I’m going to try and create a match-by-match thread for the IPL with some data from each match, and some thoughts after each match as well. After each match I’ll add on more to this thread - hope you find it interesting…

Match 1: CSK beat MI by 5 wickets (4 balls to spare).
Toss - yet another win for Dhoni. I read earlier somewhere else he has won 19 out of his last 24 tosses for CSK. There’s only one thing better than being a genius, and that’s being a lucky genius.

Boundary Count: MI 15.8%, CSK 18.1%. CSK with an easy win in the boundary count, also scoring one more six.
Dots: MI 33.3%, CSK 31.0%. Not much difference, but another win for CSK.

8 overs of spin were bowled in each innings - CSK took 3-63 off theirs, MI took 2-73 from theirs despite Krunal Pandya & Rahul Chahar having strong long-term economy. Negative effects of dew?

PP - CSK 37/2, MI 51/2. CSK were behind at this stage before catching up in the death overs. Could this be -ve effect of MI picking 2 overseas PP specialists who have mediocre death numbers? In otherwise balanced squad, one area where they could perhaps have recruited better.

Other thoughts - Smart from Dhoni pushing LH bat up order to target Krunal knowing he had a death over left. 18(6) from S Curran match-winning & showed value of an extreme high SR cameo - something I’ve pushed for years. All bowlers/All-Rounders should strive to achieve this.

Mumbai missed Hardik’s bowling. Forced them to stick with 5 bowlers who may not have always suited the situations they bowled in (this may have happened anyway). As said, I like their squad in general but they really need another death bowler to back up Bumrah in this phase.

Match 2: DC beat KXIP in super over.

Where do we even start!

Basic data:-

Boundary %: DC 15.8%, KXIP 15.0%.
Dot %: DC 42.5%, KXIP 41.7%.

Unsurprising that the match was so tight with these figures. Dot % pretty high for both teams. Boundary % both mediocre.

Both teams struggled up front in their innings before pulling it back. DC 13-3 after 4 overs. KXIP 35-4 after 6.3 overs.

Both teams have some depth - probably helped. E.g. R Ashwin at 8 for DC, Jordan at 8 for KXIP.

DC lost 3 wickets in PP but effects of this are a lot worse if you only bat to 6 & have a bowler who can bat at 7. They had extra depth plus a hitter in Pant still to bat, so didn't need to panic.

Instead of putting out general stats, people should be more mindful of this.

Key innings - pretty obvious here. Stoinis & Agarwal.

Being honest, I didn't think Stoinis had a 53(21) coming in down the order in him. Fair play to him. Will be interesting to see how he backs this up.

Took key wickets in 20th over as well. MOTM performance.

Agarwal virtually single-handedly hauled KXIP towards their target off 89(60) - absolute gem of an innings.

However, you can play a gem of an innings and still not play the match situation, which is what he looked to have done here. Why not just hit it into a gap for a single?

It's fine to appreciate his innings & also criticise at the end for his dismissal.

Watched a ton of Blast also this year & clarity of thought is so often not there for players in critical situations - this can be improved so much in T20 cricket around the world - it's just basic

Failing to get a single in one of the last three balls with a set batsman and capable rotator at the crease is an extremely unlikely scenario.

You can complain about the 'one short' but this really shouldn't have mattered - just get a single!

Finally, super over - hate the 2 wicket rule. Just hit and hit and hit.

The 2 wicket rule ruined the super over as a contest. I'm not sure how DC won this match, but they somehow managed it.

Match 3: RCB beat SRH by 10 runs.

Basic data:-

Boundary %: RCB 14.2%, SRH 14.2%.
Dot %: RCB 30.0%, SRH 40.0%.

Identical boundary %, major difference in the teams was RCB playing markedly less dot balls with the bat.

Padikkal and ABDV the obvious stars for RCB with the bat. I had full faith in Padikkal after making him RCBs player to watch a few days ago at https://twitter.com/SAAdvantage/status/1307271213278953472.

Also wrote him in detail in my book - was great to see him start the tournament like this.

