<
>

Why Nabi's contribution pipped Warner's

Jonny Bairstow, David Warner and Mohammad Nabi were the three standout performers for Sunrisers Hyderabad in their win over Royal Challengers Bangalore. How do their contributions compare against each other? Smart Stats reveals the answer.

Bairstow's 114 off 56 balls gave him a contribution percentage of 34.20, Warner's unbeaten 55-ball 100 was worth 22.80, while Nabi's 4 for 11 in four overs gave him a value of 23.90, marginally higher than Warner. These percentages take into account the batting and bowling performances of every player in the game, with the sum of these percentages in the game for all 22 players equalling 100.

Here is why Bairstow topped the charts.

While both batsmen started similarly - Bairstow was on 36 off 25 compared to Warner's 35 off 23 at the eight-over mark - Bairstow then made his move through the middle overs, and gave the innings the impetus which ensured they finished with an above-par score. Between overs 8.1 and 16, Bairstow slammed 78 off 30 balls (strike rate 260), compared to Warner's 34 off 18 (strike rate 189). Overall, Bairstow's 114 was actually wortyh 156 according to our Smart Runs calculation, while Warner's 100 was worth 122.

While chasing 232 was always going to be near-impossible, Nabi reduced it to a no-contest very early, taking key wickets and keeping it extremely tight. The wicket of AB de Villiers was obviously the highlight, and was worth 1.85 wickets. His first three wickets were worth 4.1 wickets, while the fourth scalp of Shivam Dube, when the game was pretty much decided, gave him an overall wicket value of 4.7.

Add the Smart Economy Rate of 0.75 - his 11 runs conceded were worth only three - and his overall contribution of 23.9% was just enough to pip Warner's value of 22.8. Together, these three players contributed 80.9% of the total contributions - batting and bowling - in the match, while the remaining 19 players together contributed 19.1%.

Also, overall, Sunrisers Hyderabad's players had a total score of 79.7 (the values are slightly lower than 80.9 because of negative contributions from a few players), while Royal Challengers scored a paltry 20.3. That, in nutshell, tells the story of the game.