***Official*** India in New Zealand 2013/14

[Blocky]

Oh OK, so you mean since the beginning of the 2011/12 season, not since three years. In that case, Guptill's average still comes up as 33.50 when you take out his matches against Zimbabwe. It sounds to me like you're still leaving his efforts against England out of the analysis.

Oh wait, I see - his not outs for some reason weren't calculated in the average simulation I used, but even with the inclusion of those, it doesn't change his median - i.e "his likely score"

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

You've gone back four seasons, not three.

Last 4 years, no Zimbabwe
Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo Avg: 29.45 S/R 75.79


Last 3 years, no Zimbabwe
Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo Avg: 34.44 S/R: 76:08

Last 2 years, no Zimbabwe
Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo Avg: 33.50 S/R: 78.08

Last year, no Zimbabwe
Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo Avg: 45.63 S/R: 84.51

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

I think it's high time Daniel Flynn got a go opening for NZ in ODIs. He's got panache.

 

[Blocky]

ps - McCullum who some people talk about as inconsistent, in a batting position where he has to go at the bowling more than Guptill and doesn't get the chance to bat all innings has a median of 25.5 once you exclude Zimbabwe for the last three seasons.

 

[Athlai]

Hey Blocky if you want this to be the way we treat our top order players, can you supply some context? Give us all the ODI top 3 bats in the world during this period. Keep the minnows in or leave them out at your leisure. We'll see how Guptill compares to his contemporaries.

 

[Blocky]

Median is a perfect way to assess likely result in statistics, and far more helpful than average in determining what a person is likely to perform for you - I already showed McCullum who isn't considered overly consistent having a median of 25.5 which isn't a massive outlier against his average of 33 during that period. I can't be bothered looking at every single batsman but can almost guarantee that Guptill likely has the biggest gulf between median score and average score of any international opening batsman playing for someone in the Top 8.

 

[Bahnz]

Hey Blocky if you want this to be the way we treat our top order players, can you supply some context? Give us all the ODI top 3 bats in the world during this period. Keep the minnows in or leave them out at your leisure. We'll see how Guptill compares to his contemporaries.

It's definitely not good. Just looking at his contemporaries in the New Zealand team, Taylor has a median of about 28, McCullum 25 (as Blocky suggests) and Williamson 20.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

So what you're saying is that Guptill has a superlative 50s to centuries conversion rate?

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Median is a perfect way to assess likely result in statistics........

........especially when the mean doesn't show what you'd hoped it would.

 

[Athlai]

Median is a perfect way to assess likely result in statistics, and far more helpful than average in determining what a person is likely to perform for you - I already showed McCullum who isn't considered overly consistent having a median of 25.5 which isn't a massive outlier against his average of 33 during that period. I can't be bothered looking at every single batsman but can almost guarantee that Guptill likely has the biggest gulf between median score and average score of any international opening batsman playing for someone in the Top 8.

Then I can't be bothered with your argument. If you're going to randomly give us a different way to assess players to cricticise one person and then not actually apply this in any other context than you are just wasting our time blowing your own trumpet.

 

[Bahnz]

Then I can't be bothered with your argument. If you're going to randomly give us a different way to assess players to cricticise one person and then not actually apply this in any other context than you are just wasting our time blowing your own trumpet.

Don't worry I've done it for him. Guptill is bad when compared to New Zealand's other regulars. People do have lower medians than averages (as you'd expect) but generally they appear to be in the 20's-30's range.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Don't worry I've done it for him. Guptill is bad when compared to New Zealand's other regulars.

Which no one was really refuting in the first place.

 

[Bahnz]

One interesting thing to look at (but I cbf because as far as I can tell statsguru doesn't allow you to look for it) is how Guptill's ratio of MOTM awards compares to New Zealand's other top 5 batsmen. At a guess I'd say that in the period that Blocky is looking at, it probably compares quite well (3 out of 9 matches that New Zealand won, and 3 out of 23 in total).

 

[ohnoitsyou]

As i said earlier it doesn't matter that he's an all or nothing type player,

I think its fair enough to say that most ODI's are won (or set up) by having one of the top 3 go big with the lower order consistently chipping in. Ryder, Guptill, Taylor, McCullum and Anderon all fit in with that strategy, Williamson being exempted because he's probably in between the two.

Having a median much lower than his mean actually works to his advantage, as it shows that when he goes he goes big. If he fails, then Williamson and Taylor have perfectly suited games to recovery and gives them the chance to play a big innings.

And **** off with the only plays a decent innings one in ten games. I would rather a player wins a match for me once in ten and plays a few decent knocks in between than one does bugger all to win us games by scoring 30 regularily

 

[hendrix]

yeah that's what's different about ODI batting lineups.

You can afford to have the players that are inconsistent but go big when they fire. Especially given the relative consistencies of Williamson and Taylor.

Noone's saying Guptill is more valuable to the team than Ryder, Williamson, Taylor, McCullum. Obviously those guys are better. But that doesn't mean he deserves to be dropped.

 

[Bahnz]

Yeah, just like we can afford to keep Mitch in the team as an all or nothing bowler, I think we can afford Guptill as an all or nothing batsman, at least until someone bangs the door down through weight of runs in domestic cricket.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Noone's saying Guptill is more valuable to the team than Ryder, Williamson, Taylor, McCullum. Obviously those guys are better. But that doesn't mean he deserves to be dropped.

Yeah, just like we can afford to keep Mitch in the team as an all or nothing bowler, I think we can afford Guptill as an all or nothing batsman, at least until someone bangs the door down through weight of runs in domestic cricket.

Yeah, and that's not even taking his fielding into account.

 

[Flem274*]

Lol at playing the median game and using McCullum as an example.

Because 25 is both his mean and his ****ing mode.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Actually McCullum's career median is 18. While Guptill's is 23.5.

But of course, the larger the sample, the more you should be using the mean over median.

 

[BeeGee]

If you take Guptill's ODI average as a ratio to the number of toes he has, he is world class. Even if you take out Zimbabwe and runs scored on a Tuesday.