ODI ATG XIs

[TheJediBrah]

God your tone is woeful in conversations. Such a condescending dick.

Trust me, if you explained something this obvious to people multiple times your tone would degenerate similarly

I understand how averages work. Everyone does. My point is, clearly, averages dont matter in ODIs, RPI matter far more. Bevan is overrated because his average is inflated/higher/whatever because of a high proportion of not outs. My point was clearly "people who dont understand how averages work think he must be the best because his average is high, but it's high because of the not outs". But well done you for trying to make a big man out of yourself as usual and belittle others by comparing them to your under-12 team. ****ing hero you are.

ugh

so you're penalizing Bevan for batting lower in the order. And not getting out as much. Just think about that. RPI is nowhere near as good a rating of a batsman than average.

 

[Daemon]

Good discussion guys. Imo Bevan’s SR is too low and his average is inflated by not outs.

 

[Grasshopper]

(reaches for popcorn)

 

[stephen]

You posted one, literally in the post above this one. The one against SA where he chewed up 80 balls of an innings making 33, while all the other bats managed to strike at 60-90.

One needs to look at the fall of wickets in that innings to see the full picture. Bevan was in the middle of a slow collapse and was trying to set himself up to guide the team home, since nobody else was surviving. Arguably another batsman should have slowed down and batted at the same pace.

But ok, if that's the only match we lost because Bevan batted slowly, I'll take that one loss over the countless he won by playing in exactly the same fashion.

 

[stephen]

God your tone is woeful in conversations. Such a condescending dick.

I understand how averages work. Everyone does. My point is, clearly, averages dont matter in ODIs, RPI matter far more. Bevan is overrated because his average is inflated/higher/whatever because of a high proportion of not outs. My point was clearly "people who dont understand how averages work think he must be the best because his average is high, but it's high because of the not outs". But well done you for trying to make a big man out of yourself as usual and belittle others by comparing them to your under-12 team. ****ing hero you are.

I will quote myself because I looked into this:

By comparison, Ponting's rpi is 37.5. He started later than Bevan and batted higher in the order.

Batting higher than 4, Bevan's rpi was 33.5 (4 innings)
Batting at 4, Bevan's rpi was 42.7 (53 innings).
Batting at 5 his rpi was 35.3 (33 innings).
Batting at 6 his rpi was 34.5 (87 innings).
Batting lower than 6 his rpi was 18 (19 innings).

Ponting's rpi batting at 3 was 38.4 (330 innings).

So on the rpi measure, Bevan made more rpi than his atg contemporary when batting in a comparable batting position.

Looking at the top run scorers batting at 6 in ODIs:

Dhoni 4031 runs at 32 rpi ave 46
Bevan 3006 @ 34.5 rpi ave 56
Boucher 2387 @ 24.4 rpi ave 30
Dilshan 2046 @ 23.5 rpi ave 29
Hussey 1942 @ 26.2 rpi ave 40

Bevan averages 10 runs higher in that position than Dhoni and scored 2.5 runs per innings more than Dhoni.

Hussey a distant 3rd behind those two.

Batting number 5 is probably the biggest hole in Bevan's record. In doing so he is behind 14 other players in history, based on average (and I assume RPI as well).

 

[NZTailender]

Bevan's higher average due to not outs is his trade off for batting 4-6. Generally the higher you are in the order, the higher your RPI should be. In a theoretical chase of 300 across every innings, the top order may get the bulk, where the 5 or 6 may get like 30 runs to play with.You'd expect his RPI to be 30, but that looks **** against the openers RPI of 50 or 60 (hypothetically speaking, of course). The jobs are different.

If his average due to not outs overrates him, RPIs due to batting positions also overrates other players.

 

[Victor Ian]

Average SR for Bevan's career was 72.19, Bevan was at 74.16.
Average SR for first 10 years of Dhoni's career was 78.39, Dhoni was at 89.28.

