Who was better: Hadlee or McGrath?

[Athlai]

Bruce Taylor retired in 1973, the same year that Hadlee made his debut.

The bowlers that 'helped' Hadlee throughout his long career would include Collinge, Chatfield, Snedden, and in the later part, Morrison.

Bracewell.

 

[Athlai]

Interesting to note that it was in fact Richard Collinge that got the first three batsmen out, and thus it was Collinge that started the rout.

Yet Hadlee still bowled the rest out for nothing.

 

[Ikki]

Something to note though: whilst the other guys can be said to have built pressure by keeping it tight, and saying that Warne was even better than their help so he was more help to McGrath... that isn't entirely true though. Because Warne would keep it tight, sure, but Warne also took a lot of wickets which meant that in McGrath's case his trouble would not have been not conceding runs, but taking enough wickets.

 

[SJS]

Here are some interesting stats of Hadlee and McGrath concerning their bowling partners and their respective position in their teams performance.

For the purpose of thse stats I have taken Hadlee's career from his 8th game against India at home in Feb 1976. In the three years before that he played 7 tests off and on. I felt that for the purpose of this excercise , finding his bowling partners, comparing his performance with Kiwi bowlers overall, this would be easier to do. This allows me to take the 'shortcut of taking all the tests played by Kiwis from this 8th test of Hadlee to his last, for taking the figures of other Kiwi bowlers. Otherwise this would have been very laborious to compile.

For McGrath, fortunately, his career took off right away and he became a part of the team.

1. Bowling Partners

Here are the bowlers who bowled at least a 500/200 overs for Australia/NewZealand during their respective careers.

Australia :

[B]Bowler           Overs[/B]
S K Warne	5970.5
[B]G D McGrath	4874.4[/B]
J N Gillespie	2372.2
Brett Lee	2046.3
S C G MacGill	1701.5
M S Kasprowicz	1190
C J McDermott	907.3
P R Reiffel	795.3
D W Fleming	688.1
C R Miller	681.5
M E Waugh	584.5
A J Bichel	556

Newzealand

[B]Bowler           Overs[/B]
[B]R J Hadlee	3273.3[/B]
E J Chatfield	1664
B L Cairns	1642.2
J G Bracewell	1400.3
S L Boock	1052.4
M C Snedden	795.5
G B Troup	510.3
D K Morrison	508.5
J V Coney	445.3
E J Gray	346
D R O'Sullivan	273.5
R O Collinge	268.5
M D Crowe	206.3

2. Workload and performance

- McGrath bowled 23% of overs bowled by Australia and took 32.5% of the wickets that fell.

- Hadlee bowled 30.9 % of overs bowled by Kiwi bowlers and took 54.2 % of the wickets that fell !​

3. Comparing with peers

Australian Bowlers

[B]Bowler	Average	Strike Rate[/B]
McGrath	21.6	51.9
Peers	28.6	58.5
[B]Diff.	6.9	6.5[/B]

NewZealand Bowlers

[B]Bowler	Average	Strike Rate[/B]
Hadlee	21.6	47.8
Peers	37.8	83.9
[B]Diff.	16.2	36.1[/B]

3 above includes all the bowlers who bowled for the respective countries during their countries.

You can draw what ever conclusions you want

 

[Athlai]

Loved it SJS.

 

[SJS]

Loved it SJS.

You're welcome

 

[Athlai]

You're welcome

You have a real talent for interesting and informative statistics, better than statsguru anyday.

 

[Ikki]

Nice compilation SJS but 2 problems:

- Average of peers is not indicative of keeping it tight and says not much about why McGrath or Hadlee had to have a good average.

- Secondly, the difference between McGrath and Hadlee in bowling per match is 3 overs - Hadlee bowled more. So, their workload is very similar and despite taking so many of his teams wickets he is only 1 ball faster than McGrath in taking a wicket.

Of course, your own stats show this, McGrath had to contend heavily for wickets in his team and the fact that he is only 1 ball slower than Hadlee in SR is actually a great compliment to McGrath.

If you could show the economy of their peers, that would be helpful.

 

[SJS]

You have a real talent for interesting and informative statistics, better than statsguru anyday.

Its not really a love for stats you know. I wish we could talk cricket without stats. Unfortunately thats not going to happen - definitely not at a forum like this. That being a given, the fear is that stats can lead to what I call fast-food-punditry of cricket.

So I try to put a more complete picture while using the same stats. It is still limited to figures and doesnt tell you of what is not recorded by the figures like plying and missing, edges falling in blank spaces and dropped catches or conversely wickets falling to long hops . Still if we ARE going to use stats we might as well get a better grip[ on them.

 

[SJS]

Economy during the period in question

• McGrath : 2.50
• Hadlee : 2.71

 

[Ikki]

Economy during the period in question

• McGrath : 2.50
• Hadlee : 2.71

Whilst the players themselves:

McGrath: 2.49
Hadlee: 2.63

 

[SJS]

As I said ....

You can draw what ever conclusions you want

The stats are just given as an aid .....if needed.

 

[Ikki]

As I said ....

The stats are just given as an aid .....if needed.

Sure SJS, but if we took those stats for what they were then we could really only come to the conclusion that Hadlee is better, really. The economy of the peers says a lot, though. Thanks.

 

[SJS]

Sure SJS, but if we took those stats for what they were then we could really only come to the conclusion that Hadlee is better, really. The economy of the peers says a lot, though. Thanks.

Oh I am sorry. the economy rates I gave were not for peers but for these two in the matches in question. I will post those of peers rightaway

 

[Ikki]

Oh I am sorry. the economy rates I gave were not for peers but for these two in the matches in question. I will post those of peers rightaway

Doh.

 

[SJS]

Economy Rates versus peers

• McGrath 2.50
• Other Aussies 2.93

• Hadlee 2.71
• Other Kiwis 2.71

 

[Ikki]

Economy Rates versus peers

• McGrath 2.50
• Other Aussies 2.93

• Hadlee 2.71
• Other Kiwis 2.71

Wow, would have thought it to be the other way around actually. Really, that's VERY telling to me. Not only did McGrath have less help trying to keep the run rate down, he also had more trouble in taking wickets because of his support.

 

[Prince EWS]

Wow, would have thought it to be the other way around actually. Really, that's VERY telling to me. Not only did McGrath have less help trying to keep the run rate down, he also had more trouble in taking wickets because of his support.

It should be noted that acceptable rates have changed quite a bit. What would be perceived as keeping the batsmen quiet in McGrath's later years would have been perceived as leaking runs during the most part of Hadlee's career.

 

[SJS]

Wow, would have thought it to be the other way around actually. Really, that's VERY telling to me. Not only did McGrath have less help trying to keep the run rate down, he also had more trouble in taking wickets because of his support.

There is always another way of looking at it

It could also reflective of his relatively less 'proactive" style of bowling.

 

[Ikki]

There is always another way of looking at it

It could also reflective of his relatively less 'proactive" style of bowling.

Sure, and I am actually of that thought. Even though McGrath strike-rate suggests he was as pro-active as Hadlee, watching the two you didn't quite seem to think that, though.

It should be noted that acceptable rates have changed quite a bit. What would be perceived as keeping the batsmen quiet in McGrath's later years would have been perceived as leaking runs during the most part of Hadlee's career.

How so? If anything, in McGrath's career run-rates have increased quite a bit and there are inflated averages everywhere. Yet McGrath still holds an economy that is even better than Hadlee's.