See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/305190444

Application of Markowitz Model for Analyzing the Performance of Cricket

Teams in Indian Premier League

Article · January 2015

DOI: 10.1177/0972622520150104

CITATIONS READS
0 133

3 authors, including:

Hemanta Saikia Dibyojyoti Bhattacharjee

Assam Agricultural University Assam University
23 PUBLICATIONS   80 CITATIONS    58 PUBLICATIONS   99 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Finance View project

T20 Cricket View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Hemanta Saikia on 03 February 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ISSN (Print) : 0972-6225
Metamorphosis, Vol14(1), 14-24, January- June 2015 ISSN (Online) : 2348-9324
--------------------------------------------------------
Application of Markowitz Model for
Analyzing the Performance of Cricket
Teams in Indian Premier League
Ranjit Singh 1, Hemanta Saikia 2* and Dibyojyoti Bhattacharjee3

Abstract
This study tries to identify the dominant teams of the first five seasons of IPL using Markowitz model of portfolio manage-
ment. An average composite performance score (ACPS) is developed based on two prime skills of the game (i.e. batting and
bowling) that can be used to quantify the performance of a cricket team. The value of ACPS is considered as the return of
a team and the standard deviation of the composite performance score of the team across different matches as the risk
associated with team performance. The study also tries to explore if it is the dominating team that tops the list in the tour-
nament. As an outcome of the study, it is found that Chennai Super Kings (CSK) and Delhi Daredevils (DD) had dominated
the first three seasons of IPL. The next two seasons were dominated by Deccan Chargers (DC). A dominating team is ex-
pected to be the favorite team of the tournament. Such a team is expected to get more support from the audience.

Keywords: Cricket, Markowitz Model, Performance Measurement, Portfolio Management, Sports

1. Introduction form of cricket with 20 over per innings was proposed

Cricket is an outdoor game played with a ball and bat. It
is played in a specially prepared area in the center of the
field called pitch. The game is played under certain rules
and regulations between two teams of eleven players. Out
of the two teams, one team bat first and tries to score
as many runs as possible without losing their available
resources. The available resources for team batting first
are 10 wickets and certain number of overs (in limited
over cricket). On the other hand, the team that bowls first
aspires to dismiss the opponent's batsmen under different
rules until the batting side loses all their resources.
At present, three versions of the game of cricket that
have been played in international level viz., Test cricket,
One-day international (ODI) and Twenty20. Twenty20
by Stuart Robertson in 2001. He was the then market-
ing manager of England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB).
Later, this format of cricket was called as T20 cricket. It
attracted huge crowd and became popular as it could be
finished in three hours' time. This format of cricket does
not require the day-long commitment of spectators as in
ODI9• Recognizing the popularity of Twenty20 cricket;
International Cricket Council (ICC) organized the first
Twenty20 World Cup in 2007at South Africa which was
won by India. The success of inaugural Tewnty20 world
cup has made it clear that this form of cricket is ready to
bring huge excitement for its spectators. Board of Control
for Cricket in India (BCCI) also recognizes the prospects
associated with this format of the game. They responded
to it very briskly by starting the Indian Premier League

--------------------------------------------------------·-··-· .
1MBA-IT and MS-CLIS Division Indian Institute of Information Technology Deoghat,
Jhalwa Allahabad-211 012 Uttar Pradesh, India; ranjitsingh 13@gmail.com
2School of Business, Kaziranga University, Karaikhowa, NH-37, Jorhat- 785006 Assam, India; h.saikia456@gmail.com

3 0epartment of Business Administration, Jawaharlal Nehru School of Management Studies,

