New Zealand Premier League XIII

[CG123]

The only ratings I have problems with are some of the NZ ones

Like...?

I'm guessing some of your Northern Districts favourites.

 

[CG123]

You have spurred on countless debates by posting the ratings lol.

I'm confident I had them right (as of a few months ago), so I don't have a problem proving people wrong who disagree with me.

 

[Chewie]

Stewart, Flynn and McGlashan should be 34, Hopkins should be 33 imo. I'd also make Broom, Todd, de Boorder and Raval 31, and move Wilson to 32. Kruger should be 34 as well.

Bowling wise, Woodcock and Patel should be down around 31, and Bates should be up in 30. NcCullum should be 29 at most. Yovich and Elliott should be 31.

At least that's what I think

The international ratings are gonna vary wildly based on how people rate them so I don't really care about those

 

[CG123]

Stewart, Flynn and McGlashan should be 34, Hopkins should be 33 imo. I'd also make Broom, Todd, de Boorder and Raval 31, and move Wilson to 32. Kruger should be 34 as well.

Bowling wise, Woodcock and Patel should be down around 31, and Bates should be up in 30. NcCullum should be 29 at most. Yovich and Elliott should be 31.

At least that's what I think

As I said above the domestic player ratings were mainly based on our One Day Competition from 2010/11.

In that batting wise:

Stewart - 283 @ 40, S/R 93 (Possibly could have been 34, borderline)
Flynn - 204 @ 34, S/R 95 (Possibly could have been 34, but imo more 33)
McGlashan - 197 @ 25, S/R 65 (Probably ND bias from you )

Hopkins - 428 @ 43, S/R 103 (Only behind Nicol and Vincent, so I think that justifies him being 34)

(Darren) Broom - 244 @ 41, S/R 81 (Deserves to be 32)
Todd - 167 @ 42, S/R 86 (Deserves to be 32)
Raval - 296 @ 33, S/R 91 (Probably deserves to be 32)
(Andrew) de Boorder - ? (Point taken considering he didn't even play List A cricket last season)

Wilson - 111 @ 14, S/R 59 (Definitely ND bias from you )

Kruger - 92 @ 18, S/R 65 (Definitely shouldn't be 34)

In that bowling wise:

Woodcock - 10 @ 19, E/R 4.0 (Had the best average out of the top 30 or so wicket takers)
Patel - ? (I think he's good enough to be 30)

Bates - 10 @ 31, E/R 5.6 (IIRC he was the only player I changed between seasons nine and ten, I pretty much thought he just wasn't good enough to be a 30, but at the same time I'd rate him ahead of everyone rated 31)

NcCullum - 9 @ 22, E/R 4.0 (Being an international player these days that's more personal opinion, and I think he's an underrated bowler. Purely on stats yes he probably shouldn't be 28)

Yovich - ? (Only bowled in two out of the six List A matches he played, and didn't take any wickets)
Elliott - 7 @ 28, E/R 6.6 (I just don't think he's a 31)

 

[Chewie]

imo it's not a large enough sample size to base the ratings on

 

[Sartaj]

Good to see my boy Jess right at the top.

 

[CG123]

imo it's not a large enough sample size to base the ratings on

I know what you're saying, but the thing is our domestic players only play List A cricket once a month every year, so when you start going back and looking at the season before our last season you've already gone back a year and a half. At the time I didn't think what they'd done a year and a half ago was that relevant if they were walking out and playing a match tomorrow.

IIRC I actually tried to find a way to put our last two season's domestic OD stats together, but I couldn't find one.

Yes the way I did it wasn't perfect, but just after our domestic season had concluded I thought it was the way to go. Since the new ratings that I'll be making won't be done straight after a season, they'll probably be more career based than form based which I think you'll prefer.

 

[riz7khan12]

Well I just rate them as bowlers, I don't separate them out into pace and spin. Feel free to do a test of say 50 matches, and share the results with me, which may make me consider rating them separately in the future.

usually when spinners are rated that high they end up being very inconsistent. sometimes they pick up 5 wicket hauls other times they end up getting smacked for 7 per over and usually they are not economical on normal and excellent pitches.

i might do some testing later if i can remember.

 

[CG123]

Domestic cricket up for sale - Sport - NZ Herald News

Domestic cricket would then be run under a new company with a working title of the New Zealand Premier League, which would remain wholly owned by New Zealand Cricket.

 

[Iridium]

Just say you were first.

 

[riz7khan12]

yay we'll have team names like they have in the pakistan domestic circuit... wonder what auckland's franchise will be named...

 

[Iridium]

Aces?

 

[CG123]

We're already kind of starting to see that with the likes of the Vodafone Warriors and the SkyCity Breakers, that's just the nature of professional sport.

Wellington and ND already had names like that last season, they were the Hell Firebirds and the Yahoo Xtra Knights, although hardly anyone used those names.

With some of the Pakistani domestic teams their names are just their sponsor though, like there's a team called the Bank of Pakistan or something like that.

 

[Iridium]

With some of the Pakistani domestic teams their names are just their sponsor though, like there's a team called the Bank of Pakistan or something like that.

Yea, and Sui Northern Gas Pipelines Limited. We could have The Warehouse v Baby Factory.

 

[BKB1991]

Well the domestic cricket is run by departments instead of city based teams. The idea is that they can provide more money then local cricket academies. But we also have the regional trophies as well.