Draft

Bastard

baggygreen wrote:Prez is going to be able to pick half his team in one go at this rate.

Strategy? Someone pick Steyn. Just to 'rock' his cunning plan.

You know what would be more interesting- If we did the same thing except we can only pick CURRENT players. That way we could have some sort of competition based on how that person's players do throughout the calendar year.

We could assign 'points' to each player based on performances. Eg, if Sanga were to make 200 against the Bangers on a flat deck, that would receive just 20 points. However if he were to make 80 on a minefield against South Africa, that innings would earn 50 points.

Winner would obviously be the person with the most points at the end of the calendar year.

How're you quantifying your points system? Can you display it through various formulae?

Brass Monkey wrote:How're you quantifying your points system? Can you display it through various formulae?

Perhaps have a basis of 10 points for a 50, 20 points for a century, and 5 points per wicket. Additional points could be awarded depending on ICC rankings. Eg 30 extra points for a century against the number 1 team, 20 extra against the number 2, 15 against the number 3 etc.......Or for bowling, extra points depending on who they dismiss, quality of the pitch etc.

Or.....perhaps every time we pick a player, we assign him a 'points rating'. Eg Jacques Kallis 100, Rubel Hossain 0, Stuart Broad 40........Their 'points rating' is taken into account whenever they do something good, or whenever someone does something good against them. So if Rubel were to dismiss Kallis, he would get a sh*tload of points compared to if Stuart Broad dismissed him. The points rating would have to be a fair reflection of that player's ability, and can be disputed if it's felt a player has a points rating that is too high/low for his ability.

Extra points depending on pitch quality, which would have to be assessed on the spot, obviously. So for example, we could assess the current Adelaide pitch after day 1 and say "Right, flat as hell, 0 bonus points from the pitch for batting, but 5 bonus points per wicket." Or the current Mumbai pitch- "Spinning quite a lot, occasional ball spitting up, 20 bonus points for a century, 10 bonus points for a 50, 0 bonus points for a wicket."

Urgh, could be confusing. But just a thought.

Or we could just simply base our success or otherwise on player's stats.

Henry wrote:You know what would be more interesting- If we did the same thing except we can only pick CURRENT players. That way we could have some sort of competition based on how that person's players do throughout the calendar year.

We could assign 'points' to each player based on performances. Eg, if Sanga were to make 200 against the Bangers on a flat deck, that would receive just 20 points. However if he were to make 80 on a minefield against South Africa, that innings would earn 50 points.

Winner would obviously be the person with the most points at the end of the calendar year.

Wouldn't everyone end up with more or less the same team?

Too complicated.

Even my "whole team option" baffled the Bailers sideways.

Henry wrote:

Brass Monkey wrote:How're you quantifying your points system? Can you display it through various formulae?

Perhaps have a basis of 10 points for a 50, 20 points for a century, and 5 points per wicket. Additional points could be awarded depending on ICC rankings. Eg 30 extra points for a century against the number 1 team, 20 extra against the number 2, 15 against the number 3 etc.......Or for bowling, extra points depending on who they dismiss, quality of the pitch etc.

Or.....perhaps every time we pick a player, we assign him a 'points rating'. Eg Jacques Kallis 100, Rubel Hossain 0, Stuart Broad 40........Their 'points rating' is taken into account whenever they do something good, or whenever someone does something good against them. So if Rubel were to dismiss Kallis, he would get a sh*tload of points compared to if Stuart Broad dismissed him. The points rating would have to be a fair reflection of that player's ability, and can be disputed if it's felt a player has a points rating that is too high/low for his ability.

Extra points depending on pitch quality, which would have to be assessed on the spot, obviously. So for example, we could assess the current Adelaide pitch after day 1 and say "Right, flat as hell, 0 bonus points from the pitch for batting, but 5 bonus points per wicket." Or the current Mumbai pitch- "Spinning quite a lot, occasional ball spitting up, 20 bonus points for a century, 10 bonus points for a 50, 0 bonus points for a wicket."

Urgh, could be confusing. But just a thought.

Wowzers. Thorough. Sounds pretty good though, all-in-all. I'll certainly subscribe to your newsletter.

Another problem is the differing number of games, but that could be sorted out by averaging.

taipan wrote:

Henry wrote:You know what would be more interesting- If we did the same thing except we can only pick CURRENT players. That way we could have some sort of competition based on how that person's players do throughout the calendar year.

