As amjid javed said stats without context are meaningless. Their plenty of examples in cricket where the scoreboard claims the player played rubbish yet if you actually watched those games you'd know that's not true at all.
I'll list an example
A
) Australia vs India 2015 sf ,Mitchell Johnson 2 for 50
On paper it looks nothing special as stark, Hazelwood, faulkner all have better numbers on that day, However Johnson took the wickets of rohit and kohli who were in their absolute primes and had chased 370 scores in the past.
Faulkner only cleaned up the tail, taking ashwin, mohit and raina's wicket when the game was lost, done and dusted and india had no way to come back.
In hindsight not only did Johnson take the big fish, He also has kohli play a knock of 1 of 13 and rohit play a knock of 34 of 48.
Anyone who watched that game live would know that rohit and kohli couldn't attack him and were struggling and they lost their wickets due to scoreboard pressure and RR creeping up. Johnson only got tonked once these 2 departed and india had lost the match, mostly cause he probs took it easy and was a bit more relaxed.
But stats won't tell you this. They'll tell you that faulker and stark were the 2 best bowlers due to economy and wickets even though stark's economy was achieved due to bullying the tail and faulker got those qickwts when india was done and duated.
I'm not taking credit awau from those 2, infact in 2015 starc and faulkner were >>>>>> 2015 Johnson however Johnson was clearly the best bowler in that game but again stats will tell you he was one of the worst.
@Pakpak @sweep_shot