KUMAR SANGAKKARA: A Subcontinent and Minnow Bully

You would expect a great batsman like Sangakkara, to take advantage of weaker oppositions but he has failed against Bangladesh away, 41!!!!!!

However what is the affect on his overall performance if you exclude both Bangladesh and Zimbabwe?

Marginal. Overall average drops by a mere 3.68 to 53 from 57!

If you set a  benchmark for a dominant average to be 60 and still excluding Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.

Then  ,away from home, Kumar Sangakkara has dominated Pakistan New Zealand and Australia. He has been poor against India, South Africa, West Indies and England with averages from 37-31.

He has dominated all but England, New Zealand and Australia at home. Against the last 3 his average is between 39-30.

It is clear his nemesis is England but to dominate Australia in Australia is the sign of a great batsman. 

Therefore if you exclude the minnows, the effect on his overall performance is negligible so his figures will stand up to that accusation.Yes he would have 7 less centuries.

Rev,


[color=rgb(26, 26, 26)]49.38----He needs to get it back to 50.[/color]

Quote:


Ok but close enough....HowSTAT!!!!!


However you are the detail man so i believe you.Thanks.

I disagree with the premise that Sangakarra is a subcontinent minnow bully .
Numbers  alone  cannot tell the whole story of this man's genius.

[quote author=easyrider link=topic=86700.msg542974#msg542974 date=1389287001]


[size=14pt]It is clear his nemesis is England[b] but to dominate Australia in Australia is the sign of a great batsman.[/size] 
[/quote]


OBSERVATION:

* Brian Lara averaged 41.97 in 19 tests in Australia.

* Viv Richards averaged 47.56 in 22 tests in Australia.

* Gary Sobers averaged 46.35 in 10 tests in Australia.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/...pe=batting


QUESTION:

Did those 3 greats dominate in Australia ?


Rev

The Rev,

I have outlined reasonable assumptions for domination and excluding what you call minnows. Even then KS' numbers are still exemplary and that is the issue here so do not ask stupid questions!

His average has not changed significantly whilst excluding the minnows so your argument is undermined as you have unfairly represented this man's career. If you are to do this then do the comparison for the top ten batsmen of his era and exclude what you wish consistently and see what the results are.

However based on assumptions no they are not in Australian conditions. You can lower the assumptions if you wish but you did mention dominate, did you not? 50 is great but not domination.

Therefore a baseline at 60 was set for domination.

You need to start associating numbers with other mitigating factors for them to make sense consistently.

[quote author=easyrider link=topic=86700.msg543083#msg543083 date=1389301891]

therefore a baseline at 60 was set for domination.
[/quote]

* Sangakkara has played only 5 tests in Australia and averaged 60.

* Scoring 1 hundred and 5 fifties in 5 tests at a strike rate of 51----that is NOT domination.

* By the way, 5 tests is not good enough to establish domination ?

* Shame on you.

* The reality is Sangakkara has played in 11 tests against Australia----he has scored 878 runs at an average of 43.90 with 1 hundred and 7 fifties.

* Those are very good numbers----not great.

Rev

The Rev,

We were talking about away records were we not?

Judging someone over a longer sample makes more numerical averaging sense as it incorporates consistency.

However you base your arguments purely on figures so KS has superior figures to Lara, Richards and Sir Garry.

Fact or not? The Numbers do not lie!!!!

Within numbers are variables which we need to associate, weight and normalise in arriving at results on  a consistent and level playing field basis.

Use the top ten off KS' era and take out Bangladesh and Zimbabwe and you will find some interesting results.

Ponting might be better off.

Be consistent in your argument.

[quote author=Rev link=topic=86700.msg543088#msg543088 date=1389302592]


* The reality is Sangakkara has played in 11 tests against Australia----he has scored 878 runs at an average of 43.90 with 1 hundred and 7 fifties.

* Those are very good numbers----not great.
[/quote]

C'mon thats mediocre ....forget comparisons as to how other retired greats did !

43.9 is mediocre in any analysis.

Easrrider:

* In the lead post the Rev acknowledges that Kumar Sangakkara has put up great numbers.

* A player must also be judged the by entirety of his career not via bits and pieces.

* But I made the observation that there was a great disparity in Sanga's performance against subcontinent teams plus 2 minnows(WI/Zim)---he averages 72 against these teams----while averaging only 42 against Aus/SA/ENG/NZ.

* We can go in circles arguing away stats or stats in Australia.

* [size=14pt]The fact is Sangakkara is a great batsman---he has put up great numbers overall----but when one takes a close look at his numbers---one sees his shortcomings-----he has not to date averaged 50+ against SA/AUS/ENG/NZ.[/size]

Rev

Ketchim,

44 is a combined record and by no means is that poor.

However we were discussing away records.

You know numbers do not tell the full story although I am a numbers man as well.