Statistic: BD Men of Steel and Jello (ODI)

[zsayeed]

Here is an interesting statistic.

Of the 126 matches played, Shakib averages 54.50 when BD wins (55 matches), and 26.2 when loses(71 matches)

Of the 113 matches played, Tamim averages 40.10 when BD wins (39 matches), and 24.9 when loses(74 matches)

Let's expand on this.

Here is the complete list of BD batsmen for winning games who have scored more than 500 runs in a winning cause individually.



If we relax the filter to total 400 runs in a winning cause, we get some more interesting names for comparison:



And Roqibul is really a rock when the team loses, performing marginally better under pressure. (again 500 runs is the cutoff)


Now taking those results, and arranging them in order of Loss Average over Win Average - Let's call this statistic the Solidity Factor, we see that Roq is the most die hard person on the team - nerves of steel!

Imrul is second, Junaid 3rd, .... and sadly SN last. However, SN has a fabulous win average.
Mind you these are players who have atleast 400 runs to their name in a winning cause, or 500 runs to their name in a losing cause.


On the other hand one may observe, and rightly so, that when the people below the 50% solidity factor fail - the country get's doomed.

Further observations? Let's Discuss.

[Tiger444]

zsayeed bhai, why don't you add just the wins against the G8 teams? That takes the fluff out and we can see the pure numbers.

[Navo]

^^ I think with an average of 28 throughout (with a strike rate of 60), it indicates mediocrity rather than solidity. If Rock was scoring 40 average throughout, win or lose, it might indicate that he scores runs even when the chips are down and it's the failure of others that keep the team from winning.

On the other hand, as you correctly concluded at the end of your post, when people like Shakib score less than 30, you know that the team is in for a rough time.

[zsayeed]

One may observe that SN has contributed significantly to winning causes and losing causes (in a negative way by averaging poorly), but the losing causes have stood out more in people's (selectors?) minds. When he has performed, Bangladesh have won.

[zsayeed]

Originally Posted by Tiger444
zsayeed bhai, why don't you add just the wins against the G8 teams? That takes the fluff out and we can see the pure numbers.

Let's see how it turns out.Thanks!

[Navo]

^ Zsayeed bhai, I think Tiger444 is right, you should take out the matches against Zimbabwe. It inflates the figures.

[zsayeed]

The problem I am having is that with G8 teams, the sample size becomes small (for wins, and the 400 run winning filter just leaves Shak and Ash in the list). Expanding to lower filter.

[zsayeed]

Okay, Here is with G8 teams.
I had to lower the filter on winning total individual runs to 150 to get some names on the board.


Then I used the lost games to gather the losing averages for the people found on the list found on the link above. Roq, SN had to be dropped as they do not have 150 runs against G8 teams.


Here is the solidity factor (which I think would be better named as the inverse dependence factor, that is if the people on the bottom perform poorly, the team is doomed)

Rahim is actually Mr. Dependable, and if Ashraful has a bad day we are doomed. Ashraful has had a phenomenal winning average though, 57.11 from 11 winning matches. When he had a good day, we did win. Shakib as well...when he clicks we shine. But the converse is not true always.

Tamim as well performs just as well against G8 in a win as a loss. Mr. Dependable as well.

[zsayeed]

When Shakib does poorly - the team is doomed - but we knew that already. So the analysis is atleast realistic in one perspective. And Ash... oh well - when he clicked we were home.

[zsayeed]

Originally Posted by Navo
^ Zsayeed bhai, I think Tiger444 is right, you should take out the matches against Zimbabwe. It inflates the figures.

Thanks Bhai, I have included
Australia England India New Zealand Pakistan South Africa Sri Lanka West Indies only

[zsayeed]

Okay, not to derail this conversation - but since our BD batsmen are so young, I wanted to look at all number 1 - 6 batsmen and wanted to see in the last 10 years the performance of batsmen aged up to 22 years, with at least 400 runs. I specifically looked at the conversion ratio (number of 100s over number of 50+ innings).
Here is the analysis,


Note that Shahriyar Nafees leeds the pack from BD side.

[Tiger444]

Thanks zsayeed bhai. These stats again show who are our class players and separate the ordinary ones.

[firstlane]

Thanks zsayeed. Good effort.

[zsayeed]

One thing is becoming more clear as I look over the solidity factor, the people down the list more in a position of deciding the outcome of the game! That I think is what it means. the further down the list one goes the more responsibility is held - good or bad.

[zsayeed]

Originally Posted by Tiger444
Thanks zsayeed bhai. These stats again show who are our class players and separate the ordinary ones.

Originally Posted by firstlane
Thanks zsayeed. Good effort.

Thanks for your encouragements. it means a lot.

[shakibrulz]

Stats is a bitch, it's alright for making certain generalizations/comparisons - but above that, you have to take into account criteria such as strength of the opposition, etc. for starters. SN eats Zimbabwe for breakfast, for instance.

[zsayeed]

Originally Posted by shakibrulz
Stats is a bitch, it's alright for making certain generalizations/comparisons - but above that, you have to take into account criteria such as strength of the opposition, etc. for starters. SN eats Zimbabwe for breakfast, for instance.

When I took only G8 teams into consideration, SN did disappear as he did not have more than 150 runs in winning innings in G8.
So post #8 would be of interest to you.

[NoName]

Nice, we have no Sachin.

[Rabz]

Ash averages 57 on winning cause against the G8.
That's remarkable.

[riankhan]

Interesting thread Zsayeed. Thanks a lot.

[Night_wolf]

Originally Posted by Rabz
Ash averages 57 on winning cause against the G8.
That's remarkable.

no surprise there...from 2004 to 2007 for every win vs G8 ash was the only match winner we had

this also shows that ash avg 17 in losing cause..again from 2004 to 2007 ash out r amader dom o ses hoye jeto

i am glad sei hit and miss er day gulo theke amader dol aste aste ber hoye asche

[Rabz]

^^ Yes, up until the emergency of Shakib, we had only one match winner.
Now we have Shakib and few other in leading supporting role.

Back in those days, it was all about Ash. Main/leading/supporting, all.
Mash used to win few games, Bashar used to score few half centuries, Rafiq could bowl tight, but it really was all about Ash.
Now the number tells it too !

[zsayeed]

In fact, that was my dilemma, when I started the analysis the winning run per individual was 400 as a query qualifier. when I imposed the G8 condition, only two batsmen were on the board - Ash and Shak.
No other player has more than 400 runs in the winning cause against G8!



That is why I had to lower the filter to 150 runs.

[zsayeed]

Originally Posted by riankhan
Interesting thread Zsayeed. Thanks a lot.

Thanks champ!

[TIKBoss]

just tells u how poor we used to be that we needed Sir Ash to win matches against g8.. now sir ash isn't able to find place in the team and we are winning against g8 a lot more without him..