Assam University, Silchar - 788011, Assam, India; djb.stat@gmail.com

*Author for correspondence


(IPL). Lalti Modi, the Commissioner of IPL, hired the
service of International Management Group (IMG) to
fine tune the structure of the league 25 • In April 2008, the
first season of IPL was played with eight teams. These
teams were· owned by franchisees. They were named as
Chennai Super Kings (CSK), Deccan Chargers (DC),
Delhi Daredevils (DD), Kings XI Punjab (KXIP), Kolkata
Knight Riders (KKR), Mumbai Indians (MI), Rajasthan
Royals (RR) and Royal Challengers Bangalore (RCB).
The franchisee formed their teams from a collection of
international, national and local players 12 • The existence
of international players in the teams along with national
players added talent and glamour to the teams. It was the
first time in cricket where the teams as well as players
both were auctioned. Millions of dollars were swapped in
this auction process within an hour. Though sustainabil-
ity of this league was questioned in the cricketing world,
yet BCCI went ahead with its plan. The players gave their
optimum performance and the spectators applauded itl 1•
As the franchisees invest for their teams in IPL, they
would expect some returns from their teams. The expected
return from the teams of the respective franchisee would
be to win the championship. It is directly allied to perfor-
mance of the teams. The performances of the teams can
be measured based on two essential cricketing skills viz.
batting and bowling. The motivation for considering IPL
as a source of data for the study is its suitability in terms of
data volume. The amount of information generated by the
tournament within a short span of time (approx. 60 days)
is exceptionally practical for implementing Markowitz
model. Also it is played at around the same season every
year and in the same grounds, so the seasonal impact on
playing conditions in the different IPL seasons can be
ignored. However, the salaries offered to the cricketers in
IPL were valid for three years only. Therefore, at the begin-
ning of the fourth season of IPL, a fresh bidding of players
took place. After this all the teams changed in terms of
player compositions. It has already mentioned that eight
teams were participated in the first three seasons of IPL.
In the fourth and fifth IPL seasons, two additional teams
were joined the league called Kochi Tuskers Kerela (KTK)
and Pune Warriors India (PWI).
There are some studies which have attempted to
relate the financial management theories with the dif-
ferent aspects of sports. In a way to standard assessment
of the performance of financial assets, Barr and Kantor 1
consider a 'risk-return' analysis to monitor the batting
performance of batsmen in limited over cricket (i.e. ODI).
Vol 14 (1) | January-June 2015 | www.metamorphosisjournal.com 
Ranjit Singh, Hemanta Saikia and Dibyojyoti Bhattacharjee
In place of return and risk, they have used the strike
rate and probability of getting out in any particular ball
respectively. Viewing players as securities and the team as
a portfolio, Damodaran6 demonstrated the use of stochas-
tic dominance rules which is normally used in investment
management, to analyze the ODI batting performance
of Indian cricketers during 1985 to 2005. The stochastic
dominance rules help to describe the utility of a batsman
in any given tournament. The findings of the study can be
converted into visually ~ppealing graphics for the televi-
sion medium. Chen and Chen 4 found that there is positive
impact on stock returns of the parent companies when the
teams owned by them qualified for the final champion-
ship series in a baseball tournament. They further stated
that, the parent company's stock returns became much
more if they win the tournament. Similarly, Sauer29 found
that daily stock return of a country is lowered if the coun-
try's team be defeated in the football world cup. Edmans7
investigated the stock market reaction by psychologi-
cal evidence of a strong link between soccer outcomes
and investors attitude. They found a significant market
decline after soccer losses and moreover they observed
a loss effect after international cricket, rugby and base-
ball games. A very few works are noted in cricket, where
overall team performance is measured and studies related
to dominant teams in cricket never enriched our search.
Thus, this study makes an attempt to fill up that gap and
tries to identify the dominant teams based on the data
from first five seasons of IPL using Markowitz model. The
study also tries to explore if it is the dominating team that
tops the list in the tournament or are there some other
factors that lead a team to be in the top irrespective of
being the dominating team.
The next section of this paper describes the Markowitz's
modern portfolio theory including the assumptions,
without introducing its mathematical model. Section 3
briefly explains how a cricket team can be considered as a
portfolio of players. The computational procedure for per-
formance measurement of the cricket teams are explained
in section 4. In this section, a composite performance
score is developed for a cricket team through batting and
bowling performance of the team. This measure is later
used to compute expected return and risk of the cricket
teams. The results and discussions based on methodology
are presented in section 5 of the paper. Finally, section
6 and section 7 of the paper contains respectively the
concluding remarks and discussion of the practical impli-
-
cations along with some future areas of this research.
Metamorphosis | 15
 Application of Markowitz Model for Analyzing the Performance of Cricket Teams in Indian Premier League
2. Markowitz's Modern Portfolio
Theory
In early days, investors were stressed on individually
picking high yielding stocks to earn maximum profit.
If one industry is offering good return then an inves- ·
tor would have invested his/her money in buying stocks
from the same industry. Intuitively it was a highly unwise
act of portfolio management. Markowitz23 was the first
individual to mathematically prove it and had developed
the concept of well-known Modern Portfolio Theory
(MPT).
According to Markowitz23 , portfolio is created by
choosing securities that do not 'move' exactly together.
This model shows the investors a way to reduce their
risk which is called Mean-Variance Model. It is based
on expected returns (i.e. mean) and the standard devia-
tion (i.e. risk) of the various portfolios. The theory suggests
a hypothesis that expected return on a portfolio for a given
amount of portfolio risk is attempted to be maximized or
alternatively, the risk on a given level of expected return is
attempted to be minimized. However, Markowitz23 port-
folio selection contribution to MPT is based on certain
key assumptions. These assumptions are:
a) Portfolio risk is the variability of returns from the
given portfolio.
b) An investor is risk averse.
c) An investor prefers to increase in consumption.
d) The investor's utility function is concave and increasing,
due to his risk aversion and consumption preference.
e) It is single period model of investment.
f) The model assumes rational investor. It means an
investor either maximizes the portfolio return for
a given level of risk or minimizes the risk for a given
level of return.
Based on these assumptions, MPT used mathematical
models to construct portfolio by choosing the quanti-
ties of various securities cautiously by taking mainly into
consideration the price of each security changes in com-
parison to that of every other security in the portfolio24 •
It does not consider the securities individually. Selection
of optimal portfolio depends upon the risk appetite of the
investor. According to the theory, each security has its
own risks and that a portfolio of diverse securities shall be
of lower risk than a single security portfolio. A portfolio
-
that gives maximum return for a given risk, or minimum
16 | Vol 14 (1) | January-June 2015 | www.metamorphosisjournal.com 
risk for given return is an efficient portfolio. Thus, portfo-
lios are selected as follows:
a) From the portfolios that have the same return, the
investor will prefer the portfolio with lower risk, and
b) From the portfolios that have the same risk level, an
investor will prefer the portfolio with higher rate of
return.
Now, if all the portfolios are plotted in a graph by taking
risk on X-axis and return on ¥-axis, then the portfolio
lying on farthest north-west part of the graph will be
called as dominant portfolio. There might be several dom-
inant portfolios. If all the dominant portfolios are joined,
a curve is formed which is called the efficient frontier. All
portfolios that lie below the efficient frontier are not good
enough, because the return would be lower for the given
risk. Portfolios that lie to the right of the efficient frontier
would not be good enough, as there is higher risk for a
given rate of return.
Of late many scholars like Mangram 21 , Vaclavik and
Jablonsky32 , etc. have also worked on the disadvantages
that are lying mainly in strong assumptions of Markowitz
portfolio theory which causes some computational prob-
lems during its practical usage (Vaclavik and Jablonsky, 32 •
For example, the assumption of normality in return dis-
tribution that is closely allied with the use of covariance
and standard deviations in the model enters a systematic
bias in MPT model. Moreover, in reality, the correlation
of financial instruments' return over time cannot be con-
stant. On the other hand, correlation measures the degree
of linear relationship between returns only. Thus, what
would happen if the linear relationship does not exist
between financial instruments' return. Therefore, the
authors Mangram 21 as well as Vaclavik and Jablonsky32
provided certain simplified perspective of Markowitz's
contribution to MPT using efficient computer based
solutions viz., modern financial tools and quadratic pro-
gramming through Microsoft Excel.
3. Cricket Team as a Portfolio of
Players
Cricket is a team game. Every team is a portfolio of players.
A balanced cricket team can be created by considering the
players with varied skills. Some of the players have batting
as their prime skill and score runs for their team. This can
Metamorphosis

