Discussion BBL|10 SC: Team & In-Game Discussion - Home of #1 and #2 Leagues
- Thread starter Goodie's Guns
- Start date
- Joined
- 29 Jan 2017
- Messages
- 1,512
- Likes
- 5,146
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Thoughts on my trades? I'm gonna hold off on actually doing them until tomorrow, but here's the 3 I want to do.
NCN -> Abbott (I don't rate the Stars at all and Abbott is elite)
Finch -> Lynnsanity (got big money to be able to do this and Finch is taking up space that I need to loop Hales with)
Maxwell/Philippe -> Roy
Team with those 3 trades:
McDermott \ Inglis (E)
Lynn (VC), Short, Wade, Roy, Maxwell/Philippe \ Hales (E), Bertus
Abbott (C), Jhye, Marnus, Stoinis, DC \ Livingstone (E), Owen
Plan would be to loop Inglis and Livingstone in, unless the rain holds off and Hales gets a big score. I could sell Hales instead of Maxwell/Philippe but I see no harm in keeping him and having him in the loop in case it doesn't rain
NCN -> Abbott (I don't rate the Stars at all and Abbott is elite)
Finch -> Lynnsanity (got big money to be able to do this and Finch is taking up space that I need to loop Hales with)
Maxwell/Philippe -> Roy
Team with those 3 trades:
McDermott \ Inglis (E)
Lynn (VC), Short, Wade, Roy, Maxwell/Philippe \ Hales (E), Bertus
Abbott (C), Jhye, Marnus, Stoinis, DC \ Livingstone (E), Owen
Plan would be to loop Inglis and Livingstone in, unless the rain holds off and Hales gets a big score. I could sell Hales instead of Maxwell/Philippe but I see no harm in keeping him and having him in the loop in case it doesn't rain
Last edited:
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 19,503
- Likes
- 82,810
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
As someone at the "pointy end" I find overanalysis of history unhelpful with the amount of change from year to year. Venue and opponent (e.g the Gades are 
) can be somewhat helpful but the most important thing is opportunity (e.g DGW opening the batting, bowling x overs)
) can be somewhat helpful but the most important thing is opportunity (e.g DGW opening the batting, bowling x overs)
I think if there’s an X v Y which is very hard to separate then past history can be useful but otherwise it’s largely unhelpful and can often be quite detrimental.. I’m looking at you Ferguson!
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2018
- Messages
- 1,779
- Likes
- 7,102
I feel like you are failing to see the fact that Finch is going huge tomorrow. I’m playing him on field, no need for loop. He’s the only thing standing between the Canes and the finals. He did it to the Heat last round in BBL09. FINCHY FOR A TON! FINCHY FOR A MILLION! *starts rabidly foaming at the mouth*
As someone at the "pointy end" I find overanalysis of history unhelpful with the amount of change from year to year. Venue and opponent (e.g the Gades are ) can be somewhat helpful but the most important thing is opportunity (e.g DGW opening the batting, bowling x overs)
) can be somewhat helpful but the most important thing is opportunity (e.g DGW opening the batting, bowling x overs)
T20 is such a fickle game anyway , form changes in the matter of days eg Hales
Bowler takes 3fa one game , few days later 0/40
I guess history shows us what has happened , up to us to predict what might happen when we trade a player in or out.
It's why I take no notice of batting orders as it is very much circumstantial and situational based.
Same as X might bowl 3 overs this game because he did last game , even though they have 6-7 bowling options , could be all about matchups on a given day.
Great that they are taking on feedback. Its a tough one because of how many games there are and how quickly they happen, but three items that have crossed my mind are:
1. SR and ER bonus to be dependent on how the rest of the innings has gone. As I've said before, conceding 7 an over on a night where the opposition has scored 200 has had far more impact on the match than if they are bowled out for 120. This should obtain extra points for players we feel had more 'impact' on the game than their score at the moment suggests.
2. This one may be a lot of work but separate scoring systems for SR and ER depending on status. For example, if a player is bowler only and only bowls 1 over, I think they should still get their ER bonus. Similarly, if they are BAT only, they can get a strike rate bonus regardless of whether they get to 20 or not. This adds value to BAT and BWL only players, otherwise we still go after BAT/BWL or WK/BAT players as they provide more flexibility in our teams.
3. Difference in points for wickets based on time in the innings. Maybe 25 points a wicket in the power play/surge, 15 points a wicket in the final 4 overs and 20 points a wicket outside of these times. A good example is Dorf. Should be in more teams but isn't because "he doesn't bowl the death overs". A change in the above would hopefully see us with more different players in our teams.
Those are just my thoughts on trying to get the scoring system to be a bit more supercoachy.
1. SR and ER bonus to be dependent on how the rest of the innings has gone. As I've said before, conceding 7 an over on a night where the opposition has scored 200 has had far more impact on the match than if they are bowled out for 120. This should obtain extra points for players we feel had more 'impact' on the game than their score at the moment suggests.
2. This one may be a lot of work but separate scoring systems for SR and ER depending on status. For example, if a player is bowler only and only bowls 1 over, I think they should still get their ER bonus. Similarly, if they are BAT only, they can get a strike rate bonus regardless of whether they get to 20 or not. This adds value to BAT and BWL only players, otherwise we still go after BAT/BWL or WK/BAT players as they provide more flexibility in our teams.
3. Difference in points for wickets based on time in the innings. Maybe 25 points a wicket in the power play/surge, 15 points a wicket in the final 4 overs and 20 points a wicket outside of these times. A good example is Dorf. Should be in more teams but isn't because "he doesn't bowl the death overs". A change in the above would hopefully see us with more different players in our teams.
Those are just my thoughts on trying to get the scoring system to be a bit more supercoachy.
I don't have Twitter, but one suggestion:
Split the league rankings up between 6 and 14 team leagues so they are not ranked together. Maybe copy Brice in too, I'm sure he'll be wanting that too after getting so close to top spot this year after he (hopefully) misses out.
Others such as giving all involved in a run out points and going back to the much better old scoring system for batting scoring etc are not likely to happen, but I'm sure you have seen them mentioned.
Split the league rankings up between 6 and 14 team leagues so they are not ranked together. Maybe copy Brice in too, I'm sure he'll be wanting that too after getting so close to top spot this year after he (hopefully) misses out.
Others such as giving all involved in a run out points and going back to the much better old scoring system for batting scoring etc are not likely to happen, but I'm sure you have seen them mentioned.
- Joined
- 21 Mar 2012
- Messages
- 4,253
- Likes
- 6,598
- AFL Club
- Carlton
From a person who normally pays less attention to the weather than the general consensus on here I have now no players playing tonight.
There was only one to start with and my only active donut on the bat/wkp line being Gilkes of thunder so basically useless this round.
Hales to Labuschange
With all the talk on here of trading out Zampa he is currently trying the C armband on for size in my team
There was only one to start with and my only active donut on the bat/wkp line being Gilkes of thunder so basically useless this round.
Hales to Labuschange
With all the talk on here of trading out Zampa he is currently trying the C armband on for size in my team