IPL Retentions - Part 2

Punjab Kings, Sunrisers Hyderabad, Rajasthan Royals & Royal Challengers Bangalore

In this second part of a multiple-article series, I want to start looking at the decisions of the four teams who spent the least with their retentions. Tomorrow, in part three, I’ll focus on the four teams who spent the most. If you want to read my thoughts on the retention dynamics and the marketplace, you can do so here in part one which was posted yesterday.

**Many thanks to supporters who have bought me a coffee. It is much appreciated!**

Before I start, though, I want to establish several house rules and opening thoughts.

** As I said in part one, commercial value is an absolute irrelevance. I explained why it has zero impact on a team’s chances of success in part one. I’m not going to explain that again in the remainder of this article series.

** It’s probably fair to say that player power has never been higher in the IPL. Retentions may not have happened because the player thinks he can get more money at auction, or because they want to play for a different team. Criticism of teams failing to retain specific players should be taken with this caveat.

** There is a maximum of 450.5 Crore to be spent at auction from the eight existing teams. It is easy to overestimate how many players will cost in excess of 10 Crore, when in fact, teams paying big money for a player actually will dramatically reduce their budget for the subsequent stages of the auction.

** It is very possible for a player to be very good and offer poor value for money. I cannot emphasise this enough, and I want to clarify here that any criticism of a team’s decision isn’t necessarily any criticism of a individual player, but simply because I believe that they have overpaid for that particular player - often because there is a very high chance that the player could have been purchased for much cheaper at auction.

** Finally, this leads on to rule number one for retentions - ‘Only retain a player if you perceive that there is a high chance that the player in question will cost significantly more in the open market at auction’. It’s obvious but teams still ignore it.

All good? Let’s move on to the discussion of the individual teams, and I’m going to start in order of the teams who spent the least with their retentions. Prices listed are in Crore, with ballpark currency conversions being 1 Crore = £100,000 and 1 Lakh = £1,000. Teams have a maximum of 90 Crore (£9m) to construct their rosters.

Punjab Kings:-

Retained Mayank Agarwal (12 - with 2 further deducted from auction budget) and Arshdeep Singh (4). Remaining = 72 Crore.

PBKS have lost previous captain KL Rahul, with there being plenty of reports that he was looking for a new team. It wouldn’t be a surprise at all if he was a marquee signing for one of the new teams at a very high cost. Given the fact that he was lost, it’s more understandable that Mayank Agarwal was retained, because they may view him as a potential captain and also that he’s clearly their best domestic batter after KL Rahul. To be honest, we don’t need much data to understand this, but just for clarity, here’s Agarwal’s boundary percentage versus balls per dismissal across the IPL from 2019 onwards, compared to the remainder of domestic batters facing a minimum of 400 balls:-

You can see from this that there’s a lack of strong boundary hitters among the domestic batters in the IPL, with only three players hitting over 20%. Agarwal, at just below 20%, ranks fourth, and isn’t far from the sweet spot of 20+ boundary percentage and balls per dismissal in conjunction with each other.

When you also consider that KL Rahul is the only other player from PBKS in this sample of high volume of balls faced for domestic batters, and in any case has much more of a stability-oriented dynamic, it makes the Agarwal pick pretty logical if they were going to lose Rahul - they’d be fighting for a lot of domestic batters at auction. Numbers-wise, Agarwal has been high level in recent IPL seasons, and while he doesn’t perhaps enjoy as high a reputation as some, I have no issues with his retention at this price point - as a strong boundary-hitting domestic batter, he’s offers a scarce skillset.

22-year-old left-arm pacer Arshdeep Singh has also been retained at the uncapped limit of 4 Crore. Currently in his IPL career he’s really impressed, taking a wicket just over every 15 balls, and with an economy rate below 9 runs per over. When you consider that he’s also bowled over 80% of his overs across the Powerplay and death phases, these are very impressive numbers. Furthermore, there aren’t many local pace bowlers who can boast these figures, and when you factor in the future upside of a 22 year old and such a low retention price, this looks like an easy positive retention for Punjab Kings.

Several players who might have been retained include Nicholas Pooran and Ravi Bishnoi. Bishnoi for the uncapped limit of 4 Crore surely should have been a no-brainer for Punjab Kings - he’s got huge potential - but we cannot discount the possibility that the player wanted to try and get more money in the open market. In fact, it’s the only possible logical reason that I can think of that he wouldn’t have been retained.

As for Pooran, he’d have cost 11 Crore to retain and would have increased the budget deduction for Agarwal by a further Crore, so essentially his retention would have cost 12 Crore. The West Indian is supremely talented, and is one of the best spin-hitters in T20 but where I think PBKS have struggled is his utilisation as a match-up breaker and shield - he’d be great as a shield to bat with a pace hitter who is weaker against spin. It may well be that the PBKS think-tank considered that with the oversupply of overseas batters at auction, they can pick up Pooran for less than 12 Crore, which is certainly a possibility.

