3 or more wickets + 30 or more runs in LOIs

[Trichromatic]

51 minutes ago, zen said:

@Trichromatic

 

Besides ignoring runs potential at various positions, another potential error that you made is looking at the "average", which can change with a new set of data, of 8 wickets and 250 runs. 

 

An average can be formed in multiple ways. For e.g. 6 wkts lost in one game and 10 wickets lost in another gives an avg of 8. Similarly, a 150 all-out at a tough venue in one game and 350 at a good batting venue in the next gives an average of 250. 

 

 

Just because 10+ runs at no 9 is not common in ODIs, score 15 runs becomes a good batting performance.

[Trichromatic]

1 hour ago, zen said:

Sachin is not an AR. He is primarily a batsman. And we know what he did batting in the lower middle order where ARs are usually slotted:

 

 

What is this thread about? All round performances or all rounders?

 

Quote

A thread on good all-round performances

 

How does it matter if Sachin was an AR or not.

[zen]

16 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

 

Just because 10+ runs at no 9 is not common in ODIs, score 15 runs becomes a good batting performance.

 

The minimum number is 30, which works in a variety of conditions, situations, and batting positions (mainly 1-7/8). 

 

Remember there is no min or max limit (apart from 6 * # of balls w/o accounting for extra deliveries) to what a team can score. However, we can say that 30 or more, when paired with 3 or more wickets, works well in general across the two white ball formats. 

 

 

15 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

 

What is this thread about? All round performances or all rounders?

 

How does it matter if Sachin was an AR or not.

 

The intention of the thread was to highlight good AR performances by those playing more or less as all-rounders (as you can see from the players listed in the OP) ... Mainly current players while referencing a few retired ones for reference/anchor ... However, folks can add Sachin, Srikant (if applicable. Has 2 5-ers but I am not sure about runs atm), etc. if they like. 

 

Good to see SDP setting new standards esp. in the last 12 months

Edited March 24, 2023 by zen

[Trichromatic]

54 minutes ago, zen said:

 

The minimum number is 30, which works in a variety of conditions, situations, and batting positions (mainly 1-7/8). 

 

Remember there is no min or max limit (apart from 6 * # of balls w/o accounting for extra deliveries) to what a team can score. However, we can say that 30 or more, when paired with 3 or more wickets, works well in general across the two white ball formats. 

 

 

No one considers 30 to be good number. Who came up with that minimum?

 

 As highlighted earlier that while 3 wickets or even 2 wickets can earn you a MoM by considering it impact performance, 30 will not be considered that good. So clubbing those number is bizarre.

 

Lowering bar too low for good performance to highlight a player not a good approach.

[zen]

1 hour ago, Trichromatic said:

 

No one considers 30 to be good number. Who came up with that minimum?

 

 As highlighted earlier that while 3 wickets or even 2 wickets can earn you a MoM by considering it impact performance, 30 will not be considered that good. So clubbing those number is bizarre.

 

Lowering bar too low for good performance to highlight a player not a good approach.

We are talking about the combined effect (the whole, not one or the other) with a fair minimum and no upper limit … If you pick up 3 wkts, and score 30-35 runs at any position, it is going to be one of the highlight performance in a team in ODIs. While a 20-25 will do in T20s (There will also be unusual situations where a batsman can walk in and hit 2 6s in last 2 balls to win a game like Tewatia did and such exceptions can be special mentions provided the player picked up wickets too. Otherwise it is a cool batting performance).
 

Therefore considering both formats, 30 is a good common score that accounts for a variety of situations, conditions, and batting positions in a relatively fair manner in general. 
 

If you read the OP, you will realize that many players have done it in like less than 2% of matches (some players have never done it!), which shows that “3+ and 30+” is extremely difficult to achieve! For e.g. Kapil + Yuvi + Jadeja have played a total of 825* LOIs where this has been done only 12 times.

 

 

Edited March 24, 2023 by zen

[vvvslaxman]

37 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

 

No one considers 30 to be good number. Who came up with that minimum?

 

 As highlighted earlier that while 3 wickets or even 2 wickets can earn you a MoM by considering it impact performance, 30 will not be considered that good. So clubbing those number is bizarre.

 

Lowering bar too low for good performance to highlight a player not a good approach.

 

In the last 5 years 21 bastmen have scored 100s batting at no.6 or below. 17 centuries against proper sides. Pandya is not one of them. He is yet to score a 100 playing 74 matches. He is just a cameo man. Tissera perera came at no.7 and scored 140 in 74 balls in New zealand. Couple of years back Carey and Maxwell joined at 74/5 chasing 302 and ended up scoring 100s to win the match. Those are the kind of knocks that stand out.

[zen]

This topic is not about stand out 100/knocks! The thread is on strong all round performance where you pick up 3 or more wkts and score 30 or more runs. 
 

If a 100 is considered equal to a 5-er, 1 wicket is 20 runs. In this context, the minimum value of “3+ and 30+” = 90 (usually it will be more as runs will not be exactly 30 and wickets too can be more). 
 

Some posts are classic examples  of commenting without even understanding the basics!

 

 

Edited March 24, 2023 by zen

[singhvivek141]

On 3/25/2023 at 4:20 AM, zen said:

This topic is not about stand out 100/knocks! The thread is on strong all round performance where you pick up 3 or more wkts and score 30 or more runs. 
 

If a 100 is considered equal to a 5-er, 1 wicket is 20 runs. In this context, the minimum value of “3+ and 30+” = 90 (usually it will be more as runs will not be exactly 30 and wickets too can be more). 
 

Some posts are classic examples  of commenting without even understanding the basics!

 

 

This ratio is good...can we use this to get % of

3 wickets and 60+ runs

This parameter will help us attain "Great" level performance for the allrounders....even 2 wickets and 40+ runs is good.
 

[zen]

14 hours ago, singhvivek141 said:

This ratio is good...can we use this to get % of

3 wickets and 60+ runs

This parameter will help us attain "Great" level performance for the allrounders....even 2 wickets and 40+ runs is good.
 

 

"3+ & 60+" can be almost pointless as a) it would automatically rule out ARs like Kapil and Jadeja (0.0%), and b) it would not work well in T20s. The ones who bat in the top 3-4 relatively regularly may have a chance. In ODIs, Yuvi, who tended to bat in the top 4 may have 1-2 such performances (say roughly 1 in 150 matches, 0.7%). SDP, as we know, recently took 4 wickets and scored 70+ runs in Eng (so say roughly 1 in 70 matches, 1.4%). 

 

"2+ & 40+" would not work as well too as 40 runs is like a milestone # in T20s, and picking 2 wickets is relatively common. 

 

This should not be about getting a theoretical equivalence (and without accounting for output potential at various batting positions) with bat and ball in a game. When a player picks up 3 or more wickets, he has already done a good-to-great job for his team, and then you are adding a minimum of 30 runs (usually, it would be more as players are less likely to get out exactly on 30) to the mix, which covers both the 20-30 runs range in T20s and the 30-40 range in ODIs ... In a team, while all 11 have the opportunity to contribute with the bat, only a handful can bowl. 

 

 

Edited March 26, 2023 by zen