Averages or Price?

[Frosty Ember]

When looking at youth players, what is more important, the averages or the price of them?

[patrickF690]

Average is more inportant to but look he dosent have meny not outs that will make his average bigger

[Isura]

Second XI average is more important. Age is also more important than price. Older players are often more expensive, but a 19 year old with 50 average is better than a 23 year old with a 55 average.

[Johncladio]

Second XI average is more important. Age is also more important than price. Older players are often more expensive, but a 19 year old with 50 average is better than a 23 year old with a 55 average.
I agree with u.

[the_trademarc]

Second XI average is more important. Age is also more important than price. Older players are often more expensive, but a 19 year old with 50 average is better than a 23 year old with a 55 average.

Price wise this is true, however, a 23 year old that averages 55 over a number of games, means that he has already been trained quite a fair bit, so he will make more of an impact in your side, whereas a 19-year old would need to take a few seasons to hone in their skills and eventually become more consistent.

Depends at the end of the day, what you're after in a youth player. Immediate impact or long-term success.

[Liquifier]

When looking at youth players, what is more important, the averages or the price of them?

The people in this forum have it spot-on, to add a little more (and expand on what someone already said), look at their in-depth batting statistics. How many innings, not outs and 100s they have scored to achieve their average. Price often seems to only reflect their age (i.e. 23 year old = more $ than a 19 year old).

A kid with an average of 54, but only 540 runs in 14 innings with 4 not outs and 1 x 100 is far less reliable and worthy of your hard earned $ than a kid with an average of 49 that has 1470 runs in 32 innings with 2 not outs and 5 x 100s.

Same method goes with bowlers, look at games played, wickets per game (i.e. divide total wickets by number of games played), 5wi and economy rate.

[Johncladio]

The people in this forum have it spot-on, to add a little more (and expand on what someone already said), look at their in-depth batting statistics. How many innings, not outs and 100s they have scored to achieve their average. Price often seems to only reflect their age (i.e. 23 year old = more $ than a 19 year old).

A kid with an average of 54, but only 540 runs in 14 innings with 4 not outs and 1 x 100 is far less reliable and worthy of your hard earned $ than a kid with an average of 49 that has 1470 runs in 32 innings with 2 not outs and 5 x 100s.

Same method goes with bowlers, look at games played, wickets per game (i.e. divide total wickets by number of games played), 5wi and economy rate.

Ya what u mean is right.

[the_trademarc]

The people in this forum have it spot-on, to add a little more (and expand on what someone already said), look at their in-depth batting statistics.

That was me! :p:D

[qaisfarooq]

i generally tend to took at batting averages and the no. of 100's scored because i want individuals who can score big runs in games...

[mclaren007]

some times price is important than average

[qaisfarooq]

some times price is important than average

i disagree, specially in the case of youth players...