Based on your opinion, how many runs...

[Гурин]

...does an all-time great fielder save compared to somebody who's nothing more than average in the field (on a per-innings basis)?

I left a vague definition of "all-time great" and "average" because I just wanted to put an input to the discussion (real question being "what's the value of a fielder?"), but if you want a specific example for ATG, I give you a boring "Jonty Rhodes".


The poll is about FC and TM, but do feel free to post your opinions about limited overs aswell.

 

[robelinda]

Well Jonty was largely ineffective in test cricket, all his best exploits were in ODI's.

 

[Гурин]

That's interesting. Might I ask you who do you recon was/is as an ATG Test Fielder?

 

[robelinda]

Mark Waugh, Viv Richards, Colin Bland, Clive Lloyd, Ricky Ponting.

 

[Howe_zat]

It's interesting that the most celebrated fielders were the ones that made one position their own, such as Rhodes at backward point. Often what's really the more valuable player in the field is one who can be relied on no matter where you put him.

 

[Гурин]

Mark Waugh, Viv Richards, Colin Bland, Clive Lloyd, Ricky Ponting.

Apart from Mark Waugh (surely one of the greatest slips, but the great slip fielders are a bit less valuable than great point/cover guys), those are agreeable names, even if they also gave their best in LOI, but probably that's the nature of ODIs and such.

But then we must say that, often batsmen in test were declining certain singles only because the ball went to Rhodes/Ponting, so it's not only about spectacular catches/runouts.

 

[Гурин]

It's interesting that the most celebrated fielders were the ones that made one position their own, such as Rhodes at backward point. Often what's really the more valuable player in the field is one who can be relied on no matter where you put him.

That's probably because those positions are the ones more involved in the action, so the best fielder rightfully go there (it makes you wonder how come Dhoni sometimes have Sreesanth at point and Raina at deep square leg)

 

[robelinda]

but the great slip fielders are a bit less valuable than great point/cover guys

Hugely disagree, in terms of test cricket. Would have a master slips fieldsman any day, over any cover/point guy no matter how good he is, hence Rhodes didn't do all that much in test cricket. Plus i';d take someone who caught better, taking wickets is more valuable than saving runs. Rhodes was great at saving runs, but less great at run outs and catching.

Time for the obligatory plug for my PUNTER vid, how unexpected....


1000th UPLOAD!! RICKY PONTING - EVERY RUN OUT IN INTERNATIONAL CRICKET!!!! - YouTube

 

[BoyBrumby]

Hugely disagree, in terms of test cricket. Would have a master slips fieldsman any day, over any cover/point guy no matter how good he is, hence Rhodes didn't do all that much in test cricket. Plus i';d take someone who caught better, taking wickets is more valuable than saving runs. Rhodes was great at saving runs, but less great at run outs and catching.

Time for the obligatory plug for my PUNTER vid, how unexpected....


1000th UPLOAD!! RICKY PONTING - EVERY RUN OUT IN INTERNATIONAL CRICKET!!!! - YouTube

Taking wickets saves runs, tbh. Whilst a showy stop at backward point is all well & good and can turn 2s or 4s into dots or singles, dropping a chap can cost literally dozens.

 

[akilana]

So Jonty dropped catches? CW a funny place at times

 

[Гурин]

Hugely disagree, in terms of test cricket. Would have a master slips fieldsman any day, over any cover/point guy no matter how good he is, hence Rhodes didn't do all that much in test cricket. Plus i';d take someone who caught better, taking wickets is more valuable than saving runs. Rhodes was great at saving runs, but less great at run outs and catching.

Time for the obligatory plug for my PUNTER vid, how unexpected....


1000th UPLOAD!! RICKY PONTING - EVERY RUN OUT IN INTERNATIONAL CRICKET!!!! - YouTube

That video was one of the reasons that gave me the input to make this poll.

The thing is that, right now, we have no descriptive data of how many balls go (or carry) to the various positions, so we're stuck with opinions.


But, if I'm not mistaken, the average slipper miss about 30% of his chances (I read it once on cricinfo I believe, I'm not sure). If that's true, I would be curious about what Waugh's percentage was.

Taking wickets saves runs, tbh. Whilst a showy stop at backward point is all well & good and can turn 2s or 4s into dots or singles, dropping a chap can cost literally dozens.