Overall, pretty positive. Their two retentions make sense, and there’s logical potential reasons why they didn’t retain Bishnoi and Pooran. They take the biggest pot into the auction which means there’s plenty of scope to make real positive changes to their roster compared to previous seasons. They’ve made no major mistakes, and with that far from a given in the IPL marketplace, that’s always a positive.

Sunrisers Hyderabad:-

Retained Kane Williamson (14), Abdul Samad (4) and Umran Malik (4). Remaining = 68 Crore.

On the subject of mistakes, unfortunately, here is a big one. I’ve been vocal on a number of occasions that I don’t generally rate the SRH decision-making processes particularly highly in recent years, and it’s with great regret that I have to continue along that theme.

Firstly, though, I have no real issues with the retentions of the uncapped duo of Abdul Samad and Umran Malik. Samad has ridiculous upside as a domestic hitter - don’t forget, that’s a rare skillset in short supply at auction, while Malik showed enough towards the back end of the last tournament to ensure that he’d probably cost more than 4 Crore in the open market at auction. Having said that, he leaked runs for Jammu & Kashmir in the recent Syed Mushtaq Ali Trophy (he had the worst economy by some distance out of their regular bowlers) and while that probably wouldn’t have dissuaded teams from bidding at auction, it does reinforce the point that he’s not close to being the finished article just yet.

However, the Kane Williamson/Rashid Khan debate is where we have to focus. There’s not a concrete reason given as to why Rashid wasn’t retained, but as the best spinner in T20 cricket who can also contribute aggressively with the bat, he’d have been my number one priority by an absolute mile. This article from Cricinfo suggests that SRH only offered Rashid second place in their retention slots behind Williamson, which to be frank, is absolutely absurd. In my mind, there is no debate that Rashid Khan at auction would cost in excess of 14 Crore, while Williamson would be highly unlikely to reach much more than half of this price due to the oversupply of quality overseas batters.

At this point, it’s worth remembering two of the house rules at the top of the article, because in my view they apply very relevantly here.

** It is very possible for a player to be very good and offer poor value for money. I cannot emphasise this enough, and I want to clarify here that any criticism of a team’s decision isn’t necessarily any criticism of a individual player, but simply because I believe that they have overpaid for that particular player - often because there is a very high chance that the player could have been purchased for much cheaper at auction.

** Only retain a player if you perceive that there is a high chance that the player in question will cost significantly more in the open market at auction.

Williamson’s retention has to be discussed with both points in mind. Certainly, in my view, SRH have broken the golden rule of only retaining a player who is highly likely to cost much less at auction.

Furthermore, while Williamson is a very good player, it cannot be said that he offers good value at 14 Crore. Here’s how he rates among overseas batters facing 300+ balls in the IPL from 2019 onwards, when looking at boundary percentage (attacking intent) and balls per dismissal (stability):-

Of these overseas batters facing 300+ balls across the last three editions of the IPL, Williamson has the lowest boundary percentage but the third-highest balls per dismissal. Essentially, he offers great stability but below-average intent, and there are implications to this - as long as he facilitates the other SRH batters to maximise their intent, the presence of a player like this can be a positive, but SRH as a management group need to be cognisant of this - they need to surround him with intent merchants in order to win the boundary percentage count in matches on a regular basis. History suggests that they probably won’t do this.

So, we’ve seen that the Williamson retention for 15.56% of the SRH budget brings other considerations into the debate - it should influence their batting recruitment at auction to a large degree - but also it’s difficult to rationalise the value of a player at 14 Crore who has the lowest boundary percentage among regular IPL overseas batters across the last three seasons.

Let’s not forget, stability-oriented batters are a plentiful resource. Both the domestic and overseas markets are full of these type of players. You could probably buy Devon Conway for 1 Crore and he’d be likely to do almost as effective a job, and then you could reinvest the money into a more important area where there is less of a supply of quality players.

The argument from SRH will probably be that they want Williamson’s captaincy, but there’s no doubt in my mind that if this is the case, they’ve paid an absurd premium and that’s a premium which can negatively impact their future recruitment.

When you add in the chances of Williamson going for even half of this retention price at auction (remember, not many overseas batters attract premium pricing, and that he previously cost much less than even half his retention price), plus the fact that reports suggest that it negatively impacted SRH’s ability to retain Rashid Khan, it’s difficult to think anything other than SRH have had an absolute shocker here, and we haven’t even started to discuss Jonny Bairstow. Last year’s bottom placed team have started the new cycle with more questions arising than answers, in my opinion.

Rajasthan Royals:-

Retained Sanju Samson (14), Jos Buttler (10) and Yashashvi Jaiswal (4). Remaining = 62 Crore.

When you consider Samson being the same price as SRH’s retention price as Williamson, it also starts to illustrate the poor value of SRH’s retention - particularly as Samson is a quality domestic player, therefore in shorter supply and having hugely different market dynamics.

Using the same axes as the previous chart, here’s a comparison between Samson and Williamson looking at boundary percentage and balls per dismissal in the IPL from 2019 onwards:-

Samson has much more attacking intent, hitting boundaries in around 5% more balls than Williamson, and while he trades this off with some stability, Samson’s balls per dismissal is still high at just shy of 24, and he’s not far from the 20+ sweet spot for both metrics that I mentioned when discussing Mayank Agarwal. Considering Samson is a domestic player, and therefore a scarcer resource, his retention looks much more logical than Williamson’s at the same price.

As for Buttler, he’s one of just four overseas batters facing 300+ balls in the IPL from 2019 onwards, with 20+ balls per dismissal and 20%+ boundaries, and the most balanced between the two key metrics. Here’s how he compares to other overseas batters facing this sample size of balls during this time period:-

He’s actually the closest overseas batter here to the ideal top-right corner, offering the perfect trade-off between attacking intent and stability, making his retention an absolute no-brainer. Considering also that both he and Samson keep wicket, Rajasthan are well covered for first-team keeper options and have this area locked away even before the auction.

With 19 year old left-handed batter Yashashvi Jaiswal showing some real potential - he’s hitting over 20% boundaries already at this young age - and costing just 4 Crore and avoiding the ‘left-hander tax’ in the process, Rajasthan can be extremely pleased with their work ahead of the auction.

The main other discussion points were the omission of England duo Jofra Archer and Ben Stokes from their list of retentions, but given Archer’s continued injury issues, the franchise may have considered his retention too much of a risk.

As for Stokes, I’m unsure that an all-rounder who has hit 14.90% boundaries and just 3.64% sixes in the IPL from 2019 onwards, and who has conceded 24.87% boundaries and 8.63% sixes, bowling just 197 balls in 18 matches (10.94 balls per match) in this time period offers any sort of value at a high ticket price. There might be some who say ‘yes, but it’s Ben Stokes’ but I only deal in tangible evidence, and there’s not an abundance of it to suggest that he’s a particularly high level all-rounder at IPL level in T20 cricket. If you offer me the choice between Ben Stokes at 10 Crore and Benny Howell at 1 Crore, I know who I’d pick.

Royal Challengers Bangalore:-

Retained Virat Kohli (15), Glenn Maxwell (11) and Mohammad Siraj (7). Remaining = 57 Crore.

We’ve already discussed Kohli in part one so there’s no real need to go there again. Even at 2 Crore lower than his previous 17 Crore price, there’s not much evidence to suggest that he offers on-pitch value, and he continues to take a decent proportion of RCB’s budget (this time, it’s 16.67%) which to me at least, is questionable because I’m not convinced he regularly positively contributes to their chances of winning the boundary percentage count.

However, Maxwell does, and I was amazed to read earlier that this is the first time at 33 years of age that he’s been retained by an IPL franchise. This, probably logically, coincided with him having a great season, scoring in excess of 500 runs at a strike rate over 140 - top level from Maxwell. Throw into the mix that he’s an extremely useful match-up spinner and gun fielder too, his retention at 11 Crore is a no brainer - he’d likely go for quite a bit more at auction and has done so previously. Again, though, it brings into question SRH’s retention of Williamson for 14 Crore - both being overseas batters primarily, but Maxwell is 3 Crore cheaper and is a three-dimensional player with more attacking intent.

Mohammad Siraj had an economical 2021 IPL season, going at below seven runs per over which is an exceptional effort in this tournament. He wasn’t a prolific wicket-taker in the recent season, and has never really been (he’s never taken wickets in any IPL season at below 20 balls per wicket) but this improvement in economy and being 27 years of age - theoretically getting towards peak age - suggests upside.

As is pretty much always the case, Siraj’s economy rate improvement is down to conceding a lower boundary percentage, and in his case, an incredible reduction in six conceded percentage:-

When a bowler can reduce their six conceded percentage by over 3 times the amount of the previous season, it’s unsurprising that they’re not going to go for as many runs. Whether this level of six concession from Siraj is sustainable is another question, but it’s easy to see RCB’s rationale here - at least there’s tangible evidence of improvement, particularly considering his economy across the last two seasons in the Powerplay and death overs is simply outstanding. With Siraj bowling almost 85% of his overs in these two phases in the last two IPLs, RCB have got a genuine 2 Powerplay/2 Death domestic bowler for non-premium pricing. Great work.

Finally for RCB, I’d have been hugely interested in retaining Devdutt Padikkal who I think has extreme future upside and would likely go for big money at auction. It may well be that the left-hander thinks he can get more at auction, but it’s difficult to know the exact reason why he hasn’t been retained by the franchise.

This concludes part two, and part three tomorrow will focus on the remaining four teams who bring less budget to the auction having spent more on their retentions.

**Many thanks to supporters who have bought me a coffee. It is much appreciated!**