PDA

View Full Version : New ways to rate cricketing talent.


Neel Here
April 15, 2009, 09:26 AM
sorry BCites for starting a new thread on this but rimon88's thread on moneyball concept had got me thinking. http://www.banglacricket.com/alochona/showthread.php?t=29297

and then we had the discussion on the performers in the domestic league. we have many cricket-knowledgeable experts here as also many with mathematical/statistics skills, some with both !

what if we can come up with a rating system that can really help us find out and predict who will be the future stars of BD cricket ?

I propose that BCites use the upcoming matches against SL A team and the ranji team to form a rating system to gauge a player's performances.
people can either propose a whole system on their own or particular aspects of cricket, like bowling etc.

I have some ideas of my own but it will take some time and effort to put it in readable shape.
I'll continue only if there is enough interest in this idea.

for the moment, I am asking interested members to put up their hands by posting in this thread. if there is not enough interest, mods can simply delete this thread !

Beamer
April 15, 2009, 11:03 AM
Every new initiative is applauded from my end. Go ahead with the rating system that you have in mind and we will surely discuss it.

However, when domestic matches are involved, it is a bit difficult to gauge reasonable projections of a particular player since we are not able to watch him perform. Scoreboard reading don't always paint the correct picture. As will be the case when our A team faces up against The Ranji team and the SL A team.

Whatever you do have in mind, I think its important that you have different criteria to forecast any projection of an individual that is independent for different versions of the game. In other words, different standards to rate a player for three/four day matches, one dayers and 20/20.

For example, without mentioning the obvious stats ( Avg, SR ), one can focus on minor details that may help us understand whether that player is capable of different situations in a given match. If its a 20/20 game, not only his SR is important, but also, whether how many sixes or fours he has hit will be of equal importance. For one dayers, a middle order batsman must know how to accumulate runs at a brisk rate without having the luxury of infielders in the ring. Singles and two's are bread and butter for him.

There can be an infinite number of categories to rate a player if we are to be very specific. Some maybe meaningless for a casual observer, but I bet you, it will also give us a clearer picture.

Good luck..

RazabQ
April 15, 2009, 01:18 PM
What about Asad's WEIR? Paging Furqaan, Al Furqaan

Ashfaq
April 16, 2009, 08:37 AM
I liked that cricket version of money ball. But to see if a player is good enough for any perticuler situation, or which player is more suited to which job, we need something more than statguru. Normal scorecards wont contain enough information. And often the scorcard conveys wrong and misleading data. Is there any way around this problem?

Could their be any statistical representation of the true value of a cricketer? Is such a thing even possible? The best we can do is to measure the profficiency of a certain player in certain condition and change the batting lineup accordingly. Since in cricket we cant substitute, concentrating on off field variables is kinda pointless.So we should look to sort our players according to their mental strength and mindset towards cricket. That can be done by a mental evaluation. Any suggestions?

Tigers_eye
April 16, 2009, 09:22 AM
Any process can be statistically analyzed and continuous improvement can be implemented. This needs dedication and total commitment. More than full time jobs for multiple people. Monitoring the current process/program/procedure is the first step. None of us have that much of time. Even collectively we can't do that cause we don't have the resources. Had we had video footages/on-field observer we could do something like Rivals do for college sports recruiting.

SGW
April 16, 2009, 09:59 AM
Hi Guys - I've been following this thread with some interest - I'm a fan of the Money Ball methodology and thinking and have always wonderedif it could be done successfully in cricket.....cricket has so many variables that it is actually pretty hard to do..... Also as a coach and from a practical point of view - we need to make sure that any methods we use are not too time consuming or cumbersome that it becomes unusable....Anyway, as a starting point please have a look at this method that I've been using for sometime just to measure a player's actual statistical worth to the the team.....no doubt there are many more in depth methods but this one is pretty simple and seems to work reasonably well....see what you think (?)

PLAYER VALUE SYSTEM - MVP
It can be argued that cricket is a numbers game, Allan Border once used the phrase - “it doesn’t matter how, it’s how many”.

With this in mind we have developed a relatively simple system of valuing a players worth to the team using purely the results or “numbers” he produces in each match.

The player value system is an objective measurement of the players value to the team based simply on statistics alone and does not take into account other important aspects a good player will bring to the team such as brains, heart, desire to win, game sense and the many other intangibles that make up a good “team player”.

The player value system that we have developed measures each players statistical contribution during each match and allows us to see quite clearly who are the main contributors to the team in terms of pure numbers. Eight key areas are measured and weighted according to their importance to the team result.

Four Day/Test Cricket
For longer version matches we are measuring;
1. Runs scored
2. Balls faced
3. Wickets taken
4. Balls bowled
5. Runs conceded
6. Catches/Run outs


The weighting system works as follows;
1. Runs scored. Runs made are measured at actual, for example if a player scores 100 runs, his value to the team is measured at 100 points.
2. Balls faced. We feel that it is important in our team that our players bat for long periods, so we have weighted balls faced at 1.66. So for example if a player bats for 1 over (6 balls) he is rewarded with 1 point (or the equivalent of 1 run per over faced).
3. Wickets taken. Are valued at 20 points for each wicket taken. For example if a bowler takes 4 wickets it is the same in value as a batter scoring 80 runs.
4. Balls bowled. We feel that a bowler is providing value to the team by simply bowling the ball (as it requires a certain amount of effort just to do that) so we have rewarded the bowler by weighting each ball bowled at .25.For example each over bowled rewards the bowler with 1.5 points.
5. Runs conceded. If a bowler is simply bowling for the sake of bowling and is ineffective and conceding runs and not taking any wickets then he is quite simply, not providing value to the team. With this is mind we have weighted runs conceded at negative .35 for every run conceded. What this means is that if a bowler concedes 4 runs per over and does not take a wicket, his value to the team is about even. If he bowls at less than 4 runs per over and not take a wicket his value to the team is higher and is rewarded accordingly. If he can also take a wicket he is then rewarded further etc.
6. Catches/run outs are valued at 10 points each.

One – Day Cricket
The weighting system is a little more complicated for one-day cricket but the same principle of providing an objective measurement of a players value to the team based purely on numbers still applies.

For One-Day cricket we are measuring;
1. Runs
2. Strike Rate
3. Wickets Taken
4. Overs Bowled
5. Economy rate (Power Players)
6. Economy rate (outside power plays)
7. Dismissals involved in (e.g catches, run outs)
8. Runs saved

We've got an excel spreadsheet that calculates all this for us and all we have to do is put in the actual numbers that the player produces etc. It seems to work pretty well and identifies who is actually providing value in terms of sheer numbers....

