• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

CW Draft League

Jager

International Debutant
I tried to make the system very basic so that there would be no number crunching involved - it also comes down to how I rate each player personally, so there is no real formula or anything.

I rate each batsman out of three, three being reserved for the absolute ATG batsmen (e.g Lara), two for the superb batsmen who are just under the all-time level (e.g Kanhai) and one for the great batsmen who I don't think would flourish at this level (e.g Kallicharan, although that's perhaps a little harsh). Almost every batsman I rated scored a two or three.

I do exactly the same thing for bowlers, so the system focuses on each player's primary skill. I rate the wicketkeeper on his glovework alone at this stage, so for example Flower, Walcott or Sangakkara would only score one point here but Tallon scores three. Gilchrist scores two, for the record.

Once you've added up these numbers for each player, you get a 'raw' score.

After you get the raw score, the 'bonus' points come into play, and these are the points that make or break a side and truly show how clever or resourceful the drafter was with their team. I give an extra point for left-right opening combinations, being a good batsman as a wicketkeeper, having an excellent fifth bowling option (Sobers, Worrell, Walters etc.), having batting depth to the number eight slot, having a tactical genius/inspiring captain and for having a left-arm frontline bowling option. I will probably add having three great slippers as an extra too, but here's an example using watson's side (hope he doesn't mind, but it's a pretty good wrap I am giving him :p)...

watson's XI
01. Bob Simpson 2
02. Bill Lawry* 2
03. Charles Macartney 3
04. Maurice Leyland 2
05. Bill Ponsford 2
06. Elias 'Patsy' Hendren 2
07. John Waite+ 3
08. Ray Lindwall 3
09. Bill Johnston 2
10. Sydney Barnes 3
11. Neil Adcock 3

12. Peter Heine

Raw: 27 + 1 L/R opening combination + 1 wicketkeeper batting + 1 left-arm frontliner + 1 bowling depth = 31

31 is equal highest score at the moment. Adcock was probably judged leniently in hindsight, but I think he was a magnificent bowler. Fantastic team watson
 

kyear2

Cricketer Of The Year
Nice system, one of those criteria that I used to follow, but has changed is the L/R opening batsmen. In theory it makes sense but the top 3 opening partnerships of all, Hobbs and Sutcliffe, Greenidge and Haynes and Langer and Hayden were all all rh or lh combinations. Of the great combinations from the top of my head I can only think of Barnes and Morris and Simpson and Lawry that were mixed (I am sure they were more).

I learned the hard way how much the members on this forum place in having a solid batting option (not nec. a bowling all rounder, but a Lindwall, Warne, Marshall type at least) at #8 and a keeper that can more than hold a bat. Additionally I have always seen the value in having a solid fifth bolwer and even more importantly a very strong cordon, which could be a difference between winning and loosing a series.

So who managed to tie Watson for 1st in your rankings?
 

Jager

International Debutant
Agreed the cordon is very important. Although having a wicketkeeper who is handy with the bat is useful, I will always value glovework over anything else, so my system favours proper wicketkeepers a lot. Actually, I just readjusted the scores...

(edited out)

It comes down to personal preference for me to split them here :p
 
Last edited:

watson

Banned
Thanks :shy:

I guess it is unusual CW practice to discuss the various teams 'out loud' because some people might feel upset if their team doesn't get a mention.

But on the other hand, I guess we're all grown-ups.

Perhaps it might be appropriate to display all the teams on one page so we can start doing our 'home-work' a la Jager.

I must admit that Andy's ranking is a surprise. Might need to have another look at his bowling attack. Don't know too much about Peter Pollock.
 

Jager

International Debutant
Yeah I do feel like I might taint the views of a few of the teams - I'll edit the rankings I posted out, but I'll keep my system with watson's team as an example since it will have nothing to be compared to and I am far from slandering it (unless he doesn't want it there). We're just waiting on Eds FTR, once he confirms his side we'll vote on our teams! Also kyear your team was the next best on the rankings, I think it had equal highest raw score but didn't get all of the bonuses

Edit: **** I thought it was kyear who replied - same looking avatars :laugh:
 
Last edited:

Valer

First Class Debutant
Very very close my numbers broadly agreed with Jagers

(bar my own team which is very much optimised for long careers vs high impact careers).
 
