Archived [10/08/07] Battrick

[lord_of_darkness]

thanks heaps

 

[RoMojo]

Just listed Horne for 3.7m in case anyone cares:


Ben Horne (792092)
RH Batsman, RFM Bowler, superb batting form, superb bowling form, sublime
A cautious player with abysmal leadership skills and abysmal experience.

Plays For: Scaly Piscine CC
Nationality: England
Age: 19 Years Old
Battrick Rating: 18,837
Wages: £6,311 p/w

Stamina: competent Wicket Keeping: worthless
Batting: mediocre Concentration: mediocre
Bowling: quality Consistency: mediocre
Fielding: abysmal


Dunno if he'll sell at that or not.

Anyone with a spare 3.53m?

 

[Tom Halsey]

If anyone else happened to go out of the cup, I need a friendly.

 

[PY]

I think (and others may wish to correct me) that WKs benefit from consistency and (to a lesser extent) fielding, so it makes sense to give them a fielding net - this'd increase fielding, cons and conc (which is of course useful for batting).

I'd regard it as a low-priority net, although your guy is starting from Worthless. I've got no experience in training 'keepers though, so maybe someone more knowledgeable will step in and correct me...

WK nets pop the secondaries by themselves I think. That's why you won't find many very good keepers without decent primaries as well. i.e. Gray for Bobby ('tinho) and Armstrong (?) for SP and Ashton with Adam.

 

[Mahindinho]

WK nets pop the secondaries by themselves I think. That's why you won't find many very good keepers without decent primaries as well. i.e. Gray for Bobby ('tinho) and Armstrong (?) for SP and Ashton with Adam.

Does a WK net give increases in both conc and cons? I thought it'd just be consistency.

Either way, my point was (probably) more about a fielding net being less "wasted" on a WK or all-rounder than it would on a pure batsman/bowler - who wouldn't get any use out of the cons/conc improvements, respectively.

 

[PY]

Yeah, I was just checking because I wasn't sure.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Does a WK net give increases in both conc and cons? I thought it'd just be consistency.

Either way, my point was (probably) more about a fielding net being less "wasted" on a WK or all-rounder than it would on a pure batsman/bowler - who wouldn't get any use out of the cons/conc improvements, respectively.

Yes they increase both, wicket-keeping gives the same secondary pops as fielding.


David Armstrong - 21 yo, BT Rating=91,627
RH Batsman, RH Spin Bowler, superb batting form, superb bowling form, sublime
A cautious player with worthless leadership skills and feeble experience.
Stamina: competent Wicket Keeping: strong
Batting: superb Concentration: miraculous
Bowling: abysmal Consistency: strong
Fielding: mediocre

 

[Mahindinho]

Ta very muchly, Scaly man.

BTW, what happened to your avatar?

 

[marc71178]

I believe it died.

He's looking for a suitably good one of Henry to replace it...

 

[Mahindinho]

I've just had my first real BT bidding war!

Nathan Gowland (80557)
22yo, cautious, strong leadership, woeful exp
BTR 25,594
Wages £2.908
Competent stamina
Respectable batting
Wonderful concentration

He eventually went for £1,224,001 to Chelsski Sloggers - I was definitely going no higher than £1.2M for him.

What do people think of him? Adam must like him, seeing that he bid £875k

I was after him as either an opener or middle-order bat who could stick around a bit.

 

[Scaly piscine]

I've just had my first real BT bidding war!

Nathan Gowland (80557)
22yo, cautious, strong leadership, woeful exp
BTR 25,594
Wages £2.908
Competent stamina
Respectable batting
Wonderful concentration

He eventually went for £1,224,001 to Chelsski Sloggers - I was definitely going no higher than £1.2M for him.

What do people think of him? Adam must like him, seeing that he bid £875k

I was after him as either an opener or middle-order bat who could stick around a bit.

According to that wage and BTR he must have been trained up to the very bottom of those levels since the wage recalculations. They're equivalent to a strong-respectable or something, but would be more likely to stick around in a high level division than a strong-respectable because of the high concentration. I don't think they're too bad for 1.2m.

People should be saving up to bid on Horne anyway, so I can upgrade to the wonderful that's being sold about the same time...

 

[Mahindinho]

According to that wage and BTR he must have been trained up to the very bottom of those levels since the wage recalculations. They're equivalent to a strong-respectable or something, but would be more likely to stick around in a high level division than a strong-respectable because of the high concentration. I don't think they're too bad for 1.2m.

Pretty much what I thought, but I'm really looking for a slightly older Strong that I can train up to decent Concentration.

People should be saving up to bid on Horne anyway, so I can upgrade to the wonderful that's being sold about the same time...

RFM? Quality / Mediocre?

Wouldn't get into my first XI

*smug*

 

[Scaly piscine]

Pretty much what I thought, but I'm really looking for a slightly older Strong that I can train up to decent Concentration.


RFM? Quality / Mediocre?

Wouldn't get into my first XI

*smug*

Yea, makes up for your batting I suppose.

 

[Mahindinho]

Yea, makes up for your batting I suppose.

Touché!

 

[nibbs]

for py; he'll get 1 bat, 1 bowl and 1 field for the rest of this season. he should pop to mediorce consistency next week, but even then, that isn't very high. so i'm still going to consider selling vermaak at the end of this season, but hopefully be then he'll have respectable cons. although, even then these won't be overly flash, so he most likely wouldn't become a bowler to fear until the end of next season.

James Vermaak - 19 yo, BT Rating=24,224
RH Batsman, RH Spin Bowler, superb batting form, superb bowling form, sublime
A defensive player with abysmal leadership skills and woeful experience.
Stamina: respectable Wicket Keeping: abysmal
Batting: respectable Concentration: feeble
Bowling: remarkable Consistency: feeble
Fielding: mediocre

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Releasing International Players
After a recent discussion the BCB have decided to make an amendment to the rule concerning releasing international players from unmanaged (bot) teams.

From now on, a player is only eligable for release if he has played a minimum of three games for his current international side (i.e. games for the U19's won't count if he's in the full national side).

As before, the person responsible for requesting a release is the current international manager, who must contact us via the Help menu option.

Fight the power, Collins.

 

[Robertinho]

People should be saving up to bid on Horne anyway, so I can upgrade to the wonderful that's being sold about the same time...

Hahaha, get out of it you mug, he's mine.

 

[NZTailender]

Anyone out of the cup up for a friendly? You'd be guaranteed a win...

 

[Adamc]

I've just had my first real BT bidding war!

Nathan Gowland (80557)
22yo, cautious, strong leadership, woeful exp
BTR 25,594
Wages £2.908
Competent stamina
Respectable batting
Wonderful concentration

He eventually went for £1,224,001 to Chelsski Sloggers - I was definitely going no higher than £1.2M for him.

What do people think of him? Adam must like him, seeing that he bid £875k

I was after him as either an opener or middle-order bat who could stick around a bit.

Yeah, I was interested but there was little hope I'd actually get him because the deadline was around 5am for me. I'll have about £2.6m at the end of the week, so I can spare about £1m on a middle-order batsman as I only need £1.6m or so to get the 80k interest. I'm probably going to buy a batsman then re-sell him at the end of the season when I've got enough money to buy a proper batsman.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Anyone out of the cup up for a friendly? You'd be guaranteed a win...

Yep, I'm in.