ABDV rotated extremely well. Just a handful of dots in a 30 ball innings, only scored 28/51 runs via boundaries. Probably a bit different to his usual innings but it was superb.

Perhaps a bit of a strategy departure from the new regime at SRH to not pick a more frontline 5th bowler. Unsure trying to get 4 overs out of M Marsh/Shankar/Sharma is a great strategy moving forward.

Wonder how long it will take them to play Samad or Virat Singh as batters?

Stunning collapse from SRH saw them go from 121-2 to 153 ao. Pretty inexperienced middle order with the bat maybe cost them? I don't blame Pandey 34(33) much - when he was out they needed 75 from 8 overs with 8 wickets in hand - very gettable with set Bairstow at the crease.

RCB's main pace options cost 106 in 11.4 overs. And that was with Saini going 2-25 from 4. Despite winning, this has been a historical problem and still looks a problem for the franchise to solve.

Seems strange not to pick Morris having spent all that money on him...

Out of the last few IPLs, the year that RCB had much better overall bowling economy they bowled a ton of spin. I wonder how viable that strategy might be moving forward for them.

Finally, I also wonder how these teams will look to address the potential balance issues in their team moving forward. I'd be surprised if both teams had the same XI fairly consistently moving forward.

Match 4: RR beat CSK by 16 runs.

Basic data:-

Boundary %: RR 21.7%, CSK 20.8%.
Dot %: RR 28.3%, CSK 29.2%.

Narrow win on both metrics for RR, also scored one more six and obtained 4 more extras.

Toss: Yet another win for Dhoni. Big advantage to chase at a small venue in dewy conditions.

Boundary % rose in a small venue - very much expected. Scoring metrics for both teams (high boundary %, low dot %) also logically high.

Sanju Samson man of the match. 74(32) a complete game-changer & it's worth noting the value of sixes on his 200+SR - he hit 9 sixes and just one four.

Many T20 batters have a huge bias towards fours (eg 13% fours, 3% sixes) - Samson's innings shows value of opposite approach.

Jofra Archer a very close second best - smashing Lungi Ngidi for four consecutive sixes in the final over and taking 1-26 with the ball when every other bowler in his team went for 9+ an over would probably be enough to win the award on a regular basis.

I've said it before and I'll say it again here. The value of a bowler who can come in during the last few overs and smash a few boundaries at a 200+ SR cannot be understated. An area where all bowlers should look to upskill & will be of benefit to them & their teams.

CSK's chase was weird. They got within 16 but from an early stage it never really seemed that they were ever going to chase RR's total, or go all out attack to chase it. Both Du Plessis and latterly, Dhoni, started very slowly and looked to catch up - cannot do that chasing 216

A few people have speculated on the reasons why. If a team knows they can't chase, maybe NRR is useful (e.g. not taking a complete thrashing is much better than losing by 50+ runs).

Another explanation that I've seen on here is that Dhoni valued getting some batting practice because the expected value gained from that is > expected winning % in this particular match from the point he came in to bat.

That's some pretty high level stuff there if that is the case (and I don't think the thought would cross the mind of many players) but I wouldn't want to rule out this explanation either.

Match 5: MI beat KKR by 49 runs.

Basic data:-

Boundary %: MI 18.3%, KKR 16.7%.
Dot %: MI 30.8%, KKR 45.8%.

Small win on Boundary % for MI, huge win on dot %. They obtained 9 more extras as well.

MI got their first win of the tournament after losing the opening match to CSK - this was the first match for KKR and there's a lot to take back to the drawing board.

Firstly, I've made the point in my book previously that it is ok to have a high dot % if you have enough boundary hitting capability in your team.

KKR's dot % was very high, but you can overcome this and hit 170+ scores with 20+ boundaries. Unfortunately they didn't -> 146/9.

Their chase was - in my opinion - very poorly paced.

Both Gill & Narine had <100SR innings opening and coming in at 5 at 71-3 after 10.1 overs, Eoin Morgan hit 16(20) with 12 dots. Russell 11(11) with 6 dots coming in at 6.

