No Requests Jono's ICC Downloads

[Chewie]

Well I'd prefer it if instead of asking stupid questions they actually read what the thread is about...

 

[enigma]

@ enigma. I would say you have rated Sangakkara, Chanderpaul, Bell and maybe a few others a little too high.

Gambhir and Sehwag are better than Smith in my opinion. De Villiers should be about on the same level as Gambhir or higher even. Ponting should be rated higher than Kallis even though I don't like him as he is the best (or second best maybe) in the world. I'd say that Watson should be rated slightly higher while Trott should be higher than Yuvraj as should a whole lot of people.

Hmmm. Enigma, for me, Strauss should be a bit higher and ten Doeschate should be lower, as well as pretty much everything (except Chanderpaul ) that hedger has said.

Well, I'm new at this stuff so I don't know what are the numerous purposes people usually edit for & I don't know what you guys are editing for & what basis you use to do that. I'd like to edit so that the players within ICC replicate their real-life stats within the game as I go on playing 2010,11,12...etc & that's why I've used pure statistics to come up with the ratings & not care too much about the "value" (which is subjective) of each player in real-life & that's why you see people like Sangakkara, Chandrapaul & others rated higher than their "value" in real-life.

Sangakkara has been in a prolific form for several years now & looking at trends is likely to continue with that so I felt that in order for him to be just as profilic in ICC he'd've to be rated that high & someone like Ponting who'd have a higher "value" than Sangakkara has been rated lower due to his below par last couple of years & if one sees the trends in their averages in the last couple of years, it's LIKELY (not a certainty of course) that Sangakkara's form will keep moving along (same can be said of Kallis's form) while Ponting's will be going downwards.

The above also holds true for Chanderpaul who's ahead of many players better than him in terms "value" & you might've noticed he averages lower than them in Tests & yet has been rated higher because either he averages higher than them in ODIs (Sehwag,Mahela,Gambhir) or has been in better form than them(Pietersen,Yousuf) or has sustained his high career-averages for a longer period of time than them. [Ideally, I think there should be different in-game ratings for different formats to accurately replicate stats of players like Sehwag, Mahela,etc who're guns in Tests but average in ODIs]

I completely agree that De Villiers is equal to or probably better than Gambhir but again, I've rated Gambhir higher as I've chosen to go by career averages & current form where gambhir is clearly ahead in Tests by a sizable margin (53-46/69-58) & although AB is better in ODIs, when you consider that Gambhir is to face the new ball when chances of getting out are higher (within ICC as well) & is less likely to get "notouts" to boost his average than AB, I thought Gambhir had to be rated sufficiently higher than AB for them to replicate their real-life stats within the game.

Yuvraj is an established International while Trott is in his infancy at this level & hence there's a chance he may turn out to be another "Ramprakash or Hick" (i.e. players who're guns at FC but can't replicate their performace at International level) so I don't really see any justification for rating a player higher based on his FC record against someone who's already an established International.

Ideally, I'd've had Ten Doeschate lower than what he's at but the problem I was confronting that most of the players below him are either not good enough to be rated higher than him or may prove to be better than him IN THE FUTURE but haven't YET played enough International cricket (of course, same is true of Doeschate himself) to be rated higher so it made sense to compare these players' FC records where he beats them all on averages as well as length of time he's sustained those averages for so I just left him there. Where would you put him & who'd be the two batters higher & lower than him?

As I've already mentioned, I've overrated English & Kiwis to compensate for the fact that they'll be playing in slightly bowler-friendly conditions compared to others so that'd explain why people like Bell seem overrated to you guys.

Watson has just had a nice 18 months but he hadn't done much at the International level before that so I don't really rate him that high as a batsman & to be honest, I've been pretty generous to him with his rating & I'd like to see more of him in the next few years before I raise him any higher.

As I've said, I'm new to this so if you guys use a different criteria as the basis for your ratings then do mention it, may be I'm doing it the wrong way & will possibly find a better way to do it & if possible, do mention how'd you rate the people in question & why. Cheers.

enigma added 4 Minutes and 57 Seconds later...

Ok that would be great How are you going to do it? Excel would be best, but you can put it into a text document with spaces between first name, last name, batting rating and bowling rating, and it'd work just as well

I'm doing it in Excel, I've followed your format, I've managed to do SA & SL so far.

 

[Chewie]

We normally edit so that it's a more accurate representation of current form and ability. For the most part I agree with your ratings enigma, but I would put slightly more emphasis on perceived ability. For example, I would rate Sangakkara and Chanderpaul as high as you probably, but Ponting would still be second or third, and de Villiers-Gambhir and Yuvraj-Trott would be about the same

I've finished Australia Two more for me to do.

 

[Imager36]

Hmmm. My point on ten Doeschate is that his batting averages have been vastly inflated through playing years of associate cricket against teams such as Namibia and Kenya. For example, 4 out of his 16 first class centuries came just in the Intercontinental Cup in 2006. Yes it takes a good batsman to do that, but the opposition wasn't that strong.

I'd probably put him, in your list, between Duminy and Guptill.

 

[Chewie]

Is it possible to configure statsguru to analyse his career - games for the Netherlands?

 

[Imager36]

Not for FC, I'm afraid. His ODI breakdown shows that his 3 100s have come against Kenya (2) and Bermuda though.

 

[enigma]

We normally edit so that it's a more accurate representation of current form and ability. For the most part I agree with your ratings enigma, but I would put slightly more emphasis on perceived ability. For example, I would rate Sangakkara and Chanderpaul as high as you probably, but Ponting would still be second or third, and de Villiers-Gambhir and Yuvraj-Trott would be about the same

I've finished Australia Two more for me to do.

