Average in wins is not a good metric to judge a batsman by

[Mystrey]

Can people stop throwing this absurd ''Average in wins'' stats around?

Its absolutely useless. If a crap player has scores of : 0,0,0,0,0,0,0, in seven losses yet a 55 in a win it proves nothing. All it proves is he is a failure most of the time. Hence, it would take a ****** to then say ''well he averages 55 in wins so he is a must in the team''

For our Malik supporters on this forum esp please take note.

 

[Reverselap]

Extension of the Sachin Principle used by our fans

 

[Varun]

Better yet, stop throwing stats around to prove a point. The verbal consensus is usually a more accepted form of judging whether a player is rubbish, or glorious to have in your team. The moment you dive into numbers you're attempting something secondary, and that suggests that proving the fact has initially been a problem.

 

[amlafan79]

average in wins is so stupid as proportion of amount of wins form total number of games is not considered
so they might have played 50 games and won only 10 that does not means player is doing well..

also if ur lower order batsman say number 4 or below there is high change in won matches u did well or stayed not out cos that is entire nature of cricket batting score runs and with more runs there are chances of more wins .. !

 

[talha3]

Re: ''Average in wins''

Better yet, stop throwing stats around to prove a point. The verbal consensus is usually a more accepted form of judging whether a player is rubbish, or glorious to have in your team. The moment you dive into numbers you're attempting something secondary, and that suggests that proving the fact has initially been a problem.

Nope. Stats have their place in sports, especially cricket. At the end of the day, the game is to score runs and get wickets, not to look like a better player than others. If someone is more efficient (statistically) at doing just that then it's regardless whether they 'look' like the better player.

 

[W63L35]

Can people stop throwing this absurd ''Average in wins'' stats around?

Its absolutely useless. If a crap player has scores of : 0,0,0,0,0,0,0, in seven losses yet a 55 in a win it proves nothing. All it proves is he is a failure most of the time. Hence, it would take a retard to then say ''well he averages 55 in wins so he is a must in the team''

For our Malik supporters on this forum esp please take note.

Since you came up with such a brilliant point..... would please care to suggest the "right" (non-absurd) way of evaluating a player in general ---- and specifically in wins?

For our Malik supporters on this forum esp please take note.

Issue with Malik example is .. that sample size is very small.... and the real issue is hypocrite Malik-fans... who whine/moan/cry when somebody else uses small sample .. .but in case of Malik's ave in wins since 1/1/2012.... they are bey-sharam enough to use a sample of 5 innings with 3 not-outs.

 

[Mystrey]

specifically in wins?

This IS the way to judge a player in wins, what I am saying judging players in wins shows NOTHING. Would you say some nobody from Kenya is a superstar if out of a 100 matches he fails in 99 matches but in one match he scores a 100 and Kenya wins? This is NOT the way to judge a player OVERALL.

Otherwise cretins like Malik deserve a place in the side, or so his fans say. And as I said If a crap player has scores of : 0,0,0,0,0,0,0, in seven losses yet a 55 in a win it proves nothing. All it proves is he is a failure most of the time. Hence, it would take a retard to then say ''well he averages 55 in wins so he is a must in the team''

 

[W63L35]

Since you came up with such a brilliant point..... would please care to suggest the "right" (non-absurd) way of evaluating a player in general ---- and specifically in wins?

This IS the way to judge a player in wins, what I am saying judging players in wins shows NOTHING. Would you say some nobody from Kenya is a superstar if out of a 100 matches he fails in 99 matches but in one match he scores a 100 and Kenya wins? This is NOT the way to judge a player OVERALL.

Otherwise cretins like Malik deserve a place in the side, or so his fans say. And as I said If a crap player has scores of : 0,0,0,0,0,0,0, in seven losses yet a 55 in a win it proves nothing. All it proves is he is a failure most of the time. Hence, it would take a retard to then say ''well he averages 55 in wins so he is a must in the team''

I did say in previous note that I see what you are saying.... but what alternate do you propose .. in following two cases;

a) How to evaluate a batsman in general?
Which you conveniently ignored/deleted.

b) In wins.
What do you propose?

 

[Mystrey]

a) How to evaluate a batsman in general?
Which you conveniently ignored/deleted.

That is such a dumb question there is no point even asking it, but since you're wanting to be spoon fed we use the overall average.

As for wins, I propose nothing as its a meaningless stat.

 

[Buffet]

That is such a dumb question there is no point even asking it, but since you're wanting to be spoon fed we use the overall average.

Over all avg is a reasonable starting point but we also need to take a look at how they did against better bowling units & how they played in different conditions. Same is true for bowlers as well.

You don't need to pull up stats but if forced to do so, it's still easy to see that Malik has a bad overall record. Cherry picking this avg in wins is meaningless. It's not as if any batsman forgets to bat when team is loosing. Some batsmen are better finishers but if you don't score often then team is going to lose most of the time. Those losing instances should carry negative points as well.

Simple criterion to judge a batsman should be - how often you score? Loss or win has lot more to do with the performance of 11 players.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Average in defeats would give a good indication of fighting players.

 

[amlafan79]

i think much better stat would be runs in team wins

 

[Saqs]

Why not just ditch the wholle "average" in wins and replace it with "% of runs scored" (whether in wins or losses).

Shows how important the player is to the team.

 

[Monsee]

Why not judge only Indian players in defeat...what a noble and unique idea!

 

[Buffet]

Average in defeats would give a good indication of fighting players.

I think this avg in loss doesn't reveal too much as well. A great batsman in weak team will score lot of runs in defeats and it doesn't mean that player was a fighter. It simply means that the batsman was scoring lot of runs , nothing else. It's a flip side of taking avg in wins and drawing some conclusions. Conclusion in both scenarios may or may not be true.

Why not just ditch the wholle "average" in wins and replace it with "% of runs scored" (whether in wins or losses).

Shows how important the player is to the team.

That will surely show how important a player is for his team but it has limitations when comparing players from different countries.

 

[vicky_iisc]

I did say in previous note that I see what you are saying.... but what alternate do you propose .. in following two cases;

a) How to evaluate a batsman in general?
Which you conveniently ignored/deleted.

b) In wins.
What do you propose?

I think evaluation of a batsman criteria have been discussed to death.. the include quality of strokes/impact on the game/impression on opposition/ability to play good bowlers (and bad ones too)/ability to build an innings/playing well under pressure situation etc.

To me, if a batsman has contributed enough to have made the chances of his team winning a good help, he is a match winner.

An example would be Jayawardene's century in ODI world cup final 2011, he almost single handedly was the difference b/w a SL score of 230 and 275.. and his century lifted his team to a winning score.. it is another story that the bowling of his team was not good and batting of the opposition was collectively better. While judging only average in wins, such good innings will feature nowhere and he will fall behind the "greats" list.

Judging a batsman by his team's results is not fair.. though looking at his performance totally in isolation isn't fair too. We should look at how much his innings helped the chances of his team win, and how many times did he do that. (even his team didn't win)

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

Leave Average.

Pinnacle of Cricket is Test Cricket.

Average in Away Test wins in the History of Test Cricket.



Steve Smith's Test performances in India, Bangladesh, Srilanka, Afghanistan & UAE/Pakistan in next 10 years will determine whether He could Average 100 plus in away wins or not


Can Khan break Steve Waughs record of 13 Test Tons in away wins if He is made Test Captain for 1 year as per a PPER recommendation ?