Virat Kohli, the greatest ODI bat ever?

[Pap Finn Keighl]

No era adjustments ?

After era adjustments , Dhoni just better.
Otherwise, 53@90 miles better than 54@74

Dhoni is like half Sachin half Bevan.


This is my assumption

Bevan era
Beven stats 54 at 74
Dhoni stats 48 at 80

Dhoni era
Dhoni stats 53 at 90
Bevan stats 60 at 80

 

[Borges]

After era adjustments , Dhoni just better.

Now make the ground size adjustments. And then the other players in the team adjustments, And then all the other remaining adjustments that need to be made.
What would the numbers look like then?

 

[stephen]

Bevan offers nothing that Dhoni and Kohli don’t do better.. Dhoni can also keep.
Symonds shouldn’t be in an ATG team.

I think you'll find a not insignificant number of people do

Well probably, but Indian cricket fans aren't exactly the finest judges of Indian cricketers.

Dhoni = Bevan + attacking ability

+ He is the only batsman with great stats in every position played.

+ He can keep wickets if needed

+ He is probably most intelligent Cricketer in the history

For the AR spot , Kapil > Klusener

This was the set of posts that I was responding to.

OS, who I generally rate as a pretty decent poster gets sandwiched between two posts that proved my point.

Both akilana and pap finn keighl showing the kind of one eyed beliefs that need challenging.

It's one thing to say that Bevan and Dhoni are close. It's another thing altogether to say that Dhoni is flat out better than Bevan and that Symonds has no place in an ATG side. Or that Kapil was better than Klusener (he wasn't). Kapil was a more vulnerable Klusener with the bat and would have barely made the 90s SA team with the ball (which is no slight on Kapil, he'd be competing against Donald, Pollock, de Villiers, Kallis and Klusener).

And I enjoyed watching Kapil in the 92 WC. Just like I enjoyed watching Dhoni on numerous occasions chase down big totals. But Bevan did the same thing against much better bowling attacks in a much tougher era for batting on grounds that were big enough to run 3s and with a pre-00s bat (bat technology around the turn of the century became a LOT better).

Personally I think ODIs were at their best in the period from around 92 to 03, which was when Wasim and Waqar both retired. There were so many good ODI bowlers, scores were lower but not 80s-low. Virtually all the odi sides were competitive, including Zimbabwe and three of the four world cups were unpredictable and extremely competitive. And were it not for Symonds' magical innings in 03 even that cup might have been competitive.

 

[Borges]

It's one thing to say that Bevan and Dhoni are close. It's another thing altogether to say that Dhoni is flat out better than Bevan

But of course not yet another thing altogether to say that Bevan is flat out better than Dhoni.

BTW, Symonds should be no where near an ATG side (first X1). In any format.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Now make the ground size adjustments. And then the other players in the team adjustments, And then all the other remaining adjustments that need to be made.
What would the numbers look like then?

Bevan was slow for his era
Dhoni was a fast scorer

 

[Bolo]

Akilana has been found guilty of the outrageous claim that two atg bats combined might be better than one.

OS has been found guilty of expressing an accurate factual statement on how many rank Dhoni. Actually, he is particularly guilty. The fact that is disagrees with his own opinion must mean he's breaking out some dirty Jedi reverse psychology mind tricks.

Pap Finn has been found guilty of making a legitimate (if hyperbolic) argument for why Dhoni is ahead. Unfortunately it came with his trademarked 'Kapil is the greatest' unrelated signature.

Almost nobody is claiming Dhoni is a flat out better bat than Bevan. Everyone agrees that Bevan's era was tougher. You are fighting a strawman here.

I leave you with this horribly biased nationalist rant from OS.

Look, it's fine if you want to do your mental gymnastics to rank Bevan higher, I don't even think I myself rate Dhoni above him because of how much his last few years have hurt the team.

Don't pretend it's not close though. Because it is. That's all anyone is really disagreeing with.

 

[Borges]

Bevan was slow for his era
Dhoni was a fast scorer

I see! Thank you.
Though I suppose 'slow for his era' does not make Bevan a poorer player; he won enough games scoring at that that rate.

 

[trundler]

This was the set of posts that I was responding to.

OS, who I generally rate as a pretty decent poster gets sandwiched between two posts that proved my point.

Both akilana and pap finn keighl showing the kind of one eyed beliefs that need challenging.

It's one thing to say that Bevan and Dhoni are close. It's another thing altogether to say that Dhoni is flat out better than Bevan and that Symonds has no place in an ATG side. Or that Kapil was better than Klusener (he wasn't). Kapil was a more vulnerable Klusener with the bat and would have barely made the 90s SA team with the ball (which is no slight on Kapil, he'd be competing against Donald, Pollock, de Villiers, Kallis and Klusener).