Russell came in at a worse stage than Morgan but both innings were of negative expectation. At 71-3 (Morgan came in) after 61 balls, KKR needed 12.71 RPO - can't afford a slow start. By the time he got out they needed 95 from 26 balls - basically impossible.

This is approach is also worth general discussion. Some players seem to think that playing ~ run a ball 15 ball type innings to get set is sensible - thinking it's a risk averse strategy.

I actually think its more risky, because if you get out you have cost your team greatly.

Conversely, MI's scorecard showed the value of some fairly brief but high SR innings - not worried so much about playing yourself in. Tiwary 21(13), Pollard 13(7) etc batting around Rohit Sharma 80(54) and Suryakumar Yadav 47(28).

Will be interesting to see if KKR make changes for their next match. Wouldn't mind seeing Nagarkoti given a chance.

Also not a fan of a non-bowling number 7 (e.g. Naik in their team here) unless they are an out and out hitter - Naik's SMA numbers suggest he's unlikely to be.

Profiling players like this is actually pretty easy and can be done at a number of levels in a number of competitions. If you're hitting 15% boundaries in SMA you're going to need to be on an absurdly steep upward curve to be able to hit 20% boundaries in IPL, etc...

KKR also could think about using Nitish Rana's bowling a lot more for specific match-ups. He has decent numbers at SMA level and could be useful in certain scenarios.

Match 6: KXIP beat RCB by 97 runs.

Basic data:-

Boundary %: KXIP 23.3%, RCB 12.7%.
Dot %: KXIP 27.5%, RCB 52.0%.

A resounding defeat for RCB via both scoring metrics. They batted 20 more dots in 18 fewer balls than KXIP - a huge problem for them.

I think RCB have the potential to be better this year than in recent years but their team structure gives me a headache.

One solution would be to ask ABDV to keep so Moeen can come in to replace Philippe. This gives them flexibility, all-round ability & huge spin-hitting threat

Morris for Steyn could be another option. The RCB all-rounder options also give me a headache. Dube doesn't look a +EV 5th bowler in my view, while Sundar is a front-line spinner who is a capable batsman (continued).

However the problem with capable batsmen in T20 is that they need to be a boundary-hitting threat. If you come in at 6-7 - where death-hitting skills are usually required - you must have the ability to regularly hit 18%+ boundaries.

Teams often haven't got their heads around this in T20. They recruit/select all-rounders who can bat, but who can't necessarily play a 'hitter' role - but then still bat them at 6/7! This makes no sense & how you deal with their batting should be rationalised before recruitment

Anyway, back to the match. One final thought. After being released by RCB (who retained Sarfaraz Khan instead - let's not forget) this match must have been satisfying for KL Rahul who hit 132* - outscoring RCB's entire team + extras by 23 runs...

Match 7: DC beat CSK by 44 runs.

Basic data:-

Boundary %: DC 17.5%, CSK 10.8%.
Dot %: DC 30.0%, CSK 38.3%

Comprehensive win for DC on both metrics - particularly boundary %. You won't win many matches with a 10.8% boundary percentage...

A 10.8% boundary percentage in conjunction with almost 40% dots got CSK exactly what they should have got - a weak chase in response to a solid target.

I'm not sure why there was a seeming lack of intent in the chase, but I wonder whether age is catching up with a few players.

While it's difficult to draw many conclusions yet, it's worth wondering how much CSK overperformed in the last two seasons by winning a lot of tosses & working out that they should bowl a ton of spin at home quicker than their opposition managed to work that one out.

Prithvi Shaw impressed with 64(43) for DC opening the batting. He hit 9 fours and 1 six, which I wanted to mention as I noted his extreme bias towards hitting fours in my book.

Match 8: KKR beat SRH by 7 wickets.

Basic data:-

Boundary %: SRH 10.0%, KKR 16.7%.
Dot %: SRH 33.3%, KKR 33.3%.

There's a lot to discuss with this match...

