facebook Twitter RSS Feed YouTube StumbleUpon

Home | Forum | Chat | Tours | Articles | Pictures | News | Tools | History | Tourism | Search

 
 


Go Back   BanglaCricket Forum > Cricket > Cricket

Cricket Join fellow Tigers fans to discuss all things Cricket

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 8, 2019, 11:17 PM
zman's Avatar
zman zman is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: January 20, 2005
Favorite Player: Shakib, Amla
Posts: 3,709
Default Who is the best performer ever in a World Cup event?

We have seen some amazing individual performances in this year's edition. So far the top 3 performers have been Shakib (Allrounder), Rohit Sharma (Batsman) and Mitchell Starc (Bowler). Shakib in particular won the hearts of many cricket pundits and fans around the world with his brilliant performances. Now the rest of the cricket world knows what Bangladeshi fans already knew about him. Yet as I kept getting blown away by each performance, in every innings with both bat and ball, I couldn't help but wonder how good has he really been in historical context? So I decided to do an objective analysis by resorting to simple number crunching.

The Man of the Tournament trophy was first awarded to Martin Crowe in 1992. All MoT winners since 92, top performers from the world cups prior to 1992 and this year's top 3 performers have been included in this analysis.

To keep things simple I've only focused on runs scored and wickets taken. If a run is represented by a point then how many points should be assigned to each wicket? There's a general saying that a fifer is roughly equivalent to a century. If that is the case a wicket should be worth 20 points. However we know that fifers are rarer than centuries and they're harder to get. So 25 points per wicket seems more reasonable. The total points have been calculated by following this assumption. In other words, total points = runs + wickets x 25. Since players don't play the same number of matches, PPI or Points per Innings was calculated by dividing the total points by the number of innings played. Points and PPI were also calculated for 20 Runs/wk and 30 Runs/wk. The results are compiled in the following table:



The numbers are quite astonishing. Total points for Shakib (881) is much higher than anyone else, with Yuvraj (737) coming in at second. Shakib's PPI (110) is even more impressive. The second highest score in each category is highlighted in red. To put things in perspective, Rohit will need to score two big centuries and Starc will need to take two fifers in the semifinal and final just to catch up with Shakib's points. Even that will not be enough to get them close to his PPI. Shakib's world cup show has been one for the ages. In my view it was the best ever performance by a cricketer on the sport's grandest stage, and I doubt we'll see another one like this anytime soon.
__________________
Few things inspire us to soar quite like being really f***ed if we don't

Last edited by zman; August 3, 2019 at 07:01 AM.. Reason: Added 1975 data
Reply With Quote

  #2  
Old July 9, 2019, 12:13 AM
oronnya oronnya is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: October 19, 2011
Favorite Player: Shak,TI,Mash,Mushy,Dravid
Posts: 4,124

Nice analysis and I agree with you!! I also felt (without doing any statistical analysis) that Shakib's performance is one of the finest in cricket history, still he will be forgotten just because he is from a lower ranked team
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old July 9, 2019, 08:03 AM
zman's Avatar
zman zman is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: January 20, 2005
Favorite Player: Shakib, Amla
Posts: 3,709

Quote:
Originally Posted by oronnya
Nice analysis and I agree with you!! I also felt (without doing any statistical analysis) that Shakib's performance is one of the finest in cricket history, still he will be forgotten just because he is from a lower ranked team
Nothing would be more tragic if such performance is ever forgotten. He carried the team in the tournament almost singlehandedly and got very little support when he needed. Every time they show the top fantasy points, Shakib is head and shoulders above the rest. Today Shakib tops the list with 519 while Rohit is second with 425. It would be nice if they would also figure out the points for previous MoT winners.
__________________
Few things inspire us to soar quite like being really f***ed if we don't
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old August 3, 2019, 07:12 AM
zman's Avatar
zman zman is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: January 20, 2005
Favorite Player: Shakib, Amla
Posts: 3,709

Towards the end of the world cup, I did this analysis with a view to comparing Iceman's performance against other MVP's from previous world cups. Cricket Monthly published an article today which is relevant to this topic. In his piece "World Cup MVPs across time" we can see that the author Anantha Narayanan was motivated by a similar goal. Click here for the article

Below is his summary table of top performers from each world cup.



