cricket betting betway blog banner small
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 34
Like Tree3Likes

Thread: New feature: Highest Impact - the all-time most impactful Test cricketers

  1. #1
    International Regular chasingthedon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    3,500

    New feature: Highest Impact - the all-time most impactful Test cricketers

    My forum user name, <i>chasingthedon</i>, is a tongue-in-cheek reference to the fact that Don Bradman is lauded as the greatest cricketer ever, despite the fact that there was never really a way to compare him directly with bowlers and all-rounders. Now there is....

    Highest Impact ? the Most Impactful Test Players of All-Time | Cricket Web

  2. #2
    International Captain viriya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    DC
    Posts
    6,117
    I was checking your article on how you assigned ISPs (Series Points ? A New Way of Ranking Test Players | Cricket Web), and was wondering how you valued batsmen and bowlers using the same measure. For example:

    Say the total series points is 500. The batting average during that time period was 30 and the wickets per match for the period was 3/match. Bradman made 500 runs in the series while Grimmett took 15 wickets. Assuming those are the only two players, how will the series points be assigned between the two?

    Maybe I missed some detail elsewhere - apologies if so.
    cricrate - follow twitter and facebook for updates

  3. #3
    School Boy/Girl Cricketer
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Tas
    Posts
    66
    Another Bowling impact analysis is available on this article on Lillee

    * THE COMPLETE FAST BOWLER | 100 HIDDEN CRICKET FACTS

    I do not know how good there Impact analysis is. They seem to rate

    • Significant performances that impact match/series results
    • Top seven wickets per test
    • Tail end wickets (less important than top 7)
    • Economy
    • pressure building
    • failure rate
    • partnership breaking

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    9,851
    I assume that's Mahela Jayawardene on 1911 points?
    Last edited by watson; 28-04-2016 at 03:35 AM.


  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    9,851
    Based on 'ALL-TIME BEST IMPACT TEST PLAYERS – WEIGHTED AVERAGE, ADJUSTED', and picking the lower ranked Kumar Sangakkar because the team should have a keeper, we get;

    01. Jacques Kallis
    02. Sachin Tendulkar
    03. Don Bradman
    04. Brian Lara
    05. Garry Sobers
    06. Ian Botham
    07. Kumar Sangakkara
    08. Richard Hadlee
    09. Shaun Pollock
    10. Shane Warne
    11. Sydney Barnes


    A bit surprised that none of the West Indian quicks, Imran, or Lillee are in the top 11.

    Also, there seems to be relatively few specialist openers featured in the 16 lists. Jack Hobbs, Bobby Simpson, and Virender Sehwag seem to have the highest impacts of those listed.
    Last edited by watson; 28-04-2016 at 03:50 AM.

  6. #6
    International Regular chasingthedon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    3,500
    Quote Originally Posted by watson View Post
    I assume that's Mahela Jayawardene on 1911 points?
    Sorry yes.

  7. #7
    International Regular chasingthedon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    3,500
    Quote Originally Posted by viriya View Post
    I was checking your article on how you assigned ISPs (Series Points ? A New Way of Ranking Test Players | Cricket Web), and was wondering how you valued batsmen and bowlers using the same measure. For example:

    Say the total series points is 500. The batting average during that time period was 30 and the wickets per match for the period was 3/match. Bradman made 500 runs in the series while Grimmett took 15 wickets. Assuming those are the only two players, how will the series points be assigned between the two?

    Maybe I missed some detail elsewhere - apologies if so.
    First it's allocated between batting and bowling/fielding at the team level depending on series performance and era, then shared between fielders and bowlers accordingly.

  8. #8
    International Regular chasingthedon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    3,500
    Quote Originally Posted by watson View Post
    Based on 'ALL-TIME BEST IMPACT TEST PLAYERS – WEIGHTED AVERAGE, ADJUSTED', and picking the lower ranked Kumar Sangakkar because the team should have a keeper, we get;

    01. Jacques Kallis
    02. Sachin Tendulkar
    03. Don Bradman
    04. Brian Lara
    05. Garry Sobers
    06. Ian Botham
    07. Kumar Sangakkara
    08. Richard Hadlee
    09. Shaun Pollock
    10. Shane Warne
    11. Sydney Barnes


    A bit surprised that none of the West Indian quicks, Imran, or Lillee are in the top 11.

    Also, there seems to be relatively few specialist openers featured in the 16 lists. Jack Hobbs, Bobby Simpson, and Virender Sehwag seem to have the highest impacts of those listed.
    As I mentioned, it depends on how you summarize the various data. Imran and Lillee are both mentioned at some point, as are Walsh, Marshall and Croft. As regards not being in the top 11, I wouldn't necessarily expect that - at least, not to be able to pick a full team from the top 11, if that's what you mean.

    As regards openers, that could be an artifact of the system - it's more difficult to impact the win probability at the start of the match, though not impossible; it's more likely in the team's second innings, but if the opener does nothing else (i.e. fielding or bowling) he won't rate highly. Hobbs probably the exception that proves the rule, while Goddard and Simpson were all-rounders who opened.