In his post-match interview, David Warner mentioned the high number of dots played by SRH batsmen. Actually 33.3% isn't that bad - the main issue was caused (as it usually is when teams hit low scores) by a really low boundary %. 10% batting first losing 4 wickets is unacceptable

Two innings heavily influenced this boundary percentage count

3 boundaries in 30 balls from Warner
2 boundaries in 31 balls from Saha

5 boundaries in over half a team's batting resources is asking an extreme amount from the other batsmen to hit a 165+ score (possibly par?)

I'm not sure you need Pandey & Saha in the middle overs. From a small sample of SMA data, Garg also looks more towards rotation dynamic than that of an aggressive boundary-hitter.

Pick your one anchor (probably Pandey) and surround them with boundary hitters.

If you pick three players towards a rotation dynamic you don't need Rashid Khan at number 8. He can bat higher or float. If you pick more boundary-hitters then you need that extra depth.

I would look to structure up the SRH batting rather differently...

A lot of positives for KKR - they ditched the extra non-bowling batter (Naik) at 7 which I like - but they look like having a long tail with Cummins at 7.

This wasn't exposed in this match but with a quite aggressive batting line-up, they might want to look at more depth.

Having said that, looking at their squad, I'm not sure how I would approach this situation. At least one more all-rounder picked up at auction probably would have been a positive & could be an issue which manifests itself for KKR this tournament.

However, a huge positive for them to see Cummins back to his best & also Nagarkoti getting game time. CV Varun another positive - I expect him to be pretty economical at this level. Their bowling group gives them a lot of flexibility - capable of bowling 12+ spin or pace overs.

Match 9: RR beat KXIP by 4 wickets.

Basic data:-

Boundary %: KXIP 25.8%, RR 25.6%.
Dot %: KXIP 25.0%, RR 35.0%.

These scoring metrics don't even begin to tell a small amount of the story of this match...

You'd think, by looking at the boundary % and dot % that this would be an easy win for KXIP - and in most cases this would be correct.

However, RR hit 18 sixes to KXIP's 11 - so they scored around 15 more in boundary runs.

I've written before (and do in detail in my book) about the value of boundary-hitting, and indeed six-hitting (it's why Andre Russell has a higher SR than Sunil Narine despite similar boundary % figures), this extract is a good example:-

http://www.sportsanalyticsadvantage.com/cricket-ipl-strategy-factors-influencing-a-batsman-s-strike-rate

Rajasthan's batsmen faced 41 dots in 117 balls (35%). This is actually a higher dot % than SRH (142-4 in 20 overs) managed in their innings against KKR on Saturday - as I have said many times, to hit a big total, avoiding dots = nice to have, hitting high boundary % = mandatory.

Basically, the issues of dot balls decreases when boundary percentages are high. It's basically impossible to hit 180+ totals if you don't hit 16.67% boundaries (1 in 6 balls) as an absolute minimum requirements.

It stuns me that teams can't get their heads around this.

Anyway, fair play to RR who took a completely different approach to CSK and SRH in recent matches - the RR approach is the way forward, in my view.

The match focused on a few major innings, and while Mayank Agarwal & Sanju Samson continued their strong start to the tournament, two other innings are worth focusing on...

Given Sharjah's high scoring nature, KL Rahul's 69(54) opening for KXIP looked below par & it proved to be.

431 non-extra runs were scored in 237 balls (SR of 181.86).

Based on this average scoring rate, par for his balls faced would have been 98 = 29 higher than his total.

The other pivotal innings in this match was Rahul Tewatia. I could write an entire article on this innings (and someone probably will!) and a few tweets probably won't do it justice, but here goes...

Firstly, I was appalled by the commentary during his innings. Not just criticising a player doing his best, but the extreme lack of player knowledge and scorning of any tactic which didn't comply with conventional 'wisdom' was clearly apparent on the commentary I listened to.

In addition to this, there was clear 'aftertiming' - where someone criticises something now having what they consider to be knowledge after an event as happened.

If you don't like the strategy - call it out as soon as it happens. Don't wait for it to fail.