Anyway, just some thoughts.............good luck and best wishes to all at BanglaCricket.
Cheers
Shaun Williams

Beamer
April 16, 2009, 10:24 AM
Excellent Coach! That is easy enough to calculate if someone is willing to do it. Since it doesn't require the intangibles ( heart, sense, IQ etc ), one can arrive at a reasonable conclusion by simply reading the scorecard. I think the 20/20 rating can follow the one day rating system as a starter, though the points given to SR for batsmen, and economy rate for bowlers would have to assume greater significance.

Neel Here
April 16, 2009, 10:57 AM
'The' shaun williams ?! wow ! :notworthy:

interestingly, some of the metrics you mentioned is identical to what I had in mind when I started this thread.
the equivalence of 5wkt and 100 runs, for example.

the way of rating bowling contribution is pretty ingenious !

some other things we may want to look at in order to feature in intangibles like match conditions (say a fast bowler bowling on a greentop) and opposition quality :

comparison with combined averages(both teams) for the first one and own team for the second.
of course there is also the need to calculate standard deviation to determine consistency.

now that this thread is definitely up and running, I'll post more quantitative measures over the next few days.

MarufH
April 16, 2009, 11:08 AM
Anyway, just some thoughts.............good luck and best wishes to all at BanglaCricket.
Cheers
Shaun Williams

WOW.. coach... how are you!!! so good to have u here... how is things working out for you in India?

Off topic question, is Enam jnr gonna bowl against BD A?

bujhee kom
April 16, 2009, 11:29 AM
Hi Guys - I've been following this thread with some interest - ...
...Anyway, just some thoughts.............good luck and best wishes to all at BanglaCricket.
Cheers
Shaun Williams
Deraest coach Williams,
Salaam and greetings to you from the bottom of our hearts! Welcome to Banglacricket and we are so proud to have you here among us! We miss you very dearly coach Williams and we know you are indeed a true friend and genuine well wisher of Bangladesh cricket and the people of Bangladesh! Please please do visit us more often and tell us about Maharshtra Cricket and about our BD boys of your old team! We love you coach Williams! :big_hug:

RazabQ
April 16, 2009, 12:54 PM
Shaun, has posted in the past here too. He's a genuinely decent fella in my books.
On to the topic at hand, I feel that Shaun's spreadsheet is not rewarding wicket taking enough. On 4 day matches/Test matches, while batting can get you a draw it's the bowling that will win it for you. I'm curious about how the weights that Shaun mentions were derived. Did you guys do some sensitivity analysis and then see which weights backed up what common sense was dictating? Also I wonder if runs scored or wickets taken or runs conceded should have a degree of difficulty or conditions parameter. A 50 scored in a flat, baked pitch after the top order has blunted the opposition is not the same as say opening on a green top.

I would think one would need an oppostion by opposition and ground by ground analysis to get there. In the moneyball example, the type of ballpark is factored in. Also for fielding, they have zones. Each zone has had the probability assigned - of a certain player hitting there, of an outfielder's effectiveness, etc.

SGW
April 16, 2009, 01:08 PM
I'm interested to see what else you guys might think about how we can measure players OBJECTIVELY.....it's hard to measure the intangibles......because there are so many, and still rely on "opinion" as opposed to "fact"...

Anyway, off subject for anyone who might be interested.....Enam will not play for Maharashtra in the upcoming series....his first priority is to Bangladesh cricket of course.....

As for Maharashtra, things here are going well....we have maintained our position in the Elite League of the Ranji Trophy and we currently have by far the youngest squad in the competition (average age is 21.5)....we are in the process of building a strong side for the future and part of that building process is giving our players exposure to international tours such as the upcoming series in Bangladesh. We will also be touring Australia in June/July after visiting Bangladesh...

So we're really looking forward to coming to B'desh and taking part in what we hope will be a very competitive series of matches....personally I'm also looking forward to catching up with many of the players again and seeing some old friends in Bangladesh once more......

Should be good fun :)

Best Regards
Shaun

Neel Here
April 16, 2009, 01:17 PM
A 50 scored in a flat, baked pitch after the top order has blunted the opposition is not the same as say opening on a green top.
this is precisely why I started this thread, to find if we can quantify at least some aspects of the intangibles.

I've some ideas, will post in detail later.

SGW
April 16, 2009, 01:25 PM
Good point about the bowlers not being rewarded enough...... we played around with that weighting quite a bit and what we realised was that in most cases at first class level and above....if a bowler actually took 5 wickets.....1. he had to bowl quite a few overs and 2. his economy rate was normally half decent.......so what that meant was that he would actually be scoring "points" in those areas as well as gaining for the actual wickets he took, which gave some extra reward over the guys who scores 100 runs.....anyway, look it's certainly not a flawless system by any stretch....but it does give us an OBJECTIVE indication of who is actually providing VALUE to the team...and it's quickand easy to punch in the numbers......sometimes we can get carried away with what we THINK is happening with certain players, but then the numbers can show us a different story (as do averages, aggregates and strike rates anyway)......the reason I posted this here was not to get a critique (which is ok) on this little system as such (I already know it has some limitations) - BUT I was hoping that some of you mathematical/probability/etc cricket loving gurus out there might be able to come up with some more ideas as to how we can do this...1. better 2.reasonably simply 3. and accurately.......
All for now guys......Shabash Bangaldesh !!!
Cheers
Shaun

RazabQ
April 16, 2009, 01:31 PM
Shaun, Neel:

We can use standard deviations to "objectify" some of these subjective things. For e.g., for an evaluation of grounds, look at the deviation curve of the averages of top 7 scorers each innings. Then take the 1 plus deviation off the mean. This should give you a bench mark for how a batsman should fare on this track. Perhaps that can be used to identify a grounds based parameter or multiplier for batsmen's runs scored? I'm not a stats guy and have too much work to doodle on Excel right now.

RazabQ
April 16, 2009, 01:33 PM
Shaun - wasn't a critique. I was trying to understand any unstated or implicit assumptions you guys had made before making any suggestions.

Tigers_eye
April 16, 2009, 01:33 PM
I'm interested to see what else you guys might think about how we can measure players OBJECTIVELY..........

Should be good fun :)

Best Regards
Shaun
Dear coach,
Break down the bowling figures for one day games. Boring overs in the middle gets less value. Create normal spread. Anyone outside the spread needs more care (wrong side) and reward (right side). Bowling 0-10 overs and after 45+ overs needs more mental strenght than 20-40 overs. You can come up with a formula. :)

As RazabQ has already mentioned pitches must have some values and ranking. This should affect both batsman and bowlers.

For T20, extra balls are criminal. Front foot noballs must be punished.

For test/4 dayers: Anyone bowling 8+ over spells on the dot should get a reward. I love the ball faced equation in to play. Batsmen need to be categorized in to few groups (A) Top orders (1-4), (B) middle order (5-7), (C)tail (8-11). Not outs with the side getting allout values more than notout with declarations. A - notout should be valued more than B and C notouts. B should be > C.

