Another draft!-Test players of the 90s and later - FINISHED!

[mohit_dude10]

Michael Kasprowicz

Debut vs West Indies at Brisbane, Nov 22-26, 1996

Mat: 38 | Wkts: 113 | Ave: 32.88 | BBI: 7/36 | BBM: 8/92 | SR: 63.1

​

Michael Kasprowicz didn't get too many chances but was quite good when he played. A wily customer with the ball, didn't look threatening but always had the knack of breaking partnerships. Can help maintain pressure while other bowlers can go all out attacking.

1. Sanath Jayasuriya
2. Dave Houghton
3. Rahul Dravid*
4. Ramnaresh Sarwan
5. AB Devilliers
6. Craig McMillan
7. Adam Gilchrist?
8. Mohammed Amir
9. Muttiah Muralitharan
10. Michael Kasprowicz
11. James Anderson

I can only think of openers as weak link of this team, otherwise the team looks real solid on paper. An attacking bowling lineup irrespective of other things they did (Amir) and a Solid middle order followed by one of the best keeper-bat to have played test cricket.

 

[sifter132]

I love leg spinners. Harbhajan, even if he had been a leg spinner, I wouldn't have had him. I just don't rate him.

I know Mitchell Johnson would have been a good pick. But, I already had 4 pace options and only one spinner in Rafique. So, for that I thought going for MacGill was the right choice. I'm rating my team as one of the best ones in the draft if not the best.

Well at least you're confident But then again, of course you think your team is best - you picked it! All 11 picks will be what you would have done. You don't rate Harbhajan, I think he had a much better career than MacGill who's best performances only came when he played with Warne. I think Zaheer's 7-8 years of very average bowling at the start of his career weigh his value down and that's why Johnson has had a better career to me - but that's just my opinion, I can see why Zaheer's much loved.

It just ends up being one man's opinion against another anyway. Just look at those who are pointing out that aditya should have picked Dravid instead of Ganguly. I'm one of those too, but one choice doesn't ruin his team and if people want to start criticising choices, then there are many more to find . Aditya can probably find picks that I've made that he wouldn't have. I won't agree, but at least he can voice his opinion.

I don't really expect Ganguly to bowl 20 overs for me in a day. It's just that I've got a option as a 6th bowler which does make my bowling attack stronger. My batting does look a little weak and that's why I say that having Watson in my side in place of Atapattu would have really done wonders to my side.

Perhaps it's only me, but I don't see how Watson is so much better than Atapattu - if you are talking about BATTING ONLY. Watson has scored TWO Test centuries and averages just over 40, Atapattu scored 16 100s and averages just under 40. Just because Watson's had a productive year or 2 at opener doesn't make him a batting master. Justin Langer would have been the choice to make or Simon Katich, maybe Michael Slater. Those 3 were better openers than Watson. The reason to pick Watson is if you want extra bowling, and I don't think you would have needed it with 5 bowlers below Dhoni.

 

[sifter132]

OK and I get the last pick, and thanks to everyone - you've left me my favourite ever player

Mark Waugh

Yes, Michael Clarke is my current favourite, but ever since I saw Mark Waugh play in the flesh on New Years day 1991 at the SCG, he was my favourite. Why? Waugh had fantastic style and made everything look so easy: batting, bowling and especially fielding. It was like the game was in slow motion and he had all the time in the world. It was not so much his technique that made him great to watch, but a smoothness to his batting. Last draft I nominated Ricky Ponting as one of the greatest ever fielders, Mark Waugh would be up there too, especially his catching - best pair of hands I've seen.

At only 41, Mark's average is not at a superstar level, and it mainly came down to one thing: concentration. He was often dismissed with lazy looking shots after he'd done the hard work of getting in. Only one of his 20 centuries went past 150, and only 6 went over 125. It's not as though he couldn't play long innings, he made double centuries for Essex and NSW. Part of it may have been that big hundreds weren't required in a strong Australian batting lineup, which may help explain why he was so often out straight after reaching 100.

The other reason for Mark's lower than normal average is that he played a much tougher slate of bowling attacks than most of the 2000s batsmen. About half of his 128 Tests came against Pakistan, SA and WI and they all had good attacks in the 90s. To his credit, his average against those 3 teams is just as high as his career average. In fact the teams he has a bad record against are India and SL who had 2 of the weakest attacks in the 90s. That harks back to concentration - he seemed to turn off a bit against lesser bowlers.

Interesting fact: played 107 consecutive Tests from 1993 up until he was finally dropped which is the 2nd longest streak of all time behind Border's 153. So for all the talk that his brother Steve was tougher, Mark was on the field more consistently.

