Where does Vettori rank all-time as an all-rounder?

[Zinzan]

EDIT: Removed minnows from the opposition

SK Warne 119 225 5616.3 1497 14452 575 8/71 12/128 25.13 2.57 58.6 26 7
M Muralitharan 29 47 1576.1 354 4188 162 9/65 16/220 25.85 2.65 58.3 14 5
SCG MacGill 34 66 1504.1 299 4810 153 7/50 12/107 31.43 3.19 58.9 7 1
A Kumble 46 84 2369.1 500 6632 186 8/141 12/279 35.65 2.79 76.4 8 1
DL Vettori 67 105 2589.4 577 7019 188 7/87 12/149 37.33 2.71 82.6 11 2

he still makes up the rear....

Wouldn't necessarily suggest Vettori's better than any of those names, but if you are going to make a serious comparison, you have to do a deeper analysis than merely plonking their stats down after excluding the minnow's. i.e where were these matches played, the quality of the opposition batsman, the time used purely as a stock bowler when the opposition batting team get 400+ as well as many other considerations.

Surprised someone like yourself who normally displays has such an analytical mind when it comes to such comparisons has missed a trick here.

 

[Zinzan]

God, this thread could only get worse if thierry henry got involved.

Lol, it's all in good spirit

 

[bagapath]

Surprised someone like yourself who normally displays has such an analytical mind when it comes to such comparisons has missed a trick here.

I am deeply offended by that accusation. I thought I had never hidden my true self in this forum as a biased, repetitive, myopic, speadsheet-crazy mother ****er who would hold on to preset beliefs ignoring reasoned arguments. I demand an apology.

 

[99*]

his fans talk about vettori being the atlas of NZ cricket. and he struggles to take 3 wickets per test! sad sad state of affairs here.

I'm not sure how you can say that. His role in the side now is much more than just a bowler. Yes when he was first in the side that was his one and only role but he has had to change his entire bowling action due to injury, then adapt and improve his batting. He used to average 15, he now averages double that.

His primary role in the current NZ side is not a strike spin bowler. He is a batting allrounder (tbh I think averaging 33 or whatever it is is fine for a batting a/r) who happens to be currently the best bat in the country. Without him the side loses a huge part of it's batting line up. He just also happens to be captain, coach and selector. Without Vettori we lose quite a lot.

Vettori is a mediocre cricketer who gets to play a lot of games these days because NZ cannot find XI cricketers to play for the country.

What a load of tripe. How many teams would drop a player that averages 40+ can bowl a long spell and just happens to be the only person with captaincy ability in the side?

 

[bagapath]

What a load of tripe. How many teams would drop a player that averages 40+ can bowl a long spell and just happens to be the only person with captaincy ability in the side?

that is absolutely right dude. vettori is captaining the team because there is no other option. that doesnt mean he is the best in business. he has taken 300+ wickets and scored 3000+ runs because there is no one else to take his place in the team. that doesnt mean he is an all-time great.

 

[NZTailender]

that is absolutely right dude. vettori is captaining the team because there is no other option. that doesnt mean he is the best in business. he has taken 300+ wickets and scored 3000+ runs because there is no one else to take his place in the team. that doesnt mean he is an all-time great.

Yeah agree somewhat with this. Vettori is certainly an all-time great of New Zealand cricket, but in the realms of world cricket he isn't in the pantheon of the widely accepted 'all time greats'.

That said, I think he's underrated. He's almost in a class of his own. His bowling isn't 'dangerous', yet a lot of the world's batsmen respect him. He isn't an out and out specialist bat, yet he's carried the team in that department for years and has stats to suggest he's just as good as his specialist contemporaries.
As a captain and cricketing brain overall, he's something else there again. Put all those things together and you get one complex, interesting, underrated yet overrated, cricketing work horse in a league of his own.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

I feel very sad for New Zealand cricket.

Firstly, no one is saying that he is already an all time great. But by the time he finishes, he is likely to end up with 450-500 wickets and 5000+ runs. If he does that, you will be hard pressed to not call him an all time great.

Yes his bowling average of 33 is on the higher side but you have to take into account that he made his debut way too early. New Zealand's population is only around 4 million. As a result, they have to play cricketers at the international level who are not quite ready. Anyway his average isn't all that bad when you consider that guys like Harbhajan, Saqlain, Qadir all average about 30 or more (Qadir averages 33 actually).

 

[Hurricane]

I
SK Warne (Aus) 119 225 5616.3 1497 14452 575 8/71 12/128 25.13 2.57 58.6 26 7
M Muralitharan 29 47 1576.1 354 4188 162 9/65 16/220 25.85 2.65 58.3 14 5
SCG MacGill 37 72 1599.0 321 5093 172 7/50 12/107 29.61 3.18 55.7 10 2
A Kumble 46 84 2369.1 500 6632 186 8/141 12/279 35.65 2.79 76.4 8 1
DL Vettori 73 117 2772.1 640 7434 205 7/87 12/149 36.26 2.68 81.1 11 2

Like I said before, the only way vettori's numbers could look impressive is when he is compared with all the other daniel vettoris of this world. once you bring in world class spinners to the equation his FC quality (not Test quality) talent pales in comparison in the international arena.

Vettori is a world class spinner. 300 wickets is awesome. The players you have listed above him are not simply world class. They are at several levels beyond that. They are some of the greatest bowlers of all time.

Bits and pieces players would take 50 test wickets.

Although I think Dan deserves to be rated as world class. I also rate a number of spinners in the world today higher than him and most of those I have in mind have doosras. It is hard to compete with that.
Dan did try to develop one but he said it was screwing up his natural action and he figured he was good enough without one.

