Kevin Pietersen vs VVS Laxman

[subshakerz]

Irrelevant. He was a middle order batsman who was forced to open out of desperation. They tried fitting him into the side as opener and it didn't work. KP didn't have to do this so it doesn't matter. I never said he should get more credit. I said he shouldn't be marked down for it because KP never had to deal with it. KP averaged 12 as opener and since sample size doesn't matter I've decided he would've sucked as opener anyway.

I don't mark Laxman down for it but I won't disregard those runs as opener.

Test spam beneficiary. In a 7-8 year peak period and he still only came out with a mid 40s average. Got dropped as soon as his form went which saved him from his average plummeting even more. You are faulting VVS for not being English basically. Laxman played *twice* as long. Again, averages don't exist in a vacuum and getting dropped early doesn't make one a better player.

Pure speculation. He got dropped for reasons anything to do with form, he was better than the rest of the bats in the series.

 

[trundler]

Laxman played 30 more games yet scored 6 less tons than KP. So it's no like Laxman really had some accomplishment outstripping KP.

This wasn't relevant when comparing Kallis and S Waugh so why is it relevant here? You are picking and choosing arbitrary criteria as they suit you.

 

[BazBall21]

Laxman played 30 more games yet scored 6 less tons than KP. So it's no like Laxman really had some accomplishment outstripping KP.

Yeah it's a consequence of batting position. Not only is it more comfortable, your impact ceiling is also reduced. Pietersen has more 150+ scores in less innings too.

 

[trundler]

I don't mark Laxman down for it but I won't disregard those runs as opener.

You are doing this by not accounting for the fact that the opener phase brings his average down and that VVS averages 3 more runs as a MOB for 4-5 more years.

Pure speculation. He got dropped for reasons anything to do with form, he was better than the rest of the bats in the series.

And yet his average fell quite a bit in his last two years.

 

[OverratedSanity]

VVS batted at 6 a lot too as well as no5. Rarely made hundreds there but helped his average. Not a good combination. There are downsides to batting at 6 but overall batting at 4 is more difficult. That in a robust batting lineup too; batting position is beyond dispute a feather in KP's cap here. Longevity though is a big problem for KP in comparison to most legends.

The **** is this? KP was a number 4, you're acting like he was an opener or number 3. Laxman played as much at 5 as he did at 6 and even played 37 innings as a number 3 with an average of 45 ( with four hundreds, one of them arguably the greatest knock in history). There's not much meaningful difference in their positions across their careers. I'm as much a "top order batting is harder" believer as anyone but it barely applies here.

 

[BazBall21]

Plenty more besides those. Mohali 2010, SL 2010, Durban 2010, Perth 2008, Calcutta 2001, Ahmedabad 1996. Adelaide 2003. Sydney 2008. Better knocks can be used as a tiebreaker which this comparison doesn't necessitate anyway but VVS bests KP on this metric too.

Some crackers in there for sure. Big fan of the Durban knock. But Pietersen's top ten stands up pretty well to Laxman's with VVS' top two probably the difference. Actually dug England out of a hole on a few occasions in testing conditions pre-achillies injury, as well as the marquee knocks in more glamorous fixtures.

 

[h_hurricane]

Laxman failed as opener and was punted to the back of the order to have the more technically equipped players play out the swing and he should get more credit for that?

KP played over 100 tests, plenty to judge him with.

Laxman was never a opener ffs. He was a makeshift one to accommodate him in the XI as there was no middle order slot available at the time. You know it too.

 

[trundler]

Some crackers in there for sure. Big fan of the Durban knock. But Pietersen's top ten stands up pretty well to Laxman's with VVS' top two probably the difference. Actually dug England out of a hole on a few occasions in testing conditions pre-achillies injury, as well as the marquee knocks in more glamorous fixtures.

Sure, I agree with that but KP playing more classics and having an extra gear are just lazy and easily falsified contentions imo.

 

[BazBall21]

The **** is this? KP was a number 4, you're acting like he was an opener or number 3. Laxman played as much at 5 as he did at 6 and even played 37 innings as a number 3 with an average of 45 ( with four hundreds, one of them arguably the greatest knock in history). There's not much meaningful difference in their positions across their careers. I'm as much a "top order batting as harder" guy as anyone but it barely applies here.

If I worked out the average score when they both came in, Laxman's would be a fair bit higher and that is a noteworthy advantage. For sure, I have already mentioned that Kevin had a fair old cushion of his own so he isn't the greatest example to scrutinize Laxman with in this instance, but he didn't play 68% of his Test career at no5 or lower.

 

[Jumno]

Vvs has played some outstanding, match saving innings

For me, I'd pick KP as he can change a game, from his attacking play

 

[subshakerz]

This wasn't relevant when comparing Kallis and S Waugh so why is it relevant here? You are picking and choosing arbitrary criteria as they suit you.

We are talking about Laxman playing more than KP and I brought that up. It isn't relevant in the Kallis and Waugh thread since they played the same.

 

[h_hurricane]

Laxman played 30 more games yet scored 6 less tons than KP. So it's no like Laxman really had some accomplishment outstripping KP.

Just in the other thread, you said Border > Dravid but then Dravid has more hundreds and also batted higher.

 

[subshakerz]

Laxman was never a opener ffs. He was a makeshift one to accommodate him in the XI as there was no middle order slot available at the time. You know it too.

All I am saying is that those runs shouldn't be excluded but we don't judge Laxman as an opener.

 

[subshakerz]

Just in the other thread, you said Border > Dravid but then Dravid has more hundreds and also batted higher.

Again, I am referring to that point in response to the statement that Laxman played significantly longer. Well he did but he achieved less so I wouldn't go there.

 

[trundler]

We are talking about Laxman playing more than KP and I brought that up. It isn't relevant in the Kallis and Waugh thread since they played the same.

Number of tons clearly isn't a criteria to sway your opinions so why pretend it matters here.

All I am saying is that those runs shouldn't be excluded but we don't judge Laxman as an opener.

This makes no sense at all.

 

[trundler]

Again, I am referring to that point in response to the statement that Laxman played significantly longer. Well he did but he achieved less so I wouldn't go there.

False. He averaged more as a middle order batsman for 4-5 years more and had higher highs.

 

[BazBall21]

Just in the other thread, you said Border > Dravid but then Dravid has more hundreds and also batted higher.

With Border (and to a lesser extent Waugh) their batting positions advantages are reduced somewhat by the era they played in compared to a Laxman who played no5/no6 in a strong batting lineup on a lot of flat wickets.

 

[OverratedSanity]

If I worked out the average score when they both came in, Laxman's would be a fair bit higher and that is a noteworthy advantage. For sure, I have already mentioned that Kevin had a fair old cushion of his own so he isn't the greatest example to scrutinize Laxman with in this instance, but he didn't play 68% of his Test career at no5 or lower.

I'd like to see it.

It's also a bit silly overall. If portion of his career where he opened shouldn't be ignored for his stats, then obviously you should acknowledge he had it harder because kp never had to open or bat at 3.
I also see little functional difference between 4 and 5 in the batting order. They both have it significantly easier than top order batsmen.

 

[subshakerz]

You are doing this by not accounting for the fact that the opener phase brings his average down and that VVS averages 3 more runs as a MOB for 4-5 more years.

Sure opener was a bad place for Laxman but those runs still count. And even without them he and KP average the same.

 

[cnerd123]

Laxmans whole rep was built on bailing India out of tough situations no? He wasn't a know downhill skier.