Cricket Statistics

[worbod]

Not worth its own thread, but thought I'd share CricHQ in case anyone hasn't seen it: https://www.crichq.com/

It lets you look at players First-Class stats for specific sides (so you can see their average only in First-Class games for Queensland, without County/Test stats, and the like). Successor to cricketarchive which is dead and entombed behind a paywall.

Just took a look at this site. I don't mean to be overly critical but they seem to be building their first class database or else their stats are out of whack and they don't realise it. When I looked at the first class career stats for Dennis Lillee, Glenn Turner and Bishan Bedi they were incomplete. What's more Bedi is credited with 79 Tests instead of 67 and Zaheer Abbas was credited with 92 instead of 78. Dennis Amiss was given 99 centuries instead of 102. And there were no career stats at all for Don Bradman, almost as though they have never heard of him.

 

[Richard Pryor]

Just took a look at this site. I don't mean to be overly critical but they seem to be building their first class database or else their stats are out of whack and they don't realise it. When I looked at the first class career stats for Dennis Lillee, Glenn Turner and Bishan Bedi they were incomplete. What's more Bedi is credited with 79 Tests instead of 67 and Zaheer Abbas was credited with 92 instead of 78. Dennis Amiss was given 99 centuries instead of 102. And there were no career stats at all for Don Bradman, almost as though they have never heard of him.

Have been using them to develop a wiki table of Queensland FC cricket, have not noticed any mistakes (based on comparing no. of FC games to cricketarchive, which someone archived on wikipedia.) My assumption is that they have access to the stats for big and well documented competitions like the Sheffield Shield, but not comprehensive (yet). Also does seem to be Aus focused, so they may not have gotten County stats to an acceptable level yet.

Don Bradman does have stats, but under "Sir Donald Bradman" (with the "Sir Don Bradman" page being empty), and have noticed duplicate pages of varying quality for many players which suggests to me there is some kind of user submission process (not sure though): https://www.crichq.com/players/552271/statistics/career

Definitely some kinks to be ironed out but a solid starting point.

 

[DAlembert]

One stat you never see in batting that I like is the ratio of Innings to 50s and 100's Eg
Bradman Tests 80 Innings 29*100 13*50s 80/42 = 1.904 1 in 2 If you got him cheap he was as likely to make a 100 or 50 in his next dig
G. Chappell 151 Innings 24*100 31*50s 151/55 = 2.74 1 in 3 bats likely to succeed.
Ponting 287 Innings 41*100 62*50s 287/103 = 2.78 Almost the same as G Chappell
S. Smith 131 Innings 26*100 29*50s 131/55 = 2.38 Clearly ahead of GC and RP for output consistency.
and obviously once again Bradman on another level. Could do a ratio between 50s and 100 which once again would show Bradman turned 42 opportunities into 29 100s Close to 70% Smith 26 of 55 47% Ponting 41 of 103 40% G Chappell 24 of 55 = 43%

 

[cricketnut14]

One stat you never see in batting that I like is the ratio of Innings to 50s and 100's Eg
Bradman Tests 80 Innings 29*100 13*50s 80/42 = 1.904 1 in 2 If you got him cheap he was as likely to make a 100 or 50 in his next dig
G. Chappell 151 Innings 24*100 31*50s 151/55 = 2.74 1 in 3 bats likely to succeed.
Ponting 287 Innings 41*100 62*50s 287/103 = 2.78 Almost the same as G Chappell
S. Smith 131 Innings 26*100 29*50s 131/55 = 2.38 Clearly ahead of GC and RP for output consistency.
and obviously once again Bradman on another level. Could do a ratio between 50s and 100 which once again would show Bradman turned 42 opportunities into 29 100s Close to 70% Smith 26 of 55 47% Ponting 41 of 103 40% G Chappell 24 of 55 = 43%

it doesn't matter which way you slice and dice the stats, the cream always rises to the top.

bradman is clearly our best and then daylight.

smith, ponting & chappell are on the same tier and they are our 2nd 3rd and 4th best batmen, its just debatable as to which order.

 

[DAlembert]

it doesn't matter which way you slice and dice the stats, the cream always rises to the top.

bradman is clearly our best and then daylight.

smith, ponting & chappell are on the same tier and they are our 2nd 3rd and 4th best batmen, its just debatable as to which order.

On pure stats Smith is No 2 at this point in time. Some might say Bradman has a small data set. They would not be wrong. But of course we all know that when you make your runs the circumstances the bowling attacks you faced all come into it when evaluating a players worth. Would be interesting to use 100s and a lower figure like 35 and see how the stats read. I think most players would agree that 35 is a pass...but is it on the roads they bat on in Oz?? 35 in England would be a pass.

