The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[Jono]

Just took a look. Guptil and Sharma have such a similar ODI record. Add that both of them stink up tests too, and the only thing splitting them stats wise is their amount of toes.

 

[honestbharani]

Not to forget Ganguly was actually better. There was a time in the late 90s when I felt he was more valuable to us as an ODI opener outside the subcontinent than Sachin was. And the reason the stats look better for Vettori is that he does no tplay on the flat decks in the SC as much as Harby does. Harbhajan was just as good an ODI spinner and one of the very best we have had, as a containing bowler. Not that he did not pick wickets, but he was a defensive option for us most times. And isn't there a "better" in WC KO games argument to be had for Bhajji over Vettori, if that is used to argue every other comparison?

 

[OverratedSanity]

This is going to be really unpopular I know because of WCs, but imo Vettori was a better ODI bowler than Warne ..(runs away)... He might have struggled to take wickets at Test level, but jeez he was something with the white ball.

I like Vettori but come on.

 

[Jono]

All 3 are comparable. Saying one is definitely better than the other very difficult. Doesn't seem controversial to pick one.

Ganguly 98-2000 was a great peak though.

edit: @HB

 

[honestbharani]

On Vettori. I can't remember his exact best period, but I did a random query from 2003 & this is what it came up with. Bowling records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

That is unbelievable economy for a spinner. The likes of Harby isn't even close.

Vettori may have generally played for a weak side, but he was a genuine ATG ODI bowler... his ER here is phenomenal, especially considering ODI pitches in NZ offered him nothing.

This is going to be really unpopular I know because of WCs, but imo Vettori was a better ODI bowler than Warne ..(runs away)... He might have struggled to take wickets at Test level, but jeez he was something with the white ball.

We'll just have to disagree with this and I like how you say Ganguly and Sharma & even Guptill I'd take Guptill in ODIs above either Sharma or Ganguly any day of the week.

Mate, I am not denying that Guptill and Vettori are excellent ODI cricketers. But I think the same of Harbhajan and Rohit Sharma. And I actually rate Ganguly as a better opener than Nohit and Guptill. I would concede that Vettori's figures are better than I remember but even then, I dont think it means he is easily better than Harbhajan and esp. Kumble as ODI spinners. Arguably better? Sure. But it is not a cut and dry argument like Bond and Hadlee over any other Indian ODI bowler or Sachin, Virat, MSD over any other NZ ODI bat. That was my point.

 

[honestbharani]

All 3 are comparable. Saying one is definitely better than the other very difficult. Doesn't seem controversial to pick one.

Ganguly 98-2000 was a great peak though.

edit: @HB

Fair enough. To me, given the attacks and conditions that Ganguly faced, esp. in the 90s, he is still better for me than Rohit and Guptill but of course,t hese guys have more time left on their careers and can definitely over take him in my rating of them.

 

[Zinzan]

I like Vettori but come on.

The evidence is pretty overwhelming to be fair. 3rd best ER (75+ wickets) in the 13 years between 2003-2015, with only ATG's McGrath and Pollock ahead, and that was across 198 games. I don't even know if I could get a better period than 2003, but I just remember he didn't start off that well in ODIs in his first 4-5 years since debuted at 18.

The fact he plays half his cricket on NZ wickets makes his ER of 3.97 throughout that period almost freakish.

 

[Zinzan]

Mate, I am not denying that Guptill and Vettori are excellent ODI cricketers. But I think the same of Harbhajan and Rohit Sharma. And I actually rate Ganguly as a better opener than Nohit and Guptill.

I'll disagree respectfully about Ganguly or Sharma being quite as good as Guptil, but I could see how one may argue that

I would concede that Vettori's figures are better than I remember but even then, I dont think it means he is easily better than Harbhajan and esp. Kumble as ODI spinners. Arguably better? Sure. t.

I can't even respectfully disagree about Harby being even close to Vettori as a ODI bowler (or white ball bowler ) because it's not even close, Kumble I do rate a lot more highly than Harby, but not as valuable as Vettori in ODIs , especially when you consider eras and where Vettori played most of his cricket.

I think it's easy to forget just how good Vettori was with the white ball simply because he had such a bad SR in Tests and simply wasn't a great Test bowler. .

 

[Zinzan]

I like Vettori but come on.

Pie man Warnie gets tragically overrated in ODIs, apart from one great '99 WC.

Saqlain, Murali and Vettori were all superior ODI bowlers.

 

[OverratedSanity]

The evidence is pretty overwhelming to be fair. 3rd best ER (75+ wickets) in the 13 years between 2003-2015, with only ATG's McGrath and Pollock ahead, and that was across 198 games. I don't even know if I could get a better period than 2003, but I just remember he didn't start off that well in ODIs in his first 4-5 years since debuted at 18.

