New Zealand A Tour of India and Sri Lanka

[Bahnz]

Look, I get that Anderson looked bad in Kippax's rotten cherry-picked compilation of poor strokes, but I think you're being a bit silly in saying that he's not significantly better than Neesham at this point. Yes Neesham plays some nice looking shots. So does Dougeh. So did early Mills and Franklin. But he doesn't have Anderson's natural ability or range of strokes(a fact that is reflected in their respective FC averages). Sure Anderson needs to tighten up outside the line of off-stump, but there isn't a single player in the current NZ top 6 who you couldn't say that about (including Taylor).

 

[Flem274*]

I've already acknowledged he's better right now, but ceiling wise I think they're about the same.

And I have to disagree about the flippancy towards his outside off flirts. Taylor, KW et al need to tighten up, but their ships are a lot tighter than Anderson's was last season.

 

[Bahnz]

Nah. Anderson's a mid-30's averager. Neesham's mid-20's, 30 at best.

Bowling-wise it's certainly different. Neesham's almost able to hold his own as an FC bowler. Anderson hasn't been a serious option with the ball since his legs fell off back in 2010, and might never be.

 

[BackFootPunch]

Just to jump in here with my couple of cents, I'd agree with Flem on Neesham and Anderson having a similar ceiling. Neesham may not have the natural ability of Anderson, though I'd actually argue it's pretty close, but he works damn hard and he's right up there with the best strikers of the ball I've played with/against. When Neesham gets going he's pretty unstoppable tbh. Would think his game transfers better to limited overs stuff than the longer forms though, which is where Anderson may have an advantage.

My gut says Neesham will have the better overall career but Anderson will play enough sparkling knocks/bowl enough brilliant spells to always have the 'what if he was always fit?' tag associated with him.

 

[Hurricane]

@flem

Long term bet - Anderson's highest score in fc will always be higher than Jimmy's provided both stay fit. Duration of bet 5 years.

 

[Hurricane]

My gut says Neesham will have the better overall career but Anderson will play enough sparkling knocks/bowl enough brilliant spells to always have the 'what if he was always fit?' tag associated with him.

Indeed - especially due to injuries corey will have.

 

[Mike5181]

I'd give the nod to Anderson ceiling-wise, but that would be in an ideal world where he was injury-free. As most of you tend to think, I doubt he will, and the first thing to go if that happens is his bowling. If I was asked which one will contribute more to NZC by the end of their respective careers it'd be Neesham. Honestly though, both of these guys seem to have the natural ability to be good players for us in the future. Jimmy's composure over in the Champions league was impressive. He doesn't look like a nervous player which can often make talent/ability/form etc irrelevant.

 

[Bahnz]

I don't want my comments on JimmyGS to be taken as my thinking he's not a good player. I just don't think he's got quite the potential of Anderson. He's the Nash to Anderson's Cairns (except that - unlike Nash - he's more likely to stay fit).

 

[hendrix]

Who had better 3rd form grades?

Who had better haircuts? - consistency and flair point system applies

Hotter girlfriends/exes?

 

[Bahnz]

Corey's definitely got the better cricinfo profile photo.

 

[Flem274*]

That's too chancey Hurricane - all one needs is to run into an injury ravaged Wellington on a road to win the bet - how about who will contribute more to New Zealand over their careers? We'll let CW decide who wins.

(lol, as if you or I will be on here when these two reach their mid 30s)

Nah. Anderson's a mid-30's averager. Neesham's mid-20's, 30 at best.

Bowling-wise it's certainly different. Neesham's almost able to hold his own as an FC bowler. Anderson hasn't been a serious option with the ball since his legs fell off back in 2010, and might never be.

I don't want my comments on JimmyGS to be taken as my thinking he's not a good player. I just don't think he's got quite the potential of Anderson. He's the Nash to Anderson's Cairns (except that - unlike Nash - he's more likely to stay fit).

Going to have to disagree again. I'd put money on Neesham being low 30s with bat and ball by the end of his test career if he gets a decent bite. He's no where near being Dion Nash's player type. Nash was a very good bowler who could bat a bit.

 

[Flem274*]

Corey's definitely got the better cricinfo profile photo.

Jimmy has the best fast bowler stare!

 

[hendrix]

you ****s.

They're both going to average >40 with bat and around 30 with ball.

 

[Flem274*]

60 with the bat and 20 with the ball

 

[Hurricane]

That's too chancey Hurricane - all one needs is to run into an injury ravaged Wellington on a road to win the bet - how about who will contribute more to New Zealand over their careers? We'll let CW decide who wins.

(lol, as if you or I will be on here when these two reach their mid 30s)

Well I am not taking that bet for obvious reasons that Neesham is an iron man relative to Anderson so will simply play more. You said who will have the highest ceiling I will think of some other proposal on another day.

 

[hendrix]

the consensus that Anderson will have an injury-ravaged career seems premature.

 

[Bahnz]

Can't wait for this btw:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BcMa8OdJqRs

 

[hendrix]

Can't wait for this btw:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BcMa8OdJqRs

Jimi just needs to start spelling his name correctly to win this battle though.

 

[Bahnz]

I wasn't implying that Neesham is Nash's playing type, just that he stands as the second best all-rounder of his generation. And also that their names are similar.

 

[Mike5181]

inventory, hoary, dory