 

[bagapath]

Firstly, no one is saying that he is already an all time great.

some were. you should go through the thread before posting. in fact, he was called the greatest spin bowling all rounder of all time and was bunched with botham and kapil in terms of all round cricketing ability. why would i be posting again and again in this thread otherwise?

 

[NZTailender]

Close it IMO. Just going round in circles now.

 

[bagapath]

Close it IMO. Just going round in circles now.

no need. i will stay out. made my point. dont have anything new to say. daniel fans can have a free run now.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

SK Warne (Aus) 119 225 5616.3 1497 14452 575 8/71 12/128 25.13 2.57 58.6 26 7
M Muralitharan 29 47 1576.1 354 4188 162 9/65 16/220 25.85 2.65 58.3 14 5
SCG MacGill 37 72 1599.0 321 5093 172 7/50 12/107 29.61 3.18 55.7 10 2
A Kumble 46 84 2369.1 500 6632 186 8/141 12/279 35.65 2.79 76.4 8 1
DL Vettori 73 117 2772.1 640 7434 205 7/87 12/149 36.26 2.68 81.1 11 2

How good do these guys look if you take out cheap wickets against England's batting order who, let's face it, have batted like minnows against leg spinners and Muralitharan since the early-mid 90s?

What I find crazy though is that you're saying he's not even test class. That staggers me beyond belief.

 

[Uppercut]

Yeah agree somewhat with this. Vettori is certainly an all-time great of New Zealand cricket, but in the realms of world cricket he isn't in the pantheon of the widely accepted 'all time greats'.

That said, I think he's underrated. He's almost in a class of his own. His bowling isn't 'dangerous', yet a lot of the world's batsmen respect him. He isn't an out and out specialist bat, yet he's carried the team in that department for years and has stats to suggest he's just as good as his specialist contemporaries.
As a captain and cricketing brain overall, he's something else there again. Put all those things together and you get one complex, interesting, underrated yet overrated, cricketing work horse in a league of his own.

Aha, I agree with this. I'll rant about how overrated his test bowling is, then move on to how underrated his test batting is before raving about how purely awesome his ODI bowling is. I love watching him bowl, and always have, but reluctantly concluded over time that he isn't really an effective enough bowler in tests.

He always slightly underwhelms me. For years I would watch him expecting him to take a big haul because he looks like an absolute master, then when the scene is set perfectly for him to bowl the opposition out and win New Zealand a match, he wouldn't quite manage it. It's somewhat fitting that even on the rare occasion when he did manage to churn out a seriously good performance against Sri Lanka and Australia, it wasn't enough to win his side the game.

 

[Jono]

I like the NZ gang on CW, I reckon they're good blokes that make me laugh.

But they also intimidate me with their inside jokes and their yelling at their opening batsmen, who no one knows who they are

 

[Jono]

Look at their records,

Vettori has had faaaaaaaaaaaaaaar more success than Yuvi AS A BATSMAN at test level over the last 5 years

Yuvi might look better but he doesnt deliver and, at this stage, is an incredibly ordinary test player

Also, you'd pick Vettori as a bowler alone in front of Harby in Oz every day of the week

minus minnows...

DL Vettori (NZ) 2005-2009 29 49 8 1655 140 40.36 2636 62.78 2 10 2 212 6

Yuvraj Singh (India) 2005-2009 22 35 4 1183 169 38.16 1933 61.20 2 7 6 167 12

Scoring 3 fifties in 14 more innings is no big deal. calling him "faaaaaaaaaaaaaaar more" successful is going too faaaaaaaaaaaaaaar.

Stats of Yuvraj from 2005 are pretty meaningless anyway to be honest.

 

[Jono]

God, this thread could only get worse if thierry henry got involved.

Hmmm, I actually think its one of the better threads in CW recently.

Sure it got personal at times which is unfortunate, but we've had people from both extremes, and people in the middle, discussing a topic which is quote rare and probably not focused on much.

I'm happy

 

[vic_orthdox]

Stats of Yuvraj from 2005 are pretty meaningless anyway to be honest.

Do you really think he's developed that much as a Test player?

 

[kingkallis]

Probably in the same category as Shaun Pollock personally.

I completely agree with that!

Neither took serious interest in batting and I dont think they had to put real effort. Both are seriously gifted! They make look batting so so easily when on song!

 

[Jono]

Do you really think he's developed that much as a Test player?

Short answer - probably no...but with a disclaimer.

The thing is, Yuvraj only became a highly valuable (i.e. one of the 2-3 best Indian batsmen) ODI player mid-to-late 2006-07.

That's when he became confident, and rightly or wrongly people saw that he had natural talent to perhaps perform at test level if he played in a similar style and didn't try to be another batsmen.

Don't forget, in 2004 Yuvraj played a test as a stop-gap opener! He didn't have a role, or a secured spot, for a long time.

If people are wanting to drop Hussey even though 2 years ago he was tonning up, judging Yuvraj on anything before 2007 is unfair IMO.

Plus he's done all right (averaging over 50 I believe) since his recall following Ganguly's retirement. Until he begins failing, I can't really see him being dropped.

 

[Cruxdude]

Do you really think he's developed that much as a Test player?

Well Yuvi's place has been assured in the team only after Ganguly retired. Before that he came in for the odd games and didn't have a full run. Another difference is that Vettori is the main batsman in the New Zealand team while Yuvi comes in at number 6 when the innings is close to a declaration. Yuvi's record should be looked at after some more time in the job and lets see where he stands.