ODI All Time XI

[smash84]

of course he was.

Batting average is total number of runs you score divided by how many completed innings you have i.e. how many times you get out over your career.

And the argument for not outs works both ways.

When you come at the top of the order then you get your time to settle in and to play a lot of deliveries as well. At number 6 or 7, you don't. And besides coming in at 6 or 7 and scoring at a SR of 90 is much harder compared to being an opener and striking at 95.

 

[Debris]

of course he was.

Batting average is total number of runs you score divided by how many completed innings you have i.e. how many times you get out over your career.

And the argument for not outs works both ways.

When you come at the top of the order then you get your time to settle in and to play a lot of deliveries as well. At number 6 or 7, you don't. And besides coming in at 6 or 7 and scoring at a SR of 90 is much harder compared to being an opener and striking at 95.

I understand the argument but to say that being not out does not affect your average is just silly. I thought he was throwing out a stupid statement to make a point, probably the one you are making above. Only he knows.

And I would not say a strikerate of 90 down the order is harder than a strikerate of 95 at the top, particularly with the batting powerplay. It might be more difficult to do and maintain a decent average, though

 

[ankitj]

I will borrow from uppercut here - scoring runs increases your average. Getting out reduced it. Staying not out does nothing.

 

[Migara]

Umm, yes it does. FACT.....


Dhoni has 53 not outs from 184 innings.

Gilchrist had 11 not outs from 279 innings.


Remove the luxury of "not outs" and Gilchrist averages 34, while Dhoni averages 36 (without ever facing the new ball).

So the same for Bevan as well. Ganguly is better than him

Bevan 35.3 per inngs @ 74, Ganguly 37.9 @ 73.7.

If Gilly is all they way due to this stat, then Ganguly is all the way over Bevan due to the same stat.

 

[bagapath]

tendulkar
gilchrist (wk)
richards
ponting
hussey
symonds
imran
hadlee
pollock
akram
murali

they can bat, they can bowl, they can field. what more can one ask for?

 

[smash84]

I understand the argument but to say that being not out does not affect your average is just silly.

I just explained how it doesn't.

Can you explain how it does?

Unless you have the wrong concept for batting average (which I think you do) otherwise Ankit's statement is correct.

So the same for Bevan as well. Ganguly is better than him

Bevan 35.3 per inngs @ 74, Ganguly 37.9 @ 73.7.

If Gilly is all they way due to this stat, then Ganguly is all the way over Bevan due to the same stat.

Great Point

 

[vic_orthdox]

The not outs don't change the batting average, but they can misrepresent a person's general impact on a match.

 

[Debris]

I just explained how it doesn't.

Can you explain how it does?

Unless you have the wrong concept for batting average (which I think you do) otherwise Ankit's statement is correct.

OK. The quote was "Remaining not out does nothing to the batting average. FACT."

Batting average is number of runs divided by times out. Now if you get out, it is divided by a number one higher than if you do not get out. Remaining not out allows you to increase the number of runs without increasing the number of wickets, thereby ensuring that the batting average is higher than if they did get out. It is, therefore, doing something and not nothing to the batting average.

Hope this clear this up.

 

[Dan]

Comparing Gilchrist and Dhoni as ODI batsmen based purely on average is not an accurate reflection, they have completely different roles in the team.

Statistics, namely batting average, aren't the be-all and end-all. You have to look at them in context. Take, for example Bill Johnston on the 1953 Ashes tour: 17 innings, 102 @ 102. He's hardly double the batsman Keith Miller was on that tour because Miller's average was "only" 51-ish.

End of.

 

[Dan]

The not outs don't change the batting average, but they can misrepresent a person's general impact on a match.

This is the point I'm getting at.

 

[smash84]

I agree you have to see the average in context......which is why i believe a lot of people have a very mistaken concept of batting average

However, it has to be borne in mind that the batsmen coming at 6 or 7 do not get so many opportunities to make a lot of runs too. They usually have to come in and start accelerating from the word go.

Also there have been quite a number of match winning innings from Dhoni coming down the order. For me, the best finisher after Bevan (and there isn't daylight between the two).

Can I say that about Gilchrist as the second best opener in ODIs ever? I doubt it. I might even put his own team mate Hayden above Gilchrist as an opener let alone the likes of Jayasuriya, Saeed Anwar, and Tendulkar.

 

[Debris]

I agree you have to see the average in context......which is why i believe a lot of people have a very mistaken concept of batting average

However, it has to be borne in mind that the batsmen coming at 6 or 7 do not get so many opportunities to make a lot of runs too. They usually have to come in and start accelerating from the word go.

Also there have been quite a number of match winning innings from Dhoni coming down the order. For me, the best finisher after Bevan (and there isn't daylight between the two).

Can I say that about Gilchrist as the second best opener in ODIs ever? I doubt it. I might even put his own team mate Hayden above Gilchrist as an opener let alone the likes of Jayasuriya, Saeed Anwar, and Tendulkar.

You don't rate Michael Hussey and Lance Kluesner as finishers? I would still have them above Dhoni, if not by much.

 

[smash84]

Michael Hussey is right up there with Dhoni for me. Not sure if I would say he is better.

Dhoni and Hussey better than Klusener.

Klusener showed up for a small frame of time as a lower order finisher. These guys have done it for a long tme now.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

I would rate Klusener as the best all-rounder in ODI's. Batting average of 41 with a strike rate of 89 and bowling average of 29. However his economy is little high.

 

[smash84]

Agent, did you see Klusener play?

 

[Red]

The not outs don't change the batting average, but they can misrepresent a person's general impact on a match.

I'm not sure what you mean by "not outs don't change the batting average". Do you mean not outs in general, or a score of zero not out?


Let's look at two players in a series of 3 ODIs

Player A

Game 1: 50 runs, not out

Game 2: 50 runs, not out

Game 3: 50 runs, out

Total runs: 150
Batting average: 150 (150 runs divided by 1 dismissal)



Player B

Game 1: 50 runs, out

Game 2: 50 runs, out

Game 3: 50 runs, out

Total runs: 150
Batting average: 50 (150 runs divided by 3 dismissals)

 

[smash84]

not outs didn't CHANGE the average.

By definition average = runs scored/no of dismissals

player A only got dismissed once.

Now the problem is that people interpret average as the number of runs a player scores every single time he comes on to the crease to bat. This is not so

 

[ankitj]

Saying that someone (let's take Dhoni as an example) has better average due to not outs is assuming that in each innings that he was not out in, he would have got out immediately if he continued. By all evidence, he'd on average add 51 runs to each of his unbeaten innings before getting out, had he been allowed to continue.

Likes of Dhoni and Bevan have played countless match winning knocks and their averages are an accurate representation of that value they bring.

 

[Migara]

Comparing Gilchrist and Dhoni as ODI batsmen based purely on average is not an accurate reflection, they have completely different roles in the team.

Same would apply for a Jayasuriya vs Bevan comparison them.

The point is that you cannot compare Dhnoi to Gilchrist, there's no competition there. Glchists should be weighed against openers like Ganguly or Tendulkar, who made more runs per dismissal, or with Jayasuriya or Watson, who bring in 5th bowler options. If not outs are ignored with Dhoni's credentials, then same should apply for Bevan, who is a sure pick in that XI. What ever argument used to grade down Dhoni will apply to Bevan as well.

 

[ankitj]

Statistics, namely batting average, aren't the be-all and end-all. You have to look at them in context.

Great point. But there was no need to make it. No one disagrees with it.