The fact he plays half his cricket on NZ wickets makes his ER of 3.97 throughout that period almost freakish.

More economical bowler, sure. But Warne took as manywickets as Vettori did in 100 fewer ODIs. That is a humongous difference in striking ability.

Pie man Warnie gets tragically overrated in ODIs, apart from one great '99 WC.

Saqlain, Murali and Vettori were all superior ODI bowlers.

That may be true but it's irrelevant to whether he was worse than Vettori.

 

[harsh.ag]

Vettori was damn good in ODIs. Whole match winning vs match saving thing though again. Always going to have plenty of people backing the former much more than the latter. And they have a point too. Just like the other side do. Vettori isn't capable of what Warne did in the '99 semis and final. If you are looking for big game performance (and you presumably are while picking ATXIs supposedly playing against other ATXIs), then there is every reason to prefer Warne over Vettori.

 

[harsh.ag]

More economical bowler, sure. But Warne took as manywickets as Vettori did in 100 fewer ODIs. That is a humongous difference in striking ability.

Yeah, difference is staggering. Plus the difference in ER between the two is minuscule. The SR difference is over the top.

 

[Mike5181]

Yeah, Economy Rate isn't the be all and end all. Opposition teams generally found it pretty easy to sit on Vettori for 40-45 off his ten. And, yeah, while that 10 or so runs he might have saved were valuable, there were times when the extra wicket would have been even more so.

Bowling records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Honestly, if you're talking Australian spinners. I'd have Hogg ahead of him, let alone Warne.

 

[Zinzan]

More economical bowler, sure. But Warne took as manywickets as Vettori did in 100 fewer ODIs. That is a humongous difference in striking ability.

.

Clearly I put more weighting on ODI ERs than you do.

People used to argue Vettori's Test ER was underrated because it gave NZ control, but I always argued Tests were about taking 20 wickets, but ODI's ER is a huge thing.

 

[Zinzan]

Yeah, Economy Rate isn't the be all and end all. Opposition teams generally found it pretty easy to sit on Vettori for 40-45 off his ten. And, yeah, while that 10 or so runs he might have saved via tight bowling was valuable, there were times when the extra wicket would have been more valuable.

Bowling records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Honestly, if you're talking Australian spinners. I'd have Hogg ahead of him, let alone Warne.

SR's aren't the be all and end all either, & if they were Mitchell McClenaghan, Matt Henry & Corey Anderson are suddenly three of the greatest ODI bowlers of all time

I think they're all in the top 10-15 of all time when it comes to SRs.

 

[watson]

Why not have the likes of both Warne and Vettori in the team? One bowler to pin down one end while the other bowler strikes at the other.

In fact you could argue that each type of bowler couldn't exist without the other.

 

[harsh.ag]

Zinny, Vettori's ER is 4.12 while Warne's is 4.25, while Warne's SR is 36.3 and Vettori's is 46.0

I mean, surely you can see why most people would prefer Warne. In 100 overs, Warne would take 3 more wickets and give away 13 more runs. Pretty handy trade-off that.

Few extra points to Vettori given that he kept his ER intact in the faster batting period post 2010 though.

 

[honestbharani]

Vettori was damn good in ODIs. Whole match winning vs match saving thing though again. Always going to have plenty of people backing the former much more than the latter. And they have a point too. Just like the other side do. Vettori isn't capable of what Warne did in the '99 semis and final. If you are looking for big game performance (and you presumably are while picking ATXIs supposedly playing against other ATXIs), then there is every reason to prefer Warne over Vettori.

Dont forget that performance of his in the 96 semi either. Else it was Windies who would have made it through and who knows, might well have won the trophy. Lara in king form, and a team full of players who can handle the spinners well... Might have been a better match up than that Aussie side

 

[honestbharani]

Z, we should just agree to disagree here as you seem to rate Vettori waaaaay higher than most other folks would as an ODI player. Even if I were to give you that trade off, surely you can see that the match up between the AT NZ and IND XI is still even stevens. 3 ATG batsmen Vs 3 ATG bowlers ( at least per your opinion.)



And lets not forget Bond will be more injured than even Zak would.

 

[Mike5181]

SR's aren't the be all and end all either, & if they were Mitchell McClenaghan, Matt Henry & Corey Anderson are suddenly three of the greatest ODI bowlers of all time

I think they're all in the top 10-15 of all time when it comes to SRs.

I never said it was. It's just one part of the story.

What statistics will never tell you is that McClenaghan had a rabbit's foot in his pocket during those games, though.