Talking of perceived ability, in general, perceptions can often be wrong so I tried not to let my perceptions about players get in the way beyond a point & just rely on statistics, afterall, I'm editing them to reproduce real-life-like statistics & it's only because of perceived ability of Ponting that he's been put ahead of so many who're miles ahead of him in terms of last two years' performances but anyways, since you brought it up, I thought may be I could raise him by a notch & put him alongside Sangakkara at 1640

enigma added 18 Minutes and 22 Seconds later...

Hmmm. My point on ten Doeschate is that his batting averages have been vastly inflated through playing years of associate cricket against teams such as Namibia and Kenya. For example, 4 out of his 16 first class centuries came just in the Intercontinental Cup in 2006. Yes it takes a good batsman to do that, but the opposition wasn't that strong.

I'd probably put him, in your list, between Duminy and Guptill.

Dug up his FC & you're right to an extent so lowering him to 1350

For Essex
Matches Innings	Notouts	Runs	Highest	Average	Balls	SR	100s	50s
65	 97	11	3273	159*	38.05	5044	64.89	7	16

For Netherlands
8	12	3	1285	259*	142.78			7	1


Untraced
6	5	1	294		73.5			2	0

NOTE : A couple or all of these "untraced" matches could be for Western Province which is the only other "major team" Ten Doeschate has been listed to have played for on FC level.


While tracing Doeschate, I also dug up blue-eyed-boy Morgan's FC record for Middlesex so I'm also lowering him (inspite of his wonderful hundred in the 1st Test ), may be he'll get better within the game automatically or I'll raise him. I think a "potential rating" would've come in handy for a lot of very talented youngsters where you could just set a moderate rating at the start of their careers & also set a "potential rating" much higher up which they MAY reach several years into the game through experience & technique training.

Morgan for Middlesex
Matches Innings	Notouts	Runs	Highest	Average	Balls	SR	100s	50s

37	 65	8	1815	137*	31.84	3895	46.6	3	10


Morgan for Ireland
8	13	2	639		58.09			2	2

 

[hedger_14]

I was only using Trott as an example anyway. I was just saying Yuvraj was rated too high.

 

[enigma]

I was only using Trott as an example anyway. I was just saying Yuvraj was rated too high.

Well, Trott's example stands for pretty much everyone else on that list who MAY BE a better batter than Yuvraj, doesn't it ? (while some simply aren't good enough to be rated higher) That they MAY turn out to be better than him (on statistical front) in the FUTURE but haven't YET played enough to justify putting them higher than him. I'd agree that he probably isn't worth 1400, certainly not on his last 1 year's performance anyway but if I lower him then I'll have to lower everyone else around & below him as well & rating some of them higher than him mightn't have enough justification. Could you possibly point to where you'd like to see him & name the two players above & below him with some reasoning largely based on statistics (as opposed to "value") as Imager36 did for Ten Doeschate? And as you can see, I realized I'd made an error in rating Ten Doeschate so I corrected it.

 

[Chewie]

The problem with not taking into account perceived ability comes when considering domestic players. The standards of domestic competition are extremely varied in some countries, with some having a good balance between bat and ball, and players are on a reasonably level playing field (i.e. New Zealand, England, Australia), compared to countries where there is a wide range of ability (India, South Africa), which boosts players statistics.

 

[enigma]

The problem with not taking into account perceived ability comes when considering domestic players. The standards of domestic competition are extremely varied in some countries, with some having a good balance between bat and ball, and players are on a reasonably level playing field (i.e. New Zealand, England, Australia), compared to countries where there is a wide range of ability (India, South Africa), which boosts players statistics.

Well, I'm not saying we shouldn't consider perceived ability at all but rather we should limit its weightage to a reasonable level at the international level. Of course, FC statistics & their meaning differs vastly in different countries like an English/kiwi FC Batsman averaging 35 may be just as good or better than an Indian/Pakistani FC batsman averaging 45 while an Indian/Pakistani pacer averaging 30 may be just as good or better than an English/Kiwi pacer averaging 25 & there, of course, perceived ability will have to be brought into the assessment & considering I've rated Kohli who averages 57 in FC (or Akmal/Raina 46/46 for that matter) & Morgan who averages 38 in FC (32 actually, as you can see) pretty much at the same level (considering neither has played much International cricket) should testify for the fact that I do consider perceived ability as well as the differences at FC level (& international level as well where applicable), but what I do disagree with is rating FC performers higher than established Internationals & there I feel perceived ability of FC player shouldn't be TOO MUCH of a factor in the assessment or letting one player's perceived ability overshadowing another player's actual performances at the International level (Sangakkara/Ponting).

By the way, I did WI yesterday, that was pretty easy, Ban is next on the radar, you can take up Zim if you're done with the others, I don't fancy African names that much anyways , especially after Sri Lanka :crying

 

[Chewie]

hahaha I remember doing it for the older versions. I did SL and Zimbabwe near the start because they had the least players. Turned out that it took longer doing them than the other countries

I haven't had time to do England, India or Pakistan yet, I'll do one or two today though.

 

[Chewie]

I've just realised that with the new patch coming out in a few days, some of these ratings might have changed.

Hopefully, the only ones that have changed are the ones that were posted in the thread over at Childish Things, so we should be able to see which ones might have changed and update those.

 

[hedger_14]

Another very overrated South African, you have missed is Ethan O'Reilly who has a bowling rating of 605. You might want to edit that.

 

[Chewie]

Wow that is amazingly low. I'll do it in my next update, which won't be until I've completed the Excel document.

I've done England and am halfway through India.