During Tewatia's innings, I tweeted the following, which I would stand by regardless of the outcome. Yes, it aged well, but I'd have stood by it no matter what. https://twitter.com/SAAdvantage/status/1310267881243004930?s=20

For this match, RR picked an extra bowler -> longer tail. Pushing an aggressive boundary-hitter (and strong 6-hitter) whose wicket may not have mattered much up the order after 9 overs actually makes a lot of sense, particularly at Sharjah. Also get a left-right combo from it.

Tewatia has scored 17.1% boundaries in the IPL between 2017-2019, but this probably undervalues his boundary-hitting upside. In the last three years in SMA he has hit 23.9% boundaries - an elite-level figure for that competition. In addition, he's hit almost 7% sixes.

7% sixes is a very strong figure regardless, but at a ground like Sharjah, expectation would be even more. It's not difficult to see him having double-digit % for six-hitting expectation.

Realistically, it's only likely that Tewatia's promotion was - given the match situation - one spot higher (in favour of Uthappa).

My numbers would give Tewatia a higher boundary-hitting expectation than both Riyan Parag and Shreyas Gopal.

Given the LR combo benefit plus a potential desire to hold Uthappa back to try and finish the innings, the move to promote Tewatia made a lot of sense - as I tweeted at the time.

Such a move defied conventional 'wisdom' but probably by not as much as many people thought. My view is a lot of people were influenced by results-orientated commentating by ex-players who probably didn't have any idea about Tewatia's lower-level boundary-hitting data.

I've watched a lot of T20 cricket but Tewatia's innings, to me, was arguably the most memorable innings that I've ever seen given the circumstances - the struggle at the start but emphatic finish.

An innings that many T20 fans around the world will likely never forget.

However, it does show how difficult it is to have 'innovation' accepted by commentators & the media.

Is it any surprise that captains and coaches are reticent to innovate when it will be heavily criticised if it fails, by results-orientated people with the benefit of hindsight?

This is perhaps a reason why cricket is so far behind other sports when it comes to the implementation of analytics.

There's probably a lot of fear among the industry to take a route which will be criticised if it doesn't work out well - an attitude which holds the sport back.

Match 10: RCB beat MI in super over.

Basic data:-

Boundary %: RCB 22.5%, MI 18.3%.
Dot %: RCB 33.3%, MI 27.5%.

Some really interesting talking points just from this basic scoring data.

Very different scoring dynamics for each team - MI's batters played out 7 fewer dots, but scored 5 less boundaries. So how did they tie the match?

Simple - they scored 16 sixes compared to RCB's 10 - Ishan Kishan scored 9 himself.

Six-hitting is one of the most undervalued areas of T20 cricket. A few people are waking up to it now, but most teams still aren't.

As I said in a previous tweet in this thread, it's why Andre Russell has such a high strike rate - his six percentage is huge.

Kishan was magnificent in the chase, and so was Kieron Pollard (in the second half of his innings). Pollard in particular tried to take the chase as deep as possible before attacking - seems to be a preferred tactic of players although I'm not so convinced of its merits.

At one point Pollard was 6(8) so to hit 60(24) was incredible - but also leaves the question that if he had tried to accelerate a little earlier, would MI have actually won the match?

Impressed with several young players for RCB - particularly Padikkal and Sundar. I've written about them both at length as having extremely high potential, and it was nice to see RCB have more faith in Sundar's bowling.

Having said that, I'm still not a fan of RCB's balance. I think Moeen Ali would be a big help in this respect. Death bowling still looks a concern - as it has done for a number of years.

Match 11: SRH beat DC by 15 runs.

Basic data:-

Boundary %: SRH 12.5%, DC 11.7%.
Dot %: SRH 27.5%, DC 39.2%.

Not much difference in boundary-hitting. SRH with a huge edge on dot avoidance with the bat -> most of the difference between the two teams.

As I mentioned in the analysis earlier in this thread for SRH's last match, Warner mentioned about trying to reduce dot ball %. Their percentage in this match was excellent and they also showed strong running intent running a number of tight twos (Warner/Bairstow combination).