T20I How do you statistically determine a good T20 cricketer?

[Wormkilla]

On stats alone, what makes a good batsmen, bowler, all rounder in T20? Predominantly strike rate for batsmen? Is average still given a lot of weight?

And for bowlers does economy rate mean more than strike rate do you think?

Or are players selected in franchises based more on anecdotal performances in matches, and stats are less relevant?

 

[Cleavy]

strike rate (batsmen), economy rate (bowlers), average/clutch performance/matchups (all)

 

[Wormkilla]

strike rate (batsmen), economy rate (bowlers), average/clutch performance/matchups (all)

What’s a “good” strike rate/economy/average?

Pardon my ignorance.

 

[Cleavy]

should be minimum 150 batting strike rate. maybe 5-7 rpo for bowlers?

 

[cricketnut14]

should be minimum 150 batting strike rate. maybe 5-7 rpo for bowlers?

you'd be elite to maintain a 150+ s/r over a career and maintain an average of 30. average is important as batters are not limited to facing a number of balls (unless the 20 overs expires).
most guys striking at 150+ average in the 20's.
no use averaging 3 with a s/r of 150 eg 3 off 2 - a tailender type.


same for bowlers going for less than 6 an over is elite over a lengthy career (no doubt wickets would come hand in hand and average) - but that isn't important as bowlers are limited to 4 overs a game.


if 160 is considered an average/par score then 125+ s/r is acceptable for bats and less than 8 an over is acceptable for a bowler.

 

[Yoda_]

you'd be elite to maintain a 150+ s/r over a career and maintain an average of 30. average is important as batters are not limited to facing a number of balls (unless the 20 overs expires).
most guys striking at 150+ average in the 20's.
no use averaging 3 with a s/r of 150 eg 3 off 2 - a tailender type.


same for bowlers going for less than 6 an over is elite over a lengthy career (no doubt wickets would come hand in hand and average) - but that isn't important as bowlers are limited to 4 overs a game.


if 160 is considered an average/par score then 125+ s/r is acceptable for bats and less than 8 an over is acceptable for a bowler.

I thought it was 160 for a combined strike rate + average combo for batsmen

For example

T20I - 30 ave + 155 s/r = 185

 

[PhatBoy]

I would think anyone averaging over 30 and striking at over 140 would be close to elite with the bat as a bit of a starting point - has any commentary team ever come out and made their official stand on this?

 

[ioppolo]

Over Kohli's entire T20 career he averages 41 at a SR of 133. That's a good starting point for GOAT talk in the format I'd say. That's over 383 matches too.

 

[cricketnut14]

I thought it was 160 for a combined strike rate + average combo for batsmen

For example

T20I - 30 ave + 155 s/r = 185

for me i'll take a batsman averaging 35 and s/r 140 (175) any day of the week, over a batsman who averages 25 and striking at 155 (180).

never liked the ave + s/r rubbish.

ian chappell used to bang on about it back in the 90's for odi cricket.

ya cant tell me faulkner 34 @ 104 (138) or handscomb 33 @ 97 (130) are a better bat than ponting 42 @ 80 (122) in the odi format!

 

[Yoda_]

for me i'll take a batsman averaging 35 and s/r 140 (175) any day of the week, over a batsman who averages 25 and striking at 155 (180).

never liked the ave + s/r rubbish.

ian chappell used to bang on about it back in the 90's for odi cricket.

ya cant tell me faulkner 34 @ 104 (138) or handscomb 33 @ 97 (130) are a better bat than ponting 42 @ 80 (122) in the odi format!

the question is about T20 cricket mate

 

[cricketnut14]

the question is about T20 cricket mate

yeah thats fine, same principal applies for me in t20 cricket.

ya can't tell me dre russ 22/164 (186) is better than warner 34/143 (177) or
that tim david 39/163 (202) is better than kohli 52/138 (190)

 

[Yoda_]

yeah thats fine, same principal applies for me in t20 cricket.

ya can't tell me dre russ 22/164 (186) is better than warner 34/143 (177) or
that tim david 39/163 (202) is better than kohli 52/138 (190)

they are tougher debates than it seems like you are giving them credit for

 

[Around the Wicket]

ya cant tell me faulkner 34 @ 104 (138) or handscomb 33 @ 97 (130) are a better bat than ponting 42 @ 80 (122) in the odi format!

Ponting played in a era where 250 in ODI's was a good score.

 

[Around the Wicket]

Over Kohli's entire T20 career he averages 41 at a SR of 133. That's a good starting point for GOAT talk in the format I'd say. That's over 383 matches too.

Kohli although consistent his side often loses because he bats too slow, he smacks runs every IPL but his yet to win one.

 

[Gethelred]

Kohli although consistent his side often loses because he bats too slow, he smacks runs every IPL but his yet to win one.

Almost as though cricket's a team sport...