++++
Subjective: Make videos and seek a leader. Vocal and performance wise. Alert, Agile etc. Then while comparing them make sure to get one as your "chosen one" who has an off-field interest. Be it hobby, social work, or a good family man who does activity with them.

My two cents.

RazabQ
April 16, 2009, 01:38 PM
Good to see TE espousing the standard dev approach too. If I have time, I'll doodle around to see what kind of web services CI or CricArchive provide. Else you can just create a local instance of all the stats on your hard-drive.

Tigers_eye
April 16, 2009, 02:25 PM
...Else you can just create a local instance of all the stats on your hard-drive.
There is no other alternative than this. Not only these type of analysis will give a better objective picture but can also alert the weak points of a person, position, team, mgmt. So the question becomes how easily one can get the raw stats?

RazabQ
April 16, 2009, 03:21 PM
I have to believe if not free than cheaply ... also wife & web service could work ...

al Furqaan
April 16, 2009, 03:46 PM
aight guys, i'm here...

good thread neel, i am definitely the biggest fan of numbers here or among the biggest. my thoughts:

1) i'm still a fan of my WEIR system that i devised about a year and half back
2) i am also a fan of standard deviations in regards to measuring consistency
3) there is no way to rate talent, only productivity. potential and talent are often hidden and come out late or not at all.

************************************

as of now, i have rating systems in place for tests and ODIs for both batting and bowling. i would like to include wicket keeping as well, and also fielding (catches and run outs) but that may be a bit more difficult. i have now accepted the importance of T20 cricket, and before the world cup i will have ratings up for that, inshallah.

i haven't had much time to update my WEIR, but i plan on doing it.

i have also been compiling a stats database on excel since summer of 2007, however that project has also stagnated. i do fully intend to resume work on it as soon as next week.

i am also excited about the prospect of working with other BC stalwarts, but I haven't seen much interest in that regard. what i need are honest opinions on my WEIR system, because asides from that, BC has no other rating system in place.

as of now i felt that incorporating strike rates in Test batting are not completely irrelevent and so i have waited it at 50% the value it has in ODIs. i guess in T20Is i will give a double value or 150% value.

al Furqaan
April 16, 2009, 03:48 PM
Good to see TE espousing the standard dev approach too. If I have time, I'll doodle around to see what kind of web services CI or CricArchive provide. Else you can just create a local instance of all the stats on your hard-drive.

i was doing this on excel, albeit manually. i'm not sure if this is what you are taking about. i've made significant progress. i'd estimate that i have maybe 30-40% of all our top 20 players stats compiled in Tests and ODIs. and thats taken me not that long, though i started the project 1.5 years ago.

Neel Here
April 16, 2009, 03:50 PM
furqaan bhai link to WEIR please ?

al Furqaan
April 16, 2009, 03:52 PM
not to be a downer, but i think we're getting a little bit ahead of ourselves, unless someone has some magic program which makes the data collection relatively easy. incorporating pitch and venue is great, but it seems time consuming and, at this point, a minor detail. and thats not including that certain venues can produce different types of pitches.

Neel Here
April 16, 2009, 03:53 PM
i was doing this on excel, albeit manually. i'm not sure if this is what you are taking about. i've made significant progress. i'd estimate that i have maybe 30-40% of all our top 20 players stats compiled in Tests and ODIs. and thats taken me not that long, though i started the project 1.5 years ago.
better write the thing in a code and start putting the whole data in a data file.

after the first hassles it will simple become plug and play !

We can use standard deviations to "objectify" some of these subjective things.
yes razab, I mentioned SD in my second post.


comparison with combined averages(both teams) for the first one and own team for the second.
of course there is also the need to calculate standard deviation to determine consistency.

but that is for determining performance over a period of time.

for the moment however, let me propose a system to quantify limited overs batting performance for a single match, taking into account quality of opposition and overall ground conditions.

I have used the simple concept of weightage to assign 'importance' to some parameters.
the system is kept as simple as possible for ease of use.

the following posts would hopefully explain everything. :)

RazabQ
April 16, 2009, 03:53 PM
Anyone use CI widgets? perhaps we can find out if they use SOAP or something else to get the data

al Furqaan
April 16, 2009, 03:54 PM
furqaan bhai link to WEIR please ?

http://www.banglacricket.com/alochona/showthread.php?t=24500&highlight=weir

however, here are the formulas:

Batting Formula (ODIs):

(total runs) * (strike rate)
______________________
(innings) * 100


Batting Forumala (Tests):

is the average of ODI formula and:

(total runs)
_________________
(innings) * 100


Bowling Formula (ODIs):

(total wickets) * (60,000)
_________________________________________
(innings) * (econ) * (average) * (strike rate)



Bowling Formula (Tests):

(total wickets) * (20,000)
_________________________________________
(innings * 2) * (average) * (strike rate)

RazabQ
April 16, 2009, 04:06 PM
Wait al, I think Neel thinks you are older than me! You get the bhai, I get the 1st name! LOLO

Neel Here
April 16, 2009, 04:15 PM
oops ! sorry bhai !

Neel Here
April 16, 2009, 04:40 PM
Limited Overs Individual Batting Performance Evaluator (LOvI BatPor)
(to bangla speakers, figure out what that means !) :-p

(applicable for 50-50 and T-20)

Acronyms Used : --

R -- Runs Scored by a batsman in an innings.
SR -- Strike Rate of the batsman's innings.
InSR -- Innings SR of the batsman's own team. *
MSR -- Match SR, of both teams combined. *
InAvg -- innings average of batsman's own team, calculated by dividing final score of his team minus extras /no of wkts fallen.
MAvg -- match average, average individual score of both teams combined.

* In case a team is all out and fails to complete it's full quota of overs, SR will be calculated assuming that full quota of overs has been played. For teams batting second completing the chase in less than full quota however, the exact no of overs batted will be considered.

------------------------------------------------
In the LOvI BatPor system, a batsman is awarded points on three criteria

A ) Hit and Run Score (HRS)

In a limited overs match, both runs scored AND SR are important but the level of importance changes according to the total number of overs.
Strike Rate is a more important metric in say, a T-20 match than a 50-50 one.
This criteria will try to incorporate both these factors in a quantitative way using weights.