    Thanks for taking the time to read and comment.

  9. #9
    The Tiger King smalishah84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    29,634
    not a bad list of 20 in the end, certainly can be argued for and against but a great effort overall
    And smalishah's avatar is the most classy one by far Jan certainly echoes the sentiments of CW

    Yeah we don't crap in the first world; most of us would actually have no idea what that was emanating from Ajmal's backside. Why isn't it roses and rainbows like what happens here? PEWS's retort to Ganeshran on Daemon's picture depicting Ajmal's excreta

  10. #10
    International Regular chasingthedon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    3,500
    Quote Originally Posted by smalishah84 View Post
    not a bad list of 20 in the end, certainly can be argued for and against but a great effort overall
    Cheers smalishah84, much appreciated

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    9,851
    Quote Originally Posted by chasingthedon View Post
    As I mentioned, it depends on how you summarize the various data. Imran and Lillee are both mentioned at some point, as are Walsh, Marshall and Croft. As regards not being in the top 11, I wouldn't necessarily expect that - at least, not to be able to pick a full team from the top 11, if that's what you mean.

    As regards openers, that could be an artifact of the system - it's more difficult to impact the win probability at the start of the match, though not impossible; it's more likely in the team's second innings, but if the opener does nothing else (i.e. fielding or bowling) he won't rate highly. Hobbs probably the exception that proves the rule, while Goddard and Simpson were all-rounders who opened.

    Thanks for taking the time to read and comment.
    I guess I was surprised at Shaun Pollock's high status more than anything else. Sure he can bat a bit, but so could Imran and Kapil Dev. Initially I thought that their results might be affected by poor team performance, especially with Kapil as India won little during the 80s. But that doesn't seem to be the case,

    Therefore, the actual outcome of the match is not taken into account in the assessment of the player’s performance.
    So it seems that as far as Shaun Pollock is concerned it's a case of "cometh the hour, cometh the man" as they say. Or as you neatly put it;

    For example, when Ian Botham had Jeff Thomson caught by Geoff Miller to win the Boxing DayTest of 1982 against Australia in Melbourne by just three runs, it shows on the scorecard as simply one of his two wickets in the innings. A return of 2/80 at first glance wouldn’t seem to represent a great performance, but In the context of the match that wicket had enormous significance as regards England’s chances of winning before and after the dismissal. Similarly Doug Ring – his 32* turned a likely loss into an unexpected win when Australia beat West Indies in 1951-52, again at the MCG around the New Year – those 32 precious runs were worth more than many a century in terms of their impact on Australia’s chances of winning.

    Given Shaun Pollock's more obvious status in ODI cricket it would be interesting to crunch the numbers and see whether he had more impact than assumed No.1s like Garner, McGrath, Richards and Tendulkar. Or even a comparable player like Lance Klusener.

  12. #12
    International Debutant Burner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Leave her, Johnny, leave her.
    Posts
    2,643
    Haha. Bradman, suck it.

  13. #13
    International Captain viriya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    DC
    Posts
    6,117
    Quote Originally Posted by chasingthedon View Post
    First it's allocated between batting and bowling/fielding at the team level depending on series performance and era, then shared between fielders and bowlers accordingly.
    But how exactly do you fairly allocate team level batting and bowling performance using Series Points without an assumption on how much a X runs is worth in terms of wickets?

  14. #14
    International Regular chasingthedon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    3,500
    Quote Originally Posted by watson View Post
    I guess I was surprised at Shaun Pollock's high status more than anything else. Sure he can bat a bit, but so could Imran and Kapil Dev. Initially I thought that their results might be affected by poor team performance, especially with Kapil as India won little during the 80s. But that doesn't seem to be the case,
    It shouldn't be, as the impact on win probability is taken at the time, rather than being based on whether they actually went on to win or not. There are a lot of events though, so I haven't been able to check that's always the case.


    So it seems that as far as Shaun Pollock is concerned it's a case of "cometh the hour, cometh the man" as they say. Or as you neatly put it;




    Given Shaun Pollock's more obvious status in ODI cricket it would be interesting to crunch the numbers and see whether he had more impact than assumed No.1s like Garner, McGrath, Richards and Tendulkar. Or even a comparable player like Lance Klusener.
    It would be interesting, but I'd first have to develop a database of match status to generate the win probabilities, which takes a long time. I'll probably take some time off
    Last edited by chasingthedon; 29-04-2016 at 12:29 AM.

  15. #15
    International Regular chasingthedon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    3,500
    Quote Originally Posted by viriya View Post
    But how exactly do you fairly allocate team level batting and bowling performance using Series Points without an assumption on how much a X runs is worth in terms of wickets?
    I can go back and check the method, as it was a long time ago and I can't recall all the details.

    How come you're so interested in that method? I did propose that the impact method is an improvement

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 193
    Last Post: 29-09-2010, 06:33 PM
  2. Forbes: Highest earning cricketers
    By silentstriker in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 12-09-2009, 10:28 AM
  3. Highest paid cricketers?
    By silentstriker in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 02-11-2006, 01:17 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •