Smith v Kohli (test match batting)

[TheJediBrah]

Are we saying that 24 is too low for Kohli when it's the 6th best of the last ~15 years?

I don't think it's the 6th best, that was just a random selection of 6 well-known players

I could be wrong about that

 

[Spark]

Are we saying that 24 is too low for Kohli when it's the 6th best of the last ~15 years?

I thought it was just a selection of batsmen rather than the six best

 

[srbhkshk]

there are too many "maybes" there to be sure about anything. if there's an actual, identifiable and robust reason for it then sure. until then i still think you should probably stay off his pads.

This is again a "maybe", but it could be that bowlers only bowl to his pads when there is plenty of swing or spin available and he is naturally more likely to get out in such conditions regardless of the line.

 

[Teja.]

what? he's played 84 Tests, faced 12,500 balls and been dismissed 131 times

If you consider that a small sample size in this context then there can't be much in cricket that you consider statistically relevant

This is actually true imo. Well, 'statistically relevant' is not the best way to put it but the confidence for the sample size would probably not be more than 75-80%ish which is not anywhere close to what you need for drawing any serious conclusions from it.

 

[Spark]

This stat has been going around a fair bit on Twitter but it's worth reposting here:

 

[sphynx]

As dmissive as everyone on Smith vs Kohli in ODI discussions, can be reciprocated on Kohli vs Smith in test match batting.

The difference is the same, statistically he's levels above.

 

[Coronis]

This stat has been going around a fair bit on Twitter but it's worth reposting here:

So Smith is susceptible to medium pacers and spinners...

 

[stephen]

Still lower than Bradman with no qualifications.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Still lower than Bradman with no qualifications.

It might be higher than Bradman's average vs 140+kph balls though, who knows. In fact I'd bet that it was.

 

[Slifer]

As dmissive as everyone on Smith vs Kohli in ODI discussions, can be reciprocated on Kohli vs Smith in test match batting.

The difference is the same, statistically he's levels above.

While Smith is head and shoulders above Kohli in tests the gap is smaller than the difference when it comes to ODIs.

 

[vcs]

This stat has been going around a fair bit on Twitter but it's worth reposting here:

Gap is pretty astonishing there. Wonder how Ponting, Kallis, Sangakkara etc would be on that table.

 

[honestbharani]

It should not be that surprising though? His game is built on using the pace much more than any other batsman we have seen.

 

[sunilz]

As dmissive as everyone on Smith vs Kohli in ODI discussions, can be reciprocated on Kohli vs Smith in test match batting.

The difference is the same, statistically he's levels above.

Yeah , Smith ranked 23 in ICC ODI ratings is same as Kohli ranked no.1 in ICC test ratings.

 

[sunilz]

This stat has been going around a fair bit on Twitter but it's worth reposting here:

I am really struggling with this stat . It may be right but I would really like to see sample size and bowlers.
Most of the top 140+ bowlers belong to AUS and SA. Smith can't play vs AUS and averages 41 vs SA. So who exactly are these bowlers: Umesh, Archer , Ferguson, Wahab Riaz ?

 

[Daemon]

Never been dismissed by Archer, a few times to Yadav but after scoring a butt ton of runs, only once against Shami, three times against Rabada. Dunno if many of those were 140+kph though.

I suspect this stat comes about because by the time he gets out the bowlers are too tired to be bowling 140+ anyways.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Would be funny if it was just a complete fabrication and everyone went with it

 

[vcs]

Must have required a **** ton of data mining to get that stat out. You have to go over all the live commentary scorecards of every match the batsman has played, and filter out the ones which were 140+ (assuming they were correctly recorded). Basically, a more tedious version of the "average of a batsman vs. a particular bowler" stat.

Also, I refuse to believe that they could have accurately done this exercise for the entirety of Sachin's career. Guy started out in 1989 FFS.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Yeah I dont think anyone even has accurate ball by ball data for matches as far back as 1989, much less the accurate speeds of every ball for matches as far back as 1989.

 

[vcs]

Yeah I dont think anyone even has accurate ball by ball data for matches as far back as 1989, much less the accurate speeds of every ball for matches as far back as 1989.

Yeah some of the scorecards from Sachin's early days don't even have "Balls Faced".

https://www.espncricinfo.com/series...nka-only-test-sri-lanka-tour-of-india-1990-91

Definitely a bollocks stat at least as far as he's concerned.

 

[Daemon]

Must have required a **** ton of data mining to get that stat out. You have to go over all the live commentary scorecards of every match the batsman has played, and filter out the ones which were 140+ (assuming they were correctly recorded). Basically, a more tedious version of the "average of a batsman vs. a particular bowler" stat.

Also, I refuse to believe that they could have accurately done this exercise for the entirety of Sachin's career. Guy started out in 1989 FFS.

This isn't the first time cricviz has produced material that would require data such as pitch maps and speeds.

They haven't claimed that to be the entirety of Tendulkar's career either:

Steve Smith’s average against balls of more than 140 kph in Test cricket is 40% better than the next best among players to have faced 1000+ such balls in the @CricViz database.

https://twitter.com/cricvizanalyst/status/1219620935390633985