Calculation Formula
http://www.texify.com/img/%5CLARGE%5C%21H.R.S%20%3D%20x_1%20%5Ctimes%20R%20% 2B%20%281-x_1%29%20%5Ctimes%20%5Cfrac%7BR%20%5Ctimes%20S.R%7 D%7B100%7D.gif

Here, http://www.texify.com/img/%5CLARGE%5C%21x_1%20.gif is the weight used in order to assign importance to runs scored and the pace at which they are scored.
In my view, a proper value would be :
o http://www.texify.com/img/%5CLARGE%5C%21x_1%20%3D%20%5Cfrac%7B3%7D%7B4%7D.gi f for 50-50
and
o http://www.texify.com/img/%5CLARGE%5C%21x_1%20%3D%20%5Cfrac%7B2%7D%7B3%7D.gi f for T-20

the formula then becomes :
50-50
http://www.texify.com/img/%5CLARGE%5C%21H.R.S%20%3D%20%5Cfrac%7B3%7D%7B4%7D% 20%5Ctimes%20R%20%2B%20%5Cfrac%7B1%7D%7B4%7D%20%5C frac%7BR%20%5Ctimes%20S.R%7D%7B100%7D.gif

and
T-20
http://www.texify.com/img/%5CLARGE%5C%21H.R.S%20%3D%20%5Cfrac%7B2%7D%7B3%7D% 20%5Ctimes%20R%20%2B%20%5Cfrac%7B1%7D%7B3%7D%20%5C frac%7BR%20%5Ctimes%20S.R%7D%7B100%7D.gif

Comments :-- Mostly Self explanatory, the formula would perhaps become clearer with an example, I've calculated some but it takes time to post all that ! :(
For the moment, members can tweak the weights to see if they see fit.

----------------------------------------------

B ) Quality of Opposition Team Score (QOTS)

Objective of this score will be to reward performance against good teams and thereby even out scores against weaker teams.
Determined on Two Counts, difference in strike rate(which can be seen as a measure of dominance over bowling) and difference in runs scored and average.

i) QOTS Strike Rate Difference
http://www.texify.com/img/%5CLARGE%5C%21QOTS%28S.R%29%20%3D%20R%20%5Ctimes%2 0%5Cfrac%7BS.R-In.S.R%7D%7B100%7D%20.gif

ii) QOTS Average Score Difference
http://www.texify.com/img/%5CLARGE%5C%21QOTS%28Avg%29%20%3D%20R%20-%20In.Avg.gif

Comments :-- These two parameters compare the performance of the batsman wrt other members of his team, in doing so it is assumed that against a good opposition there would be in general lesser no of good performances than against weaker teams.

Therefore, this parameter will
o reward him for performing better than his teammates, IOW performing against
quality opposition.
o neither reward nor punish him for performance at same level as his teammates
o subtract points for performance worse than that of his teammates.

-------------------------------------

C ) Ground Condition Score (GCS)

How to account for a seaming greentop where a batsman scores a gritty 75 while his team is all out for 200 and the opposition too bundles out for a similar low score ?
it is certainly not the same as a 75 where his team scores 200 in reply to oppositions 350 !
and it is much more valuable than a 125 on a flat wicket where his team scores 300 + !

the way to do it would be to compare his performance with scores from both teams
A very good team playing against a weak team can still skew up the performance of one team but using data from both teams, we can figure out if the weather and pitch had some role to play after all or not !! :)

Again, we calculate this score on two counts but this time, we use the match averages and SR :
i) GCS Strike Rate Difference

http://www.texify.com/img/%5CLARGE%5C%21GCS%28S.R%29%20%3D%20R%20%5Ctimes%20 %5Cfrac%7BS.R-M.S.R%7D%7B100%7D%20.gif

ii) GCS Average Score Difference

http://www.texify.com/img/%5CLARGE%5C%21GCS%28Avg%29%20%3D%20R%20-%20M.Avg.gif

-------------------------------------------

That's it for the day ! feel free to pick holes and/or suggest improvements !

Coming Next : Score of some batsmen from the famous Aus vs RSA run chase, followed by Bowling Analysis System.

Edit : Not Out Bonus :-- A batsman staying not out is always advantageous to his team, the longer a batsman has stayed out and more the runs he has scored, the better it is for his team.
a NO batsman is awarded with 0.2 points for every run scored.

RazabQ
April 16, 2009, 05:01 PM
Damn Neel, eita porte shomoy laagbe - I'll come back and check later in the evening.

al Furqaan
April 16, 2009, 05:06 PM
the formula must also be tested so that its objectivity correlates reasonably with our subjective accepted conception of various players relative ability.

* In case a team is all out and fails to complete it's full quota of overs, SR will be calculated assuming that full quota of overs has been played. For teams batting second completing the chase in less than full quota however, the exact no of overs batted will be considered.

don't agree with this part.

since its the SR, it should be runs/balls ratio, period. no need to extend it to the full quota of overs. thats a NRR calculation, which has its flaws. basically we are rewarding our batsman for the good work of the bowlers (or misdeeds of the oppossing batsman). the batsman's stats should be simply their own handiwork. if say a team scores 200 in 45 overs all out, their SR will be calculated at 66.67 rather than their real striking rate of 74.07.

Neel Here
April 16, 2009, 05:12 PM
the formula must also be tested so that its objectivity correlates reasonably with our subjective accepted conception of various players relative ability.
yes, it is still being created, fully open to tweaks and suggestions. :)

that is one reason why I was calculating examples, to calibrate the system. no doubt there's still work to be done but the figures I got till now look promising.

al Furqaan
April 16, 2009, 06:07 PM
Neel, do have a single formula that encompasses pitch conditions and strength of opposition??

Ajfar
April 16, 2009, 07:07 PM
neel bhai..after seeing this my calc homework looks like a peice of cake

SGW
April 16, 2009, 08:49 PM
Nice work Neel - I think you are onto something good there...

al Furqaan
April 16, 2009, 10:37 PM
neel bhai,

your formulas are for a single innings or match...is there a way to get a cummulative rating for a series/season/career?

also, try and finish ur system...we can run it up against my WEIR and see if the results coincide. the WEIR is a much simpler method tho...

al Furqaan
April 16, 2009, 10:40 PM
btw, hearty BC welcome to Coach Williams!!!

i hope you can contribute to BC for years to come!

MarufH
April 16, 2009, 11:08 PM
I'm interested to see what else you guys might think about how we can measure players OBJECTIVELY.....it's hard to measure the intangibles......because there are so many, and still rely on "opinion" as opposed to "fact"...

Anyway, off subject for anyone who might be interested.....Enam will not play for Maharashtra in the upcoming series....his first priority is to Bangladesh cricket of course.....

As for Maharashtra, things here are going well....we have maintained our position in the Elite League of the Ranji Trophy and we currently have by far the youngest squad in the competition (average age is 21.5)....we are in the process of building a strong side for the future and part of that building process is giving our players exposure to international tours such as the upcoming series in Bangladesh. We will also be touring Australia in June/July after visiting Bangladesh...

So we're really looking forward to coming to B'desh and taking part in what we hope will be a very competitive series of matches....personally I'm also looking forward to catching up with many of the players again and seeing some old friends in Bangladesh once more......

Should be good fun :)

Best Regards
Shaun

Thanks for clearing that out! Also, I am glad things are working out for you in India...

Coach... see if u can recruit Mithun Ali or Boro Shuvo for Moharastra..... these kids are results of your hard work!!! They need proper exposure!

