draft !

[Ludwig]

Mills and Hopper are the only two close to guaranteed to be matched by their host clubs if bid at pick 3. Even Hopper might not be 100% guaranteed if the Giants figure, for balance purposes, they only need one of Hopper and Kennedy. If the Dees bid their first pick on Kennedy (after already bidding it on Hopper), Keays or Hipwood, they will probably be left holding that player. So long as that is a player they want, it's not a problem for them.

I think the Giants will definitely take both Hopper and Kennedy. They've got pick 10 and then heaps of later picks to use up and a handful of first round picks they traded in for next year.They also lost Treloar, so that's one big time midfielder out and I think they would like the fill their list with local players, as do we, as much as possible, considering the epidemic of homesickness in the AFL at the moment.

And that goes double for Brisbane, who are also certain to take both Keays and Hipwood. They're looking at a pretty good draft when you add Schache to that list and I think they also have a few decent prospects later in the draft as well. Brisbane might have the best set of young KPPs in the league, so their future may not be so bleak as it appears.

[liz]

I doubt Brisbane would take Keays and Hipwood if Melbourne bid on one at 3 and then the other at 4. So they are far from certain to take them in the context of the question that was asked.

[Ludwig]

I doubt Brisbane would take Keays and Hipwood if Melbourne bid on one at 3 and then the other at 4. So they are far from certain to take them in the context of the question that was asked.

You're probably right if they bid for both at 3 and 4, but that would fall into the category of pugnacious bidding, a category even beyond vexatious, and would trigger Brisbane to insist on an AFL investigation into the matter and a WADA investigation into the Melbourne recruiting team.

[Nico]

You're probably right if they bid for both at 3 and 4, but that would fall into the category of pugnacious bidding, a category even beyond vexatious, and would trigger Brisbane to insist on an AFL investigation into the matter and a WADA investigation into the Melbourne recruiting team.

If this sort of stuff happens it will prove to all and sundry what a stupid system they have dreamed up. You have to wonder the mentality of some list managers if this happens. As others have said there would be a list of "no future deals with these clubs". Again, can't wait for; "we did it to get the best deal for our supporters".

[dejavoodoo44]

You're probably right if they bid for both at 3 and 4, but that would fall into the category of pugnacious bidding, a category even beyond vexatious, and would trigger Brisbane to insist on an AFL investigation into the matter and a WADA investigation into the Melbourne recruiting team.

Hi, Ludwig. You know, if the term "pugnacious bidding" becomes popular, I want the Oxford English Dictionary to note that it first started here.

[Mug Punter]

If this sort of stuff happens it will prove to all and sundry what a stupid system they have dreamed up. You have to wonder the mentality of some list managers if this happens. As others have said there would be a list of "no future deals with these clubs". Again, can't wait for; "we did it to get the best deal for our supporters".

I tend to disagree.

The system is fundamentally sound but it cannot cater for unethical behaviour.

Just as for this system to work other clubs need to bid on academy players, even if they know that their bids will be matched, then academy clubs from time to time have to be prepared to let a player go to another club if that club values the player higher than we do. And we at the Swans are on the record as saying we want to get to the stage where other clubs get our academy products.

See, it's not a vexatious bid of they are left with the player on their list. It's simple, if we think someone is bidding overs for our player to make us pay overs we always have the right to not match the bid.

So, it's simple. If Mills gets bid for at 1 (highly unlikely I know) we have to make a decision as to whether he is worth it.

It's why I don't think that the Lions have too much to worry about with Keays and Hipwood as they would be considered early teen picks at best and do no club would be willing to risk losing out on, say, a bid 6. For the Lions though I do think they have missed a trick with their strategy as they have telegraphed it a bit. They would have been a lot better, I believe having a late first round banker (say at 14) that allowed then to dip into the draft and which also matched their approximate valuation of Keays. That would have given them a bet each way if a club tried to screw them.

This really is only going to be an issue with us relatively rarely. Once a player gets past about 12 or so then the penalties for a vexatious bid are much less anyway. As an example, let's say a player is rated at an early second rounder (say 21) at 878 points. Any matched bid at 15 or later can be matched and provide no real penalty to the academy club. But for the vexatious bidding club there is a real risk in ending up with a kid rated at 21 when you could get a kid rated at 15 instead.

Melbourne clubs will make genuine bids to keep us honest (as they should) but I really do think they will be reluctant to make overly vexatious bids to kids that are so emotionally attached to the Swans when they are going to have to pay significant overs to inflict a relatively minor penalty on us.

[Ludwig]

Hi, Ludwig. You know, if the term "pugnacious bidding" becomes popular, I want the Oxford English Dictionary to note that it first started here.

It is a certainly a lexically combative term, so we'd have a rondarowdious fight on our hands.

[barry]

Isn't it awesome that we can finish top4 and still pick up a number 2 draft selection !

[dejavoodoo44]

It is a certainly a lexically combative term, so we'd have a rondarowdious fight on our hands.

Hmmm: after our most recent meeting with Hawthorn, I felt truly ufced.

[cartman48]

The higher Bids will more than likely come for Hopper & Mills and from what I have seen Either is worth as high as pick 2 but I can't see Brisbane not taking Schade (Or Weitering) at this number.

[neilfws]

Don't think I've seen this posted yet:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/injury-...12-gkxg8b.html

It is not a short read, but is very comprehensive. I guess the bidding system is just too complex to be summarised in anything shorter!

[Doctor]

Where would we be without Emma Quayle? Brilliant article. Thanks for posting.