Thanks

Why I thought I couldn't work it out was more to do with reasonable exclusions. I'd have thought only games involving the main teams should count - wasn't sure how to exclude the rest. And perhaps tails and openers shouldn't be included. Nevertheless it seems a fair call that Dhoni struck at a better pace than average, which is what Bevan did (hit at average rpo).

At others, coce again, I really don't think it is fair on Dhoni to poo on his last years. It might hurt his legacy, but in picking an all time 11, I am not picking ol' grey beard, I am picking 10 year peak Dhoni.

 

[TheJediBrah]

At others, coce again, I really don't think it is fair on Dhoni to poo on his last years. It might hurt his legacy, but in picking an all time 11, I am not picking ol' grey beard, I am picking 10 year peak Dhoni.

That's the classis distinction isn't it. When you're picking an All-Time team do you use peaks or do you have to take a player's whole career into account? depending which you go with could lead to very different teams

 

[Victor Ian]

That's the classis distinction isn't it. When you're picking an All-Time team do you use peaks or do you have to take a player's whole career into account? depending which you go with could lead to very different teams

Yeah, it can change things a lot. I don't have any particular number or years, but I like to ignore end of career slumps. A vague gut feel for me is that I am quite happy to discount anything beyond 10 years if it happens to diminish the excellence of a player. I don't produce All time great lists so it is not something I have bothered to codify too strongly.

My key point is that Ponting is much better than the player we imagine over his full career. So is Viv, so is Dhoni. While they are all brilliant anyways, I know and remember them without the end parts.

Just for clarity - I don't go much for small peaks. But 10 years? That's plenty enough.

*I reserve the right to enforce full careers when I'm trolling.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Yeah Ponting is one of the key players I think of in that scenario. If you take his peak 5 or so years he's almost one of your first picked, but over the whole career he drops down significantly because he played on for like 5 years when he was well past his best, and wasn't particularly great in his first 5 years or so either.

 

[h_hurricane]

Missing the point if you think there is a comparison between a bunch of ARs from a single team and an atg bat. And its not about him chasing, which nobody is questioning. Its about how fast his first innings scoring was when a whole team of ARs in comparable batting positions from his time score quicker than him.

Yes, I missed the point on batting first where he did score a bit slower than expected. With the likes of Gilchrist in the team and Mcgrath and Warne in the bowling line up, it would have hardly mattered in the end result anyway, except for very rare instances.

There could be an issue with his strike rate if the opposition is full of all time great hitters in a hypothetical lineup, but that is a risk most people are willing to take with Bevan, especially when he could help them recover from a collapse consistently.

World cup semfinal 1996 comes to mind when Aus were up against a red hot Ambrose.

 

[stephen]

Yes, I missed the point on batting first where he did score a bit slower than expected. With the likes of Gilchrist in the team and Mcgrath and Warne in the bowling line up, it would have hardly mattered in the end result anyway, except for very rare instances.

There could be an issue with his strike rate if the opposition is full of all time great hitters in a hypothetical lineup, but that is a risk most people are willing to take with Bevan, especially when he could help them recover from a collapse consistently.

World cup semfinal 1996 comes to mind when Aus were up against a red hot Ambrose.

Arguably Bevan should have batted ahead of Steve Waugh in the 1996 final he was in such good form. Other than Taylor, none of the other batsmen really batted quickly enough in the first innings of the final, and yet they all found a way of getting out.

 

[srbhkshk]

Thanks

Why I thought I couldn't work it out was more to do with reasonable exclusions. I'd have thought only games involving the main teams should count - wasn't sure how to exclude the rest. And perhaps tails and openers shouldn't be included. Nevertheless it seems a fair call that Dhoni struck at a better pace than average, which is what Bevan did (hit at average rpo).

At others, coce again, I really don't think it is fair on Dhoni to poo on his last years. It might hurt his legacy, but in picking an all time 11, I am not picking ol' grey beard, I am picking 10 year peak Dhoni.