be related to investing and making profit in stock market.
On the contrary, some players are good at bowling and
they restrict the opponents from scoring runs, which is
similar to the short selling notion in portfolio manage-
ment. A good cricket team also requires batsmen who
can score runs for the teams even in unfavorable batting
conditions. Such batsmen generally may not have a high
strike rate. This is similar to a security which is having
defensive Beta value. A good portfolio is one that consists
of different kinds of securities. It can protect the value of
portfolio from unforeseen ups and downs in the environ-
ment and economy. Similarly, a good cricket team is one
which is diversified and consists of players having varied
skills that can protect the team in different playing con-
ditions. Furthermore, to familiarize the readers with the
features of MPT and the game of cricket, some analogies
have been illustrated below.
Though individual superlative performances in cricket
often make news headlines yet it is the combined perfor-
mance of the players of the team that keep them in the
winning track. A consistent team is less risky compared to
an inconsistent one. If a performance measure for a cricket
team can be developed then an ideal team is expected
to have a relatively high performance score in all their
matches and match wise variation in their performance
score is expected to be minimum. Numerical measurement
of consistency of a team performance can be calculated by
standard deviations of their performances. Thus, a team
tries to perform as better as possible by keeping its varia-
tions to the minimum or tries to minimize its variations for
a given level of performances. Markowitz23 was the pioneer
who tried to calculate dominant portfolio of assets by using
mean and standard deviation. Since a cricket team is portfo-
lio of players, so a team with highest performance level with
minimum standard deviation given the same performance
level is supposed to dominate the tournament. According
to Markowitz23 , standard deviation of return of a portfolio
is the single appropriate measure of the risk of a portfolio.
He has also emphasized on the portfolio created by choos-
ing securities that do not 'move' exactly together. Similarly
in cricket, a team is made by combining the abilities of play-
ers that is not similar. Someone can bowl well, some can bat
well. Within bowling and batting also there are varied type
of skills like fast bowler, medium pacer and spin bowler etc.
and there are all-rounders: hard hitters etc.
The Markowitz model is based on the expected
returns (i.e. mean) and the standard deviation (i.e. risk)
of the various portfolios. This conception can be gainfully
Vol 14 (1) | January-June 2015 | www.metamorphosisjournal.com 
Ranjit Singh, Hemanta Saikia and Dibyojyoti Bhattacharjee
applied in the context of a cricket team also, if a combined
performance score is considered as expected return of the
team and variations in their combined performance score
is considered as the risk of the team. Thus, a team with
high combined performance score is preferred for a given
level of variation then that of other team. Alternatively, a
team with lower variation is preferred by the investors for
a given level of combined performance score.
Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT) assumes the inves-
tor is risk averse. In case of franchisee based cricket
tournament, a consistent cricket team is preferred by
the investors. Usually the franchisee owners prefer more
cricket to be played by the teams because that will help
them in earning more revenue from various sources. The
franchisees utility functi~n is concave and increasing. This
is due to his risk aversion and consumption preference.
MPT is a single period model of investment, so each
season of IPL is taken as a single period here. The model
also assumes that an investor either maximizes the port-
folio return for a given level of risk or minimizes the risk
for a given level of return. This is equally true for a cricket
team also. Apart from that MPT does not consider the
securities individually. Thus, the individual performances
of crickets are not considered in this study.
From the given backdrop, it is evident that the
Markowitz mean-variance criterion could be applied in
case of cricket team. Further it is also effective in address-
ing the relation between the dominant team and their
final ranking in the tournament.
3.1 Return of the Cricket Team
There are broadly two aspects of team performance in the
game of cricket. One is batting and another is bowling.
The batting and bowling performance of a team can be
measured through traditional performance statistics like
batting average, strike rate, economy rate, etc. But such
measures have different units of measurement. However,
if they can be made unit free, then it is possible to combine
them into a composite score. This composite score can be
considered as a return ofthe cricket team. A detailed discus-
sion on the formulation of the composite score along with
a brief literature review is provided in sub-section 4.1.
3.2 Measuring the Risk of Team
Performance
As suggested by Markowitz23, standard deviation of
-
return of a portfolio is the single appropriate measure of
Metamorphosis | 17
 Application of Markowitz Model for Analyzing the Performance of Cricket Teams in Indian Premier League
the risk of a portfolio. Similarly, standard deviation of the
composite performance scores of a team can provide a
measure of volatility of the team performance. This vola-
tility can be considered as the risk of a team's performance.
Accordingly, the standard deviations of the composite
performance scores of the participating teams in the first ·
five seasons of IPL are calculated.
4. Performance Measure of a
Cricket Team
The methodology that has adopted with respect to
calculating the return of the teams in terms of overall per-
formance and the risk undertaken by the teams is given
below.
Victory of a team in any format of cricket can be
determined based on the batting and bowling perfor-
mance. Most of the performance measures available in
cricket are concerned with the performance of individual
players. However, this study is concerned with the overall
batting and bowling performances of the teams and not
of .the individual players. Thus, batting and bowling per-
formance
. of a team are measured and after . that both are
combined to get the overall performance of a cricket team.
'Il}is aspect of the paper can be considered as an extension
to the available performance measurement in cricket.
: Various common statistical concepts such as ratio and
averages along with traditional performance statistics like
batting and bowling averages and strike rates, economy
rate, etc. are used to measure the performance of the play-
ers in cricket. Existing simple statistical measures are not
judicious in sensing the true ability of players. Therefore,
different authors have developed several measures to
quantify batting and bowling performance of cricketers.
Kimber and Hansford 11 mentioned that the existing bat-
ting average over estimates the actual performance of a
batsman, so they developed an alternative batting aver-
age. Similar problem was addressed by Damodaran6,
Maini and Narayanan22 and Barooah and Mangan 3• They
forwarded some alternate performance measures in this
regard. Barr and Kantor 1 developed another performance
measure for batting by combining batting average with
strike rate. Lemmer13 developed a measure of batting
performance using an exponentially weighted batting
average. For bowling, Lemmer 16 proposed a performance
measure called the combined bowling rate (CBR) which
-
comprises of combining the three traditional bowling
18 | Vol 14 (1) | January-June 2015 | www.metamorphosisjournal.com 
statistics viz. bowling average, economy rate and bowling
strike rate through harmonic mean. This CBR was later
refined by Lemmer 14 by associating wicket weights and
renamed as adjusted combined bowling rateand abbrevi-_
ated it as CBR*.
Apart from batsmen and bowlers in a cricket team, the
players who perform reasonably better as both batsman
and bowler are termed as all-rounders. Similarly, wicket
keepers with considerably better batting skills are preferred
for a balanced cricket team. Therefore, the need was felt
to combine all the different skills of a player into a single
measure. This shall enable comparison between cricketers
with different expertise. Conceiving this concept in mind,
several authors forwarded different combined measures.
Remarkable contributions were made in this issue by
Suleman and Saeed30, Gerber and Sharp8, Beaudoin and
Swartz2, Lewis 20 and Saikia and Bhattacharjee27 •
However, all these measures are player specific rather
than team specific. So, it is necessary to extend some of
the above mentioned performance measures to quan-
tify the overall teams' performance. The two different
measures viz., Batting Performance (BP) and Adjusted
Combined Bowling Rate (CBR *) developed by Lemmer18
and Lemmer 14 respectively, are used to quantify the
overall batting and bowling performance of the cricket
teams. These measures are usually used to quantify the
batting and bowling performance of individual players.
Therefore, both the measures are extended to quantify the
respective performances of entire cricket team. The bat-
ting performance measure (BP) takes into consideration
the match situation against which the runs are scored.
This is done by bringing in global strike rate which is the
strike rate of the entire match (MSR, cf. equation 3). The
reason for selecting CBR * from a host of other measures
of bowling performance is that it considers the strength
of a batsman dismissed by the fielding team. Unlike, all
other measures which consider each dismissed batsman
to be equally important. The main contribution of this
work to existing body ofliterature is how individual play-
ers' performance measure can be aggregated to the overall
teams' performance.
4.1 Batting Performance Measure (BP)
Let Rii be the runs scored by the r"fh team in the J"th match
and Bii be the balls faced by ther"th team in the J"th match.
Then the batting performance of a team in that match is
denoted by,
Metamorphosis
 Ranjit Singh, Hemanta Saikia and Dibyojyoti Bhattacharjee