MarufH
April 16, 2009, 11:11 PM
Mods/Admins... can you guys change his street cricketer status into Former BD coach?

bujhee kom
April 16, 2009, 11:59 PM
Mods/Admins... can you guys change his street cricketer status into Former BD coach?
I second that dear Mod Admin bhais please!
Thank you dear Maruf bhai for pointing it out!
Honoring coach SGW is honoring the BD tigers :flag:

Neel Here
April 17, 2009, 05:00 AM
quick question ! how do I put in a scorecard ?

like in this post ??
http://www.banglacricket.com/alochona/showpost.php?p=843301&postcount=179

Neel Here
April 17, 2009, 06:21 AM
Ricky Ponting Vs Herschelle Gibbs.


SA vs Aus (ODI no. 2349)
http://content.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/238200.html

Played at New Wanderers Stadium, Johannesburg, on 12 March 2006 (50-over match)

Result South Africa won by 1 wicket (with 1 ball remaining)
__________________________________________________ _____________


INSERT SCORECARD HERE. (someone please tell me how to do this.)

__________________________________________________ _____________

Some Calculated Figures :--
Team...........Strike Rates........Batting Avg.
Aus............144.67 (In.SR)......103.75 (In.Avg)
SA ............146.5 (In.SR).......46.44 (In.Avg)
Both...........145.58 (M.S.R).......64.08 (M.Avg)

==================================================
Now let's compare the two very similar performances from both teams,

Ponting's 164(105) @ 156.19
and
Gibbs 175(111) @ 157.65

Player.....Runs.....S.Rate....H.R.Score....QOTS(SR )....QOTS(Avg)....GCS(SR)....GCS(Avg)....Total Score

Ponting....164.....156.19......187..........18.89. .........60.25.........17.4..........99.92........ .383.46
H.Gibbs....175.....157.65.....200.22.......19.50.. .......128.56.........21.1........110.92.........4 80.3
================================================== =====================

In most rating systems, gibbs and ponting would have got very similar scores, but here gibbs clearly has a big advantage.
In my opinion that reflects positively on the systems ability to take into account the
difference in the bowling sides and match situation.
But I'll not analyze the results now. ;)

I'm asking BCites to first analyze the results (hint: focus on the individual components :) ) and say what they think !
It's better that we can have some unbiased opinion before looking at my analysis, which would surely have some personal bias.

Neel Here
April 17, 2009, 01:09 PM
T_E bhai's message.
posted with permission.

Hello Neel,
I went through your performance evaluation system, and must say excellent thought process was put in.

1) To have any type of rating one has to have a level playing field. The scores Gibbs and Ricky "I am the forth Umpire" Ponting have 480 and 380 are open ended.

2) Ground condition, opponent strength has equal values as runs and SR. Those parameters are important but not the most important parameter.

3) Bating position has not been considered. (Even though both were top order batsman) In future, we would compare between Bhua and Stud Shakib's innings.

So my suggestion is make the rating a weighted score:

H.R.Score(75%)..QOTS(SR)(5%)..QOTS(Avg)(5%)..GCS(S R)(5%)..GCS(Avg)(5%)..BP & NO(Batting postion & not out)(5%)

and my reply
T_E bhai, don't you think the qots and gcs deserve more weightage ?
as a matter of fact I am NOT YET done on this, I'm tempted to scale the whole QOTS/GCS thing to a par score. will post later on that.

among other things, can I post this PM on the thread ? it has some points that are worth discussing.
regards.
.....................................
furqaan bhai, I'll reply in detail later, tomorrow hopefully. for the moment let me just say that you can actually combine the opposition team and ground condition in a single formula, it won't change anything but that make understanding the points difficult.
I would look forward to your comments on the gibbs vs ponting example.

to all who have commented, thanks for the kind words ! :)
even more than praise, please keep the criticism coming !

Zeeshan
April 17, 2009, 02:18 PM
neel bhai,

genius thread... was wondering if you could post ratings for a gradient from crappy players to Sachin tendulkar and give us a realistic glimpse of their talents. :)

cricman
April 17, 2009, 06:36 PM
Using the Coaches System I did All the Batsmen up to date (No Fielding & Bowling). I didn't Rewards players for Not Outs. The Results are per Innings

Ashraful: 31.102
Shakib: 33.72
Mushifiq: 28.35
Tamim: 31.21

If you want it per Test Match just * 2.

Shakib would be pretty close to 150ish I would assume if you included his fielding and bowling.

125 Would be Test Class from my prespective, Ash and Tamim are around 70-80's and Mushifiq close 100 only due to the opportunites he gets for dismissals.

SGW
April 17, 2009, 09:15 PM
Like your work Neel - obviously you've put a lot of work into that (!)
Can I ask you how practical and how easy is it for you to punch in the numbers - e.g How long would it take you to rate every player in one match or one series for example (?)
Keep it up though - it's really interesting stuff.....
Regards
Shaun

Neel Here
April 18, 2009, 10:46 AM
thanks for the response shaun !

it takes about a minute for calculation of the scores for each player with the calculator.
you'll notice that a few stats are common for all players (innings SR, innings avg, match SR etc) and the input data for the individual players (SR and runs scored)can be simply read off the score cards.
it will also be fairly easy to write a code for this, it would be a very simple one, 20-30 lines at most. that can bring the calculation time for a whole match to about a minute ! :)

as a matter of fact it takes faaaaar longer to type it down in a readable format for BCites than to calculate it !

al Furqaan
April 18, 2009, 03:55 PM
also, Neel if its possible to scale your system to 100 (actually 99) please?

this is has the benefit that its the number system we use (if we were Mayans i'd suggest it to be scaled to 60). by this i mean, once you have every player done...pick the highest rated player (Tendulkar, KP, Kallis) whoever it might be, and set his career score at 99. basically this could let us calculate percentages very easily. of course the guy at 99 might start jumping over 100 based on performance, but if you pick one of the guys i mentioned above, it won't be too great a deviation.

thanks and good work.

i will try to run the SL-BD U19 series into my WEIR and lets see what happens when we compare your complex system vs my simpler one.

cheers and carry on the hard work!

Zeeshan
April 18, 2009, 04:06 PM
also, Neel if its possible to scale your system to 100 (actually 99) please?

this is has the benefit that its the number system we use (if we were Mayans i'd suggest it to be scaled to 60)....

Mayans used vigesimal or base 20 system. you are confusing them with the Babylonians.

And I respectfully disagree making the scaling out of 100 because then it looks like master-moshai's nomboring system.... Rather, in the interest of preserving individuality I prefer the credit score or Chess rating type of system with no limits.

Just my two pence...

