Weds Lightening Draft

[Somerset]

Originally Posted by Matt79

So Hanif is keeping wickets for you then?

Correct. He did wicket keep in three tests so I'm prepared to hand over the gloves to him. Besides, Barnes and Lohmann combined took 301 test wickets, including only 35 wicket keeper catches - so hes hardly going to be overworked based on that.

[Goughy]

Tharmi, who was your pick before changing?

It isnt a big deal, but Im not in favor of changes as that player was not available when myself or Somerset picked. ie they were off the market. Doesnt matter though

[chaminda_00]

Sorry Ted Dexter, maybe I should change him back or one of you guys can take him. Not fussed.

[Goughy]

Originally Posted by chaminda_00

Sorry Ted Dexter, maybe I should change him back or one of you guys can take him. Not fussed.

meh, I wouldnt have taken him. Great player but wouldnt fit in under my management

I dont mind if you keep Lloyd

[chaminda_00]

I was going for Doug Walters and then Matt took him. Saw Dexter and went for him without thinking of where he would bat. Doesn't really fit anywhere without affecting someone else in the line up.

[Somerset]

Unless Ted Dexter volunteers to keep wicket I've no interest in him.

[chaminda_00]

BTW Somerset why did you overlook Denis Lindsey, awsome keeper batsmen.

[Matt79]

Originally Posted by Matt79

Eddie Paynter
Doug Walters

Completed Team:
Len Hutton: 6971 runs @ 56.67. 19 100s.
Sid Barnes: 1072 runs @ 63.05. 3 100s.
Don Bradman (c): 6996 runs @ 99.94. 29 100s.
Eddie Paynter: 1540 runs @ 59.23. 4 100s.
Doug Walters: 5357 runs @ 48.26. 15 100s. 49 wickets at 29.08
Aubrey Faulkner: 1754 runs @ 40.79. 4 100s. 82 wickets @ 26.58
Keith Miller: 2958 runs @ 36.97. 7 100s. 170 wickets @ 22.97.
Mike Procter: 226 runs at 25.11. 41 wickets @ 15.02 (FC 21936 runs @ 36.01, 1417 wickets at 19.53)
Alan Knott: 4389 runs @ 32.75. 5 100s. 269 dismissals.
Ray Lindwall: 1502 runs @ 21.15. 2 100s. 228 wickets @ 23.03
Bill O'Reilly: 410 runs @ 12.81. 1 50. 144 wickets @ 22.59

Walters to act as the fourth seamer if conditions merit.

Strengths of my team are fairly obvious - Bradman at three, Hutton opening, class batsmen around them in the top five, three top flight all rounders, and a long long tail - Lindwall would be a decent 8, let alone a 10. The bowling doesn't look as statistically mean as Somersets, but for the eras they bowled in were all lethal.

Probably have one allrounder too many, maybe should have taken another specialist bat instead of Faulkner, but I figure with Don in the team, might as well enjoy the edge that give me and strengthen my bowling options.

As in the full draft for me, took Knott as he was an awesome keeper and a very good batsman - he's a fantastically good number 9.

[Somerset]

Originally Posted by chaminda_00

BTW Somerset why did you overlook Denis Lindsey, awsome keeper batsmen.

He was my other option and I definitely considered him. In the end I went with Hanif due to his twelve test centuries - admittedly half were opening the batting - and because if we were to sim the teams against each other, I'd imagine that Hanif would perform better then Lindsay.

[Matt79]

Jock Cameron, Don Tallon, and Godfrey Evans all also pretty good.

[Somerset]

Originally Posted by Matt79

Strengths of my team are fairly obvious - Bradman at three, Hutton opening, class batsmen around them in the top five, three top flight all rounders, and a long long tail - Lindwall would be a decent 8, let alone a 10. The bowling doesn't look as statistically mean as Somersets, but for the eras they bowled in were all lethal.

Probably have one allrounder too many, maybe should have taken another specialist bat instead of Faulkner, but I figure with Don in the team, might as well enjoy the edge that give me and strengthen my bowling options.

As in the full draft for me, took Knott as he was an awesome keeper and a very good batsman - he's a fantastically good number 9.

I'd personally consider your team to be the strongest, even if we were to disregard the influence of Bradman. I actually think that the bowling combination is appropriate - having Faulkner share the fifth bowler responsibilities, rather than leaving Walters as the sole fifth bowler for the team, is ideal IMO.

[Somerset]

Originally Posted by Matt79

Jock Cameron, Don Tallon, and Godfrey Evans all also pretty good.

Yes there were plenty of options - but as soon as Knott and Ames went within a few minutes of each other, I decided upon Hanif, even though his wicket keeping experience at test level was limited.

[chaminda_00]

Originally Posted by chaminda_00

Sir Jack Hobbs
Eddie Barlow
Wally Hammond
Sir Everton Weekes
Ken Barrington
Clyde Walcott (wk)
Clive Lloyd (c)
Allan Davidson
Fred Trueman
Jim Laker
Alec Bedser

Went for Walcott early so we could bat down to 7 with specialist. I decided early to not pick any all rounders and go for four man attack. It probably is my weakness but Barlow and Hammond offer enough as 5th and 6th bowlers.

I like my bowling attack. I figured a lot of guys would go for stats based bowlers. So I tried to pick four bowlers with lots of wickets and good averages. Four of my favorite bowlers as well. I love that batting line up. Apart from Barlow and Hammond the rest are all my favorite batsmen of the era.

I think this side is a lot better then my other two sides, cus I picked my bowlers early. Made the mistake in the past of picking bowlers too late.

[The Sean]

Originally Posted by Matt79

Strengths of my team are fairly obvious - Bradman at three, Hutton opening, class batsmen around them in the top five, three top flight all rounders, and a long long tail - Lindwall would be a decent 8, let alone a 10. The bowling doesn't look as statistically mean as Somersets, but for the eras they bowled in were all lethal.

Probably have one allrounder too many, maybe should have taken another specialist bat instead of Faulkner, but I figure with Don in the team, might as well enjoy the edge that give me and strengthen my bowling options.

As in the full draft for me, took Knott as he was an awesome keeper and a very good batsman - he's a fantastically good number 9.

Makes it a very short tail, TBH.

[Matt79]

They're four really strong teams - even the difference between four and five players makes for much stronger teams, and in this case, we have 100 years of cricket rather than 30 to pick from...