• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Scorecard Draft

weldone

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
pskov said:
I haven't finished with all the players yet (currently about halfway through round 4), but WG Grace's adjusted average for the sim I will be running is 47.02 and Rhodes' is 35.20 so it's not all that bad. However no amount of adjustment can make Peel, Ambrose, Donald, Tyson anything other than a pretty dodgy looking tail. :p
Click to expand...
I guess we have reached a general consensus in this thread already about running the sim with non-adjusted (or, real) averages.
 
Last edited:
G.I.Joe

G.I.Joe

International Coach
Haha, its simple. The people with only bowlers from the A-hole era, and no batsmen from that era would obviously prefer a sim with non-adjusted averages. The people with only batsmen from the A-hole era, and no bowlers from that era would prefer adjusted averages. The people with both batsmen and bowlers from that era, and the people with no people from that era could go either way. The only fair solution is to run a sim with adjusted averages. It compensates for all factors, including those unhappy about having to make multiple picks from that era.
 
Cevno

Cevno

Hall of Fame Member
Adjusting averages is a good Idea Certainly.

Or otherwise batsmen who bowled just few overs can have a good average too and also with different Era's different bowlers and batsmen have too good or too bad averages due to the era.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
G.I.Joe said:
Haha, its simple. The people with only bowlers from the A-hole era, and no batsmen from that era would obviously prefer a sim with non-adjusted averages. The people with only batsmen from the A-hole era, and no bowlers from that era would prefer adjusted averages. The people with both batsmen and bowlers from that era, and the people with no people from that era could go either way. The only fair solution is to run a sim with adjusted averages. It compensates for all factors, including those unhappy about having to make multiple picks from that era.
Click to expand...
adjusted averages won't work for one particular era alone though.. If you are gonna adjust, come up wtih a formula and fit it across every player in every team here...
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Cevno said:
Adjusting averages is a good Idea Certainly.

Or otherwise batsmen who bowled just few overs can have a good average too and also with different Era's different bowlers and batsmen have too good or too bad averages due to the era.
Click to expand...
that is silly coz the amount of cricket played between eras is vastly different as well...
 
weldone

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
Cevno said:
Adjusting averages is a good Idea Certainly.

Or otherwise batsmen who bowled just few overs can have a good average too and also with different Era's different bowlers and batsmen have too good or too bad averages due to the era.
Click to expand...
How does adjusted averages address the problem I highlighted in bold? For example, Mark Boucher averages 6 with the ball. If someone uses him as a bowler in his team, what'll be Boucher's adjusted bowling average? 6.231?
 
Last edited:
G.I.Joe

G.I.Joe

International Coach
The adjusted averages are a solution to the issue of certain eras being too bowler friendly, and certain eras being too batsman friendly, and the players' statistics being a reflection of that and unduly influencing the simulated matches. They are not intended to be a solution to the part timers issue. That is an issue for the sim software itself to tackle, and I believe it does that by taking into account the overs bowled per match statistic. It's something that we will be confronted with whether or not we go for adjusted averages. It's an entirely unrelated issue to adjusted averages.
 
Last edited:
weldone

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
G.I.Joe said:
The adjusted averages are a solution to the issue of certain eras being too bowler friendly, and certain eras being too batsman friendly, and the players' statistics being a reflection of that and unduly influencing the simulated matches. They are not intended to be a solution to the part timers issue. That is an issue for the sim software itself to tackle, adn I believe it does that by taking into account the overs bowled per match statistic. It's something that we will be confronted with whether or not we go for adjusted averages.
Click to expand...
And what adjustments are going to be made for the fact that (for example) Gavaskar and Richards played in the same era. Gavaskar had to face Marshall, Garner, Holding, Roberts and Richards had to face none of them? Are we adjusting for opponrnts also? That might take more time and calculation, but will be more logical.
 
G.I.Joe

G.I.Joe

International Coach
It would require a very very hard minded individual to be willing to work it out, and the reward to effort ratio wouldn't make it worthwhile. Again, that is an issue that'll persist even in a sim with non-adjusted averages, and is therefore not an argument against going with a sim with adjusted averages. Next, you'll be asking to factor in pitch conditions for each and every match played by the player, the support he had, the context of the matches played by him etc etc. We're being provided with an opportunity to run with a sim method that is superior to just simming with on-paper averages, and we should really shouldn't be wasting our breath arguing against it by nit picking.
 
kingkallis

kingkallis

International Coach
Guys, I am in the favor of 12 picks and the 12th one replace any one prior pick.

Or you may go with 12 players as well and select a playing XI for the Sim...

Adjusting averages may not satisfy everyone but Round 12 surely will help!
 
Cevno

Cevno

Hall of Fame Member
weldone said:
How does adjusted averages address the problem I highlighted in bold? For example, Mark Boucher averages 6 with the ball. If someone uses him as a bowler in his team, what'll be Boucher's adjusted bowling average? 6.231?
Click to expand...
Depends on what Forumla Pskov is using.

If he takes into account the number of balls/Overs bowled as well ,as the number of innings batted then this could also be adjusted.
 
Himannv

Himannv

Hall of Fame Member
kingkallis said:
Guys, I am in the favor of 12 picks and the 12th one replace any one prior pick.

Or you may go with 12 players as well and select a playing XI for the Sim...

Adjusting averages may not satisfy everyone but Round 12 surely will help!
Click to expand...
Joe doesn't like the idea so it wont happen. :laugh:
 
Cevno

Cevno

Hall of Fame Member
G.I.Joe said:
It would require a very very hard minded individual to be willing to work it out, and the reward to effort ratio wouldn't make it worthwhile. Again, that is an issue that'll persist even in a sim with non-adjusted averages, and is therefore not an argument against going with a sim with adjusted averages. Next, you'll be asking to factor in pitch conditions for each and every match played by the player, the support he had, the context of the matches played by him etc etc. We're being provided with an opportunity to run with a sim method that is superior to just simming with on-paper averages, and we should really shouldn't be wasting our breath arguing against it by nit picking.
Click to expand...
AWTA.

What about somebody having a average of 50+ after 10 tests and somebody doing it after 150 matches.

Then there is also the factor about players playing longer than others and past their best which affects their averages and what era do you adjust average of a players who played for more than 2 decades.

You cannot satisfy all of the these questions ever even if there is no adjustments but adjustments Certainly makes the draft better than the pre/early-1900 bowlers and batsmen of certain era's ruling the draft.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top