Here's what the abridged sorted version of his table looks like:



According to his anaylsis, Shak's world cup performance is the 2nd best ever only behind Klusener.

I think he did a good analysis. Instead of focusing only on previous MoT's he focuses on best performers. The one area where his metrics falls short is the weight he assigns to runs scored. Shakib gets 368 batting pts for scoring 606 runs while Klusener got 300 pts for scoring 281 runs, which is strange!
__________________
Few things inspire us to soar quite like being really f***ed if we don't
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old August 4, 2019, 02:15 AM
ToBeFair's Avatar
ToBeFair ToBeFair is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: February 8, 2018
Posts: 2,564

I disagree that Shakib's performance is all time great. Let's do a match by match qualitative analysis

v SA: 75 runs @ 89.28 SR, 10 overs-50 runs-1 wk-5 rpo
Perfect batting and bowling
Score 9/10

v NZ: 64 runs @ 94.11 SR, 10 overs-47 runs-2 wk-4.7 rpo
Needed to carry bat but got out at the most inopportune time. Bowling was OK.
Score 5/10

v ENG: 121 runs @ 101.68 SR, 10 overs-71 runs-0 wk-7.1 rpo
Horrendous bowling. Even though he scored a century, loss was a forgone conclusion.
Score 4/10

v WI: 124* runs @ 125.25 SR, 8 overs-54 runs-2 wk-6.75 rpo
Dominant match winning performance
Score 10/10

v AUS: 41 runs @ 100 SR, 6 overs-50 runs-0 wk-8.33 rpo
Horrendous bowling, batting is irrelevant because the match outcome was a forgone conclusion.
Score 3/10

v AFG: 51 runs @ 73.91 SR, 10 overs-29 runs-5 wk-2.9 rpo
Match winning performance
Score 9/10

v IN: 66 runs @ 89.18 SR, 10 overs-41 runs-1 wk-4.1 rpo
Good bowling. Needed to carry bat but failed.
Score 5/10

v PAK: 64 runs @ 83.11 SR, 10 overs-57 runs-0 wk-5.7 rpo
Expensive bowling. Needed to carry bat but failed.
Score 5/10

Out of eight matches, only against WI Shakib's performance was essential for the team to win. Without it, team would have lost. Thus he got 10/10.

Against AFG and SA, Shakib's performance was superb but overall those wins were team effort and others chipped in. Thus he got 9/10.

Against ENG and AUS, Shak's bowling was EPIC fail and batting was irrelevant because outcome was known after the first half.

Against NZ, IND, and PAK - being a no 3, Shak needed to carry on at least in one match, but he failed. His OK bowling performance in those matches is no excuse because he chose to take the most important batting position, and it not too much to expect the no 3 to carry or dig deep in one out of three matches. Thus he got 5/10.

Average score: 6.25/10

This score reflects Shakib's overall impact on match outcome - and this is a fair reflection. It is D. Out of eight matches, only against WI he single handedly took the match away from WI and won it for BD.
__________________
Self-respect is the fruit of discipline; the sense of dignity grows with the ability to say no to oneself- AJH| Don’t disrespect your life by living aimlessly – set goals and work hard to attain them.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old August 4, 2019, 02:30 AM
ToBeFair's Avatar
ToBeFair ToBeFair is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: February 8, 2018
Posts: 2,564

