Are we really going to pretend that Tim Southee...

[Spark]

So would Stokes I would think.

Nah Stokes is fine because I'm pretty sure the Australian summer falls within the cut-off.

 

[Valer]

Nah, look, it's incredibly common that a bowler's performance doesn't show up in the stats. In fact it's almost more common than the other way around. Either due to bad luck or because they were playing a certain important role that didn't entail running through a side - or, alternatively, they picked up a couple of cheap tail end wickets which meant very little but gave them "respectable" figures. Bowling figures are really a terrible way to do analysis in short sample sizes -- unless you're talking 80.15, of course.

It's not that they lack nuance or whatever, it's that they're often genuinely only weakly related to the actual quality of bowling delivered in the Test match.

Good example is MJ @ Perth. Took 2/150 in the match or something but he bowled damn, damn well, and it was really down to the cricketing equivalent of the random number generator that he didn't take more wickets - but people still tried to use 2/150 as evidence that he was tapering off, which was clearly not the case to anyone who had bothered to watch the actual Test.

I'm not suggesting that figures are good for small sample sizes more that subjective predictions are ****ty in general...

 

[OverratedSanity]

I'm not suggesting that figures are good for small sample sizes more that subjective predictions are ****ty in general...

We're not talking about predictions here, are we?It's about evaluating a series which has already happenned.

 

[Valer]

We're not talking about predictions here, are we?It's about evaluating a series which has already happenned.

NZ has already finished the series against Pakistan? ONIY's prediction is what I was quoting initially.

 

[Spark]

We're talking about how we'd evaluate whether Southee had a better series than Johnson, right?

 

[Daemon]

I think the one thing Southee and Harris have going for them is that they get the ball to jag back in to the right handers with regularity and to great effect as compared to Anderson. It's why they're able to do better than him in slightly tougher conditions to bowl in compared to England imo. Anderson's jizzworthy spells with the Duke kinda make up for it though, and the fact that the rest of the attack tends to go to **** when he doesn't perform has to count for something. Can't really split the three fairly not having watched all the games they've played in but I think I'll go Harris>Anderson>Southee.

 

[Valer]

We're talking about how we'd evaluate whether Southee had a better series than Johnson, right?

Kinda. ONIY predicted that Southee would have a series at least as good as Johnson. I was asking how he was planing on evaluating that prediction.


I also noted that averaging ~30 and getting a few more wickets due to the test doesn't really tell us much.

Eta:
Tbh while subjective analysis can be good for short term comparison of bowlers playing the same series or to say player X did well that match/ series. I don't think its possible to make a decent fist of it between series prediction or otherwise.

 

[Spark]

I think the one thing Southee and Harris have going for them is that they get the ball to jag back in to the right handers with regularity and to great effect as compared to Anderson. It's why they're able to do better than him in slightly tougher conditions to bowl in compared to England imo. Anderson's jizzworthy spells with the Duke kinda make up for it though, and the fact that the rest of the attack tends to go to **** when he doesn't perform has to count for something. Can't really split the three fairly not having watched all the games they've played in but I think I'll go Harris>Anderson>Southee.

Anderson simply bowls too short, though. And has done for three years now. You can talk up keeping tight and applying pressure all you like, the simple fact is that he does not take as many wickets as a strike bowler and attack leader of his clear quality should.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Heh, posters using the Anderson "explain away career average/only last few years count/debut early" theorem about Southee. To Anderson supporters.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Heh, posters using the Anderson "explain away career average/only last few years count/debut early" theorem about Southee. To Anderson supporters.

Haha yeah. But it's easier to justify for Southee because he appears to have hit his stride after 13-14 tests of being mediocre, which is what you'd normally expect from a quality bowler. Anderson took ages to get that good. Not to mention Southee was brought in when he was quite a bit younger.

 

[Furball]

Haha yeah. But it's easier to justify for Southee because he appears to have hit his stride after 13-14 tests of being mediocre, which is what you'd normally expect from a quality bowler. Anderson took ages to get that good. Not to mention Southee was brought in when he was quite a bit younger.

Anderson debuted at age 20 and had barely played 20 Tests in his first 4 years, but please, continue spouting rubbish.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Well that's a bit rude, but I'm sure no one will call you out for being unnecessarily dickish because you've been here a while. I was under the impression Anderson only really started putting out top quality consistent performances after 2009 or so, by which time he'd played plenty more than Southee did when he hit his stride in 2012. Didn't really watch English cricket much around that time, so I dunno, could be I'm talking out of my undoubtedly fine behind.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I do like spouting rubbish though. I like how you think.

 

[ImpatientLime]

Well that's a bit rude, but I'm sure no one will call you out for being unnecessarily dickish because you've been here a while. I was under the impression Anderson only really started putting out top quality consistent performances after 2009 or so, by which time he'd played plenty more than Southee did when he hit his stride in 2012. Didn't really watch English cricket much around that time, so I dunno, could be I'm talking out of my undoubtedly fine behind.

Hmmmmm, 2007 at home to India he started to get his act together. Was still patchy but you could see progression at least.

Honestly thought Anderson was a busted flush at one point after the horrible way the ECB managed him. Constant third man duties during the English summer meaning he got precious little time working on his game at Lancashire. So he's done ok to get to where he is but can't help but feel he's under delivered to a degree. Bloke has got so much in his locker, immense skills.

 

[Bahnz]

Anderson actually had a much better start to his international career than Southee did, but Southee definitely did hit his stride at the international level at a much younger age. Anderson kinda plateued in the 2008-2010 period before entering god mode in late 2010.

(the black line marks the period when Southee was dropped for poor form and technique, and his return several months later).

 

[ohnoitsyou]

From 45 to sub 30. WAFG,

 

[hendrix]

I remember one Jimmy Anderson spell vs Michael Clarke in that 2010-11 Ashes.
Old ball with a slight amount of reverse.
Inswinger, inswinger, inswinger, inswinger.
Everyone, the batsman included, know that the out swinger was coming soon. Just not exactly when. Clarke duly knicked to slip, looking absolutely mortified when it happened, but it was just inevitable.

That style of bowling is excellent when you're on top and trying to pry out those wickets. The problem with that plan is not so much that you have to get change-up delivery perfect (which Anderson does amazingly regularly); it's that you're simply bowling fewer wicket taking deliveries.

I think that's what Anderson has suffered from in recent years. His stock delivery is not a wicket taking one.

 

[Bahnz]

When Anderson is bowling well, as he was in the second half of the India series, then his stock ball is definitely a wicket taking delivery. The problem is that for whatever reason, in the last 2 years he just hasn't bowled to his full potential all that often.

 

[Flem274*]

it's because Anderson tends to drop slightly short

 

[Jono]

Heh, posters using the Anderson "explain away career average/only last few years count/debut early" theorem about Southee. To Anderson supporters.