(1) composite index to compute a teams' composite perfor-

mance score based on the said two significant performance
where, Rii = runs scored by the ,-u. team in the ;-u. match indicators. This is the empirical contribution made in this
SRij = Strike rate of the ,-u. team in the ;-u. match paper.

R
=___.2._x100 (2) 4.3 Composite Performance
Bij
Score of a Team
Match strike rate MSR.J = The composite performance score ( Tii) of ,-u. team in the ;-u.
total no. of runs scored in the match match is defined as
total no. of balls bowled in the entire match ... (6)
R.
x100=-' x100 (3) where, Y..,, = normalized score of the BP,,..
Bj Z ,,. = normalized score of the CBR..,,
w 1 =weight associated with the normalized score
4.2 Bowling Performance Measure (CBR*) of the BP.,,
w2 =weight associated with the normalized score
The combined bowling rate ( CBR *) is used to measure the
of the CBR..,,
bowling performance of the ,-u. team in the ;-u. match and
is given by, Iyenger and Sudarshan 10 (1982) stated that the weights
, vary inversely as the variation in the respective variables.
• , • • Rij
cBR ij = 3Rij 1nv;j + oij + w;j x R.) (4)
This conception has been methodically applied here
I) to determine the weights associated with batting per-
formance (BP) and bowling performance (CBR) of the
where, B,,.. = number of balls bowled by the ,-u. team in the
cricket team. As per their formulation, the weight w1 and
rmatch
w 2 can be expressed as,
0..,, = number of overs bowled by the ,-u. team in the
;-u. match (7)
w;· = sum of weights of the wickets taken by the jth
team in the fh match
Rii'= Adjusted runs conceded by the z-u. team in the where, w1 + w2 = 1 and Cis a normalizing constant that
J"lh match follows
-1
where the adjusted runs of the ,-u. team in the ;-u. match is
defined as c- 1 + 1 (8)
- [ Var(Y.) ~Var(Zn) ]
i I) i f)
(5)