Now lets do a similar analysis of Rohit Sharma's performance

v South Africa 122* runs @ 84.72
Absolutely dominating performance, without it, India might have lost.
Score 10/10

v Australia 57 runs @ 81.42
This opening half century was crucial to see off the testing opening spell and set the platform for a winning total.
Score 9/10

v Pakistan 140 runs @ 123.89
Absolute domination, broke the opponent psychologically.
Score 10/10

v Afghanistan 1 runs @ 10
Fail
Score 0/10

v West Indies 18 runs @ 78.26
Fail
Score 3/10

v England 102 runs @ 93.57
Needed to have a better strike rate but it is easier said than done while batting second
Score 8/10

v Bangladesh 104 runs @ 113.04
Match winning knock, decimated BD mentally
Score 10/10

v Sri Lanka 103 runs @ 109.57
Absolute domination
Score 10/10

v New Zealand 1 runs @ 25
Fail
0/10

Conclusion: He is a binary mode player, but he did the job more often than not, stumped his authority in single handedly taking the match away from opposition and eviscerating them psychologically.

Average 6.67

This is also a fair reflection. Rohit Sharma is definitely more likely to be able to swing match outcome single handedly compared to Shakib. Therefore, Rohit was a better WC performer compared to Shak.
__________________
Self-respect is the fruit of discipline; the sense of dignity grows with the ability to say no to oneself- AJH| Don’t disrespect your life by living aimlessly – set goals and work hard to attain them.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old August 4, 2019, 09:21 AM
dolcevita dolcevita is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: November 3, 2009
Favorite Player: Shakib
Posts: 3,334

ToBeFair, here you are "notfair"

If Shakib could have the same number of life Rohit Sharma got he would have scored over 800 runs
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old August 4, 2019, 12:01 PM
ToBeFair's Avatar
ToBeFair ToBeFair is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: February 8, 2018
Posts: 2,564

Quote:
Originally Posted by dolcevita
ToBeFair, here you are "notfair"

If Shakib could have the same number of life Rohit Sharma got he would have scored over 800 runs
How many lives Sharma got is irrelevant. We are discussing the end result.

This ranking is subjective. So is your perception about my fairness

If Shakib comes one down and faces a testing opening spell and scores 25 runs, how can it be equivalent to a wicket he earns at the end of an innings where the batsmen are trying to slog against him?

More often than not, Rohit was clinical and authoritative in achieving win for his team. When he did it, he completed the job and did not leave his team stranded in the middle with a half done job accompanied with what ifs. Additionally, he singlehandedly did it many times in the WC and in the process also pulverized opponents both psychologically and physically. Shakib could not do it often, be it with ball or bat. He did it only once against WI. Against NZ, IND, and PAK, Shak had good performances but none of them was good enough to induce substantial damage to opponent, let alone making BD win.

Rohit > Shakib
__________________
Self-respect is the fruit of discipline; the sense of dignity grows with the ability to say no to oneself- AJH| Don’t disrespect your life by living aimlessly – set goals and work hard to attain them.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old August 4, 2019, 08:57 PM
zman's Avatar
zman zman is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: January 20, 2005
Favorite Player: Shakib, Amla
Posts: 3,709

ToBeFair, Thank you for your detailed counter-analysis

Rohit had a tremendous world cup and there's no denying that. In fact in my analysis, which takes into account matches until the semi finals, Rohit scores higher than all world cup MoT's except Kapil and Yuvraj. I concede that between Shakib and him, Rohit was the better batsman.

But aren't you ignoring a few things here?

A) Rohit has a solid batting unit around him. He opened with Dhawan/KL Rahul and consistent performers like Kohli, KL Rahul, Hardik, Dhoni were to follow him. The batting depth enabled him to play pressure free cricket and to take the attack to the opposition from ball one. Same cannot be said about Shakib.

You gave Rohit 10/10 for his best performance against SA and rightly so. But look the fall of wickets for IND:
1-13 (Shikhar Dhawan, 5.1 ov), 2-54 (Virat Kohli, 15.3 ov), 3-139 (KL Rahul, 31.3 ov), 4-213 (MS Dhoni, 46.1 ov)
He had players around him who would stick around even if they couldn't score freely on that day.