We could assign 'points' to each player based on performances. Eg, if Sanga were to make 200 against the Bangers on a flat deck, that would receive just 20 points. However if he were to make 80 on a minefield against South Africa, that innings would earn 50 points.

Winner would obviously be the person with the most points at the end of the calendar year.

Wouldn't everyone end up with more or less the same team?

But once a player is picked, that player is no longer available. Same as Prez's draft.

Henry wrote:

taipan wrote:

Henry wrote:You know what would be more interesting- If we did the same thing except we can only pick CURRENT players. That way we could have some sort of competition based on how that person's players do throughout the calendar year.

We could assign 'points' to each player based on performances. Eg, if Sanga were to make 200 against the Bangers on a flat deck, that would receive just 20 points. However if he were to make 80 on a minefield against South Africa, that innings would earn 50 points.

Winner would obviously be the person with the most points at the end of the calendar year.

Wouldn't everyone end up with more or less the same team?

But once a player is picked, that player is no longer available. Same as Prez's draft.

Yeah, but there are a limited number of current test players.

Still should be enough players to go around this forum. Perhaps EVERY current test player would get picked by someone. That would make it more interesting, imo.

Some of us who know our domestic cricket could even take a punt by picking some players on the fringes of their national team.

Henry wrote:You know what would be more interesting- If we did the same thing except we can only pick CURRENT players. That way we could have some sort of competition based on how that person's players do throughout the calendar year.

We could assign 'points' to each player based on performances. Eg, if Sanga were to make 200 against the Bangers on a flat deck, that would receive just 20 points. However if he were to make 80 on a minefield against South Africa, that innings would earn 50 points.

Winner would obviously be the person with the most points at the end of the calendar year.

Maybe something worth while but to be done in December before the January beings if you want it done in Calendar years or if you want to do it in a season (13/14) before the Ashes start and maybe you can select more than 11 so there's more chance of a team have scoring players. Say 15 or 16 with set restrictions like 6 batters, 2 all rounders, 2 wicketkeepers, 2 spinners, 4 pacemen.

Stats would be the easiest metric to judge results rather than a complicated points system and doesn't require a lot of legwork. Couldn't be a draft like this one, meandering along on a forum for a month, you'd need every participant online here at the same time or on some chat client like skype/irc/msn etc etc.

So far only 3 current players picked, if you still regard SRT as a current player.

Does that say something about the state of the game today?

May have to do this the other way round but a nice table on the current selections:

	Selection #1	Selection #2	Selection #3	Selection #4	Selection #5	Selection #6	Selection #7	Selection #8	Selection #9	Selection #10	Selection #11
Henry	Brian Lara	Richard Hadlee	Imran Khan	Alan Knott	Jim Laker
Brass	Victor Trumper	Wasim Akram	Muttiah Muralitharan	Allan Donald	GS Chappell	Ray Lindwall
tricycle	Keith Miller	Kumar Shri Ranjitsinhji	Fred Trueman	Bishan Bedi	Frank Tyson	Clyde Walcott
Skully	Garry Sobers	Dennis Lillee	Graeme Pollock	Kumar Sangakkara	Clarrie Grimmett	Ian Botham
Growl	Jacques Kallis	Glenn McGrath	Clive Lloyd	Alec Stewart	Derek Underwood	Waqar Younis
baggygreen	Jack Hobbs	Vivian Richards	Wally Hammond	Allan Border	Michael Holding	Ian Healy
Pete	Shane Warne	Curtly Ambrose	George Headley	Barry Richards	Alan (K) Davidson	Everton Weekes
taipan	Len Hutton	Sydney Barnes	Adam Gilchrist	Frederick Spofforth	Harold Larwood	Ken Barrington
Prez	Sachin Tendulkar	Malcolm Marshall	Mike Procter

Nice work, bg. I like some organisation in these threads.

Personally, I think Petey has the gun side at this stage.

Wrong thread, skullery.

Nice table bg.

Wrong thread? What?

skully wrote:Wrong thread? What?

Wrong thread for the 'FFS, where are you Trev?'

So I should use this thread???

Use this thread to deride.

I see. Trev, I deride you, and hail Mon-teh!!!

:

Bastards! F*cking bastards!