ankitj
Hall of Fame Member
Being obsessed with formatting is my thing. I can't stop fixing formatting even for a work in progress document where getting content together is more importanti like your order formatting style ankitj. very neat
Being obsessed with formatting is my thing. I can't stop fixing formatting even for a work in progress document where getting content together is more importanti like your order formatting style ankitj. very neat
Others can share the burden. Or just share the idea someone else will run draft.The effort put into formatting is basically what prevents me from running drafts
And the best part about it is I have two guys who took over 100 wickets at under 22 in ODI cricket, one of whom is a competent number 8 and I'm still only in 76 .There goes another guy I wanted. My genius master plan for this draft is in tatters already.
RedHill up next
Yeah there's not that many guys in the 70s worth drafting IMO. You'd have done well to get two of those 3. Starting with a Wasim pick doesn't set anyone back much at all IMO.I thought I'd get Chappell and Imran early on and then jump to Wasim and shock everyone with my boldness. All 3 went in the first round
There's actually plenty of good quicks out there, even if the pickings are slim after 2005.My plan involved picking at least 2 great fast bowlers from Imran, Holding, Roberts, Lillee, Hadlee and then a "risky" dash to grab Akram. Haha.
Edit: Similar to trundler's plan
I only skipped one player I would even considering picking. In fact I could have probably skipped an entire decade and barely noticed after grabbing Hadlee.There are more years than letters, am totally fine with not picking many players from the 70s and 80s. I of course say this having made my first pick knowing I was not going to have another one forever.
The batsmen back then had different challenges than today's batsmen. Bats were thinner, grounds weren't roped in, they played less ODIs each year, field placements were more akin to tests so it was harder to score, particularly early on. There were a ton of good quick bowlers floating around.There's like 6 batsmen worth picking from the 70s though. I was shocked to see how few 100s were scored back then.
Hadlee and Holding both took just as many wickets as Garner. It's only that Garner took his wickets at 18.8 instead of 21.5. Lillee took a few less wickets but took his at an average of 20. All four should be considered top notch ODI bowlers IMO. Roberts took less wickets (managing 87 in 56 matches) but had just as good of an average. Outside these guys, Imran and Kapil are good because of their batting. After those guys you really need to get to the 80s to start finding good bowlers. Very few batsmen who debuted in the 70s are really worth drafting IMO. You would need to make massive era adjustments, basically adjusting strike rates up by 30 to make some of them worth picking. The ones who do stand out, do so pretty dramatically IMO.Yep knowing I was going to be going fairly early it was just about getting Richards or Garner. Did not even think about anyone else.
I know all of that but it's still pretty a stark contrast. Lloyd scored just in 80+ matches, Chappell got 3 in the same time and that was the record for a while.The batsmen back then had different challenges than today's batsmen. Bats were thinner, grounds weren't roped in, they played less ODIs each year, field placements were more akin to tests so it was harder to score, particularly early on. There were a ton of good quick bowlers floating around.
Ijaz Ahmed, who retired in 2000 was only the fifth batsman to have ten centuries to their name.
Yeah all those bowlers are good picks but you take Garner if you can. Richards obviously stands out an absolute mile at this stage.Hadlee and Holding both took just as many wickets as Garner. It's only that Garner took his wickets at 18.8 instead of 21.5. Lillee took a few less wickets but took his at an average of 20. All four should be considered top notch ODI bowlers IMO. Roberts took less wickets (managing 87 in 56 matches) but had just as good of an average. Outside these guys, Imran and Kapil are good because of their batting. After those guys you really need to get to the 80s to start finding good bowlers. Very few batsmen who debuted in the 70s are really worth drafting IMO. You would need to make massive era adjustments, basically adjusting strike rates up by 30 to make some of them worth picking. The ones who do stand out, do so pretty dramatically IMO.