where, RPBii = Runs per ball scored by the z1 h team in the
J"lh match
_ Runs conceded by the i'h team in the j'h match
- Balls bowled by the ith team in the jth match
The choice of the weights in this way would ensure that
the large variation in batting performance of the team
would not unduly dominate the contribution of the bowl-
ing performance or vice-versa 10•

RPBMt Runs per ball scored in the ;"th match 4.4 Normalization
Let X..,, be the observed values of the ,-u. team for the ;:th
Total runs scored in the jth match
match. Since the batting performance indicator BP repre-
Total no. of balls bowled in the jth match sents the positive dimension (i.e. positively associated with
the performance of the team) then it is normalized as
Now to quantify the overall performance of the ,-u. team in
the ;-u. match, it is very important to combine the BPii and y = BP;i - min(BP;i)
(9)

-
CBR*ii values of each team. Thus, the paper developed a '' max(BP;i)- min(BP;i)

Vol 14 (1) | January-June 2015 | www.metamorphosisjournal.com  Metamorphosis | 19

 Application of Markowitz Model for Analyzing the Performance of CricketTeams in Indian Premier League

But the bowling performance indicator of a team sponding to each team. This exercise is repeated for each
(i.e.CBR*) represents the negative dimension because the of the first five IPL seasons separately to identify the dom-
CBR is a reverse measure. A low value of CBR* is consid- inant IPL teams.
ered as good bowling performance of a team. Therefore,
it is normalized as
5. Results and Discussion
z.. = max(CBR';i)-CBR'ii
Based on the equation (7}, the weights of the performance
{10}
'' max(CBR'ij)-min(CBR'ij) indicators for different seasons of IPL are calculated and
This process of normalization helps to limit the perfor- can be seen in Table 1. The standard deviations and aver-
mance indicator values within an interval of 0 and 1, and ages of the team-wise composite scores for all the eight
is always non-negative. teams are provided in Table 2.
The graphical representations of the first five IPL sea-
4.5 Computation of Risk and Return sons that are used to identify the dominant IPL teams can
be seen in Figure 1-5.
At the end of the exercise, as discussed in the previous
From the Figure 1, it is revealed that DO and RR
section, the values of the composite performance score of
emerge clearly as the dominating IPL teams in first
z'lh team in the ;'lh match is reached which is denoted by
season. It means that these teams have given the best
Tii' For computing the risk and return of the z'lh team for
performances at a given level of volatility, since they are
a given season of IPL, the average of that team score is
lying at the farthest North-West corner of the graph. If the
calculated across all the matches. It will be called as the
Average Composite Performance Score (ACPS) of that
team.
Table 1. Batting (BP) and bowling
Thus, ACPS of the z'lh team= AvgJ;i = aj (say) (11) (CBR) weights for different seasons
j
ofiPL
This value provides the expected return of the z'lh team in a
given season ofiPL. Similarly, to compute the overall risk Seasons BP CBR
associated with the z'lh team, the standard deviation of T..1) 2008/IPLl 0.414 0.586
across all the matches is computed by 2009/IPL2 0.531 0.469
2010/IPL3 0.493 0.507
SD(J;i) = si (say) (12) 2011/IPU 0.517 0.483
J
2012/IPL5 0.522 0.478
So for each team, a pair of (a.,1 s.)
1
values are observed and Source: Compiled from data available on
a scatter diagram is drawn with the (a.,1 s.)I values corre- www.espncricinfo.com

Table 2. Standard Deviation and Average of Team-wise Composite Score for

Different Seasons of IPL
IPL 2008/IPLl 2009/IPL2 2010/IPL3 2011/IPU 2012/IPL5
Teams SD Avg. SD Avg. SD Avg. SD Avg. SD Avg.
CSK 0.117 0.661 0.118 0.615 0.099 0.494 0.174 0.438 0.268 0.492
DC 0.091 0.65 0.129 0.56 0.118 0.441 0.126 0.515 0.152 0.526
DD 0.074 0.689 0.088 0.537 0.133 0.475 0.191 0.586 0.178 0.453
KKR 0.134 0.67 0.093 0.459 0.133 0.419 0.246 0.558 0.178 0.503
KXIP 0.098 0.698 0.112 0.5 0.08 0.425 0.175 0.508 0.167 0.492
MI 0.142 0.658 0.121 0.552 0.173 0.532 0.225 0.576 0.195 0.503
RCB 0.123 0.603 0.117 0.512 0.083 0.434 0.177 0.423 0.180 0.438
RR 0.109 0.715 0.142 0.512 0.132 0.447 0.211 0.487 0.214 0.503
PWI 0.293 0.527 0.243 0.499
KTK 0.197 0.473 0.249 0.509

