marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
It's the only way that anything meaningful can be derived in relation to fielding.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Fielding Statistics: A New Approach
- Thread starter viriya
- Start date
viriya
International Captain
cnerd123
likes this
See, saying 'This is the best that I can do' doesn't suddenly maks the ratings good.
They are flawed because you used flawed data. The flawed data is all we have. Ergo, it isn't your fault if you can't produce meaningful ratings.
There is no reason to get so defensive or to dismiss valid criticisms.
viriya
International Captain
I'm not dismissing valid criticisms - I already made disclaimers when I went about this project in the first place and some people seem to think I don't realize the implications. A system can be flawed but still be useful - just because cricinfo commentary isn't perfect doesn't mean it doesn't get it right most of the time - the criticism is just too extreme: "if it's not perfect it's trash" - hence the BCCI vs DRS comparison.
RossTaylorsBox
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
You don't actually know how correct your methodology is unless you watch some games for comparison. A flawed system can still be useful but you haven't quantified how good or bad your system is. You said in the other thread it's 90% accurate. How do you know that? Also, you know your system is flawed but you quote statistics from it as if it's a ground truth. I'm guessing that's a large part of why you're copping criticism.
I'd love cricket to go the baseball route and have fielding scorers then at least we have some standardized statistics. I'm guessing teams have their own people to do this job but it would be nice to quantify good fielders.
I'd love cricket to go the baseball route and have fielding scorers then at least we have some standardized statistics. I'm guessing teams have their own people to do this job but it would be nice to quantify good fielders.
viriya
International Captain
I was quoting Smith's 25%+ drop rate because we actually painstakingly went through all those drops in this thread itself so it wasn't debatable. The 90%+ is based on my analysis of a few games and I agree I should attempt to systematically test this approach better eventually (working on match odds stuff lately).
weldone
Hall of Fame Member
Hi viriya, since you have researched this data in detail, can you tell me what is the overall drop ratio per 100 catching chances from your data?
Also, have you done any research on stumping chances? If so, do you also have a ratio of missed stumping per 100 stumping chances?
Also, have you done any research on stumping chances? If so, do you also have a ratio of missed stumping per 100 stumping chances?
viriya
International Captain
Didn't realize you had posted on this thread. Gonna copy the response I gave you:
When I checked mid last year, the average drop rate was 13-14% (ignoring identified tough chances). I haven't checked the missed stumping rate - partly because stumpings are so rare that I haven't focused on it.. there are a bunch of fielding fixes I have to do, but focusing on making a statsguru "clone" atm.
When I checked mid last year, the average drop rate was 13-14% (ignoring identified tough chances). I haven't checked the missed stumping rate - partly because stumpings are so rare that I haven't focused on it.. there are a bunch of fielding fixes I have to do, but focusing on making a statsguru "clone" atm.
FBU
International Debutant
FBU
International Debutant
Thanks for the link.. I just browsed it but this... this sounds like exactly like what I did already
Only 1.5 years late.
It's good to see drop percentage by country. New Zealand, South Africa and Australia the best fielders. I would like to see a list of bowlers who have had dropped catches, fielders who has missed them and batsmen who have got off from drops on cricinfo. Even if it starts from 2000.
viriya
International Captain
I was planning to do this as a next step but been focused on other ideas.. also I lost a bit of interest when the numbers showed that fielding doesn't make as much of an impact (win share-wise) on average.
It's good to see drop percentage by country. New Zealand, South Africa and Australia the best fielders. I would like to see a list of bowlers who have had dropped catches, fielders who has missed them and batsmen who have got off from drops on cricinfo. Even if it starts from 2000.
FBU
International Debutant
Please do it. Forget your other ideas for a while.
Victor Ian
International Coach
You know, he probably got the idea from you too. It's unlikely he decided to write a topic without checking out if it is already written. What a toss pot.