A Statistical Way of Ranking the All Rounders by their overall numbers

[sayon basak]

If you compare how the players did against all players in the same match it might be more realistic (though that doesn’t account for strength of opponents), interesting nonetheless

Was thinking the same. Is probably fairer that way.

That would be very accurate, but would take a lot of work.

I'm lazy

 

[capt_Luffy]

I think the players performing in a weaker team should get some advantage, but your point stands. Probably should've set the weight a bit lower for that.

That's true, doesn't means Flower was better than Tendulkar for playing in a weaker team. Probably better than Lloyd as he had it tougher, but this formula would put him only second to Don.

 

[sayon basak]

That's true, doesn't means Flower was better than Tendulkar for playing in a weaker team. Probably better than Lloyd as he had it tougher, but this formula would put him only second to Don.

Really? Haven't really applied the formula to batters so I'm not sure. You could provide the points of Sachin and Flower if you've done that.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Really? Haven't really applied the formula to batters so I'm not sure. You could provide the points of Sachin and Flower if you've done that.

India in matches involving Tendulkar without him: 85112 @32.9
Tendulkar: 15921 @53.78

Zimbabwe in matches involving Flower without him: 21678 @22.9
Flower: 4794 @51.54

 

[Coronis]

India in matches involving Tendulkar without him: 85112 @32.9
Tendulkar: 15921 @53.78

Zimbabwe in matches involving Flower without him: 21678 @22.9
Flower: 4794 @51.54

I did do a comparison similarish to this but it involved the performances of players on both teams. Headley was easily top of non-Bradman players, and I presume would still be on top compared only to his own team. Other top performers were Smith, Hobbs, Sutcliffe and May. Sehwag was noticeably low on the list.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I did do a comparison similarish to this but it involved the performances of players on both teams. Headley was easily top of non-Bradman players, and I presume would still be on top compared only to his own team. Other top performers were Smith, Hobbs, Sutcliffe and May. Sehwag was noticeably low on the list.

I expect I am spot on on Flower and he was also near the top??

 

[Coronis]

I expect I am spot on on Flower and he was also near the top??

Nah. But of course, other teams scored well against Zimbabwe.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Nah. But of course, other teams scored well against Zimbabwe.

So like, the comparison also took into account the runs the other team scored...... That explains it perfectly.

 

[Coronis]

So like, the comparison also took into account the runs the other team scored...... That explains it perfectly.

That is what I said lol. It was a vague attempt inspired by someone doing something similar with bowlers to see how players did in regards to conditions I think?

 

[capt_Luffy]

That is what I said lol.

In my defence, I read past it completely.

 

[sayon basak]

Btw the formula also takes no. Of 50's, 100's, 0's, 5'fers, 10'fers into account; so Keith Miller is downgraded as he scores low in that.

Jadeja has the same no. Of 10'fers as shakib, but in higher no. Of test matches.
So, Jadeja doesn't get any advantage in that.

 

[sayon basak]

I am thinking of doing something that would take away performance and performance against strong team into account.

Let's say during the career of a player "X", team A(1) has the lowest bowling average, team A(2) has the second lowest bowling average,.....and A(n) has the worst bowling average. Then, I could do this.

Batting performance points(1)= 1*batting performance point against A(n)+2*batting performance point against A(n-1)+.........+(n-1)*batting performance point against A(2)+ n*batting performance point against A(1)

Same for bowling. And then take the geometric mean (or maybe the harmonic mean so that specialists like Hammond don't get much advantage) of batting and Bowling performance separately.

And for away record, I could do:-
Batting performance point(2)= 3*away batting performance point+ home batting performance point. [Away record given thrice as importance as home record]
(Again same for bowling and taking the geometric or harmonic mean with the necessary weight)

And then taking the arithmetic average of All rounder performance point(1) and all Rounder performance point(2).