And I enjoyed watching Kapil in the 92 WC. Just like I enjoyed watching Dhoni on numerous occasions chase down big totals. But Bevan did the same thing against much better bowling attacks in a much tougher era for batting on grounds that were big enough to run 3s and with a pre-00s bat (bat technology around the turn of the century became a LOT better).

Personally I think ODIs were at their best in the period from around 92 to 03, which was when Wasim and Waqar both retired. There were so many good ODI bowlers, scores were lower but not 80s-low. Virtually all the odi sides were competitive, including Zimbabwe and three of the four world cups were unpredictable and extremely competitive. And were it not for Symonds' magical innings in 03 even that cup might have been competitive.

Err, you're at fault for taking a hyperbolic PFK post at face value.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Kapil was a top 5 ish bowler and top 10 ish batsman most part of 80s.
He would make in to any team of 90s with his bowling alone. Klusner was a border line specialist bowler , Kapil was borderline great. That's a big difference. He maintained number 1 allrounder status straight 10 years , that too when other 3 greats playing at their prime.
Klusner bat stats 41 at 90 in a relatively easier era ( 8.5 years )
Between 1982 and 1988 , for 7 years Kapil averaged 30 at 106 .. which is on par with Klusner stats without era adjustment and just 1.5 year short of Klusner total career.
But yes , overall klusner was slightly better batsman, but Kapil bowling was far better.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

I see! Thank you.
Though I suppose 'slow for his era' does not make Bevan a poorer player; he won enough games scoring at that that rate.

That's why most people rates him among top 10 odi batsmen alltime.

In my list dhoni is 5th and Bevan at 8.

Sachin
Viv
ABDV
Kohli
Dhoni
Lara
Ponting
Bevan
Abbas
Jones

 

[Kilowatt]

I have little doubt that in five years, there will be similar discrediting of Virat by the resident Aussies in favour of some Australian batsmen (maybe Warner) or some batsman 'who we remember because of his performances against Australia'.

 

[trundler]

Now Kilowatt Vs Stephen is something I'm very keen to watch.

 

[stephen]

Err, you're at fault for taking a hyperbolic PFK post at face value.

So which of his posts aren't hyperbolic?

 

[Kilowatt]

As for Dhoni, he is likely a superior bat to even Virat. Average of over 80 @ No.3 despite the small sample size is no joke especially given how early it came in his career.

His ability to consistently build innings, survive difficult conditions with little support and finally accelerate at will would have likely seen him break all ODI records. Even today, it wouldn't be a bad bet to bat him at No.3 if we hadn't got Kohli. It takes him a while to settle down at his age just like Gayle, except the match situations he normally comes in at don't afford him that luxury unlike Gayle.

There's so many matches he won at the end with his big hitting ability where Bevan would have obviously failed.

 

[stephen]

I have little doubt that in five years, there will be similar discrediting of Virat by the resident Aussies in favour of some Australian batsmen (maybe Warner) or some batsman 'who we remember because of his performances against Australia'.

I doubt it. Most Aussies recognise class when we see it, which is why only rate Kapil as a very good cricketer and not the second coming.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

What's the wattage on Stephen? Mega? Tera?

I mean it has to be something greater than Kilo.

 

[Borges]

Now Kilowatt Vs Stephen is something I'm very keen to watch.

Yes, these two would be pretty evenly matched; should be a very exciting contest.

 

[trundler]

Match-up of the year. Lillee Vs Richards, Tendulkar Vs McGrath, etc.

 

[stephen]

As for Dhoni, he is likely a superior bat to even Virat. Average of over 80 @ No.3 despite the small sample size is no joke especially given how early it came in his career.

His ability to consistently build innings, survive difficult conditions with little support and finally accelerate at will would have likely seen him break all ODI records. Even today, it wouldn't be a bad bet to bat him at No.3 if we hadn't got Kohli. It takes him a while to settle down at his age just like Gayle, except the match situations he normally comes in at don't afford him that luxury unlike Gayle.

There's so many matches he won at the end with his big hitting ability where Bevan would have obviously failed.

So I'm assuming that you rate Voges as the second best batsman ever. After all, his average came after 31 innings which is a far larger sample size than Dhoni's 18 innings batting at number 3. Voges average of 61.87 is no joke especially given how late it came in his career.

His ability to consistently build innings, survive difficult conditions with little support and finally accelerate at will would have seen him break almost all test records. Even today, it wouldn't be a bad bet to bat him if we didn't have 6 batsmen under 35. It takes him a little while to settle down at his age just like Tendulkar, except the match situations he normally comes in at normally don't afford him any balls to face, just like Tendulkar.

There's so many matches he won with his big scoring ability where any other batsman would have obviously failed.

Sarcasm aside, nobody is saying Dhoni isn't an ATG batsman and wicketkeeper. It's just that he's not the best in class as a batsman. Being second best is no shame. Except when you're in a world cup semi final (sorry SA).

 

[SillyCowCorner1]