btw.Quote:
Originally Posted by CSAD
But let's see what happens next season. I find it doubtful that Parrott will score 20 senior goals unfortunately.
It is relevant when you have only played 12 minutes.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
We’ll then you’re clearly biased so it’s a pointless argument
That’s the point, players develop at different rates so we just need to wait and see what happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bungle
Hailing him like a god? :rolleyes: I have better things to do than refute strawman BS.Quote:
Originally Posted by CSAD
By that logic hes not as good as Robbie Keane, who lets face it his career was top 6 permiership. Great Irish player of course. But not world class, which the way some of the talk about Parrott was going thats where he was headedQuote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
We dont really. There are exceptions to most rules, and Bamford was probably one of those a late bloomer, and the right trajectory at pivotal points in his career. Vardy is another exception. Parrot was being touted as a great player with great potential. He scored a couple of goals for the u21s and there were calls to play him at senior level, and it wasn't just out of desperation. He has done very little to show outside of youth football he has got anything other than the ability to outshine his peers at youth level.Quote:
Originally Posted by CSAD
How can anyone try to hype a striker on the basis on scoring 1 goal in 1560 minutes? I worked for a Sports Data Collection company until last month. We covered every League 1 game live. I saw plenty of Parrott with Ipswich and very little to get overly excited about. All that he's proven this season is that he's currently nowhere near Championship standard and, at a push, not a good League 1 striker yet either. He's young enough to have the potential the develop alright. For his sake (and the sake of us all) I hope he does so but he should be well behind Connolly and Idah at the moment in the pecking order by any metric.
Bamford's 3 assists on his MK Dons were not in different seasons to Parrott'sQuote:
Originally Posted by CSAD
Parrott played four games (95 minutes) for Spurs in the 19/20 season. So if Bamford's first season was 12 minutes for Forest and his second was 3 assists on his debut, then Parrott's first season was last year and his second has seen 29 games and 1 goal.
I'm "clearly biased"? How on earth do you figure that?Quote:
Originally Posted by CSAD
If Parrott had done something in his 1650 minutes on the pitch, it would definitely be relevant. But I'm sure Bamford could have played those games and not scored at the same age as well.
I think next season, while far from a make-or-break year for Parrott, will tell a lot about how far he's going to go.
Also - would you ever relax a bit. It's great to see new posters on the board, but there's no need to be quite so aggressive. (I see you've quietly dropped your complaints about 18 goals in 37 league games for example)
They were in different seasons. Those assists came in his second season. His 3 assists came in the 2012/2013 season when he was 19 going on 20, so Parrott played 95 minutes for a top 6 club whereas Bamford played 12 minutes for a championship club and people have the audacity to compare the two in the same season, surely that in itself should tell you who’s done more at that point in their career.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
29 games in parrots first season compared to 2 games in Bamford’s. That’s the direct comparison.
What has Bamford done in his 12 minutes on the field? If you weren’t biased you’d compare the two in the same playing Field when they were both 18/19 years old, right now you were comparing a 18/19 year old with a 19/20 & 20/21 year old.
Because this argument is incredibly stupid,
Unless you have been under a rock you’d have known that he isn’t being hyped based on what he was like this season.Quote:
Originally Posted by sadloserkid
I'll rephrase then. Hyping him at all, on the back of the season he's had, is bewildering.Quote:
Originally Posted by CSAD
I’m just comparing because many on here are comparing a 18 year old in his first season with a 20 year old in his 3rd.Quote:
Originally Posted by sadloserkid
Just because I'm coming in pointing out errors in your posts - such as denying 18 goals in 37 games, or your continual mis-counting of the players' senior seasons, which you're after doing again in your most recent post - doesn't mean I'm biased. And there's still no need to be quite so aggressive.Quote:
Originally Posted by CSAD
FWIW, tomorrow Parrott is the exact same age as Bamford was when he got those three assists on his MK Dons debut. The clock to obscurity starts then... :)
Yeah that was me who said that. There are lots of players that lack pace and still do well, but I thought at times he looked cumbersome. Not only a lack of speed but also a lack of quick thinking.Quote:
Originally Posted by seanfhear
Ive completely flip flopped on my opinion of Parrott. Its not that long ago I was calling for him to start for Ireland. I thought he would get a big confidence boost after his first goal but that never happened and hes actually looked worse since.
The Stokes or Graham Barrett comparisons look fairly accurate right now
Barrett was a tragedy. All those injuries destroyed him. I think he could have been a wonderful player but thems the breaks in the game. I remember him captaining Arsenal to the Fa Youth Cup and all the big English journalists talking about him as the next big Gunner...a little like the boy Troy I guess to be fair.Quote:
Originally Posted by Razors left peg
Comparing the two this season for Parrott is the equivalence of comparing Bamford from the 11/12 season, his MK Dons loan is irrelevant.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Huge LOL.Quote:
Originally Posted by CSAD
I haven't played any senior seasons of football yet. I'm in my late thirties, but it's good to know that Bamford was 0 minutes of senior football ahead of me at the same point in his career.Quote:
Originally Posted by CSAD
Granularity is critical. Let’s keep drilling. We should look into Mrs Bamford folic acid and vitamin D intake during the first trimester to line up with Mrs Parrots.Quote:
Originally Posted by CSAD
There's a bang of 'he's 28 until he's 29' off these first or second season arguments. I don't really get what Bamford has to do with this anyway.
His coaches at Spurs obviously rate him and have tried to get him experience at different levels but it hasn't really happened yet. I'm sure they won't give up so it's a bit pointless drawing wide-ranging conclusions now, particularly comparing him with one of the best strikers around at the moment.
People are saying Bamford was doing much more at the same point in his career which is just blatantly wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
He’s scored consistently at every level he’s been at except senior level but that will come with time.