-
Source: Compiled from data available in www.espncricinfo.com

20 | Vol 14 (1) | January-June 2015 | www.metamorphosisjournal.com  Metamorphosis

 Ranjit Singh, Hemanta Saikia and Dibyojyoti Bhattacharjee

0 .74 0.68
+ CSK
0 .72 + !VII
+RR 0.67
0 .7
+ DD + RR
+ KXIP 0.66
+ DD
..
Ql
0.68 Cf)

~
l'S L'CIP + +DC
+ KKR Ql
0.65
f 0.66 + CSK
"' • lvii ~
~ +DC 0.64
0 .64
+ ITR
0 .62 0.63
+ RCB
0.6 + RCB 0.62
0.065 0.075 0.085 0.095 0.105 0.115 0.125
0.58
0.06 0 .08 0 .1 0 .12 0 .14 0 .16 Standard De,·iaflon
Standard Deviation

Figure 4. Scatter plot showing risk and return for the

Figure 1. Scatter plot showing risk and return for teams in IPL (IPL I, II and III)
the teams in IPL-I
actual ranking of the teams are considered, then these two
teams qualified for the semi-finals along with CSK.
0.65 In Figure 2, it is revealed that DD and CSK are the
two teams dominating second season of IPL followed by
+ CSK
0.6 MI. ~ut interestingly, RCB and DC have played the final
+DC in second season and both the teams were dominated by
~ 0.55 MI +
+ DD DD, CSK and MI. This interesting fact has raised some
E KXIP + + RCB + RR
~ 0.5 critical issues. In this season of IPL, it was seen that the
teams that reached the finals did not dominate the tour-
0.45 + KKR
nament by their performance. Thus, there might be some
0.4 +-----.--~.-----.-----,---,----,-----,
other factors that are responsible for the victory of the
0.08 0.09 0.1 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 team other than the team performance.
Standard Deviation With respect to third season of IPL, Figure 3 reveals
that the teams that can be considered in the north-west
Figure 2. Scatter plot showing risk and return for corner of the scatter plot is MI, CSK, RCB and KIXP. Out
the teams in IPL-II of these dominating teams, CSK eventually emerged as
the champions of the third season of IPL tournament.
CSK has always been a consistent team with a high level
of performance.
0.54
+ MI From Figure 4, considering all the three seasons of
0.52 IPL taken together. DD and CSK are the two teams that
0.5 have an overall dominance. These two teams are provid-
+ CSK
ing high return at a low level of risk. It is also supported
~ 0.48
+ DD
Ql from the fact that in all the three IPL seasons, CSK is in
~ 0.46
the dominating position and reached the final twice and
0.44 DC+
+ RR
+ RCB immerged as a winner in the third season of IPL. DD is
0.42 •
paP + KKR dominant in IPL in the first and second season and quali-
0.4 +---.-----,----,------.------.--~ fied for the semi-final. MI is providing high return but at
0.076 0.096 0.116 0.136 0.156 0.176 0.196 higher risk and hence cannot be considered as a dominant
Standard Deviation team. The final result of the tournament also supports
this finding. Other teams of the tournament failed to
Figure 3. Scatter plot showing risk and return for the provide consistent performance in comparison to CSK.

-
teams in IPL-III In addition, DD won the maximum number of matches

Vol 14 (1) | January-June 2015 | www.metamorphosisjournal.com  Metamorphosis | 21

 Application of Markowitz Model for Analyzing the Performance of Cricket Teams in Indian Premier League

(24) compared to any other team in league stages in all 6. Conclusion

the first three seasons of IPL taken together. At the end
of first three seasons fresh bidding took place and so the It is evident from analysis that DD, KXIP and RR (these
composition of the teams changed. The Figure 5, 6 below teams reached the playoffs) emerged clearly as the domi-
shows the outcome of the fourth season of IPL. nating teams in first season of IPL. In second IPL season,
In IPL IV, the there are two teams emerging as the it was DD and CSK (both reached the semi-finals). In the
dominating teams. These are DD and DC. But interest- third IPL season, KXIP, RCB, CSK and MI dominated
ingly in spite of being dominant these two teams have the tournament. Except KXIP, all the other three teams
failed to qualify for the playoffs. reached the play offs. If the first three seasons are taken
In case of IPL V, the only team that dominates the together- DD and CSK are the two teams that dominated
tournament in terms of its combined performance score the IPL. These findings support that the dominating
and consistency is DC. But this team also did not qualify teams are able to register their performances in the tour-
for the playoffs. nament. It is visible from their ranks in the points table
of the tournament. The non-dominating teams as per
the study, which are able to maintain better rankings, are
RCB and DC in second season of the IPL. But both RCB
0.600 MI
and DC won lesser number of matches compared to DD
+
DD
• + KKR
and CSK in the league stage. However, RCB and DC were
0.550
able to handle the pressure of the semi-final matches and
+RR
0.500
DC+ KXIP + emerged to the finals of the second season. The dominat-
•
+ RCB ing teams that are not able to maintain better rankings
..
3'D
f 0.450
CSK + KTK in the tournament are DD and DC in the fourth season
~
0.400
•
PWI
of IPL and DC in the fifth season of IPL. This gives raise
to one pertinent question that some other factors also
0.350 need to be studied that are responsible for the victory of a
team. At the same time, it has opened up a methodologi-
0.300 +-----.---,----,-------...-----,---------,
0.050 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250 0.300 0.350
cal question; shall the performance in the matches of the
Standard Deviation knockout stage be given more importance than the league
matches? Perhaps due to this reason, the organizing com-
mittee of the IPL has introduced the concept of play-offs
Figure 5. Scatter plot showing risk and return for
the teams in IPL-V rather than knock out round for the top four teams of IPL
from the fourth season of IPL. In the play-offs, the top
team of the group stage is given one more chance to qual-
ify for the final rather than just getting eliminated after
0.540
one defeat in knock out round. The dominance and rank-
+DC
0.520 KTK ing of teams may not go hand in hand, as noted in case of
0.500 KKR +
MI
+ + + RR
• the second, fourth and fifth seasons of I PL.
3'D 0.480
KXIP + RCB •
CSK
t
~ 0.460
7. Practical Implications and Area
+ DD
0.440 + PWI
of Further Research
0.420 It has been observed that in IPL 2, RCB and DC have
0.400 +-----,-----.,------,---------, played the final match and DC has won the tourna-
0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250 0.300 ment. But both of them were not the dominating team
Standard Deviation in that tournament. It has raised an important question.
Apart from dominating a tournament the other factors
Figure 6. Scatter plot showing risk and return for the that affect the team's final ranking need to be investi-