 

[cricketnut14]

On pure stats Smith is No 2 at this point in time. Some might say Bradman has a small data set. They would not be wrong. But of course we all know that when you make your runs the circumstances the bowling attacks you faced all come into it when evaluating a players worth. Would be interesting to use 100s and a lower figure like 35 and see how the stats read. I think most players would agree that 35 is a pass...but is it on the roads they bat on in Oz?? 35 in England would be a pass.

smith is one of my all time fave players.

lets wait to see where he finishes.

i don't think he will pass ponting's runs or games played, but certainly will finish with an ave off 50+.

bradman's first class record say enough and playing test cricket for 20 years is no mean feat (the likes of ponting, border, s.waugh were like 17-19 years)

 

[Richard Pryor]

smith is one of my all time fave players.

lets wait to see where he finishes.

i don't think he will pass ponting's runs or games played, but certainly will finish with an ave off 50+.

bradman's first class record say enough and playing test cricket for 20 years is no mean feat (the likes of ponting, border, s.waugh were like 17-19 years)

The fact Bradman was able to come out of what was essentially retirement after WW2 and do so well pushing 40 is another mark in his favor which I don't think anyone has emulated.

 

[Gough]

The fact Bradman was able to come out of what was essentially retirement after WW2 and do so well pushing 40 is another mark in his favor which I don't think anyone has emulated.

Helped that he spent most of the war in his slippers.

 

[DAlembert]

Helped that he spent most of the war in his slippers.

Bit harsh I would reckon....He never looked like an alpha male to be fair. Batting genius does not mean you are a great bloke and plenty of his contemporaries would attest to that. Now Keith Millar was an alpha male and considered a good bloke. But he was NOT Bradman.

 

[MC Bad Genius]

One stat you never see in batting that I like is the ratio of Innings to 50s and 100's Eg
Bradman Tests 80 Innings 29*100 13*50s 80/42 = 1.904 1 in 2 If you got him cheap he was as likely to make a 100 or 50 in his next dig
G. Chappell 151 Innings 24*100 31*50s 151/55 = 2.74 1 in 3 bats likely to succeed.
Ponting 287 Innings 41*100 62*50s 287/103 = 2.78 Almost the same as G Chappell
S. Smith 131 Innings 26*100 29*50s 131/55 = 2.38 Clearly ahead of GC and RP for output consistency.
and obviously once again Bradman on another level. Could do a ratio between 50s and 100 which once again would show Bradman turned 42 opportunities into 29 100s Close to 70% Smith 26 of 55 47% Ponting 41 of 103 40% G Chappell 24 of 55 = 43%

Thought this recent article on cricinfo about consistency of batters a really interesting read: https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/...t-consistent-let-look-how-often-score-fifties

 

[big_e]

Helped that he spent most of the war in his slippers.

Thanks, Chappelli.

 

[DAlembert]

Thought this recent article on cricinfo about consistency of batters a really interesting read: https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/...t-consistent-let-look-how-often-score-fifties

Thanks for that...similar to my analysis. Kohli has a good conversion rate of 50s to 100s...at 55%..but is less consistent than some of the other top players with a ratio of 2.95. Interesting Viv Richards only converted 35% of his 50s to 100s but ratio at 2.63.
For allrounders Sobers is head and shoulders above the slightly overrated Botham ie 2.85 ratio against 4.47 for Botham. Plenty of failures between successes for Botham with the bat.

 

[cricketnut14]

i read the other day on cricinfo that smith has the best ave batting @ 4 (74)

only bradman, chappell & smith averaged 50+ both home and away.

only ponting and haydos have 20+ tons @ home.

punter leads the way with 18 'away' tons , but with an ave of 46.

 

[DAlembert]

i read the other day on cricinfo that smith has the best ave batting @ 4 (74)

only bradman, chappell & smith averaged 50+ both home and away.

only ponting and haydos have 20+ tons @ home.

punter leads the way with 18 'away' tons , but with an ave of 46.

Clearly all the positions in the batting lineup could be statistically broken up and evaluated...wicket keepers etc etc
So many factors could be used much more difficult than say a Baseball Slugger who receives a thrown pitch that must go over the plate like a full toss.

 

[Richard Pryor]

i read the other day on cricinfo that smith has the best ave batting @ 4 (74)

only bradman, chappell & smith averaged 50+ both home and away.

only ponting and haydos have 20+ tons @ home.

punter leads the way with 18 'away' tons , but with an ave of 46.

Greg Chappell seems a bit forgotten. Bit too early to have the tons of highlights to keep him in the popular consciousness and doesn't have the aura of the Don. The fact he is basically Satan Incarnate to Indian cricketing fans because of his disastrous coaching stint doesn't help I imagine.