How do Williamson/Root/Smith compare to Tendulkar/Ponting/Lara?

[Jono]

Sounds like a sports game involving mathematics. Pull your head in.

 

[Stace]

Are these three head and shoulders above Angelo right now? They are younger but I don't think they are clearly better than him.

I really like Matthews and was VERY impressed with him last year in England but I didn't see much of him in his early half of his career, going by his stats (I know it doesn't tell the full story) he's played most of his career batting at 5 and 6 and if we take a look at his stats at no.5 in particular he has a good average of 50 but in his 31 innings he has 3 tons and eight 50's, compare that to Root who has 6 tons and also eight 50's in just 28 innings and averaging 73, also Smith has played at no5 most of his career too so far and has 4 tons and six 50's averaging 66 in just 22 innings. So it looks like Root and Smith more often make a big match winning score, Mathews had a chance to get a match winning score against NZ in the 2nd innings of the 2nd Test (not a big hundred a 70+ would have been a game changer) but I was disappointed in him. Maybe he's more of a Chanderpaul then Tendulkar/Lara? He's certainly a world class middle order batsman no doubt.

I am certain KW will be the best of his era and I say that as a massive/obsessive Root fan, I cant see any weaknesses in his game can anyone else? He will retire as an ATG and its going to be ****ing exciting to follow his career. I don't like Smith (he's turned into a umpire complaining cry baby) but I have to admit he's very impressive and fun to watch his unique style. I think Root will be more inconsistent then the other 2 but will still have a great career and finish averaging around 48 while KW will finish close to 60 and Smith 53.

 

[viriya]

I really like Matthews and was VERY impressed with him last year in England but I didn't see much of him in his early half of his career, going by his stats (I know it doesn't tell the full story) he's played most of his career batting at 5 and 6 and if we take a look at his stats at no.5 in particular he has a good average of 50 but in his 31 innings he has 3 tons and eight 50's, compare that to Root who has 6 tons and also eight 50's in just 28 innings and averaging 73, also Smith has played at no5 most of his career too so far and has 4 tons and six 50's averaging 66 in just 22 innings. So it looks like Root and Smith more often make a big match winning score, Mathews had a chance to get a match winning score against NZ in the 2nd innings of the 2nd Test (not a big hundred a 70+ would have been a game changer) but I was disappointed in him. Maybe he's more of a Chanderpaul then Tendulkar/Lara? He's certainly a world class middle order batsman no doubt.

I am certain KW will be the best of his era and I say that as a massive/obsessive Root fan, I cant see any weaknesses in his game can anyone else? He will retire as an ATG and its going to be ****ing exciting to follow his career. I don't like Smith (he's turned into a umpire complaining cry baby) but I have to admit he's very impressive and fun to watch his unique style. I think Root will be more inconsistent then the other 2 but will still have a great career and finish averaging around 48 while KW will finish close to 60 and Smith 53.

I think this is partly a weakness in Angelo's game (not making a lot of tons) and partly that he doesn't come in to bat earlier.. I expected him to come in earlier (#4 preferably) after Sanga retired but none of the kids can bat with the tail like he can so he's stayed there.. as a result he won't make as many runs but probably will keep a high average.. would be hard to compare him with a top order batsman as a result.

 

[jimmy101]

i swear it was definitely lara/tendulkar/waugh that people talked about in this way til at least 2000

That's true. There was also a time circa 2000 that the big three all used MRF bats.

EDIT: Just realized that Jono had already pointed this out. That'll teach me for commenting before reading the entire thread haha

 

[Daemon]

They absolutely are just as good as any. They need a couple of wtf KP/Clarke innings against good bowling in pressure situations with the world watching, and then people will start to realise that we're watching the peaks of some of the best players to ever play the game.

 

[Furball]

Root's Trent Bridge innings and Williamson's Brisbane effort are in that category for me. Root's is just under appreciated because of Broad wrecking Australia and Williamson's is kinda undermined by the way any Aussie could rock up on day 1 and score a ton.

 

[Howe_zat]

Sounds like a sports game involving mathematics. Pull your head in.

Just out of interest, what sport do you believe you are a fan of?

 

[Jono]

Chandimalball.

 

[Howe_zat]

Funny how we have sort of ignored the in between generation - Cook, Clarke, Pietersen, De Villiers, Amla, Taylor. Even writing that list was way harder than it should be. Why are there no Indian or Pakistani players who debuted in the mid 2000s and then built a quality Test career?

The Tendulkar, Ponting, Kallis and Sangakkara gen kind of stole the thunder from everyone who should be the best players this decade by playing on far longer than anyone thought.

 

[Jono]

Cook is boring and the others only became really super awesome a little later in their careers compared to these 3. They never gave off ATG vibes at 25-26.

 

[Howe_zat]

Cook is boring and the others only became really super awesome a little later in their careers compared to these 3. They never gave off ATG vibes at 25-26.

Yeah I don't disagree, just wondering if there's are reason.