-
teams in IPL-VI gated in future. This kind of phenomenon has happened

22 | Vol 14 (1) | January-June 2015 | www.metamorphosisjournal.com  Metamorphosis

 Ranjit Singh, Hemanta Saikia and Dibyojyoti Bhattacharjee

Appendix-A. Descriptive Statistics

Total Runs Total Balls Total Runs Total Balls Wickets
IPLSeasons Scored Faced Conceded Bowled Taken
IPL 1 Mean 154.7193 111.6579 154.7193 111.6579 5.9561
Median 156.0000 120.0000 156.0000 120.0000 6.0000
Minimum 55.00 33.00 55.00 33.00 .00
Maximum 240.00 120.00 240.00 120.00 10.00
Std. Deviation 34.62479 16.23000 34.62479 16.23000 2.69181
Skewness -.301 -2.682 -.301 -2.682 -.277
Kurtosis .259 7.958 .259 7.958 -.740
IPL2 Mean 144.0370 115.2778 144.0370 115.2778 6.1759
Median 146.5000 120.0000 146.5000 120.0000 6.0000
Minimum 58.00 29.00 58.00 29.00 .00
Maximum 211.00 120.00 211.00 120.00 10.00
Std. Deviation 27.20669 12.19072 27.20669 12.19072 2.46026
Skewness -.601 -4.438 -.601 -4.438 -.195
Kurtosis .805 24.946 .805 24.946 -.810
IPL 3 Mean 157.2083 116.0667 157.2083 116.0667 6.0000
Median 157.0000 120.0000 157.0000 120.0000 6.0000
Minimum 82.00 64.00 82.00 64.00 .00
Maximum 246.00 120.00 246.00 120.00 10.00
Std. Deviation 29.05859 8.91862 29.05859 8.91862 2.61540
Skewness .008 -3.317 .008 -3.317 -.072
Kurtosis .382 12.746 .382 12.746 -.958
IPL4 Mean 156.5349 112.9767 153.4651 109.5349 5.2791
Median 152.0000 120.0000 151.0000 118.0000 6.0000
Minimum 95.00 56.00 105.00 29.00 .00
Maximum 231.00 123.00 232.00 120.00 9.00
Std. Deviation 25.85983 14.68639 30.28936 18.40206 2.38373
Skewness .495 -2.682 .374 -2.640 -.348
Kurtosis .827 7.199 -.478 8.203 -.915
IPL5 Mean 159.2203 117.1017 146.7288 116.5763 5.3898
Median 157.0000 120.0000 146.0000 120.0000 5.0000
Minimum 100.00 88.00 74.00 88.00 1.00
Maximum 222.00 120.00 197.00 120.00 10.00
Std. Deviation 29.87680 6.50383 28.64818 7.33486 2.10923
Skewness .072 -3.177 -.211 -2.720 .308
Kurtosis -.845 10.948 -.484 7.327 .148

in international cricket also. For example, in 1992 world
cup, Pakistan (won 4 out of 8 matches at league stage) has
been able to won the world cup even though the entire
tournament was dominated by New Zealand (winning 7
out of 8 matches at league stage). Thus, there is a need
to identify, some other factors that influence the final
standing of teams in a tournament apart from being the
dominant team.
In IPL, the teams are owned by the franchisees
through competitive bidding so it is purely an investment
which has emerged as a major commercial and business
force may be entering into stock markets in near future,
as few teams mull the possibility of initial public offer-
ings (IP0) 5• If the team owners go for an IPO issue, then
the number of product endorsement contracts will have
a significant impact on the success of the IPO. The teams
reaching the playoff stage ofiPL gets a chance to partici-
pate in the Champions league, which is an international
tournament featuring cricket clubs from different coun-
tries. Thus, a team showing dominating performance

-
with a business perspective. This giant cricketing event is most likely to get a chance to play in the champions'

Vol 14 (1) | January-June 2015 | www.metamorphosisjournal.com  Metamorphosis | 23

