The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[Malcolm]

Well, I could explain this. Jadeja's average in most countries abroad is better than Anderson's in likewise countries. These are small sample sizes admittedly, but they are already rough equivalent of Anderson's best performances abroad. Which means, Jadeja has to be thrash abroad for the second half of his career(a rough equivalent of Anderson's worst performances abroad). I don't see this coming as Jadeja is on an upward curve as a cricketer in alien conditions (much like Anderson a decade back or Kumble 2 decades back).

So you still stand by your theory that Jadeja is the better traveling bowler because he averages 25 in SA (1 match) and 28 in AUS (2 match)?

And, I do have my short comings as an individual, stats analysis is certainly not one of them. I don't even need to look at cricinfo to look at the averages of several great cricketers as it is already in my subconscious mind.Could do a 3 by 3 digit multiplication without a calculator if it gets to that point. Not exaggerating it one bit

I believe you, my friend.

 

[Slifer]

I threw them in the same bucket which is "below ATG level but were great servants for their country". Here's what I said:



There's quite clearly a huge spectrum and maybe you could split a whole bunch of players. Zaheer would be at the bottom of that pile and Walsh at the top (though TBF maybe I'm slightly underrating him because I mostly watched him against Australia). You don't get 300 test wickets while being complete and utter garbage. That's something only 24 pace bowlers in history have managed.

Whether you place Walsh at the bottom of the ATG tree or at the top of the ATVG tree is largely a matter of how many players you put in each category.

Frankly though, there are 20 or more bowlers in history I'd have ahead of Walsh. From the top of my head - Marshall, Ambrose, Garner, Holding, Croft, Roberts, Bishop, Hadlee, Donald, Pollock, Steyn, Philander, Trueman, Statham, McGrath, Lillee, Davidson, Lindwall, Wasim, Waqar and Imran. There are a few others like Reid and Harris who had quite short careers but were better while they played who I wouldn't consider to be ATG. Walsh is somewhere in the mix with those guys for me.

Among west Indians imo only Ambrose, holding, Marshall and garner are definitely greater than Walsh. Bishop and Croft simply didn't play enough. Philander is also not greater. No way. I'll concede that the others mentioned were. But that still doesn't stop Walsh from being an atg. I could reasonably rank 20 batsmen above Allan border, still doesn't stop him from being an atg

 

[Jack1]

Not at all.

I am not arguing he is on par with McGrath, Marshall, Akram, et al but he is a great bowler.

At his best he's been great, one of the best. Particularly in England. But overall, good. For me.

 

[Malcolm]

I don't have any statistical background but I will try to explain my perspective on Anderson's career statistically.

As I said before, Anderson's career is unusually long for a fast bowler that even if you exclude his first 7 years, he still has a reasonably long career for a fast bowler with 105 test matches.

Anderson till 31 Dec 2009

matches 44
Wickets 148
average 35
home 30
away 45

Anderson since 01 Jan 2010

matches 105
Wickets 427
average 24
home 21
away 29

A bowler with an average of 24 in 105 matches over a span of 10 years is an all-time great bowler in my book.

 

[h_hurricane]

So you still stand by your theory that Jadeja is the better traveling bowler because he averages 25 in SA (1 match) and 28 in AUS (2 match)?

On his best trip to Australia, Anderson averaged 26. His worst has been several magnitudes higher. He never averaged sub 30 in any of his trips to SA.

Anderson has performed well in a sum total of 2 out of 7 series in Aus and SA. In Jadeja's case it is already 2 and I don't see him having a failure in all of the future series there.

We have already seen the best and worst of Anderson abroad. Jadeja's worst phase abroad is probably over while he he has put in some good performances abroad. I don't see Jadeja putting up as many bad performances as Anderson abroad (not just on an absolute basis, but on a percentage basis as well).

 

[h_hurricane]

I don't have any statistical background but I will try to explain my perspective on Anderson's career statistically.

As I said before, Anderson's career is unusually long for a fast bowler that even if you exclude his first 7 years, he still has a reasonably long career for a fast bowler with 105 test matches.

Anderson till 31 Dec 2009

matches 44
Wickets 148
average 35
home 30
away 45

Anderson since 01 Jan 2010

matches 105
Wickets 427
average 24
home 21
away 29

A bowler with an average of 24 in 105 matches over a span of 10 years is an all-time great bowler in my book.

The issue with this is that you are giving a free pass to him for his first 44 matches. Had he debuted in Jan 2010 and retired now, he would have been an ATG. If you remove a long baptism period, most ATVG players will look like ATG

Also, that away average of 45 for a 7 year period is awful. No ATG player has ever been that trash for that long.

 

[Malcolm]

The issue with this is that you are giving a free pass to him for his first 44 matches. Had he debuted in Jan 2010 and retired now, he would have been an ATG.

So basically you are punishing him for making it into the national side much earlier than he should've. That's not how I view a career.

If you remove a long baptism period, most ATVG players will look like ATG

Could you name a few ATVG bowlers averaging sub 25 over a continuous stretch of 100 plus matches?

 

[h_hurricane]

So basically you are punishing him for making it into the national side much earlier than he should've. That's not how I view a career.

I am not punishing him but cannot take out one part (a huge part by the way) to make him look better than what he is. Anderson started playing around 20-21, a perfectly normal age for a cricketer to debut. It is not as if he started at 16 or 17, an abnormally young age like Tendulkar.