You gave Shakib 5/10 against IND. Let's look at the fall of wickets for BD:
1-39 (Tamim Iqbal, 9.3 ov), 2-74 (Soumya Sarkar, 15.1 ov), 3-121 (Mushfiqur Rahim, 22.6 ov), 4-162 (Liton Das, 29.4 ov), 5-173 (Mosaddek Hossain, 32.2 ov), 6-179 (Shakib Al Hasan, 33.5 ov)

These data points exemplify the type support Rohit and Shak got from team mates respectively. Yet Shakib somehow maintained a higher avg while scoring at almost similar SR as Rohit.

B) Until the semis IND was presumed to have the strongest bowling attack. They have 4 attacking bowlers who possess variety and each is considered a match winner in their own right. When you have that kind of bowling unit to support your batting the pressure is reduced further.

C) The area where you grossly underestimate Shakib's value is his bowling. Rohit's services are required for batting which is half the match. Shakib is often needed to be the best player in his team for the full 100 overs, with both bat and ball.

Recently I jokingly said about our bowling strategy in the world cup: "first 30 overs you score at will, last 20 we'll see what we can do". Shakib was the only exception. Every opposition knew he was the danger man and they needed to see him off, yet he was able to create enough pressure to prize out 9 top order batsmen (all batting in top 4). The other two were also bonafide middle order AFG batsmen that completed his fifer. He didn't take a single easy or tailender wicket in the world cup.

In the match against NZ you gave Shakib 5/10. He scored a team high 64, and then removed both NZ openers cheaply putting them under huge pressure. Had Mushy not miraculously gotten in the line of fire and taken the bullet to save Williamson, I'm sure you would've awarded Shakib at least 9/10. That's how much difference team mates can make.

There's a reason why Anantha Narayanan awarded 353 bowling points to Shakib which compares to his own legendary world cup winning captain Kapil Dev's 370 points in the 1983 WC.

While Rohit was exceptional, Shakib was in a league of his own.
__________________
Few things inspire us to soar quite like being really f***ed if we don't
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old August 5, 2019, 03:18 AM
dolcevita dolcevita is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: November 3, 2009
Favorite Player: Shakib
Posts: 3,334

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToBeFair
How many lives Sharma got is irrelevant. We are discussing the end result.

This ranking is subjective. So is your perception about my fairness

If Shakib comes one down and faces a testing opening spell and scores 25 runs, how can it be equivalent to a wicket he earns at the end of an innings where the batsmen are trying to slog against him?

More often than not, Rohit was clinical and authoritative in achieving win for his team. When he did it, he completed the job and did not leave his team stranded in the middle with a half done job accompanied with what ifs. Additionally, he singlehandedly did it many times in the WC and in the process also pulverized opponents both psychologically and physically. Shakib could not do it often, be it with ball or bat. He did it only once against WI. Against NZ, IND, and PAK, Shak had good performances but none of them was good enough to induce substantial damage to opponent, let alone making BD win.

Rohit > Shakib
I am not denying that Rohit Sharma is a better batsman than Shakib (Rohit is at least one class above Shakib as batsman).

But here in this WC, Shakib's contribution was much greater than Rohit's
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old August 5, 2019, 05:00 AM
ToBeFair's Avatar
ToBeFair ToBeFair is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: February 8, 2018
Posts: 2,564

Quote:
Originally Posted by zman
You gave Rohit 10/10 for his best performance against SA and rightly so. But look the fall of wickets for IND:
1-13 (Shikhar Dhawan, 5.1 ov), 2-54 (Virat Kohli, 15.3 ov), 3-139 (KL Rahul, 31.3 ov), 4-213 (MS Dhoni, 46.1 ov)
He had players around him who would stick around even if they couldn't score freely on that day.