Neel Here
April 21, 2009, 05:58 AM
damn ! I was waiting for mash to play in today's match to do a performance analysis ! :hairpull:

anyway, I'll do it for the limited overs match on 2nd May with SL U-19. in the meantime I'll try to answer some of the questions above and explain why I think the gibbs vs ponting scoring is justified.

the interest in this is low now due to IPL !

al Furqaan
April 21, 2009, 06:51 AM
no system is perfect...but is that gibbs innings relatively close to 20% better than pontings is the question we have to ask. but even thats not enough...what we need are to find several "nearly identical" innings in the same match and run that data through to see if we get the same relative results. of course there is some leeway and i'd say up to 20% is fair.

as for just that one match...is 20% performance rating of gibbs justified? perhaps, i can't decide:

1) his team won an epic match, but on the other hand
2) the win also had contributions from 10 other guys, most notably smith's innings.
3) the closeness of the match, dictates that even a slight increase in say a haydo innings, would have given ponting with identical stats the win. so should his rating go up 20% because haydo scored 10 more runs?

just a few questions...but nonetheless a superiorly constructed system to my WEIR :)

Ajfar
April 21, 2009, 09:07 PM
asad bhai are you a math major??..you always seem very interested with numbers

SGW
April 22, 2009, 07:01 AM
Hey guys - I hop ethis thread can stay alive for a bit longer......need a favour to ask of you if you don;t mind.....can you guys test out your ranking system during the Maharashtra v B"Desh series coimng up in May/June.....I'll also use my simple system that I explained before and we'll also just use some good old fashioned "opinion or gut feeling" to see who comes up as the MVP for that series of games......I just think it will be interesting to see how we rate things.....I'm all for the ranking sysytems that you guys have explained throughout this thread.......as a mathematic/probability layman I find it very interesting to see what you guys have come up with ...... very interesting and shows a keen understanding of the game..... well done...

Tigers_eye
April 22, 2009, 08:07 AM
Hey guys - I hop ethis thread can stay alive for a bit longer......need a favour to ask of you if you don;t mind.....can you guys test out your ranking system during the Maharashtra v B"Desh series coimng up in May/June.....I'll also use my simple system that I explained before and we'll also just use some good old fashioned "opinion or gut feeling" to see who comes up as the MVP for that series of games......I just think it will be interesting to see how we rate things.....I'm all for the ranking sysytems that you guys have explained throughout this thread.......as a mathematic/probability layman I find it very interesting to see what you guys have come up with ...... very interesting and shows a keen understanding of the game..... well done...
Mods: Please make this thread sticky.

Most certainly sir. As long as we get the correct scorecard.

Tigers_eye
April 22, 2009, 01:28 PM
Coach,
1 - 10 scale, 10 being the best. Rate
(a) match winner (also duck champion);

(b) Consistant performer - One day games (30 sure shot). Pace not that good.

al Furqaan
April 24, 2009, 07:46 PM
asad bhai are you a math major??..you always seem very interested with numbers

no, i'm not smart enough to be a math major...but i do enjoy numbers, its one of the most beautiful things about sports, especially cricket.

al Furqaan
April 24, 2009, 07:53 PM
according to WEIR,

Ponting's 164 off 105 earns a 256.15 rating

and

Gibbs' 175 off 111 earns a 275.91 rating.

the WEIR system only takes into account runs, strike rate, and number of innings.

Neel Here
April 25, 2009, 02:50 PM
now that the KKR match has been washed out, we finally get an window where BC-ites would be a little more interested in this thread. :-p

and of course, shaun's presence is a huge morale booster in my effort to steal time for this ! :)

for the record, I'm posting the snapshots of the scorecard of the match.
http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/8107/aus.jpg
http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/5183/29191410.jpg

Ricky Ponting Vs Herschelle Gibbs.

==================================================
Now let's compare the two very similar performances from both teams,

Ponting's 164(105) @ 156.19
and
Gibbs 175(111) @ 157.65

Player.....Runs.....S.Rate....H.R.Score....QOTS(SR )....QOTS(Avg)....GCS(SR)....GCS(Avg)....Total Score

Ponting....164.....156.19......187..........18.89. .........60.25.........17.4..........99.92........ .383.46
H.Gibbs....175.....157.65.....200.22.......19.50.. .......128.56.........21.1........110.92.........4 80.3
================================================== =====================


I would analyze the results for each data-point (i.e individual sub-heading) and try to justify them based on my understanding of cricket.

two points though,

point # 1
this system is intentionally open ended, IOW theretically, there is almost no limit to how much a batsman can score. so don't be offended by scores that read like 200 or 300 ... the problem is simply due to our familiarity with the "out of 100" system of scoring. if need be, we can always scale the score to some arbitarily fixed maximum although I'm not in favour of it. (more on this later in reply to T_E bhai's post)
point # 2
this particular match was an aberration in terms of run scored, we haven't seen the like of it before or since. so the scores are big. they will be much smaller in other matches.

a)Hit and Run Score (HRS)
(depends only upon runs scored and SR with 75% weightage given to runs scored)
RP : 187
HG : 200.22

Comments : If we say that HRS measures the direct contribution of the batsman to the match, we see that the batsmen have comparable scores.
Gibbs scored 11 more runs than RP at a slightly higher SR.
No wonder he scores more than RP in HRS by about the same difference (~13)
-------------------------------

Quality of Opposition Team Score QOTS(SR)
RP : 18.89
HG: 19.50

Comments : Both players have scored roughly the same. remember that this metric is measured by comparing the players SR with the SR of his team.

This almost equal score means that it was more or less equally difficult (or easy) for RP and GB to score against the opposition bowling. since both teams have very close run rates, we can immediately see that the system's result matches with the actual one.

(to be continued)

Tigers_eye
April 25, 2009, 06:10 PM
Eagerly waiting for the rest of the part.
...
point # 2
this particular match was an aberration in terms of run scored, we haven't seen the like of it before or since. so the scores are big. they will be much smaller in other matches.
Since we are on a discussing stage of creating a formula let me say few things.

1) Extreme cases are way out side of the normal curve. I think these two exceptional innings can be related to Wanderers ground. Now if we give more percentage points (emphasis on grounds similar to HRS) based from these scores then we would not be doing a justice to the other grounds around the world. That is why I think to make a formula like this to work, we need to create a database for all the grounds average scores for the last few years.

2) We have to keep in mind we are trying to create this formula for all players. Some may score ducks that would hurt their performance.

3) Some of us are old school. We do not care much (not that much as some) on Strike Rate. T20 would end the Gavaskar, Hanif like test players (assumption). Which is a bad thing for us. I ask how would this formula work for the longer version of the game? For example, I think the second innings (at Dhaka) knock of Javed Omar and Nafis Iqbal are the greatest test knocks since then for Bangladesh. Would the formula give that kind of picture?

Neel Here
April 25, 2009, 09:48 PM
T_E bhai, those are good questions you raise. I'll give a short reply now and perhaps longer ones later.

