weldone
Hall of Fame Member
This thread is for SJS (and for those who find in-depth analysis of cricket statistics interesting). If any member doesn't like cricket statistics and/or proper in-depth analysis based on that he's kindly advised not to post in this thread as they'll find a lot other threads of their likings.
SJS, you remember you asked me to compare the test batiing careers of Lara, Sobers and Hammond based on pure proper statistical analysis? Here it is...
I shall explain it to you with the example of Sir Garfield Sobers. He played his first test on 30 March 1954 and his last test on 30 March 1974. First, I calculated the M.A. (Median of Average) of all bowlers except West Indian bowlers (of course, because he never faced West Indian bowlers at test level) during that period. It came out to be 34.53....Now, what is M.A.?
It means 50% of all bowlers against whom Sobers played had bowling averages less than 34.53 (during that period only) and the other 50% greater than that...So, 34.53 was the bowling average of an 'average bowler' who bowled against Sobers during that period...
Now, Sobers' batting average at test level was 57.78 you know. So, that means an 'average bowler' whose bowling average was 34.53 during that period had a bowling average of 57.78 when he bowled against Sobers.
From there we can calculate D.F. (what I call Dominance Factor) of Sobers as (57.78/34.53) or 1.67 roughly...
This measure D.F. is a measure which takes into account strength of opposition bowling and fielding, nature of pitches and grounds during that period and even the batting calibre of batsmen of that period (even you need to know that, otherwise how'll you measure the greatness of someone like Grace or Trumper?)...Here, I calculated the D.F.of the 3 batsmen you wanted...
batting average M.A. D.F.
Garfield Sobers 57.78 34.53 1.673327541
Wally Hammond 58.45 37.89 1.542623383
Brian Lara 52.88 38.11 1.38756232
Now, how to interpret D.F.? An 'average batsman' will have a D.F. of 1...Anything above 1 means the batsman was batter than average...As we can see here all the 3 batsmen here were considerably better than average to be called greats....However, even though Sobers had a lower average than Hammond, he was a better test batsman (not by a huge margin though)...Similarly, Hammond was also better than Lara by a moderate margin...And also there is enough difference of points between Sobers and Lara for one to be termed better than the other...Interestingly, we also see (from M.A.) that the bowlers Sobers had to face were of better quality than the same for the other 2 and/or the pitches and conditions were more difficult for Sobers than the other two...That's why Sobers' average was a greater achievement which gets reflected in his D.F.
Having said that, this only measures their batting achievement at test level (not F.C.). D.F., by any means doesn't measure their talent or for example doesn't say who was better in away matches against leg-spinners, or it doesn't say who was better on 'his day'...But it compares them on the basis of their overall batting achievements at test level...
SJS, if you find any major limitation or way to improve in this method, kindly bring that to my notice...
And one last thing...If you like it even in part then kindly keep my one request...Change your signature to something better and more meaningful because
1. Statistics may be popular, but proper meaningful analysis based on statisics is not; and
2. Statistics and cricket are not enemies, they are friends indeed.
Edit: After Top Cat's advise I replaced medians in M.A.'s with means and found out a better measure...His advise was helpful indeed
Batting Average M.A. D.F.
Garfield Sobers 57.78 31.5 1.834285714
Wally Hammond 58.45 33.86 1.726225635
Brian Lara 52.88 32.59 1.622583615
Though the rankings remain the same...
Caution: Never use this method for any batsman who has been dismissed less than 30 times or any bowler who has had less than 70 wickets because with too few data points any statistical measure is flawed.
SJS, you remember you asked me to compare the test batiing careers of Lara, Sobers and Hammond based on pure proper statistical analysis? Here it is...
I shall explain it to you with the example of Sir Garfield Sobers. He played his first test on 30 March 1954 and his last test on 30 March 1974. First, I calculated the M.A. (Median of Average) of all bowlers except West Indian bowlers (of course, because he never faced West Indian bowlers at test level) during that period. It came out to be 34.53....Now, what is M.A.?
It means 50% of all bowlers against whom Sobers played had bowling averages less than 34.53 (during that period only) and the other 50% greater than that...So, 34.53 was the bowling average of an 'average bowler' who bowled against Sobers during that period...
Now, Sobers' batting average at test level was 57.78 you know. So, that means an 'average bowler' whose bowling average was 34.53 during that period had a bowling average of 57.78 when he bowled against Sobers.
From there we can calculate D.F. (what I call Dominance Factor) of Sobers as (57.78/34.53) or 1.67 roughly...
This measure D.F. is a measure which takes into account strength of opposition bowling and fielding, nature of pitches and grounds during that period and even the batting calibre of batsmen of that period (even you need to know that, otherwise how'll you measure the greatness of someone like Grace or Trumper?)...Here, I calculated the D.F.of the 3 batsmen you wanted...
batting average M.A. D.F.
Garfield Sobers 57.78 34.53 1.673327541
Wally Hammond 58.45 37.89 1.542623383
Brian Lara 52.88 38.11 1.38756232
Now, how to interpret D.F.? An 'average batsman' will have a D.F. of 1...Anything above 1 means the batsman was batter than average...As we can see here all the 3 batsmen here were considerably better than average to be called greats....However, even though Sobers had a lower average than Hammond, he was a better test batsman (not by a huge margin though)...Similarly, Hammond was also better than Lara by a moderate margin...And also there is enough difference of points between Sobers and Lara for one to be termed better than the other...Interestingly, we also see (from M.A.) that the bowlers Sobers had to face were of better quality than the same for the other 2 and/or the pitches and conditions were more difficult for Sobers than the other two...That's why Sobers' average was a greater achievement which gets reflected in his D.F.
Having said that, this only measures their batting achievement at test level (not F.C.). D.F., by any means doesn't measure their talent or for example doesn't say who was better in away matches against leg-spinners, or it doesn't say who was better on 'his day'...But it compares them on the basis of their overall batting achievements at test level...
SJS, if you find any major limitation or way to improve in this method, kindly bring that to my notice...
And one last thing...If you like it even in part then kindly keep my one request...Change your signature to something better and more meaningful because
1. Statistics may be popular, but proper meaningful analysis based on statisics is not; and
2. Statistics and cricket are not enemies, they are friends indeed.
Edit: After Top Cat's advise I replaced medians in M.A.'s with means and found out a better measure...His advise was helpful indeed
Batting Average M.A. D.F.
Garfield Sobers 57.78 31.5 1.834285714
Wally Hammond 58.45 33.86 1.726225635
Brian Lara 52.88 32.59 1.622583615
Though the rankings remain the same...
Caution: Never use this method for any batsman who has been dismissed less than 30 times or any bowler who has had less than 70 wickets because with too few data points any statistical measure is flawed.
Last edited: