The match situation is described in terms of the three measurements given. They do not directly reflect the ask. But they do reflect the balance of power between bat and ball.
So let's say my team needs 85 runs in 50 overs and I'm batting against a weak bowling side. I score 45 in 105 balls. My returns would be negative even though I did my job which sounds weird. I guess NRR could be one reason.
The other figures in that are not a mystery or a secret though. they suggest that below average contributions are sufficient to chase 85 in 50 overs because 85 in 50 overs is a below average ask.
The point of measurements is to describe. When it shows that the expected runs for Kohli are 51 below average, it is also showing that he made 594 runs, and that he was dismissed 6 times to deliveries which produce 15 dismissals. Descriptions are additive.
The kind of single measure answer you are seeking is both nearly impossible and undesirable from my point of view, because the point is not to rank people but to describe patterns.
You explain that NET EXP W CONTRIB = EXP DIS + MISB DIS, but this doesn't seem to match the values in the India table at the beginning. Is there an error in the explanation?
Partly because I don't understand this calculation - if a positive value of NET EXP W CONTRIB is good for bowlers, and a negative value is good for batters, how should we think about these values in all rounders?
(sr, winhand, brem) → (r, d, b) is very simplistic because you don't say the part aloud of "all else being equal". The quality of opposition bowling or batting are the hidden variables that just cannot be averaged out.
Great insights. A couple of questions though.
Is the match situation (runs required while chasing especially) considered while calculating expected runs?
And why is it an upset if IND lose in the knockouts? Winning knockouts is more about luck than competence.
The match situation is described in terms of the three measurements given. They do not directly reflect the ask. But they do reflect the balance of power between bat and ball.
So let's say my team needs 85 runs in 50 overs and I'm batting against a weak bowling side. I score 45 in 105 balls. My returns would be negative even though I did my job which sounds weird. I guess NRR could be one reason.
The other figures in that are not a mystery or a secret though. they suggest that below average contributions are sufficient to chase 85 in 50 overs because 85 in 50 overs is a below average ask.
The point of measurements is to describe. When it shows that the expected runs for Kohli are 51 below average, it is also showing that he made 594 runs, and that he was dismissed 6 times to deliveries which produce 15 dismissals. Descriptions are additive.
The kind of single measure answer you are seeking is both nearly impossible and undesirable from my point of view, because the point is not to rank people but to describe patterns.
Got it. Thank you.
Further, the expected dismissals from 105 balls will be significantly greater than 1.
Interesting analysis!
You explain that NET EXP W CONTRIB = EXP DIS + MISB DIS, but this doesn't seem to match the values in the India table at the beginning. Is there an error in the explanation?
Partly because I don't understand this calculation - if a positive value of NET EXP W CONTRIB is good for bowlers, and a negative value is good for batters, how should we think about these values in all rounders?
Thanks for pointing this out. It should be JOGI_W + MISB_DIS
I call my expected_runs "misbah" when its for a batter and "jogi" when its for a bowler after that famous last delivery in the 2007 World T20 Final.
(sr, winhand, brem) → (r, d, b) is very simplistic because you don't say the part aloud of "all else being equal". The quality of opposition bowling or batting are the hidden variables that just cannot be averaged out.
Not sure what you mean by a hidden variable. The quality of the bowling and batting is what produces the match state.