Last edited:

Eds

International Debutant
Apologies for the delay.

1. WG Grace
2. Desmond Haynes
3. Clyde Walcott
4. Graeme Pollock
5. Martin Crowe
6. Shivnarine Chanderpaul
7. Alec Stewart/Zaheer Abbas
8. Maurice Tate
9. Shane Warne
10. Colin Croft
11. Glenn McGrath

Not sure whether to go with Stewart or Abbas, really.
 
Last edited:

kingkallis

International Coach
Apologies for the delay.

1. WG Grace
2. Desmond Haynes
3. Clyde Walcott
4. Graeme Pollock
5. Martin Crowe
6. Shivnarine Chanderpaul
7. Alec Stewart/Zaheer Abbas
8. Maurice Tate
9. Shane Warne
10. Colin Croft
11. Glenn McGrath

Not sure whether to go with Stewart or Abbas, really.
Apology not accepted!

Waqar and Lillee roaring to get rid of Abbas, Stewart whoever you pick, mate!
 

Jager

International Debutant
Take your pick when you can Eds, polling will start when you have. I'd go Stewart personally
 

kingkallis

International Coach
KingKallis's CricZo XI

Len Hutton ( c )
Matthew Hayden
Hashim Amla
Everton Weekes
Doug Walters
Trevor Goddard
Andrew Flintoff
Jeff Dujon ( + )
Hedley Verity
Waqar Younis
Dennis Lillee





Tests : 834
Runs by Top 5 : 30,354 @ 52.84 with 95 centuries and 104 half centuries
Runs by 6,7,8 : 9,683 @ 32.72 with 11 centuries and 60 half centuries
Wickets by Top 5 : 1221 @ 26.17 with 14 ten-fers and 58 five-fers
Wicket-keeper : 267 catches & 5 stumpings
 

Jager

International Debutant
Alright, give me an hour or so and I'll introduce the concept for Season 3... hopefully I will be around for it and not relegated :/
 

Eds

International Debutant
I think we should use a total points system to determine relegations. Use mean number of points in drafts, and the lowest go out, IMO.

Oh, and the Season 3 draft to be a good 'un.
 

Jager

International Debutant
In regards to using a mean points system, I based the relegation system on football leagues - City might have won last year but if they were to finish bottom three this year, they'd go down. It will be fairer in the long run when everyone has points on the board IMO, because it won't be as difficult to retain a place if you're promoted
 

Eds

International Debutant
In regards to using a mean points system, I based the relegation system on football leagues - City might have won last year but if they were to finish bottom three this year, they'd go down. It will be fairer in the long run when everyone has points on the board IMO, because it won't be as difficult to retain a place if you're promoted
Yes but we're looking for the best drafters over a series of seasons. The best way to do that is not relegate someone for having one bad draft.

Who do we rate as a better drafter, someone who comes 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, last, or someone who avoids relegation by one point each time?
 

watson

Banned
Admittedly, I do have a vested interest here - but to use a parallel - the Premier League Soccer doesn't use a mean to decide who gets relegated at the end of a season. It's whoever has the least points.

But I'm happy to follow the consensus. Both ideas are fair.
 

Jager

International Debutant
Perhaps we could have an immunity zone where the top x amount of players in the championship are safe?

Should someone come first that many times though (or even place, just to make it more realistic) then they'd have five titles and the most points scored overall by far, so they'd still be ranked as the best
 

watson

Banned
Perhaps we could have an immunity zone where the top x amount of players in the championship are safe?

Should someone come first that many times though (or even place, just to make it more realistic) then they'd have five titles and the most points scored overall by far, so they'd still be ranked as the best
'Immunity Zone'? That's going to get very messy. Besides living on the edge is fun. Keeps you sharp.

Mean or Premier League relegation style.

To be honest, I don't mind if I go to the Reserves as long as I still have the fun of selecting teams.
 

Jager

International Debutant
Agreed, it's simpler if it stays the way it is. It's only two people who go down/up out of twelve, so if you're consistent then it shouldn't be too much of a threat
 

Top