Could you name a few ATVG bowlers averaging sub 25 over a continuous stretch of 100 plus matches?

If this was the only part of Anderson's career, he would have been an ATG in my book, just like what I mentioned in my previous post .

 

[Malcolm]

I am not punishing him but cannot take out one part (a huge part by the way) to make him look better than what he is. Anderson started playing around 20-21, a perfectly normal age for a cricketer to debut. It is not as if he started at 16 or 17, an abnormally young age like Tendulkar.
If this was the only part of Anderson's career, he would have been an ATG in my book, just like what I mentioned in my previous post .

Of course you can remove a part of one's career if the remaining part is as long as a normal career, which is true in Anderson's case. At least that is my view.

I wouldn't rate Tendulkar, Ponting or Richards any higher if they had hung their hats 2-3 years before they actually did and ended up with an average of 55 plus or vice versa. Playing longer shouldn't be penalized.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Of course you can remove a part of one's career if the remaining part is as long as a normal career, which is true in Anderson's case. At least that is my view.

I wouldn't rate Tendulkar, Ponting or Richards any higher if they had hung their hats 2-3 years before they actually did and ended up with an average of 55 plus or vice versa. Playing longer shouldn't be penalized.

I agree with this. In boxing I consider Muhammad Ali to be the greatest heavyweight. The fact that he shuffled into the ring against Holmes and Berbick when well past his best doesn’t change that.

 

[Jack1]

I agree with this. In boxing I consider Muhammad Ali to be the greatest heavyweight. The fact that he shuffled into the ring against Holmes and Berbick when well past his best doesn’t change that.

I don't.

Of course you can remove a part of one's career if the remaining part is as long as a normal career, which is true in Anderson's case. At least that is my view.

I wouldn't rate Tendulkar, Ponting or Richards any higher if they had hung their hats 2-3 years before they actually did and ended up with an average of 55 plus or vice versa. Playing longer shouldn't be penalized.

Most players drop off at the end of their career. Anderson is doing the opposite. Need to compare two apples not apple and an orange - if you are then fine.

 

[bagapath]

Zaheer
Brett Lee
Stuart Broad
Srinath
Harmison
Caddick

They all belong to a family

Mixing them with

Walsh
Gillespie
S Pollock
McDermott
Ntini
Akhthar


Is not right. IMHO

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Where does Mohammad Rafique fits into the conversation about SLA's?

 

[Jack1]

Zaheer
Brett Lee
Stuart Broad
Srinath
Harmison
Caddick

They all belong to a family

Mixing them with

Walsh
Gillespie
S Pollock
McDermott
Ntini
Akhthar


Is not right. IMHO

Interesting way of putting it. I do agree.

Where does Mohammad Rafique fits into the conversation about SLA's?

About on a par with the King of Spain. In other words, he's not up to much.

 

[Red]

It's not 100% accurate, but I've always thought that if a cricketer from another nation could hypothetically make their way into the New Zealand all time XI comfortably by displacing someone already in the team, they're an ATG. And I mean no offence to NZ, the gauge just seems to work.

Turner
Dempster
Williamson
Crowe
Taylor
Reid/Cairns
McCullum +
Hadlee
Vettori
Cowie/Boult
Bond

 

[Jack1]

It's not 100% accurate, but I've always thought that if a cricketer from another nation could hypothetically make their way into the New Zealand all time XI comfortably by displacing someone already in the team, they're an ATG. And I mean no offence to NZ, the gauge just seems to work.

Turner
Dempster
Williamson
Crowe
Taylor
Reid/Cairns
McCullum +
Hadlee
Vettori
Cowie/Boult
Bond

u might be on to something minus Vettori (he's weak)

edit: they have a hopeless collection of spinners for their all star team, comical almost. maybe we need a placeholder that's on the cusp instead of Vettori like Ravi Ashwin.

 

[ImpatientLime]

Pollock could bat too. 32.31 average with the bat. Pollock was a better all-rounder than Botham and it's not even close that's how good Pollock was.

one scored 14 test match centuries, the other 2.

I agree with this. In boxing I consider Muhammad Ali to be the greatest heavyweight. The fact that he shuffled into the ring against Holmes and Berbick when well past his best doesn’t change that.

yep. carlos monzon was 16-3 at one point and went onto be arguably the greatest middleweight that ever lived.

the idea that you can't be quite ready for the big time when you first burst through and it impacts your overall rating is a nonsense known only to stats obsessed games.

 

[Jack1]

one scored 14 test match centuries, the other 2.



yep. carlos monzon was 16-3 at one point and went onto be arguably the greatest middleweight that ever lived.

the idea that you can't be quite ready for the big time when you first burst through and it impacts your overall rating is a nonsense known only to stats obsessed games.

Fair point, Botham was a match winner with bat and ball whereas Pollock was steady eddy.. a damn good steady eddy however..

 

[Coronis]

You don’t get to to cherrypick peoples careers and only rate them on the parts of their career that suit you. You also can’t be complete **** for a third of your career and be considered an ATG.

 

[Logan]

Zaheer
Brett Lee
Stuart Broad
Srinath
Harmison
Caddick

They all belong to a family

Mixing them with

Walsh
Gillespie
S Pollock
McDermott
Ntini
Akhthar


Is not right. IMHO

Mixing Pollock with anyone with maybe the exception of Walsh is a crime.