Different styles/approaches/philosophies of IPL teams

[zen]

IPL is not only about observing the teams battle it out on the field every year but also about seeing how the teams approach the game to see how different philosophies play out: 

 

 

Flexibility and an open mind 

 

• Teams like CSK and GT come to mind where they pick players who can do multiple roles in general, allowing them to be flexible in both batting and bowling orders. The one-dimensional cricketers are there to play specific roles
• These teams also believe in strong bowling attacks with CSK focused on a spin-centric one, while GT is focused on a pace-centric one 
• Their approach to a game depends on playing conditions and match situations to play a relatively non-formulaic cricket 

 

Batting focused 

 

• MI devoted a major part of its budget to Green, Kishan, and David while retaining Rohit, SKY, and Pollard (now retired). In bowling, it primarily focused on bowlers such as Bumrah and Archer
• PK attempted to build a team to replicate England's style of batting but this season, that plan may have gone off the rails 
• RCB is at the extreme end where the rest of the 11 is designed to support certain high-profile batsmen 
• SRH went for many high-strike-rate batsmen too, while ignoring the bowling to a certain extent 

 

Role or position or skills-focused 

 

• KKR where it relies on players with unique or unusual skills such as Russell, Naraine, Varun C, & Suyesh. Liked to bat like Eng too when BMac was the coach 
• LSG where it seeks to go by who is ideally suited for what position whether in batting or bowling
• RR where specialist batsmen focus on batting, and specialist bowlers focus on bowling. Though it is reliant on the star performances of Buttler 

 

To be determined 

 

• DC which at the moment appears to rely on certain individuals 

 

 

Of course, some teams can get into other categories as well but lumped them based on the best fit. 

[Tibarn]

The impact player rule devalues the role of allrounders. A team can just use a specialist batsman during the batting innings and then a specialist bowler during their bowling innings. The Royals aren't off base with their strategy.  

Edited April 21, 2023 by Tibarn

[zen]

34 minutes ago, Tibarn said:

The impact player rule devalues the role of allrounders. A team can just use a specialist batsman during the batting innings and then a specialist bowler during their bowling innings. The Royals aren't off base with their strategy.  

 

Theoretically yes, but practically not necessarily as it depends on the quality of players. For e.g. CSK fields Mooen Ali and Jadeja, and has the option to play Ben Stokes too. These players are not just ARs but also provide a team with the flexibility to bat them anywhere in the lineup (they are not limited to being top-order batsmen or middle-order batsmen) and also bowl at different stages. 

 

For e.g. Ryan Parag or Devdutt Paddikal + Navdeep Saini is not necessarily a better option than having just Moeen Ali or even Jadeja. At times, a team can even get hindered by an impact player. Say RR has Holder in its line up who is a big and better hitter than a Parag or a DDP but because RR could bring in one of them as an impact batsman, that player would bat up the order and Holder could be left with only a few balls. 

 

Another example is Andre Russell. Teams will prefer to have a match-winner like Russell than the option to play a Parag/DDP + Saini/Sandeep. 

 

Teams don't necessarily have to use even the impact option. Its effectiveness depends on the quality of the players, and how teams use all-rounders. 

 

 

Edited April 21, 2023 by zen

[Tibarn]

5 minutes ago, zen said:

 

Theoretically yes, but practically not necessarily as it depends on the quality of players. For e.g. CSK fields Mooen Ali and Jadeja, and has the option to play Ben Stokes too. These players are not just ARs but also provide a team with the flexibility to bat them anywhere in the lineup (they are not limited to being top-order batsmen or something) and also bowl at various stages. 

 

For e.g. Ryan Parag or Devdutt Paddikal + Navdeep Saini is not necessarily a better option than having just Moeen Ali or even Jadeja. At times, a team can get hindered by an impact player. Say RR has Holder in its line up who is a big and better hitter than a Parag or a DDP but because RR could bring in one of them as an impact batsman, that player would bat up the order and Holder could be left with only a few balls. 

 

Another example is Andre Russell. Teams will prefer to have a natch winner like Russell than the option to play a Parag/DDP + Saini/Sandeep. 

 

So it depends on the quality of the players, and how teams use all-rounders. 

 

 

Yes, it definitely depends on the quality of the allrounder(s) in question, but when there is one of questionable quality, in either of the skillsets, then it's a good option. 

 

I think how GT doesn't really use Vijay Shankar for his bowling, despite being an allrounder: it is probably better to use Abhinav Manohar(or Shankar if they rate him higher) during batting, and then either a fast bowler/spinner (Little/Sai Kishore/Noor) during the bowling innings.

[zen]

2 minutes ago, Tibarn said:

Yes, it definitely depends on the quality of the allrounder(s) in question, but when there is one of questionable quality, in either of the skillsets, then it's a good option. 

 

I think how GT doesn't really use Vijay Shankar for his bowling, despite being an allrounder: it is probably better to use Abhinav Manohar(or Shankar if they rate him higher) during batting, and then either a fast bowler/spinner (Little/Sai Kishore/Noor) during the bowling innings.

 

Since GT has a few ARs in its playing 11, it tends to use its impact player like a tool in the Swiss Army knife per match situation and conditions. So if it feels that it needs a spinner, it can bring in a Noor or a Sai Kishore, if a pace bowler someone else. The use of Abhivan and Shankar will also depend on the match situation and conditions (who is bowling, expected to bowl, etc.) In one game, it replaced an injured batsman (KW) with another batsman (Sudarshan). Sometimes, it does not even use an impact player (if not required). 

[Tibarn]

3 hours ago, zen said:

The use of Abhivan and Shankar will also depend on the match situation and conditions (who is bowling, expected to bowl, etc.) In one game, it replaced an injured batsman (KW) with another batsman (Sudarshan). Sometimes, it does not even use an impact player (if not required). 

It was only 2 games, but I was more impressed with Abhinav so far over Shankar.

Edited April 22, 2023 by Tibarn

[zen]

Btw, RR did almost exactly as I wrote in one of the posts above -> did not use Holder’s batting v RCB, while promoting Ashwin and an impact sub above him. It lost the game by a hit. 
 

One of the reasons, I look at teams' abilities to practically carry out a move. 

Edited April 24, 2023 by zen

[Nikhil_cric]

RCB are trying to overpower teams upfront with both bat and ball. Faf and Maxwell are combining to be a destructive pair and Siraj is wrecking batting sides in the Powerplay. Massive difference between these 3 and the rest of the squad. 

 

RR, LSG, GT and CSK are much more well rounded sides with more quality throughout and the ability to come back even if they didnt't start off as well as they'd have liked.