"Paji D" <pajidada@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1114021117.286636.57900@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
m i r a h f sr wickets> A 83 80 2309 31.63 6 10 71> C 117 104 2696 29.30 2 17 86 32> B 87 75 1860 31.52 1 11 74>
Player A:> 80 ODI innings and scored 2309 at an avg of 31.> strike rate: 71.> Most innings at the middle-order and above> with more scoring opportunities.> Another 5 years of cricket left based on> historical retirement age.>
Player B:> 75 ODI innings, scored 1860 at an avg of 31.> Strike rate: 74> Most innings at lower middle order with very limited> scoring opportunities.> 10 years of cricket left.>
Who has done well in over 75 innings? If one player is> 5-6 years younger ( a lot more upside potential), and> outstanding fielder, who would you pick?
Both A and B are mediocre. Will not pick both of them. Doesn't matter if 5 or 10 years left. In fact if one has 5 and another has 10 years left, it is a non-factor for selection. 5 years is still a long time.
SR of A and B are 71 and 74. If B comes more in the lower order, then the SR should be higher than that. As of now both are not suited for ODIs.
Takeiteasy.
Player C:> 104 ODI innings at an avg of 29.> Strike rate: 86> Most innings at the lower middle order with limited> scoring chances.> 10 years of cricket still left.> Very good fielder.> In addition, has taken 30 odd wickets at a fair avg.>
Who would you want in the team?> Numbers speak for themselves, 75 past innings are enough to> judge what one can offer.> There's no need to take names, just pick based on the numbers.> In the end, matches are won by numbers, not by quality of> boundaries. It's the quantity that matters.