Anyway, if you've got a few minutes to kill, go to robelinda's channel on youtube and watch some Mark Waugh: batting or fielding. I could go on all day about how awesome he was...as I said he's my favourite

Debut: vs England, Adelaide, 1990/91 (138 on debut)
Tests: 128
Runs: 8029
Average: 41.81
HS: 153* vs India, Bangalore, 1998
100s: 20

1 Gautam Gambhir
2 Graeme Smith
3 Younis Khan
4 Mark Waugh
5 Andy Flower (wk)
6 Murray Goodwin
7 Andrew Flintoff
8 Daniel Vettori
9 Chaminda Vaas
10 Shane Warne (c)
11 Merv Dillon

I'll just say I'm very happy with the XI. I don't need to go over the top with gushing praise - you can all see the quality

 

[cricket_icon]

wooo it's done. some very good teams. I think sifter has the 2 best allrounders. Some decent bowling line ups here too.

 

[Num]

I've sort of been following this draft, I saw that it was finished so I figured I'd list all the drafted XIs in one post for ease of comparison. Of all the teams, it's hard to pick a 'best' team because they're all pretty good and on a similar level, but I particularly like the teams of sifter132 and shravi. With sifter132's, I think Vettori would really thrive if he had bowlers like Vaas and Warne at the other end whilst Flintoff fills the strike-bowler role. With Vaas at #9, the team batting line-up is pretty deep as well. Solid top 6, I especially like how you've picked Flower/Goodwin. Shravi's batting line-up is probably the most stylish but it doesn't necessarily lack substance either, though it's the pace trio of Steyn/Bond/Malinga that stands out for me.

mohit dude10

1. Sanath Jayasuriya
2. Dave Houghton
3. Rahul Dravid*
4. Ramnaresh Sarwan
5. AB Devilliers
6. Craig McMillan
7. Adam Gilchrist?
8. Mohammed Amir
9. Muttiah Muralitharan
10. Michael Kasprowicz
11. James Anderson

cricket icon

1. S Watson
2. W Hinds
3. R Ponting C
4. K Pietersen
5. J Ryder
6. T Samaraweera
7. T Taibu WK
8. S Pollock
9. S Akhtar
10. S Mushtaq
11. I Sharma

sifter132

1 Gautam Gambhir
2 Graeme Smith
3 Younis Khan
4 Mark Waugh
5 Andy Flower (wk)
6 Murray Goodwin
7 Andrew Flintoff
8 Daniel Vettori
9 Chaminda Vaas
10 Shane Warne (c)
11 Merv Dillon

send2yaari

1. Mathew Hayden
2. Chris Gayle
3. Graham Thorpe
4. Michael Hussey
5. TM Dilshan
6. Brendon McCullum (wk)
7. Lance Klusener
8. Heath Streak
9. Anil Kumble (c)
10. Allan Donald
11. Mohammad Asif

shravi

Gary Kirsten
Tamim Iqbal
Ian Bell
Brian Lara
Michael Clarke
VVS Laxman
+ Ridley Jacobs
Dale Steyn
Shane Bond
Lasith Malinga
Mushtaq Ahmed

Yudi

1. Alastair Cook
2. Virender Sehwag
3. Stephen Fleming
4. Kumar Sangakkara
5. Jimmy Adams
6. Prassana Jayawardene
7. Mark Boucher (wk)
8. Brett Lee
9. Danish Kaneria
10. Mashrafe Mortaza
11. Javagal Srinath

Aditya

1. Hashim Amla
2. Marvan Attapattu
3. Inzamam-ul-Haq
4. Shivnarine Chanderpaul
5. Sourav Ganguly
6. MS Dhoni
7. Shakib Al Hasan
8. Graeme Swann
9. Jason Gillespie
10. Chris Martin
11. Glenn Mcgrath

User2010

1. Saeed Anwar
2. Mark Richardson
3. Jacques Kallis
4. Mahela Jayawardene (c)
5. Mohammad Yousuf
6. Dwayne Bravo
7. Matt Prior (wk)
8. Mohammad Rafique
9. Zaheer Khan
10. Makhaya Ntini
11. Stuart MacGill

 

[sifter132]

Thanks for doing that summary num

I was also doing some fiddling around this arvo to evaluate the teams and promote discussion. Here's a statistical summary:

Most career runs (top 7 batsmen)

1. shravi - 41,395 runs
2. User2010 - 40,684 runs
3. mohit_dude10 - 40,379 runs
4. aditya - 39,288 runs
5. Yudi - 38,882 runs
6. send2yaari - 35,930 runs
7. sifter132 - 34,479 runs (lucky I couldn't add Vettori, Vaas and Warne, that's another 10,000...)
8. cricket_icon - 32,874 runs (I used Shaun Pollock as your #7 - he's scored more runs at a higher average than Taibu)

