Vanilla Drafting Ideology ( Seam Bowlers / Seam Bowling Allrounders )

[shortpitched713]

So, I always used to assume that for an all-time team, you would select the best specialists for each pick for bowling or batting. However, I remember there was a poll of selecting an all-time great Test team by position, and there was a really contentious pick between Imran and Hadlee for number 8. And after selecting Imran, I guess the concensus was just "**** it" we'll go Hadlee at 9. That opened my eyes to a world in which all-time bowling all-rounders might just be the way to go, especially if they give up next to nothing on bowling to a front-line seam, batting bunny.

Anyway, who do you go with in a (no Bradman) vanilla draft? Assume, the first choice is whoever you think is the best seam bowling all-rounder of all-time, and the second choice is whomever you think is the best specialist seamer of all time.

 

[Himannv]

I used to always pick bowling allrounders like Hadlee or Imran first if I could. Now I just pick McGoat first up no matter what.

 

[shortpitched713]

I guess the big thing with all-rounders, is even if we're not that impressed with their game, by picking them early you almost always end up with a better side, definitely a more balanced side if nothing else.

I'd love to pick the McGoat first up, trust me, but it's so hard to justify.

 

[ataraxia]

You need some decent no. 8, I think. So that's Imran/Hadlee/Davo/S Pollock/Benaud/Tate; a limited selection. Otherwise you get into the Marshall/Warne/Wasim/Verity/Lindwall/P Pollock/Larwood types who aren't quite there. I think Imran/Hadlee/Marshall/McGrath generally go a bit earlier than Ambrose/Steyn and then the rest. So you take who you can. Hadlee probably first priority there.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

@shortpitched713 - find out everyone's strategies for drafting
#knowyourenemy

 

[Himannv]

I'd love to pick the McGoat first up, trust me, but it's so hard to justify.

It's McGoat - you simply can't go wrong with him. He was incredibly consistent and accurate and had just the right amount of bounce and movement in every single delivery for maximum awkwardness. Plus he played at a very high level for almost his whole career up until retirement (I think there was just one slight blip in 2003 or something). He was just a bit better than every single other bowler I've watched including Marshall, who I felt lost a bit of zip towards the latter part of his career.

 

[shortpitched713]

Oh, I'm with you when it comes to the skills and accomplishments of McGrath.

McGrath for mine, was the most important piece of the Waugh/Punter era dominant Australia. So for me, (barring skills like captaincy /leadership, intangibles) that makes him the best cricketer, bar none of the modern era, defined as starting roughly some time in the early 70s.

Still, batting is a useful skill toi have. It has utility for every one of your selections (maybe not an 11).

If you use your first pick on a true batting bunny like a McGrath or even Murali, you are left having to consider batting for every one of your remaining bowling picks. I'd really rather not field a team with a long tail when it could be helped.

 

[honestbharani]

For me, it goes

Marshall
Hadlee
Ambrose
McGrath
Pollock

 

[Fuller Pilch]

I'd probably go


Hadlee
Marshall
McGrath
Ambrose
Pollock

 

[shortpitched713]

@shortpitched713 - find out everyone's strategies for drafting
#knowyourenemy

Probably not going to be able to participate in more drafts going forward, tbh. Will be voting in some though, I imagine.