DoG's Top 100 Test Batsmen - The Top 25

[NUFAN]

Someone to create a DoG top 100 batsman debate thread IMO.

No real clue who number 7 is going to be, perhaps Lara?

 

[Migara]

Been following this page since it began, loving it great work. The first thing i noticed at the beginning is the significant innings per match statistic you have. Obviously India in the last 20 years have not won more matches because of their terribly average/below average bowling attacks. Why is Tendulkar being penalised for this ? It does not make any sense.

Inzamam has a very high rating in the significant innings stat as he was blessed with Pakistan having some of the best bowlers of all time. If Tendulkar played for Australia or Pakistan with their bowling attacks then he would have a hell of a lot more wins - and thus in your basis probably be ranked top 2 or 3 of all time (as he should).
Also it should not be ignored that in this day and age any weakness a batsman has is thoroughly analysed by computers and every bowler knows all about each batsmans weaknesses. Bowlers and coaches know inside out where players like to score their runs from all the computer analysis (thus they will score a bit lower) and know their specific weakness to (none of these 2 were available in previous decades which is an advantage to the older batsman).

My main point is about Tendulkar though;put Inzamam with Indias bowling attack and he would be a lot lower in your list. Put Tendulkar with Pakistans bowling attacks and he would be top 2 or 3 - As he should be (you said if Tendulkar retired a year ago he would of been number 6 on the list).
To have 20 years right at the very very top is remarkable.

Put Sangakkara with Aussie or Pakistan bowling lineup, and he would be still higher than Tendulkar.

 

[Furball]

Someone to create a DoG top 100 batsman debate thread IMO.

No real clue who number 7 is going to be, perhaps Lara?

I honestly think Lara could turn up at number 2.

 

[Furball]

You are ignoring the main points of what I have said read them again
Tendulkar would be a lot higher in this list if he had even a half decent bowling attack, instead Indias bowling attack has been dire as a result India havent won a very large quantity of matches due to their bowlers

Still doesn't explain why Dravid managed to have a higher percentage of significant innings.

 

[Coronis]

I honestly think Lara could turn up at number 2.

Sobers or Hobbs for the podium, I reckon.

 

[NUFAN]

I honestly think Lara could turn up at number 2.

Initially when I heard the criteria I thought Lara was a massive chance for a top 3 spot due to his number of massive innings but I kind of expected him and Tendulkar to be very close as Sachin beats Lara in other areas. Lara's career average is around 5 worse than the other batsman remaining so I'm just thinking that could potentially cost him. Basically I have no clue who's up next, I wouldn't be surprised with any of Lara, Hammond, Headley or Hutton up next.

 

[Days of Grace]

Haha, knew one Sachin fanboy would come on here eventually.

You're very welcome, btw.

Regarding Inzamam, Pakistan's batting in the 1990s was inconsistent at best. Someone had to score the runs to give their bowler's a chance to win the match. Time and time again, and often in a crisis, Inzi stood up.

Significant innings are just that: did they have a significant impact on the result of the game? India have won 70 matches with Tendulkar in the side. Sachin had 45 significant innings in those wins.

Pakistan won 49 matches with Inzamam in the side. Inzi contributed 39 significant innings to those wins. Quite a difference.

 

[Viscount Tom]

The quality of Lara's innings I suspect is on average higher given his 150 odd against the Aussies was the top innings.

 

[Furball]

The quality of Lara's innings I suspect is on average higher given his 150 odd against the Aussies was the top innings.

It's a shame DoG can't quantify things like pressure when we're talking about Lara, because his double ton at Jamaica the previous Test, and even his 400* I think would rank very highly if there was a "pressure" variable added. Lara himself reckons that double ton is his greatest ever innings.

 

[kyear2]

Inzamam was just an example. How many of Tendulkars absurd amount of 100s would of been to a winning cause if he was born Australian etc. Tendulkar if he was Australian with all his stats would most likely be number 1 or 2 because of 1 of the statistics DOG is using. But he wont be because hes had shocking bowlers for the last 20 years. Imagine the amount of matches India would of won with even above average bowling attacks (thus not being 10th which is plain silly) !!!

