the best at going big- a little system to work out the best at getting big daddy 100s

[flibbertyjibber]

ah but where do you draw the line for what qualifies as BDH? 150?

Well as it is your thread you can set that, be it 150, 175 or 200+ it is up to you and we would have to follow that lead.

 

[indiaholic]

M_M if you are not doing the calculations by hand, something like HB's suggestion might be interesting.

 

[mr_mister]

i am doing it by hand but i'll try a few different things a few good theories were thrown up in this thread

 

[mr_mister]

one last bdr my way then tomorrow ill try a different method


B-mac: 211.1

 

[mr_mister]

george headley is quite interesting here.


of his 10 hundreds, 6 were between 100-114. so you've got seemingly another mark waugh who throws it away when he reaches three figures. but his other 4 were 176, 223, 169 and 270. so when he felt like getting dug in he managed it quite comfortably. no middle ground at all really

 

[mr_mister]

chris gayles bdr: 220.1

 

[Spark]

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cri...other-random-statistical-measure-batsmen.html

I still have the code for that btw (and so, I presume, does PEWS).

I'm kind of curious to see what would have happened had I stuck with my original idea which was to use a log-scaling function, which reading on in the thread seems to reproduce much better results in terms of utility for the team.

 

[stephen]

This got me thinking - who has the highest ratio of hundreds to tests and innings (min 15 hundreds).

Hundreds per test:
Bradman 0.558
Smith 0.346
Walcott 0.341
Weekes 0.313
Sutcliffe 0.296
Khan 0.296
Hayden 0.291
Warner 0.290
Kohli 0.286
Sangakkara 0.284
Sobers 0.280
Chappell 0.276
Gavaskar 0.272
Williamson 0.271
Kallis 0.271

Hundreds per innings:
Bradman 0.363
Walcott 0.202
Sutcliffe 0.190
Smith 0.188
Weekes 0.185
Kohli 0.167
Khan 0.164
Sangakkara 0.163
Hayden 0.163
Sobers 0.163
Kallis 0.161
Chappell 0.159
Gavaskar 0.159
Hammond 0.157
Warner 0.157

Proving once and for all that Bradman was the greatest. But we all knew that. Only 13 players have scored more hundreds than him and they've all had careers double the length of Bradman.

 

[vcs]

Good to see Kohli up there among some illustrious names.

 

[honestbharani]

Take median, not average. Or xth percentile.

How s the median ever useful though?

 

[indiaholic]

Good to see Kohli up there among some illustrious name.

That is a very iffy statistic though. Will penalize players who waited to check whether they are useless before retiring and it will favour batsmen who are playing ATM and are at their peak.

 

[stephen]

That is a very iffy statistic though. Will penalize players who waited to check whether they are useless before retiring and it will favour batsmen who are playing ATM and are at their peak.

Meh, it is what it is. It's not really any worse than the average tapering effect of batsmen playing on too long.

I tend to like the hundreds per test statistic because it filters out the average increasing massive scores. It also helps show the frequency of how useful a player was for their team.

I was surprised that less players from the current era had high stats. But then when I think about it most players have a slower start to their career and to score 15 hundreds takes quite a while.

Steve Smith is a freak. Kohli is extremely good too. But Smith is just incredible. If he keeps up this productivity for another 3-5 years he could easily be seen as the best batsman behind Bradman.

 

[honestbharani]

The bad part about looking at 100s alone is that a lot of the times a 100 and then out is not really what the team needs either. Esp. on the Oz tracks of late... I think both the innings per 100 as well as the average 100+ score have their own benefits when it comes to analyzing batsmen.

 

[Furball]

This got me thinking - who has the highest ratio of hundreds to tests and innings (min 15 hundreds).

Hundreds per test:
Bradman 0.558
Smith 0.346
Walcott 0.341
Weekes 0.313
Sutcliffe 0.296
Khan 0.296
Hayden 0.291
Warner 0.290
Kohli 0.286
Sangakkara 0.284
Sobers 0.280
Chappell 0.276
Gavaskar 0.272
Williamson 0.271
Kallis 0.271
Bradman 0.231

Hundreds per innings:
Bradman 0.363
Walcott 0.202
Sutcliffe 0.190
Smith 0.188
Weekes 0.185
Kohli 0.167
Khan 0.164
Sangakkara 0.163
Hayden 0.163
Sobers 0.163
Kallis 0.161
Chappell 0.159
Gavaskar 0.159
Hammond 0.157
Warner 0.157
Bradman 0.150
Proving once and for all that Bradman was the greatest. But we all knew that. Only 13 players have scored more hundreds than him and they've all had careers double the length of Bradman.

Have edited in Bradman's double hundreds per Test/innings rates.

 

[Adders]

Victor Ian needs to comment in here and tell us about "wanker runs" again.

 

[vitalogy83]

Mahela Jayawardene bdr - 254.85

 

[NUFAN]

How did you get 292.2 for Bradman? It should be 277.

Elgar just hit his 7th ton and his big daddy rating is 120.1

I do find it ironic that Elgar hasn't been able to go large. He just needs to rearrange something.. perhaps his name.