1) Extreme cases are way out side of the normal curve. I think these two exceptional innings can be related to Wanderers ground. Now if we give more percentage points (emphasis on grounds similar to HRS) based from these scores then we would not be doing a justice to the other grounds around the world. That is why I think to make a formula like this to work, we need to create a database for all the grounds average scores for the last few years.
added later : about the first line, you need not think in that way and ignore the extreme data points.
we can simply assume a normal gaussian like distribution which means that for every rare abnormally high score, there is one equally rare abnormally low score.

there are two sides to this. on one hand, runs scored are runs scored, irrespective of opposition or ground, I've listened to gavaskar or boycott stress this numerous times. whatever be the bowling/pitch condition, you can't take away the fact that the batsman did actually score a very big hundred. the HRS points are in that way justified.

OTOH, I've seriously given thought to introducing a par score while calculating QOTS/GCS, IOW scale the match score to something like 275(say). all the individual scores will then get similarly adjusted and QOTS/GCS calculated from the adjusted score.

you might remember this exchange :
T_E bhai, don't you think the qots and gcs deserve more weightage ?
as a matter of fact I am NOT YET done on this, I'm tempted to scale the whole QOTS/GCS thing to a par score. will post later on that.

There is one practical point though, this will increase the complexity of calculations by a notch, moreover, the difference in QOTS/GCS calculated from raw score and adjusted score won't be much. So we need to ask ourselves is it really worth making all that extra effort for only a little improvement.

I'll definitely post a revised version of QOTS/GCS calculation using par score once I've completed the first version of this system. I still haven't said anything on bowling. :)


2) We have to keep in mind we are trying to create this formula for all players. Some may score ducks that would hurt their performance.
entirely justified, won't you say ? :D
you score a duck in a match when all your teammates performed and on a pitch where everybody gets runs means that you performed very poorly indeed ! :-p

although, if this happens in a low scoring match, the system will take that into account and a very small # of points shall be deducted. this, I believe is the real strength of this system.

3) Some of us are old school. We do not care much (not that much as some) on Strike Rate. T20 would end the Gavaskar, Hanif like test players (assumption). Which is a bad thing for us. I ask how would this formula work for the longer version of the game? For example, I think the second innings (at Dhaka) knock of Javed Omar and Nafis Iqbal are the greatest test knocks since then for Bangladesh. Would the formula give that kind of picture?
not yet. I haven't gone around to adjusting this system for test matches which are in general much more complex and subtle.
I intend to do that shortly and I will need advice from people like you and of course, shaun.
might I mention that as far as I'm concerned, test cricket is cricket, so rest assured that I'll be much more careful while devising something to gauge test performances.
----------------------------------------------

Damn Neel, eita porte shomoy laagbe - I'll come back and check later in the evening.

razab bhai, koto sondhya gelo ar koto elo, but I'm yet to read your comments ! :(

----------------------------------------------
A F bhai, I think your WEIR system will be better utilized to get a quick and dirty appraisal of a player's whole career, it's a truly handy method for that.
but I don't think you should use it for evaluating individual performances. :)

----------------------------------------------

coming up : concluding part of the analysis.

Neel Here
April 26, 2009, 12:58 AM
Quality of Opposition Team Score QOTS(Avg)
RP : 60.25
HG: 128.56

This is the metric in which Gibbs really trumps Ponting, his score is more than double that of RP !!:wow:
now, QOTS(Avg) is simply the difference between the batsman's score and the avg individual score by his team. (statistics and mean deviation lovers note that this is nothing but Absolute deviation)

IOW QOTS(Avg) awards points by comparing performances with the other members of his team. That is the mechanism, its object however is to identify and appropriately reward performances against good bowling attack/difficult situation.

A better way to look at QOTS(Avg) is: how difficult is it to survive and score runs against the particular bowling attack in the given match condition.(batting in 2nd innings facing aussie attack while chasing 434 is not the same as batting first against SA attack)

so, the score of 60.25 and 128.56 for RP and HG implies that HG scored against a better bowling attack and/or more trying situation than RP.
question is, is it justified ? let's find out.

first, let us step back from all these numbers and formulae and concentrate on the match situation when gibbs comes out to bat with smith, chasing 434, an impossible run-chase at that moment.

Consider :
a) Gibbs bats against the combo of lee(one of the best fast bowlers in world cricket at that time, he also had a 4wkt haul in 3rd match), bracken(arguably the best ODI bowler in the world, performed superbly in this match too ! figures : 10-0-67-5)
both wicket taking bowlers.

then there was stuart clarke, pup and symonds, all capable of being match winners on their day with bowling alone.

Ponting OTOH faces an attack comprising of ntini, hall, telemachus kallis etc.
other than ntini, none of them are particularly penetrating bowlers.
bottomline : gibbs faces a much better bowling side than ponting does.

b) SA was chasing a mammoth total, the likes of which that had not been surmounted ever in ODI history, not by a looong way. the highest succesful run chase before that was a 332 by NZ, a target smaller by a full hundred runs !

It was also the series decider, effectively the final ! The pressure must have been telling on the SA players when they went out to bat !

Considering both the quality of the australian attack and the match situation, it was infinitely harder to bat second chasing the score than it was to set it.

Now, we can do the analysis up to this point as SA comes out to bat, the match result will tell us whether our analysis was correct or not. :)

----------------------------------
At first glance we may be tempted to say that the analysis was wrong since SA won the match, right ?
Let's dig a little deeper, SA won by 1 wkt with 1 ball to spare, putting in a different language,

SA lost 9 wkts in the chase(Aus only lost 4) and had to play almost their full quota to get to the target. even more importantly, the average individual score in the Aus innings is 103.75 as compared to 46.44 in the SA innings.
That means for every aussie wkt team australia scored 104 runs as against a measly 46 runs/wkt by SA !!
other than smith, gibbs and boucher, every SA batsman fell cheaply in the endeavour to score quickly.
now does the jigsaw puzzle fall into place ?? ;)

can we now say that indeed the overall poor performance of the SA batting as compared to the Aus one proves that both the bowling quality and match situation odds were stacked against gibbs and therefore he deserves every bit of the extra credit for that superlative innings ?

Zeeshan
April 26, 2009, 01:03 AM
But Neel-da, question is.... does_it_blend_ice?

Neel Here
April 26, 2009, 01:07 AM
that leaves

Ground Condition Score - Strike Rate GCS(SR)
RP 17.4
HG 21.1

Comments : Again roughly same score for both, Gibbs scored a bit higher than ponting at a little higher SR, so gets 4 more points. nothing earth-shattering. Both have scored a large amount of runs at a strike rate higher than that of the match, therefore both have a positive GCS(SR) score.

--------------------------------

Ground Condition Score - Average GCS(Avg)
RP 99.92
HG 110.92

Again, nothing extraordinary, gibbs has exactly 11 points more than ponting, which is simply the the no of runs he scored more than ponting in this match.
_________________________

Any questions ??