No matter where he was born, he wouldn't have been number one and very unlikely even in the top four. One of the reasons that India has not won more matches and not produced that many (if any) great fast bowlers is because the pitches are not conducive to pace bowling. So is it possible that the same conditions that would have hindered the amount of matches that Sachin won still would have made batting at home that much easier.
Not even remotely calling Sachin a FTB or anything of the sort, but can't have it both ways.

FTR, Sachin easily makes my top ten, but have no issue where he was rated.

 

[Days of Grace]

7. Wally Hammond (England) (1927-1947)

Career Length (Days): 7027
Percentage of team's matches played: 86%
Career Average: 58.45
Adjusted career average: 54.35
Adjusted away average: 63.78 (rank 2nd)
Adjusted top-opposition average: 45.61
Top Tier centuries: 2
Second tier centuries: 3
Third tier centuries: 11
Significant innings: 29
Significant innings per match: 0.34

Great innings: 7 (rank 5=)
2nd Test: Australia v England at Sydney, Dec 14-20, 1928 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 12.86
3rd Test: Australia v England at Melbourne, Dec 29, 1928 - Jan 5, 1929 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 13.59
4th Test: Australia v England at Adelaide, Feb 1-8, 1929 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 12.69 (2nd Inns)
2nd Test: New Zealand v England at Auckland, Mar 31-Apr 3, 1933 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 15.73
1st Test: West Indies v England at Bridgetown, Jan 8-10, 1935 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 12.91
2nd Test: Australia v England at Sydney, Dec 18-22, 1936 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 16.05
2nd Test: England v Australia at Lord's, Jun 24-28, 1938 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 14.86


Innings worth average: 3.62

25 Test peak adjusted average: 67.99 (1933-1937)
50 Test peak adjusted average: 62.26 (1928-1936) (rank 10th)


Quality Points: 632
Career Points: 122
Peak Points: 149 (rank 8th)
TOTAL POINTS: 902


The great Wally Hammond announced himself on the 1928/29 tour of Australia when he scored 905 runs which included 3 great innings, the most in a single series that I have come across. Then came Don Bradman and the 1930 Ashes. The Don scored 974 runs and from then on Wally was always deemed to be second-best to the Don. Even in the 1936/37 Ashes, after Hammond scored a double century in Sydney to put England 2-0 up, Bradman then responded with three scores above 150 in three tests and Australia won the rubber 3-2. No wonder Hammond had a reputation for being somewhat of a **** in his later years. What gets him in this top 10 is his away average, which is only second-best to...you guessed it. He may have plundered some runs against some fledgling test nations but he scored 5 of his 7 great innings against Australia. At the commencement of the Second World War, Hammond had an adjusted career average of 57.11. Had he not come back after the war, he may have challenged the top 5.

 

[kyear2]

Haha, knew one Sachin fanboy would come on here eventually.

You're very welcome, btw.

Regarding Inzamam, Pakistan's batting in the 1990s was inconsistent at best. Someone had to score the runs to give their bowler's a chance to win the match. Time and time again, and often in a crisis, Inzi stood up.

Significant innings are just that: did they have a significant impact on the result of the game? India have won 70 matches with Tendulkar in the side. Sachin had 45 significant innings in those wins.

Pakistan won 49 matches with Inzamam in the side. Inzi contributed 39 significant innings to those wins. Quite a difference.

It was inevitable.

What was really shocking to me, and I guess it shouldn't have, but that after this exercise had started I started looking around on line for other top tens and was surprised how many of them had Sachin as number one. It got to the point that I just stopped looking and it was as if it's unquestioned that Sachin is the best ever. Quite a sureal experience actually.

 

[The Sean]

Hobbs
Hutton
Bradman
Headley
Lara
Sobers

The All Time Test top 6 based on DoG's ratings. Gilchrist had better get used to coming in at five for about a thousand.

