Expeditious Draft- real quick

[watson]

I've picked Prasanna, Chandra, and Venkat before in Drafts, but never Bedi. So Bedi it is as he balances the attack very nicely.

Incidently, I wish I could have watched a duel between Bedi and Brian Lara at their respective peaks. Bedi attacking and goading Lara, with Lara always willing to counterpunch would have been facinating.


01. Gordon Greenidge
02. Geoff Boycott
03. Viv Richards
04. Javed Miandad
05. Clive Lloyd*
06. Aubrey Faulkner
07. Les Ames+
08. Richard Hadlee
09. Alan Davidson
10. Michael Holding
11. Bishan Bedi

Happy with this team as it is very well balanced (something I always set out to achieve) and has just about everything necessary to win a Test series. Hadlee-Davidson-Holding-Bedi-Faulkner is probably not the strongest attack on show, but it's not entirely bad either.

Also don't mind the West Indian connection of Greenidge-Richards-Lloyd-Holding as it gives the team cohesion and pulls Geoffrey into line at the same time.

 

[watson]

Just Monk and Spikey to pick. Looking forward to Monk's last pick as the No.8 position is pivotal to his team.

 

[kyear2]

Final team :

1. WG Grace
2. Graham Gooch
3. Rohan Kanhai
4. Martin Crowe
5. Frank Worrell
6. Imran Khan (c)
7. Adam Gilchrist (wk)
8. Kapil Dev
9. Shaun Pollock
10. Allan Donald
11, Hedley Verity

Thoughts?

If I am to be honest, probably a batsman short and a little all rounder happy for mine. Donald and Imran are top tier to lead the attack though and Worrell and Kanhai are pure class. Gilly makes up some of the batting deficit and is a match winner.

 

[kyear2]

I've picked Prasanna, Chandra, and Venkat before in Drafts, but never Bedi. So Bedi it is as he balances the attack very nicely.

Incidently, I wish I could have watched a duel between Bedi and Brian Lara at their respective peaks. Bedi attacking and goading Lara, with Lara always willing to counterpunch would have been facinating.


01. Gordon Greenidge
02. Geoff Boycott
03. Viv Richards
04. Javed Miandad
05. Clive Lloyd*
06. Aubrey Faulkner
07. Les Ames+
08. Richard Hadlee
09. Alan Davidson
10. Michael Holding
11. Bishan Bedi

Happy with this team as it is very well balanced (something I always set out to achieve) and has just about everything necessary to win a Test series. Hadlee-Davidson-Holding-Bedi-Faulkner is probably not the strongest attack on show, but it's not entirely bad either.

Also don't mind the West Indian connection of Greenidge-Richards-Lloyd-Holding as it gives the team cohesion and pulls Geoffrey into line at the same time.

Love the team Watson. Great attack, though I would open with Holding and Hadlee.

 

[AldoRaine18]

If I am to be honest, probably a batsman short and a little all rounder happy for mine. Donald and Imran are top tier to lead the attack though and Worrell and Kanhai are pure class. Gilly makes up some of the batting deficit and is a match winner.

Yeah I guess the lack of another top batsman in top 5 would be made up by the fact that they bat till 9 specially with someone like Gilly coming in at 7.

 

[Red]

Hugh Trumble- How this guy is not remembered more is beyond me. Four and a half wickets per test. Great SR and economy rate. Handy enough batsman to average 20. 3 first class hundreds. Suits my team well as I think I need two guys at 8 and 9 who can handle a bat (considering I have Waqar and McGrath at 10/11)

Monk's XI

- Len Hutton
- Bruce Mitchell
- Brian Lara
- VVS Laxman
- Steve Waugh *
- AB DeVilliers +
- Chris Cairns
- Ray Lindwall
- Hugh Trumble
- Waqar Younis
- Glenn McGrath

 

[kyear2]

Great attack monk. Lara and A.B are the keys to the batting firing.

 

[Red]

McGrath, Lindwall, Younis, Cairns, Trumble plus Waugh and Mitchell....plenty of bowling options...

 

[Spikey]

Mohammad Azharuddin

Barry Richards
Victor Trumper
Kumar Sangakkara
Wally Hammond
Clyde Walcott (+)
Mohammad Azharuddin
Ian Botham
Shane Warne
Jack Cowie
Curtly Ambrose
Shoaib Akhtar

kinda wanted to pick Pujara

 

[watson]

Very enjoyable draft Monk, and very well run. Thankyou!

Now comes the difficult task of finding the 3 'strongest' teams.

 

[kyear2]

Great job Monk.

As I said earlier, a draft format and time allotment that I hope is followed from here onwards. Even if not 3 hours, 6 is ideal and the allotment of positions was better than randomizing every other round.

 

[AldoRaine18]

Very much agree. Thanks for an excellent draft, monk. Loved the restrictions as well.

 

[watson]

Great job Monk.

As I said earlier, a draft format and time allotment that I hope is followed from here onwards. Even if not 3 hours, 6 is ideal and the allotment of positions was better than randomizing every other round.

Yes, we've run the empirical experiment and 3 hours worked fine for the most part thus making the traditional 12 hours seem rather silly and redundant.

Even if the drafter times-out occasionally because the time-interval is 3-6 hours, and doesn't get the exact player that he wants, then I hardly see this as being the end of the world. In other words, the postive of having a draft hum along outweigh the negative of having to pick Greenidge instead of Hutton (for example) - IMO.

 

[kyear2]

And the one drop draft order each round worked equally as brilliantly and one that I hope is retained and utilized going forward.

 

[watson]

And the one drop draft order each round worked equally as brilliantly and one that I hope is retained and utilized going forward.

I agree. If the time-interval is 3-6 hours then the entire draft order will need to be determined before the start so that the person making the first pick of the round is not disadvantaged.

Also, 'descending the ladder' seemed better than 'ascending the ladder' (a method that we've used previously) but I'm not sure why exactly.

 

[kyear2]

It's also fairer than a randomizer every other round.

 

[Dan]

How exactly is it fairer?

Randomising every second round, and reversing, should mathematically give everyone the same average position.

 

[watson]

It's also fairer than a randomizer every other round.

I think that you mean more predictable rather than 'fairer' because picks in a 'descending ladder' method are made from each rung on the ladder in an orderly sequence.

However, no system is perfect and the the 'decending ladder' system does have its own foibles. For example, if there are more than 11 drafters then the people at the top of the ladder will never reach the bottom and therefore miss out on the 'double-pick'. People will then complain about not getting the 'double-pick' because people seem to like having the 'double-pick'.

Randomised odd-numbered rounds and inverted even-numbered rounds are about as fair a system as you're ever going to get for a Draft IMO. But with a 3-6 hour time limit the whole draft order will needed to be posted before the start so that the person in the poll position of the odd-rounds isn't left in the lurch.

 

[Prince EWS]

How exactly is it fairer?

Randomising every second round, and reversing, should mathematically give everyone the same average position.

Only if you have an infinite number of rounds.

EDIT: Actually this isn't true because of the reversing. The reversing means everyone will have the same average position irrespective of what the original order every second round is.

 

[Dan]

Yeah, which was the entire basis for me making the point in the first place..