...or nothing, if the batman's out next ball. And is not only about dropping catches; it's also about creating chances. Jonty could have put a hand on a ball that nobody else would have reached, maybe dropping it, but he was there.

 

[robelinda]

So Jonty dropped catches? CW a funny place at times

He sure did, he wasn't superman. I can probably upload about 10 or so drops of his easily. He dropped some clangers too. Obviously he didn't drop them all, but he was more spectacular at stopping the ball, rarely did he take a spectacular catch.

 

[Redbacks]

But, if I'm not mistaken, the average slipper miss about 30% of his chances (I read it once on cricinfo I believe, I'm not sure). If that's true, I would be curious about what Waugh's percentage was.

If we guess that a better slip catcher drops 15% and that when given a life, batsmen score about their average again, take ~40 as an overall guess.

Dismissals per Innings for catchers is about 0.7 Fielding records | Test matches, so they get roughly that many chances per innings + error rate: so 0.82 chances per innings @15% dropped. The weaker catcher drops 30% of these and takes 0.57 per innings for an equal number of chances. The difference in success then being 0.7-0.57 = 0.13 pi

So my initial guess is = 40*.13 = 5.2 rpi.

 

[Гурин]

All right, let's put some hypotetical, easy numbers here. Let's say that a normal slipper would have taken 70% of Mark Waugh's chances; that's 127 wickets instead of 181.

That's 54 more wickets for MW over 256 innings, assuming that he always played in the slips in all of those innings (I'm not trying to be very accurate, it's just an indicative calculation); if we give every of those 54 wickets an average of 32 runs (I don't know what was the per-wicket average in MW's playing time, so the all-time will do) he "saved" 1728 runs, which roughly translates as 6,75 runs per innings (again, compared to a normal slipper). Thoughts on this, anyone?


Of course this method could not be translated to other positions, because fielding range comes into play.

 

[Гурин]

If we guess that a better slip catcher drops 15% and that when given a life, batsmen score about their average again, take ~40 as an overall guess.

Dismissals per Innings for catchers is about 0.7 Fielding records | Test matches, so they get roughly that many chances per innings + error rate: so 0.82 chances per innings @15% dropped. The weaker catcher drops 30% of these and takes 0.57 per innings for an equal number of chances. The difference in success then being 0.7-0.57 = 0.13 pi

So my initial guess is = 40*.13 = 5.2 rpi.

Interesting, I maximized every number to get an extreme value but we're not far away. But I think the average of 40 runs after dropped catch is a bit too high, the average per wicket in the time analized should be used.

However, your link is taking into account every position in cricket, and as I said, for other positions there's more than simple converting chances; so I'd like to know the value for slips and close-in fielders, which I believe should be a little bit higher

 

[robelinda]

This thread is reminding me to complete my video of every Mark Waugh catch in international cricket....it goes for 80 mins already and I'm only just over half way......quality viewing.....

 

[Redbacks]

Interesting, I maximized every number to get an extreme value but we're not far away. But I think the average of 40 runs after dropped catch is a bit too high, the average per wicket in the time analized should be used.

40 could be a bit high I agree. My thinking was biased towards slip catchers and my I feeling is that tail enders don't edge the ball as often. Without some serious investigation of scorecards it will always be tough to say how many more runs dropped players average.

However, your link is taking into account every position in cricket, and as I said, for other positions there's more than simple converting chances; so I'd like to know the value for slips and close-in fielders, which I believe should be a little bit higher

I only looked at the top of the list of all time highets catchers to make a rough guess of 0.7. These tend to be slip/gully fielders and the best players who have made it to 80+ tests. Fielders in the outfiled look like they take ~0.5 catches per innings.

It will be tough to judge players in the outfield as knowing what should/shouldn't be stopped is hard to judge.

 

[Xuhaib]

He sure did, he wasn't superman. I can probably upload about 10 or so drops of his easily. He dropped some clangers too. Obviously he didn't drop them all, but he was more spectacular at stopping the ball, rarely did he take a spectacular catch.

I can recall atleast half a dozen and I most probably watched 1/5 of the matches he played.

 

[Xuhaib]

I do agree a good slip catcher is more valuable then a cover/point stopper in test cricket.

 

[Daemon]

Dwayne Leverock is an ATG slip fielder