Jacques Kallis vs Allan Border

[Bolo.]

Might be onto something there, but how about with a draw as well (unless it supports subshakers point)

A not out in a draw doesn't tell you if you have played a game saving blinder or faffed and cost your team a win.

Border was NO in more draws, Waugh/Kallis more in wins. But I don't know if this gives more info than how often their teams were winning/drawing.

 

[subshakerz]

It's basically about what others do. The idea that run scoring can ever be not "match-winning" especially in test cricket is quite ludicrous (with odd exception of something like exposing #11 to face full over)

Yeah but some innings are more decisive than others in bringing in a positive result.

 

[Victor Ian]

A not out in a draw doesn't tell you if you have played a game saving blinder or faffed and cost your team a win.

Border was NO in more draws, Waugh/Kallis more in wins. But I don't know if this gives more info than how often their teams were winning/drawing.

fair point. I guess you were onto nothing then. Being not out in a loss is a great thing as you were trying to take that loss to a draw. It is unlikely you lost a match you could have won being not out in a loss. Bummer, I liked your point first time around. It still doesn't exonerate Subs for his irrational downgrading of Kallis.

Steve Waugh and Kallis having more not outs in wins is probably a result of strong teams winning so much.

 

[bagapath]

That is one of my favorite Border knocks when Australia was in the middle of the rebuilding process.
Two mediocre teams from India and Australia battled out to a 0-0 draw on Aussie soil in 1985-86 and achieved the same result in India a few months later with the Chennai test ending in a super exciting tie.

The second test in Melbourne should have been won by India; could have been had the umpires been fair about the rain/ restart on the last day. But before that fiasco Border stood like a rock between India and Australia's annihilation with a classic AB knock.

 

[shortpitched713]

That is one of my favorite Border knocks when Australia was in the middle of the rebuilding process.
Two mediocre teams from India and Australia battled out to a 0-0 draw on Aussie soil in 1985-86 and achieved the same result in India a few months later with the Chennai test ending in a super exciting tie.

The second test in Melbourne should have been won by India; could have been had the umpires been fair about the rain/ restart on the last day. But before that fiasco Border stood like a rock between India and Australia's annihilation with a classic AB knock.

Ah the "good" ol days of home side favored cheating.

 

[Himannv]

Border definitely went after the bowling when his team needed him to. Some really nice big hits in the little cameo above that wouldn't look out of place in a modern T20.

 

[weeman27bob]

this is of course the right answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe and everything...

Jadeja is the new Kallisball, and look where we are with Kallis today

 

[Gob]

I found a nice boulder in the garden today. I'm going to name it Allan

 

[ankitj]

Did you know Kallis hits more sixes per test innings than Tendulkar? Difference is of about 1.7x so not small. In ODIs their rate of hitting sixes is nearly identical.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Did you know Kallis hits more sixes per test innings than Tendulkar? Difference is of about 1.7x so not small. In ODIs their rate of hitting sizes is nearly identical.

Not surprising at all

 

[Gob]

Did you know Kallis hits more sixes per test innings than Tendulkar? Difference is of about 1.7x so not small. In ODIs their rate of hitting sizes is nearly identical.

He bops spinners down the ground a lot

 

[Bolo.]

fair point. I guess you were onto nothing then. Being not out in a loss is a great thing as you were trying to take that loss to a draw. It is unlikely you lost a match you could have won being not out in a loss. Bummer, I liked your point first time around. It still doesn't exonerate Subs for his irrational downgrading of Kallis.

Steve Waugh and Kallis having more not outs in wins is probably a result of strong teams winning so much.

It's not nothing. I'm just saying we should only look at not outs in losses in terms of the context of this discussion. A not out in a loss does tell you something- that you are leaving runs behind. A better innings would involve acceleration and strike farming. Leaving runs behind doesn't tell you if you will get a win. But a batting style that costs runs is bad, sometimes to the point of costing wins and is likely to be indicative of a more general problem.

Lara has zero NOs in losses. Chanders has 19. This stat from similarly averaging (mostly) teammates does a great job in demonstrating the value difference between the two (that we already knew was there).

 

[Victor Ian]

I found a nice boulder in the garden today. I'm going to name it Allan

You could just call your fence Allan and not try so hard.

 

[Victor Ian]

It's not nothing. I'm just saying we should only look at not outs in losses in terms of the context of this discussion. A not out in a loss does tell you something- that you are leaving runs behind. A better innings would involve acceleration and strike farming. Leaving runs behind doesn't tell you if you will get a win. But a batting style that costs runs is bad, sometimes to the point of costing wins and is likely to be indicative of a more general problem.

Lara has zero NOs in losses. Chanders has 19. This stat from similarly averaging (mostly) teammates does a great job in demonstrating the value difference between the two (that we already knew was there).

Yeah, I'm not arguing against you. Comparing Lara and chanders works but less so border and kallis. It's not leaving runs on the board when you are always losing. I watched most of Allan's career and that was mostly 'when he's out, add ten runs for the rest kind of feeling. Not once did I feel he should have gone harder. Different team.

 

[BazBall21]

Kallis was very boring but he hit plenty of sixes. Powerful ball-striker.

 

[BazBall21]

Lara and Gooch both have virtually no not outs.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Yeah, I'm not arguing against you. Comparing Lara and chanders works but less so border and kallis. It's not leaving runs on the board when you are always losing. I watched most of Allan's career and that was mostly 'when he's out, add ten runs for the rest kind of feeling. Not once did I feel he should have gone harder. Different team.

The suggestion that Border being more aggressive would have helped his team is simply absurd.

 

[Coronis]

Lara has zero NOs in losses. Chanders has 19. This stat from similarly averaging (mostly) teammates does a great job in demonstrating the value difference between the two (that we already knew was there).

So you’re saying Lara tended to get out and help his team lose whilst Chanders stuck around and at least tried to salvage draws?

 

[Bolo.]

Yeah, I'm not arguing against you. Comparing Lara and chanders works but less so border and kallis. It's not leaving runs on the board when you are always losing. I watched most of Allan's career and that was mostly 'when he's out, add ten runs for the rest kind of feeling. Not once did I feel he should have gone harder. Different team.

Ya, I barely saw him at all, and these things are highly situational, but I really can't see how the ability to accelerate in a lower-middle bat would not be massively useful.

You are likely right in your impression that it was 10 more runs and done when he got out, but that was likely a result of there typically only being the tail left when he did so... he faced a hell of a lot of balls per innings from low down in a weak line up, and unless he was the best strike farmer ever, that's a lot of balls for the opposition to cut the chaff away while he didn't score that many runs.

IDK exactly how relevant this theory is to border... the way cricket typically works it should be, but, as I said, I barely watched him. The idea was a response to the suggestion that Kallis should be penalised for slow scoring in relation to Border when the vast majority of generally applicable principles suggest the opposite to be true.

TBH now though, I'm more interested in how well it holds up as a general stat for the (lower) middle than its applicability to Border.

 

[Bolo.]

Lara and Gooch both have virtually no not outs.

Openers don't really have a place in this theory. They will almost never remain unbeaten in a loss, and nobody is suggesting that stronger bats should be moving up into the specialist opening positions.

So you’re saying Lara tended to get out and help his team lose whilst Chanders stuck around and at least tried to salvage draws?

I'm specifically looking at NOs in losses.

Generalizations across other circumstances strike me as much tougher. A gung-ho player is defs gonna cost his side some draws, but these are balanced by wins in other games. I don't see how you can work out which is more valuable in general terms without going case by case or using some extremely involved stats.