You gave Shakib 5/10 against IND. Let's look at the fall of wickets for BD:
1-39 (Tamim Iqbal, 9.3 ov), 2-74 (Soumya Sarkar, 15.1 ov), 3-121 (Mushfiqur Rahim, 22.6 ov), 4-162 (Liton Das, 29.4 ov), 5-173 (Mosaddek Hossain, 32.2 ov), 6-179 (Shakib Al Hasan, 33.5 ov)

These data points exemplify the type support Rohit and Shak got from team mates respectively. Yet Shakib somehow maintained a higher avg while scoring at almost similar SR as Rohit.

.
.
.

In the match against NZ you gave Shakib 5/10. He scored a team high 64, and then removed both NZ openers cheaply putting them under huge pressure. Had Mushy not miraculously gotten in the line of fire and taken the bullet to save Williamson, I'm sure you would've awarded Shakib at least 9/10. That's how much difference team mates can make.
First of all, please note that I am somewhat biased against Shakib

Having said that, I am unwilling to be sold into the argument that a players' batting performance is correlated or affected by sub-par batsmen and bowlers around him. Great players are capable of doing the job even when others around him fails, and doing the job here entails getting beyond the finish line.

Look at fall of wickets in WI vs AUS WC match. Wickets were falling all around, but Smith did the job of holding up and guided his team to safety before getting out. If Shakib could have held one end till end, who knows, probably his partnership with Saifuddin could have won it for BD. But Shak got out again at an inopportune time.

Fall of wickets: 1-15 (Aaron Finch, 2.2 ov), 2-26 (David Warner, 3.6 ov), 3-36 (Usman Khawaja, 6.6 ov), 4-38 (Glenn Maxwell, 7.4 ov), 5-79 (Marcus Stoinis, 16.1 ov), 6-147 (Alex Carey, 30.4 ov), 7-249 (Steven Smith, 44.2 ov),

Also look at the recent first test in Ashes. Everyone failed in the first innings but Smith's superman like innings was the difference between win and loss.

Also fall of wickets do not capture the impact of Rohit's innings against SA. Even though other players were sticking around, it was Rohit who showed intent and took it to SA bowlers. If Rohit could not do it, others would have stalled and got out. Therefore, it was Rohit and his attacking innings which allowed others to stick around
without feeling the pressure; others sticking around did not allow Rohit to play that attacking innings.
__________________
Self-respect is the fruit of discipline; the sense of dignity grows with the ability to say no to oneself- AJH| Don’t disrespect your life by living aimlessly – set goals and work hard to attain them.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old August 5, 2019, 08:13 AM
zman's Avatar
zman zman is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: January 20, 2005
Favorite Player: Shakib, Amla
Posts: 3,709

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToBeFair
Having said that, I am unwilling to be sold into the argument that a players' batting performance is correlated or affected by sub-par batsmen and bowlers around him. Great players are capable of doing the job even when others around him fails, and doing the job here entails getting beyond the finish line.
This notion is flawed. A great player on a weak team can get the team over the finish line once in a while but not consistently. If two teams face each other 10 times the team that has better players overall will win more often. This could mean 7, 8 or 10 wins depending on the overall strength. Doesn't matter if the weaker team has the best player in the game.

Rohit's best innings against SA came while chasing a sub 230 score, which is much more manageable than having to keep up with the scoring rate when chasing 315 on a similar pitch (vs IND). To account for the important variable which is pitch condition we look at runs scored, average and SR. Shakib wasn't far behind in any of those metrics but what really impressed me was his 96 SR vs Rohit's 98.

When it comes to bowling, imagine how many more wickets Shakib would've got if he had a bowling partner on the other end who could've kept the pressure on. I think it would've resulted in at least 3-4 more wickets and/or 2-3 more wins.
__________________
Few things inspire us to soar quite like being really f***ed if we don't
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old August 5, 2019, 08:13 AM
zman's Avatar
zman zman is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: January 20, 2005
Favorite Player: Shakib, Amla
Posts: 3,709

Quote:
Originally Posted by dolcevita
I am not denying that Rohit Sharma is a better batsman than Shakib (Rohit is at least one class above Shakib as batsman).