Average of the batting averages of top 7 batsmen

1. User2010 - 46.97
2. sifter132 - 45.41
3. cricket_icon - 44.26
4. mohit_dude10 - 44.20
5. shravi - 44.02
6. Yudi - 43.23
7. send2yaari - 43.14
8. aditya - 42.42

Most career wickets (top 5 bowlers)

1. sifter132 - 1765 (Flintoff as 5th)
2. send2yaari - 1351 (Klusener as 5th)
3. mohit_dude10 - 1300 (Jayasuriya as 5th)
4. aditya - 1247 (Shakib as 5th)
5. User2010 - 1241 (Kallis as 5th)
6. cricket_icon - 973 (Watson as 5th)
7. Yudi - 924 (Sehwag as 5th)
8. shravi - 632 (Clarke as 5th)

Average of main 5 bowlers bowling average

1. send2yaari - 28.46
2. aditya - 28.65
3. cricket_icon - 28.92
4. mohit_dude10 - 29.90
5. shravi - 30.11
6. sifter132 - 31.06
7. User2010 - 32.48
8. Yudi - 35.95

Batting average of top 7 minus bowling average of 5 main bowlers (list 2 minus list 4)

1. cricket_icon - 15.34
2. send2yaari - 14.68
3. User2010 - 14.49
4. sifter132 - 14.35
5. mohit_dude10 - 14.30
6. shravi - 13.91
7. aditya - 13.77
8. Yudi - 7.28

And a non-stat based measure: All time XI nominees, from cricinfo's all-time XI feature last year. They made an all time XI for the 8 major nations from a pool of nominees.

• aditya - 4 XI members (McGrath, Dhoni, Inzamam, Atapattu) + 4 nominees (Gillespie, Ganguly, Martin, Chanderpaul)
• sifter132 - 4 XI members (Warne, Vettori, Smith, Vaas) + 3 nominees (M.Waugh, Flintoff, Younis Khan)
• mohit - 4 XI members (Gilchrist, Dravid, Jayasuriya, Muralitharan) + 2 nominees (McMillan, De Villiers)
• User2010 - 3 XI members (Saeed Anwar, Kallis, Jayawardene) + 4 nominees (Zaheer, Richardson, Mohammad Yousuf, Ntini)
• Yudi - 2 XI members (Sehwag, Sangakkara) + 6 nominees (Lee, Srinath, Fleming, Danish Kaneria, Boucher, P.Jayawardene)
• shravi - 2 XI members (Bond, Lara) + 5 nominees (Laxman, Mushtaq Ahmed, Kirsten, Steyn, Malinga)
• send2yaari - 2 XI members (Kumble, Donald) + 4 nominees (Hayden, McCullum, Dilshan, Gayle)
• cricket_icon - 2 XI members (Pietersen, Pollock) + 4 nominees (Ponting, Shoaib Akhtar, Saqlain Mushtaq, Samaraweera)

And of course there are a few other ways the teams could be ranked: fielding ability for example. There are other things too, like minimizing the number of players out of position. A veritable myriad of factors to analyse who's team might be the greatest.

Anyway...thanks a lot guys for keeping up the picks. There wasn't too much downtime and it seemed to go pretty well These are always good fun and help you learn about players you aren't so familiar with...and about team selection as well. Next time we'll have to do a similar one but maybe for 60s,70s and 80s players.

 

[Gaurav_7]

That's a great summary Sifter. Was waiting for this as you did one during the WC draft. I like your XI the most (after mine ). Shrav's probably got the best middle order (along with me, serious here) and best bowling attack.

And, I think if we look at everything, stats plus positions of players and all other things, I like mine team there. Fielding is probably the weakest link for me.

 

[Aditya]

It just ends up being one man's opinion against another anyway. Just look at those who are pointing out that aditya should have picked Dravid instead of Ganguly. I'm one of those too, but one choice doesn't ruin his team and if people want to start criticising choices, then there are many more to find . Aditya can probably find picks that I've made that he wouldn't have. I won't agree, but at least he can voice his opinion.

Exactly, everyone is free to voice their opinion. I really respect their opinion and I might be wrong here to not pick Dravid in place of Ganguly but then as it's my team, I wanted to have a team that I like and a team that has the best players of the 1990's and personally I think I've done well.

