Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Worst Debut followed by redemption.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Worst Debut followed by redemption.

    Anyone else have a decent player with a shocker on debut and turn it around so quickly?

    . 1st game of the new Ipl season, New Million $ marquee signing Haider Ali opening on Debut at home on a decent pitch gets a 12 ball duck (8/10 aggression) and the team gets skittled for 117 and thrashed.

    2nd game of the season, chasing 130 away from home on a more difficult pitch, races to ~75 off 23 balls and finishes on 100 off 46 balls. (started with the same 8/10 aggression and progressed to 9/10 later on)

    Is this just the random game mechanics at play?

  • #2
    I’ve had ducks followed by big scores but that is hilarious, especially in the IPL!

    How has the player kicked on from there? I would look at his batting stats to see the percentage of 50s and 100s as he may just be an all-or-nothing type of player.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by cde View Post
      I’ve had ducks followed by big scores but that is hilarious, especially in the IPL!

      How has the player kicked on from there? I would look at his batting stats to see the percentage of 50s and 100s as he may just be an all-or-nothing type of player.
      Was it a trend with the same players doing it?

      Ironically he was good without being great in the next 3 innings with a 44,20,57. I couldn't believe that 12 ball duck though lol, and then the next game i've never seen a player start a game so well with 70 off the first 20 balls and he wasn't even max aggression.

      Comment


      • #4
        Yes, always the same players. It can more of a natural feature with the more aggressive players but sometimes the average batsmen too.

        They are reasonably easy to spot from the stats, just look for a high percentage of ducks, 50s and 100s compared to the total number of innings. I find a good guide is, to take your player and his small sample size as an example, to first of all look at the total number of innings and take away the number of ducks. That’s one in 5 innings, a 20% chance of a duck.

        I then work out the player’s batting average outside of their 50s and 100s. Usually there is a larger sample size and you have to assume all 50s and 100 are round numbers but in this case I would take 157 from his combined total and divide it by the number of innings in which he has not scored a duck, 50 or 100.

        So based on these results I would expect the player to get out for a duck around 20% of the time, about 32 40% of the time and otherwise make it big the remaining 40%.

        You will notice that some batsmen will average a bit lower but once you remove the extremes of ducks, 50s or 100s the revised average is a lot closer to their overall average. I tend to look for one of each to open so that I have one player who will almost certainly give me a solid start and another who could win the match before it’s hardly started.

        Comment


        • #5
          Not outs will up averages though especially for middle to lower order in limited overs games. I have some players with stupid averages just because they are only ever in for the end of an innings

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Jamesy1984 View Post
            Not outs will up averages though especially for middle to lower order in limited overs games. I have some players with stupid averages just because they are only ever in for the end of an innings
            Quite right. If it’s an opener (as I think this player seems to be) I usually ignore the not outs because I assume that they are mostly accounted for in the 100s. If looking at a middle order player I halve the number of not outs and subtract from the total number of innings played. This seems to be about the right balance without being too complicated. (Yes, I know it is already.)

            On a broader note I always look for high strike rates over averages lower down the order where 12 from 5 balls is more helpful than being able to build a good innings and the number of not outs isn’t an issue.

            Comment

            Working...
            X