I am not very clear on why to exclude openers, but if we do positions 3-7 ( and only the top 8 teams) -

SR during Bevan's time - 72.5 - Bevan's SR - 73.6 (RPI - 35.8)
SR during Dhoni's 10 years - 80.7 - Dhoni's SR - 88.6 (RPI - 37.0)

 

[Victor Ian]

I am not very clear on why to exclude openers, but if we do positions 3-7 ( and only the top 8 teams) -

SR during Bevan's time - 72.5 - Bevan's SR - 73.6 (RPI - 35.8)
SR during Dhoni's 10 years - 80.7 - Dhoni's SR - 88.6 (RPI - 37.0)

Thanks

I'm not sure why to exclude openers either. I mostly meant I could not think of any well justified reasons to exclude anything but felt someone better versed would know what might pollute the data. Maybe openers bat significantly different, was my vague hunch. During Bevan's career openers went from seeing off the new ball and scoring 50ish to SriLanka changing things up and going hell for leather in the first 15 overs. In Bevan's time, a run a ball off the last ten turned into 100 off the last ten in Dhoni's time. But if comparing against peers - I suppose it just doesn't matter.

 

[stephen]

Bevan's strike rate was average for his era. Dhoni's strike rate is a little above average for his era. Both were exceptional batsmen.

I think if Bevan was playing today he would not stand out as much and paradoxically would be considered more of a test player than limited overs player.

Then again I think with bigger bats, two new balls and roped in boundaries I think he'd play more innings like his world XI innings.

 

[vcs]

Bevan's shots made it look as though he never timed a ball properly. My abiding memory of him is mistiming the ball to some outfielder on those huge Australian grounds and him running 2s and 3s as a result.

 

[Bolo]

There could be an issue with his strike rate if the opposition is full of all time great hitters in a hypothetical lineup, but that is a risk most people are willing to take with Bevan, especially when he could help them recover from a collapse consistently.

As the batting gets stronger, the value of a guy like bevan decreases. At the extreme end is kallis, who is the best bat in a weak side, but a horrible liability in an atg one. I would pick afridi as a specalist bat ahead of kallis in an atg side.

Bevan isnt so extreme, and needs to be compared to proper bats. The logic could lead to guys like symonds and klusenar being better fits as bats, even if they arent as good. Im not sure- these guys would definitely give bigger team scores more often than bevan (after the top order succeeds, which it usually will). But if guys like viv and ab are firing you probably dont need these runs anyway, so bevan could be the best pick despite being the wrong one the majority of the time.

 

[OverratedSanity]

.

Bevan isnt so extreme, and needs to be compared to proper bats. The logic could lead to guys like symonds and klusenar being better fits as bats, even if they arent as good. Im not sure- these guys would definitely give bigger team scores more often than bevan (after the top order succeeds, which it usually will). But if guys like viv and ab are firing you probably dont need these runs anyway, so bevan could be the best pick despite being the wrong one the majority of the time.

I've seen this said before but Australia's team in Bevan's time was ridiculously stacked (only a bit worse than an all time world xi lineup) and still needed him to bail them out lots of times. It's an attribute that will be highly useful even in hypothetical ATG XIs because even great top orders fail a lot more than people might think.

 

[TheJediBrah]

As the batting gets stronger, the value of a guy like bevan decreases.

I'm not saying this true at all, but even if it was, it's assuming that your ATG side is playing normal sides. If your ATG side is playing another ATG side then the batting isn't really "stronger" than a normal international side, relative to the opposition

Bevan's shots made it look as though he never timed a ball properly. My abiding memory of him is mistiming the ball to some outfielder on those huge Australian grounds and him running 2s and 3s as a result.

Sounds about right. Meanwhile you'd have young Andrew Symonds somehow timing drives to deep cover on the full and gets out for 10 (10).

Funny game cricket

 

[harsh.ag]

ABdV is underrated as a modern day Bevan. People talk about Dhoni a lot, and rightfully so, but ABdV at 5 is most of the Bevan you need in the ATG side. 6 and 7 should be high SR finishers. Maybe Dhoni. Maybe not.