 

[CricAddict]

Funny how we have sort of ignored the in between generation - Cook, Clarke, Pietersen, De Villiers, Amla, Taylor. Even writing that list was way harder than it should be. Why are there no Indian or Pakistani players who debuted in the mid 2000s and then built a quality Test career?

The Tendulkar, Ponting, Kallis and Sangakkara gen kind of stole the thunder from everyone who should be the best players this decade by playing on far longer than anyone thought.

We can put Sehwag, Gambhir, Younis Khan and Misbah in this period. But yes, none of these guys are in the quality of Tendulkar/Lara/Ponting etc.

 

[Prince EWS]

Are these three head and shoulders above Angelo right now? They are younger but I don't think they are clearly better than him.

Yeah all are really close. I'd rank them Williamson>Mathews>Smith>Root, but there's not a massive difference between them at the moment.

However I think the more interesting comparison lies in the fact that they're all better than Mathews was at the same age. As long as they don't decline at any earlier age than Mathews does they'll have it over him career wise.

 

[Athlai]

Yeah all are really close. I'd rank them Williamson>Mathews>Smith>Root, but there's not a massive difference between them at the moment.

However I think the more interesting comparison lies in the fact that they're all better than Mathews was at the same age. As long as they don't decline at any earlier age than Mathews does they'll have it over him career wise.

Trust you to Jacques 2.0 above Lara/Ponting

 

[91Jmay]

I reckon Williamson will have an inexplicable year of terrible form in the next few years. Mark it down.

 

[Howe_zat]

I reckon Williamson will have an inexplicable year of terrible form in the next few years. Mark it down.

literally everyone has that, including those in the thread title. If you average 55 then a year averaging 90 has to be compensated for somehow

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Pietersen is/ was a better player IMO. That's not a sledge at Root.

Surprised nobody claimed he is not English.

Guys not getting a jokey dig in are missing a trick there.

 

[Flem274*]

I'm kinda rehashing my point buried in the tour thread but I think it's relevant here and I want to expand a bit. I'm thinking out loud as usual so bear with me (or scroll past).

I reckon the biggest "must have" for a talented player to be an ATG is ruthlessness. Some posters/columnists use dominance and aggression to separate players, and that's fine. I think they're missing the point though, it's ruthlessness that makes someone a class above.

Good, world class and "minor" ATG players are either dominant or stoic, or jump between modes with an audible clunk (watch McCullum and Chanderpaul, two very different batsmen of different quality, switch between dominant and stoic. It's like they exchange notes over lunch).

A ruthless batsman does what he needs to do and never looks like he's struggling with himself or the role he's playing for the period of play. He's just there, scoring massive runs with no risk. He goes big often and in various gears. His presence at the crease feels different to the one role guys.

It's what currently separates Smith, Root and Kane from Kohli, Warner, Cook and Mathews imo. Kohli and Warner can tend to be a bit too aggressive (Warner's dayboo innings tho...so much aura), Cook can occasionally go for it but you hear the clunk from Perth and Mathews is guilty of throwing tons away.

My favourite aspect of my post is it will piss off both Viv and Kallis fans.

Just my two cents.

 

[theegyptian]

I'm kinda rehashing my point buried in the tour thread but I think it's relevant here and I want to expand a bit. I'm thinking out loud as usual so bear with me (or scroll past).

I reckon the biggest "must have" for a talented player to be an ATG is ruthlessness. Some posters/columnists use dominance and aggression to separate players, and that's fine. I think they're missing the point though, it's ruthlessness that makes someone a class above.

Good, world class and "minor" ATG players are either dominant or stoic, or jump between modes with an audible clunk (watch McCullum and Chanderpaul, two very different batsmen of different quality, switch between dominant and stoic. It's like they exchange notes over lunch).

A ruthless batsman does what he needs to do and never looks like he's struggling with himself or the role he's playing for the period of play. He's just there, scoring massive runs with no risk. He goes big often and in various gears. His presence at the crease feels different to the one role guys.

It's what currently separates Smith, Root and Kane from Kohli, Warner, Cook and Mathews imo. Kohli and Warner can tend to be a bit too aggressive (Warner's dayboo innings tho...so much aura), Cook can occasionally go for it but you hear the clunk from Perth and Mathews is guilty of throwing tons away.

My favourite aspect of my post is it will piss off both Viv and Kallis fans.

Just my two cents.

Speaking on the purely English level of Root v Cook I'm not sure ruthlessness is the term you want. Or at least Cook has plenty of ruthlessness but in a different way to Root.

If Cook gets in he can bat an enormous time and set up a game - that takes ruthlessness. Root at present seems to have lost that ability. Root of course has other qualities that Cook doesn't; the ability to change gears, to change the momentum of a game in a session or two etc.

They're both ruthless in their own ways. Don't underestimate the abililty to bat a couple of days as you drain the hope from the opposition.

 

[91Jmay]

literally everyone has that, including those in the thread title. If you average 55 then a year averaging 90 has to be compensated for somehow

I think he has a year averaging 20 odd, which no literally everyone doesn't have.