Neel Here
April 26, 2009, 01:08 AM
GB bhai, could you dilute it a little so that it can flow into my (block)head ? :)

Zeeshan
April 26, 2009, 01:12 AM
khek khek khek....merely khepafying. [on topic: although 1/2 of it went over my head, great work, keep it up....just a suggestion: maybe you can make it a little more lucid and kind of publish it in some newspaper?]

Neel Here
April 26, 2009, 01:19 AM
err, bhai re, er chey lucid amar kommo noye ! :(

explanation na pore sudhu formula use korle eta very lucid ! ;)
just a suggestion though, have a look at the match scorecard and think what you would have made of the various performances if you weren't able to watch the match.
try to deduce this from your past cricketing knowledge/feel only, forget the system.
then you'll really get the feel for it. trust me !

newspaper ? where will I find an editor ? don't know of any ! :( anyway, BC is any day a better platform for cricketing matters than a newspaper.

Zeeshan
April 26, 2009, 01:30 AM
I dont know if I skipped it by mistake, but Neel-da do you have any formula to rate fielding/bowling/wkeeping?

Neel Here
April 26, 2009, 01:48 AM
not yet, GB bhai, I've mentioned that next to come would be bowling which I have more or less figured out, just need to calibrate it to give equal weightage with batting.

I'm a little confused with fielding/wkeeping. the moment we go beyond the score-card i.e beyond simply catches, run-outs and stumpings, the analysis demands records to be maintained of each and every ball bowled and then too, a lot of subjective aspects will come in. it's not very practically feasible unless you have a paid job to do so ! :D
my conclusion is it is quite difficult to analyze fielding objectively, so I'll restrict myself to dismissals and runs conceded only(for WK).

Tigers_eye
April 26, 2009, 06:50 AM
Dear Neel,
Wonderful job in analyzing and breaking down the formula.

QOTS (AVG)
Say team India ( :lol: ) scores 250/10 in 43 overs. Now team BD kicks rear 251/9 in 49.5 overs. An avg score of opponents would say India faced better bowlers on that day. But in all reality (for argument purpose) their tail could not deliver after 40 overs. Slinger Rubel worked his magic. They lost 4 wickets in three overs, lol.

Just a thought, would you include Avg SR of players with the Avg scores? What do you think? That info can be easily formulated. (Only for short version of the game)

We need feedback from others as well.

Neel Here
April 26, 2009, 08:48 AM
T_E bhai, I have already incorporated SR in the formula, two metrics, QOTS(SR) and GCS(SR), cater to SR.
look in this post.
http://banglacricket.com/alochona/showpost.php?p=846567&postcount=43

in the example you give, there is no way to look at it objectively and still make it compatible with the subjective assessment, i.e BD had a weaker bowling attack than ind.

but the fun thing is, if what you say is true(that the BD bowling is indeed weaker) this particular performance will only be an one-off case and the cumulative results will even out.

for cricketing performances do follow a gaussian distribution around a median value.

Neel Here
April 26, 2009, 08:49 AM
post deleted.

al Furqaan
April 26, 2009, 01:02 PM
A F bhai, I think your WEIR system will be better utilized to get a quick and dirty appraisal of a player's whole career, it's a truly handy method for that.
but I don't think you should use it for evaluating individual performances.

good observation.

indeed the WEIR was created using entire career stats (some spanning 300+ matches) and isn't as good with individual games.

which brings an intersting possibility of having a combined WEIR and you system. for example:

according to my understanding the quality of opposition you're calculating seems to only incorporate stats within that particular game. i think an entire career, spanning all sorts of conditions and venues and teams is a pretty good predictor of "quality". that is to say that a bowler like murali or mcgrath, with a sufficiently long career, can be said to be pretty much amongst the best bowlers in the game, if not the best.

however, in that epic win against SL a few months ago, sakib's extraordinary innings might lose its gloss if you only include quality of opposition within the game because guys like murali and mendis were made to look quite ordinary.

but i guess i just now realized that you're probably comparing against other batsman in teh game, in which case its OK. but do you include the opposition bowling attack also? perhaps if its not too difficult, you can include that.

at any rate, can you compare sakib's 92 off 60 odd and ash's 26 in that SL game (and also ash's 94 off 52 against England in 2005)?

Neel Here
April 27, 2009, 01:50 AM
A F, would love to analyse the innings you mention. please give me a link to the scorecard, don't have time to hunt cricinfo ATM. thanks in advance.

al Furqaan
April 27, 2009, 12:26 PM
http://content.cricinfo.com/tri-bdesh/engine/match/378755.html

here you go Neel bhai.

Neel Here
April 19, 2011, 05:54 AM
bump. sorry for neglecting this thread. I will try and find time to write a small code to do all this calculation and then use it to do some neat analysis. ;)

RazabQ
April 19, 2011, 11:09 PM
Neel now that I have had a chance to think about it your weights are too linear and giving extra 0.2 to Not Outs can wrongly enhance a batters value. Take Junaid's performance against Pakistan in the last Asia Cup. If he had remained not out, what would your rating say?

I am thinking the answer would be more segment the 50 overs and then look at the scoring outcome per delivery. In just doing IK's SR analysis the other day I realized how misleading strike-rate can be to proving the effectiveness of a batsman. Honestly what I'm thinking of we need an OLAP dealio rather than Excel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabermetrics

Neel Here
April 20, 2011, 12:24 AM
perhaps a NO bonus only if

a) batting first
i) score > 75% of innings avg (runs scored by team/wkts lost) AND SR > (80% of innings SR)

b) batting second
i) as in (a)
OR
ii) team wins

re: 'weights are too linear'
kindly elaborate a bit ?

Neel Here
April 20, 2011, 03:08 AM
**********************************************==== =================================***************** *****************************
**********************************************==== =================================***************** *****************************
**********************************************==== =================================***************** *****************************
KINDLY IGNORE POST FOR THE MOMENT.
the image links are giving errors.
**********************************************==== =================================***************** *****************************
**********************************************==== =================================***************** *****************************
**********************************************==== =================================***************** *****************************

Limited Overs Individual Batting performance Evaluator v1.1
(this is a slightly modified and simplified version of my earlier system)
M.P or Match Point is the score allotted to each batsman after a match (a batsman who doesn't bat is not scored). The score can be positive or negative depending upon his performance.
500

M.P is the sum of 3 factors,
a) HRS or Hit and Run Score
Which tells you how much a batsman scored and how quickly.
350


b) QOTS or Quality of Opposition Team Score
Which evaluates the quality of the bowling faced by the batsman and rewards him for performing against good bowling opposition.
400

where,
600

and
400


c) GCS Ground Condition Score
This factor takes into account difficult batting conditions, so that a batsman making a match winning 75 in a low scoring match doesn't get the raw end of the statistical deal when compared to someone scoring a 100 on a 350 pitch.

400

where,

600

and

400