Perhaps it's only me, but I don't see how Watson is so much better than Atapattu - if you are talking about BATTING ONLY. Watson has scored TWO Test centuries and averages just over 40, Atapattu scored 16 100s and averages just under 40. Just because Watson's had a productive year or 2 at opener doesn't make him a batting master. Justin Langer would have been the choice to make or Simon Katich, maybe Michael Slater. Those 3 were better openers than Watson. The reason to pick Watson is if you want extra bowling, and I don't think you would have needed it with 5 bowlers below Dhoni.

Now I think of it, I guess that's a very valid point, excellent point in fact. Although Watson's form in the last two years has been terrific but if you are looking for a long term player, Atapattu is better and if you see, he has EIGHT double centuries, which is absolutely amazing so yeah I actually feel that I did the right thing by not picking Watson.

 

[Dr. Pepper]

Love shravi's team. That middle order is beautiful and the pace attack is brilliant. Sifter's side has got a great balance I think. Really like how aggressive send2yaari's side is as well. If I had to pick a side, I'd go with shravi's.

 

[cricket_icon]

Great work Sifter!!! Love the statistical analysis, the pace attack of Steyn, Malinga and Bond is probably the best here. Good to see I actually topped a list lol. And some good ideas about future drafts.

 

[sifter132]

^Indeed. Actually of those 6 lists I made, there is a different leader for EVERY one. So that shows that there was no clear choice for best XI, it just comes down to personal preference: which players you rate, how you like the balance etc. eg. Lots saying they like shravi's bowling attack, but it's the least experienced one there, Warne and Murali have more wickets than them by themselves! You can make a case for almost every team. If I had to pick one other than mine, I'd probably go user's team, or maybe send2yaari's who has a sweet 4 man attack. The others aren't far behind though - and we've ended up with some pretty nice XIs

 

[shravi]

Well that settles it, I guess. It's fairly obvious I have the best team here .

Nah, just kidding.

mohit- disq

cricket icon- While Watson gives you a good bowling line up, I'm not sure he's done enough as an opener YET to be paired with an average/below average player. Number 3 and 4 is very, very strong. Jesse Ryder has all the talent in the world, but I would have gone for Roscoe simply because he's achieved more and you had the chance to pick him. Samaraweera scores runs at will but isn't as strong away from home. Top WK, decent spinner who perhaps wasn't as good in test cricket as he was in LOIs. Very good opening bowlers but Ishant Sharma is a weak 3rd bowler. I don't think you had much choice at the time, but it will make it very difficult on Pollock and Akhtar. You need a more reliable 3rd pacer when you have a true fast bowler like Akhtar who will be out of gas frequently.

sifter: Great openers, decent number 3 who isn't as strong away from home but still averages 40+ against all opposition IIRC. Mark Waugh was supremely talented but perhaps didn't make the most of it. I don't remember Goodwin so I don't know what to tell you. World Class WK and spinner. While Flintoff was inspirational, he wasn't a born wicket taker so wickets may be a little hard to come by in the fast bowling department considering your third pacer is Dillon.

send2yaari-disq

Yudi- disq (Kaneria)

Aditya- Amla as opener? Number 3 is a specialist position and I would have kept him there and got an opener in another round. Strong middle order. Not spectacular, but not weak by any means. Inzamam was all class. Shiv has been a lone warrior at times and Sourav would make a great leader of your team. MSD is decent but nothing special in tests. Not a great WK or a batsman in testing conditions. Great new ball duo. Good spinner, one I rate very highly. A mediocre third seamer but I guess you had no other choice.

User- Solid openers. Very good 3-5. Bravo is neither a good batsman, nor a good bowler. He promises a lot, but delivers little. Prior is a fantastic pick. Rafique is a bad choice considering he's your 2nd spinner, I guess it's not horrible. But definitely sets your team back a few points. Zaheer Khan is all class and Ntini is very underappreciated. Very good bowler. McGill was also a good bowler and who knows how his career would have gone if Warnie wasn't there to spoil his party.

 

[cricket_icon]

pretty much agree with your analysis. i kinda had no choice other than sharma for my india round. definitely would have chosen atherton as my opener if i was slightly higher in the other rounds, namely australia.
i disagree about bravo. his bowling is not so good but coupled with decent batting and very good fielding he isn't half bad.

 

[Aditya]

@Shravi - Agree with your analysis. In NZ round, I was confused whether to go for a keeper who can bat (Brendon McCullum) or pick a bowler which I did (Chris Martin). From the starting of the draft, I was looking to have quite a few bowlers in my side and so picked Martin. Who is a fine bowler but obviously not as good as his other bowling partners, Mcgrath and Gillespie.

 

[Aoun13]

Yudi- disq (Kaneria)

Lol! Did that ever prove?