Thoughts on this? @capt_Luffy @Coronis
@honestbharani

 

[ashley bach]

Interesting method but need to be convinced that Shakib >> Hadlee

 

[sayon basak]

Interesting method but need to be convinced that Shakib >> Hadlee

Shakib is not way ahead. And wait untill I include their away performance and performance against strong sides.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I am thinking of doing something that would take away performance and performance against strong team into account.

Let's say during the career of a player "X", team A(1) has the lowest bowling average, team A(2) has the second lowest bowling average,.....and A(n) has the worst bowling average. Then, I could do this.

Batting performance points(1)= 1*batting performance point against A(n)+2*batting performance point against A(n-1)+.........+(n-1)*batting performance point against A(2)+ n*batting performance point against A(1)

Same for bowling. And then take the geometric mean (or maybe the harmonic mean so that specialists like Hammond don't get much advantage) of batting and Bowling performance separately.

And for away record, I could do:-
Batting performance point(2)= 3*away batting performance point+ home batting performance point. [Away record given thrice as importance as home record]
(Again same for bowling and taking the geometric or harmonic mean with the necessary weight)

And then taking the arithmetic average of All rounder performance point(1) and all Rounder performance point(2).

Thoughts on this? @capt_Luffy @Coronis
@honestbharani

Get the gist, but that doesn't deal with one thing, the quality gap. Suppose, during career of a batsman (let's call him Mr A) Australia and West Indies were the two best bowling sides, with difference in them being marginal (like 0.01). Now, he did great against the slightly weaker team (say Australia) but struggled relatively against the slightly stronger one. On the otherhand, Mr B did slightly better against WI but much worse against Australia. This method would probably come with Mr B as better. Moral of what I am blabbering, there should be a metric for difference in team quality. There are also the issues that quality can fluctuate wildly. Like for eg Gavaskar faced probably some of the worst bowling (1971 and 78) and definitely some of the best bowling (1983 x 2, 76), both against WI.

 

[sayon basak]

Get the gist, but that doesn't deal with one thing, the quality gap. Suppose, during career of a batsman (let's call him Mr A) Australia and West Indies were the two best bowling sides, with difference in them being marginal (like 0.01).

Then,
The weight could be something like (32/bowling average of Opponent)^n instead of 1,2,3,..... Where n is an integer.

Let's say, during the career of player "J" (J for Jadeja),
Bowling average of Team A= 24
Bowling average of Team B= 24.01
Bowling average of Team C=25.69
Bowling Average of Team D= 39

Then player "J" 's batting performance point would be,
2.3703*Batting performance point against team A+ 2.3674*Batting performance point against team B+ 1.933*Batting performance point against team C+ 0.55*Batting performance point against team D
[Letting n=3]

There are also the issues that quality can fluctuate wildly. Like for eg Gavaskar faced probably some of the worst bowling (1971 and 78) and definitely some of the best bowling (1983 x 2, 76), both against WI.

I have no answer to that. Maybe you could suggest something.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Then,
The weight could be something like (32/bowling average of Opponent)^n instead of 1,2,3,..... Where n is an integer.

Let's say, during the career of player "J" (J for Jadeja),
Bowling average of Team A= 24
Bowling average of Team B= 24.01
Bowling average of Team C=25.69
Bowling Average of Team D= 39

Then player "J" 's batting performance point would be,
2.3703*Batting performance point against team A+ 2.3674*Batting performance point against team B+ 1.933*Batting performance point against team C+ 0.55*Batting performance point against team D
[Letting n=3]

I have no answer to that. Maybe you could suggest something.

The first one works very well when the quality of bowling is consistent.
Honestly, the only way to work around the second way is to do a match by match (at most series by series) analysis and adding them.

 

[sayon basak]

The first one works very well when the quality of bowling is consistent.
Honestly, the only way to work around the second way is to do a match by match (at most series by series) analysis and adding them.

That's a lot of work.

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

Thoughts? Any notable ommissions?

Chris Woakes.

 

[sayon basak]

Chris Woakes.

Really not into considering immortals.