4 ms·
> Cricket is a lot like that, actually. Including the often very dicey performance metrics. My favourite example is batting average(total runs/total dismissals
by pmccool 16y ago
> Cricket is a lot like that, actually.
Including the often very dicey performance metrics. My favourite example is batting average(total runs/total dismissals), which is skewed in favour of lower-order batsmen, who are more likely to record not-out scores.
I'm more interested in their median score (or better yet, median partnership).
- maw 16y agoAgreed, except on the partnership bit, which I don't understand. Keeping track of partnerships always seemed like trivia to me. Can you explain a bit further?
- pmccool 16y agoBatsmen contribute to partnerships with, e.g. good running between wickets. Things like that aren't reflected in batting averages, or their effect is downplayed.
- maw 16y agoTrue. It still sounds uncomfortably like trivia, but maybe that's because nobody's figured out how to measure it properly yet. It sounds a lot like evaluating fielding, in both cricket and baseball, because in addition to keeping track of whether a player drops the ball (both figuratively and literally) or not, there are many would-haves and should-haves to take into account. But you're right: good running between the wickets, and also shot selection with a view toward getting the better batsman more of the strike, is a real skill which should be measured, even if it is difficult and nobody really knows how yet. :)