But here in this WC, Shakib's contribution was much greater than Rohit's
Spot on summary
__________________
Few things inspire us to soar quite like being really f***ed if we don't
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old August 5, 2019, 10:14 AM
ToBeFair's Avatar
ToBeFair ToBeFair is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: February 8, 2018
Posts: 2,564

Quote:
Originally Posted by zman
This notion is flawed. A great player on a weak team can get the team over the finish line once in a while but not consistently. If two teams face each other 10 times the team that has better players overall will win more often. This could mean 7, 8 or 10 wins depending on the overall strength. Doesn't matter if the weaker team has the best player in the game.
Agree.

Part of greatness lies in taking your team above the finish line. And you can consistently do it if you are part of a great team.

Too bad Shakib plays for BD and Rohit plays for IND. But this is the reality. History is written by winners. Therefore, history will judge Rohit a batter player and performer over Shakib.
__________________
Self-respect is the fruit of discipline; the sense of dignity grows with the ability to say no to oneself- AJH| Don’t disrespect your life by living aimlessly – set goals and work hard to attain them.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old August 6, 2019, 01:43 PM
Tigers_eye's Avatar
Tigers_eye Tigers_eye is offline
Cricket Savant
 
Join Date: June 30, 2005
Location: Little Rock
Favorite Player: Viv Richards, Steve Waugh
Posts: 32,593

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToBeFair
...

v NZ: 64 runs @ 94.11 SR, 10 overs-47 runs-2 wk-4.7 rpo
Needed to carry bat but got out at the most inopportune time. Bowling was OK.
Score 5/10
Really unfair. 50%? His two wkts don't mean anything? His econ don't mean anything? This wasn't a batting paradise. That 64 would have been match winning innings if someone didn't miss the runout. If this the grading you are giving out then EVERYONE in our team gets an "F" in every game.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToBeFair
v ENG: 121 runs @ 101.68 SR, 10 overs-71 runs-0 wk-7.1 rpo
Horrendous bowling. Even though he scored a century, loss was a forgone conclusion.
Score 4/10.
A century and an "F"? wow!!! How many players scored a century in the WC? Who is your standard? Bradman?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToBeFair
v IN: 66 runs @ 89.18 SR, 10 overs-41 runs-1 wk-4.1 rpo
Good bowling. Needed to carry bat but failed.
Score 5/10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToBeFair
v PAK: 64 runs @ 83.11 SR, 10 overs-57 runs-0 wk-5.7 rpo
Expensive bowling. Needed to carry bat but failed.
Score 5/10.....
What do you mean by "Needed to carry bat but failed."? How many times 1st down carried his bat when none gave him company from Eng, WI, Aus, NZ, SA, Ind, ABCDEF....let alone in a WC pressured match? Is Shakib a human or a Robot? How come Tamim didn't score a 50? How come Sarkar got the starts but gifted away his wickets? How come Mushi couldn't do a jack when it mattered the most? How come Riyad didn't carry his bat while coming later down the order?

I know it is subjective and everyone has their own opinion but all I can say about your grading is, "not fair at all."

In this WC, from my grading he would average of 8.5.
__________________
The Weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is an attribute of the Strong." - Gandhi.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old August 6, 2019, 09:57 PM
DinRaat. DinRaat. is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: January 30, 2017
Location: Sydney Australia
Favorite Player: AirBus A340
Posts: 5,744

it's Shakib , no one minutely comes close
__________________
Follow your deepest dream, the one you had as a kid... but stay focused.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:59 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
BanglaCricket.com
 

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Partner Sites | Useful Links | Banners |

© BanglaCricket