 Application of Markowitz Model for Analyzing the Performance of Cricket Teams in Indian Premier League

league and hence become more attractive to the advertis- 16. Lemmer HH. The combined bowling rate as a measure of
ers. Such a team is expected to get good response from the bowling performance in cricket. South African J Res Sport,
investor community. Physic Educat Recreat. 2002; 24{2):37-44.
17. Lemmer HH. Performance measures in wicket keepers in
cricket. South African J Res Sport, Physic Educat Recreat.
8. References 2011; 33(3):89-102.
18. Lemmer HH. Team selection after a short cricket
1. Barr GDI, Kantor BS. A Criterion for comparing and select-
series. Eur J Sport Sci. 2011; 13{2):200-206. doi:
ing batsmen in limited overs cricket. J Oper Res Soc Am.
10.1080/17461391.2011.587895.
2004;55(12): 1266-74.
19. Lemmer HH. Predicting the names of the best teams after
2. Beaudoin D, Swartz T. The best batsmen and bowlers in
the knock-out phase of a cricket series. Eur J Sport Sci.
one-day cricket. S Afr Stat J. 2003; 7:203-22.
2012; 14(1):S191-96. doi: 10.1080/17461391.2012.679315.
3. Barooah VK, Mangan JE. The "Bradman class": An explo-
20. Lewis AJ. Towards fairer measures of player performance in
ration of some issues in the evaluation of batsmen for test
one-day cricket. J Oper Res Soc Am. 2005: 56{7): 804-15.
matches, 1877-2006. J Quant Anal Sports. 2010; 6(3): 1-21.
21. Mangram ME. A simplified perspective of the markowitz
doi: 10.2202/1559-0410.1201.
portfolio theory. GJBR. 2013; 7{1):9-70.
4. Chen CD, Chen CC. Assessing the EffectsofSports Marketing
22. Maini S, Narayanan S. The flaw in batting averages. The
on Stock Returns: Evidence from the Nippon Professional
Actuaries. 2007 May; 30-1.
Baseball Series. J Sports Econ. 2012: 13(2):169-97.
23. Markowitz HM. Portfolio Selection. The J Finance. 1952;
5. Choudhury G. IPOs to follow IPL: Three teams may sell
7{1):77-91.
stake, hindustan times. 2010 Mar 23. Available from: http:/I
24. Markowitz HM. The elimination form of the inverse and
www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/Business/IPOs-to-
its application to linear programming. Manag Sci. 1957;
follow-IPL-Three-teams-may-sell-stake/ Article1-522135.
3{3):255-69.
aspx.
25. Mitra S. The IPL: India's foray into world sports business.
6. Damodaran U. Stochastic dominance and analysis of odi
Sport Soc. 2010; 13(9):1314-33.
batting performance: the indian cricket team, 1989-2005. J
26. Saikia H, Bhattacharjee D. On classification of all-rounders
Sports Sci Med. 2006; 5:503-08.
of the indian premier league {ipl): a bayesian approach.
7. Edmans A, Garcia D, Norli 0. Sports sentiment and stock
Vikalpa. 2011; 36{4):25-40.
return. The J Finance. 2007; LXII(4):1967-98.
27. Saikia H, Bhattacharjee D, Bhattacharjee A. perfor-
8. Gerber H, Sharp GD. Selecting a limited overs cricket squad
mance based market valuation of cricketers in IPL. An
using an integer programming model. South African J Res
International Journal (SBM). 2013; 3(2):127-46.
Sport, Physic Educat Recreat. 2006; 28(2):81-90.
28. Saikia H, Bhattacharjee D, Bhattacharjee A. Is IPL respon-
9. Gupta A. India and the IPL: cricket's globalized empire. The
sible for cricketers' performance in twenty20 world cup? Int
Round Table. 2009; 98{401):201-11.
J Sports Sci Eng. 2012; 6{2):96-110.
10. Iyenger NS, Sudarshan P. A method of classifying
29. Sauer S. The world cup and stock returns. The Sports
regions from multivariate data. Econ Polit Wkly. 1982;
Economist. 2005 Jul 14; Assessed on 26.6.2013. Available
5:2048-52.
from: http:/ /thesportseconomist.com/2005/07I 14/the-world-
11. Kimber AC, Hansford AR. A Statistical analysis of batting
cup-and-stock-returns/.
in cricket. J Roy Stat Soc. 1993; 156(3):443-55.
30. Suleman MT. Saeed MA. Option on human performance:
12. Kitchin P. The development of limited overs cricket: lon-
a case study ofindian premier league. 2009; Accessed on 2009
don's loss of power. LJTSCI. 2008; 1(2):70-75.
Dec 12. www.papers.ssrn.com/sol3 .../SSRN_ID1474093_
13. Lemmer H. A Measure for the batting performance of
code1208558.pdf.
cricket players. South African J Res Sport, Physic Educat
31. Vasu A. Return of the league. sports illustrated India. 2011;
Recreat. 2004; 6{1):55-64.
2{7):52-55.
14. Lemmer H. A method for the comparison of the bowling
32. Vaclavik M, Jablonsky J. Revisions of modern portfolio
performances of bowlers in a match or series of matches.
theory optimization model. Cent Eur J Oper Res. 2012;
South African J Res Sport, Physic Educat Recreat. 2005;
20(3):473-83.
27{1):91-103.
15. Lemmer H. An analysis of player's performances in the
first cricket twenty20 world cup series. South African J Res
Sport, Physic Educat Recreat. 2008; 30(2):71-7.

-
24 | Vol 14 (1) | January-June 2015 | www.metamorphosisjournal.com 

View publication stats

Metamorphosis