Hundreds shmundreds - who the eff cares?

[nevada]

1 hour ago, flat_wicket_bully said:

I remember Kohli celebrating a century against hapless Windies after 2019 as if he was the first one to score 500 and he will do the same when he scores next ton lol. This itself tells you what matters to players 

In a series he had initially planned to skip but ended up playing fearing a threat to his captaincy. Jumped as high as he could to celebrate the century.

[Trichromatic]

Because centuries don't end at 100-101.

 

Let's assume 10 innings are spread over similar type of scenario.

 

If you're scoring 5 centuries, your average score could be around 115-120.

 

If you are scoring 5 90s, then you're basically scoring 25-30 runs less from first scenario.

 

You could say 5 90s is similar to 5 centuries, but it's not.

[Vijy]

1 hour ago, Trichromatic said:

Because centuries don't end at 100-101.

 

Let's assume 10 innings are spread over similar type of scenario.

 

If you're scoring 5 centuries, your average score could be around 115-120.

 

If you are scoring 5 90s, then you're basically scoring 25-30 runs less from first scenario.

 

You could say 5 90s is similar to 5 centuries, but it's not.

and if one is like sehwag or rohit sharma, those 100s tend to spill over to 150+ and beyond.

[Trichromatic]

33 minutes ago, Vijy said:

and if one is like sehwag or rohit sharma, those 100s tend to spill over to 150+ and beyond.

 

Even Kohli for ex

 

Career averages

	Span	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	BF	SR	100	50	0	4s	6s
unfiltered	2011-2021	91	153	10	7490	254*	52.37	13112	57.12	27	25	12	839	22	Profile
filtered	2012-2019	26	27	4	4065	254*	176.73	6242	65.12	27	0	0	452	15

 

 

His average score in centuries is 150.

 

We can pretent that 90s are similar to 100s but they aren't. There is huge difference of 50 runs in case of Kohli and 70+ runs in case of Sehwag.

 

Career averages

	Span	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	BF	SR	100	50	0	4s	6s
unfiltered	2001-2013	104	180	6	8586	319	49.34	10441	82.23	23	32	16	1233	91	Profile
filtered	2001-2012	23	23	1	3996	319	181.63	4786	83.49	23	0	0	548	50

 

 

His average score in centuries is 173.

[BacktoCricaddict]

10 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

Because centuries don't end at 100-101.

 

Let's assume 10 innings are spread over similar type of scenario.

 

If you're scoring 5 centuries, your average score could be around 115-120.

 

If you are scoring 5 90s, then you're basically scoring 25-30 runs less from first scenario.

 

You could say 5 90s is similar to 5 centuries, but it's not.

Fair point, but we don't celebrate the average of 115-120, rather we celebrate the fact that they reached that minimum 100.  We are not having this conversation if WS was stranded on 100* and it all ended there.  

 

Above, you mentioned Rohit Sharma for his daddy knocks and somehow crossing the 100-mark correlates to those daddy knocks.  Checking his inning-by-inning score, his cut off point could be 84.  Every time he crossed 84 he also crossed 100.  For Kohli, the cut-off is 97.  

 

Maybe we should celebrate stats that directly impact victories or saved-match efforts.  Like score differential between when a batsman entered and when he left.   Or partnership average.   I am not smart enough to figure out what it is, but the arbitrary 100 cut-off point is not it.  This same attitude of celebrating 100s causes players to shelve team needs for strictly individual milestones - ya know, the nervous 90s. 

 

And by Gaad, I hated the 100 100s obsession from some years ago.     

 

 

Edited March 7, 2021 by BacktoCricaddict

[Vijy]

15 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

Fair point, but we don't celebrate the average of 115-120, rather we celebrate the fact that they reached that minimum 100.  We are not having this conversation if WS was stranded on 100* and it all ended there.  

 

Elsewhere, Rohit Sharma is mentioned for his daddy knocks and somehow crossing the 100-mark correlates to those daddy knocks.  Checking his inning-by-inning score, you can make the argument for his cut-off point being 72, for every time he crossed 72, he also crossed 100.  For Kohli, the cut-off is 96.  

 

Maybe we should celebrate stats that directly impact victories or saved-match efforts.  Like score differential between when a batsman entered and when he left.   Or partnership average.   I am not smart enough to figure out what it is, but the arbitrary 100 cut-off point is not it.  This same attitude of celebrating 100s causes players to shelve team needs for strictly individual milestones - ya know, the nervous 90s. 

 

And by Gaad, I hated the 100 100s obsession from some years ago.     

 

 

express bowling had a suggestion on separately listing no. of impact performances; thread is in the first page still. a good idea, albeit rather difficult to implement IMO.

[kirkutfan]

On 3/6/2021 at 10:22 AM, BacktoCricaddict said:

The discussion around arbitrary landmarks like centuries is getting to a be truly annoying.  It should become a relic of the past.  Even I am guilty of it and catch myself watching "till someone gets his 100." 

 

In contrast, listen to Washington Sundar when he was asked if he was disappointed:  

----------------------------------

"No, no. Not at all disappointed," he said, when asked the inevitable question. "When it's the right time for me to get a hundred, it'll come, I feel, and yes, definitely very, very happy to have contributed, especially in those couple of innings, and you know, any way I could contribute to the team, and if the team could succeed out of that, I'm the happiest person."

-----------------------------

Same with Pant.  Was on 89 and reverse-sweeps Anderson.  He did not try anything like that when the team was still in trouble, but by the time he had 89, things were comfortable and he felt confident enough to smash the Poms to pulp.  It was not about his "100."  It was about his team.  Sehwag was the same way.  

 

Just win, baby.  Eff the 100s.  Eff the 5-fers.  If you got out 50 times in the 90s in your career and your team won most times you did it, hold your head high - you are an ATG.  

Rahane agrees and says that he scores when the team needs it. That is why he can go thru a series with maybe just one good score and justify it because the team is winning. Also, of course Sundar is going to say that. He won’t throw his own team mates under the bus. His father on the other hand doesn’t have the same constraints.

[kirkutfan]

13 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

Because centuries don't end at 100-101.

 

Let's assume 10 innings are spread over similar type of scenario.

 

If you're scoring 5 centuries, your average score could be around 115-120.

 

If you are scoring 5 90s, then you're basically scoring 25-30 runs less from first scenario.

 

You could say 5 90s is similar to 5 centuries, but it's not.

Exactly right. And you run the risk of continuing to accept less. After all, if 90s are just like 100s, then 80s are just like 70s, and on and on. The point is the player should take advantage of the time in form to score as much as possible, within the context of team goals. A player should strive for it and the supporting cast should enable it. 

[Trichromatic]

3 digits is max you can get.

 

There is a reason for prices being 99 and not 100.