Which ATG unit is a better nucleus for a side?

[Johan]

Definitely averaging 99.94 in any circumstance SSJ Bradman would make this an easy choice, but a more realistic mortal Bradman makes the comparison more interesting.

McGrath is the best bowler of the group, and I think that is what leans it for be between that side and the West Indies one.

The Boy from Buwral isn't bound by the limitations the rest of the batsmen were bound by.

 

[subshakerz]

Lindwall, Miller and Johnston emulate three pacers of sub 23 average, which is what Walsh, Holding and Marshall are. The latter's advantage is there and clear but it's marginal, and then Invincibles have a huge advantage in spin variety and batting.

I didn't put Johnston man. Stick to my comparison

 

[Johan]

I didn't put Johnston man. Stick to my comparison

The discussion is about the Invincibles though

 

[subshakerz]

In terms of just bowling.
Marshall, Holding and Walsh are the best.

I picked Miller, Lindwall and a serviceable spinner. They don't match up to WI.

 

[subshakerz]

The discussion is about the Invincibles though

I am asking based in this thread selection, because I wanted to see how a batting heavier nucleus can compare with a bowling heavy one.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

The one with Bradman.

 

[reyrey]

Batting strength in the first unit is ridiculous. Bradman obviously, Miller also gives them the allrounder advantage. Lindwall and Johnson were very handy lower order bats too.

 

[Coronis]

Definitely averaging 99.94 in any circumstance SSJ Bradman would make this an easy choice, but a more realistic mortal Bradman makes the comparison more interesting.

McGrath is the best bowler of the group, and I think that is what leans it for be between that side and the West Indies one.

Too bad, such a thing never existed