 

[kyear2]

7. Wally Hammond (England) (1927-1947)

Career Length (Days): 7027
Percentage of team's matches played: 86%
Career Average: 58.45
Adjusted career average: 54.35
Adjusted away average: 63.78 (rank 2nd)
Adjusted top-opposition average: 45.61
Top Tier centuries: 2
Second tier centuries: 3
Third tier centuries: 11
Significant innings: 29
Significant innings per match: 0.34

Great innings: 7 (rank 5=)
2nd Test: Australia v England at Sydney, Dec 14-20, 1928 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 12.86
3rd Test: Australia v England at Melbourne, Dec 29, 1928 - Jan 5, 1929 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 13.59
4th Test: Australia v England at Adelaide, Feb 1-8, 1929 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 12.69 (2nd Inns)
2nd Test: New Zealand v England at Auckland, Mar 31-Apr 3, 1933 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 15.73
1st Test: West Indies v England at Bridgetown, Jan 8-10, 1935 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 12.91
2nd Test: Australia v England at Sydney, Dec 18-22, 1936 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 16.05
2nd Test: England v Australia at Lord's, Jun 24-28, 1938 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 14.86


Innings worth average: 3.62

25 Test peak adjusted average: 67.99 (1933-1937)
50 Test peak adjusted average: 62.26 (1928-1936) (rank 10th)


Quality Points: 632
Career Points: 122
Peak Points: 149 (rank 8th)
TOTAL POINTS: 902


The great Wally Hammond announced himself on the 1928/29 tour of Australia when he scored 905 runs which included 3 great innings, the most in a single series that I have come across. Then came Don Bradman and the 1930 Ashes. The Don scored 974 runs and from then on Wally was always deemed to be second-best to the Don. Even in the 1936/37 Ashes, after Hammond scored a double century in Sydney to put England 2-0 up, Bradman then responded with three scores above 150 in three tests and Australia won the rubber 3-2. No wonder Hammond had a reputation of being somewhat of a **** in his later years. What gets him in this top 10 is his away average, which is only second-best to...you guessed it. He may have plundered some runs against some fledering test nations but he scored 6 of his 7 great innings against Australia. At the commencement of the Second World War, Hammond had an adjusted career average of 57.11. Had he not come back after the war, he may have challenged the top 5.

Great batsman no doubt who was also a superb slipper and under rated all rounder. Doesn't make my personal top ten due to that fact that I don't believe that he ever dominated a great pace attack but definately just outside of the top ten along with Gavaskar and Ponting and just ahead of Weekes, Walcott and Kallis ect. and definately an elite ATG batsman.

 

[Furball]

I'm telling you, Lara to be number 2.

 

[kyear2]

I'm telling you, Lara to be number 2.

Think his away average may to low for that, but I have been wrong this entire, so................

 

[Ikki]

I have a certain respect for Hammond. It must be hard to go out and bat and know that there is some **** on the other team who is going to score a ****load more than you and anyone else; making it that much harder to win.

 

[The Sean]

Headley definitely the most interesting of those still to come. He played only 49% of the West Indies' Tests in his career span, so either a) he hasn't lost many points for that, or b) he scores so highly in other categories that it makes little difference.

 

[Furball]

Is there anyone else who could reasonably be expected to be this high?

There's a tiny part of me that thinks that DoG has been trolling us all along with this Headley thing but there's absolutely no-one else that fits is there?

 

[The Sean]

I have a certain respect for Hammond. It must be hard to go out and bat and know that there is some **** on the other team who is going to score a ****load more than you and anyone else; making it that much harder to win.

Yeah for sure, and he felt it very keenly too. One of the greatest, and yet also most unfulfilled, cricketers of all time.

For all that though and leaving aside the Bradman comparisons which haunted his career, there can have been few better batsmen in the history of the game to watch in full flight than Walter Reginald Hammond. Sheer magisterial dominance.