DoG's Top 100 Test Batsmen Countdown Thread

[kyear2]

Does it really make a difference though?

 

[mr_mister]

Means you have to click next page less times while reading a thread I guess

 

[ataraxia]

Under General Settings > Thread Display Options. Must be useful on mobile.

 

[Athlai]

40ppp is the only way to live.

 

[jaideep]

I think AB de Villiers should be next.

 

[OverratedSanity]

de villiers will be top 20 imo

 

[jaideep]

de villiers will be top 20 imo

I dont think he will be top 20.His adjusted stats will be similar(slightly better) to Inzamam's adjusted stats.

 

[ataraxia]

Surprisingly low strike rate of a mere 54. Effected by his save-the-game innings I think. Probably will come up soon if not next.

 

[Logan]

No batsman has made batting look more easy than ABD in the last 25 years I have been watching cricket IMO.

 

[OverratedSanity]

AB has a great peak which counts for 20% of the points, his longevity isn't great but it's only 10%. He should be quite high imo.

 

[Days of Grace]

No.27

George Headley (West Indies) 807

Quality Points: 762
Career Points: 45

Career/Runs: 1930-1954, 2190 (rank 103)

Overall average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate: 60.24 (60.83) 54.22 (54.75) 48.32 (44.12) (rank 11)
50 Innings Peak Average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate (1930-1954): 60.24 54.22 48.32 (rank 77)
Non-Home Average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate: 48.73 44.30 47.13 (rank 56)
Quality Opposition Average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate: 61.92 55.57 48.33 (rank 6)

No.27 may be slightly lower than what many people were envisioning for George Headley, the 'Black Bradman'. He carried the West Indies through their formative years and lost a lot of his career to the Second World War. Up to the end of 1939, he had played 19 matches and averaged 66.72 (66.04), all of his runs scored against quality opposition. If he had never come back after the war, he would have been ranked at no.23 with 811 points, pointing to the fact that while he got more career points, he ultimately suffered because of a drop in his quality. He loses out somewhat in the overall, peak, and non-home categories because he did not bat in enough innings to get the full allotment of points. In addition, his peak ranking of no.77 indicates that while his overall stats are superb, George Headley unfortunately did not play enough test cricket to rank within the top 20 of this analysis.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Interesting. Should've just stayed retired.

@DoG How is his 50 innings peak calculated when he only played 40 innings?

 

[_00_deathscar]

Was AB really a top 20 test batsman of all time? He was a hell of a player but that seems generous (if he does end up there).

 

[OverratedSanity]

Was AB really a top 20 test batsman of all time? He was a hell of a player but that seems generous (if he does end up there).

I'd say he's bunched in with several batsmen in the 20-35 range for me. I'd have him lower than he is in this list but that's just because I value longevity and availability a lot more than others do. On just sheer ability, he's up there.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Overall average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate: 60.24 (60.83) 54.22 (54.75) 48.32 (44.12) (rank 11)

Suprised that there are 10 batsmen ahead of him here.

 

[Days of Grace]

Interesting. Should've just stayed retired.

@DoG How is his 50 innings peak calculated when he only played 40 innings?

If a player bats in less than 50 innings, then their peak is their career, but they lose points because they didn't play in 50 innings. That is why Headley is only ranked no.77 in peak, because a lot of batsmen averaged more over 50 innings and actually batted in 50 innings. In addition, he is only ranked no.11 overall because once again he batted in less than 50 innings.

For overall and peak:
50 or more innings: full points
20 innings: 70% of full points
10 innings: 50% of points
0 innings: 0% of points

i.e. 38 innings = 88% of full points, 12 innings = 54% of full points, etc.

Non-home and quality opposition
25 or more innings: full points
10 innings: 70% of full points
5 innings: 50% of points
0 innings: 0% of points

 

[StephenZA]

If we talking de Villiers and not the other AB. Then how the hell is a 13 year Test career that includes wicket-keeping not long enough for longevity?

 

[OverratedSanity]

If we talking de Villiers and not the other AB. Then how the hell is a 13 year Test career that includes wicket-keeping not long enough for longevity?

Im talking about it relative to other batsmen Id rank in the top 20, who almost all have 15+ year careers with basically no breaks apart from injuries.

 

[Days of Grace]

No.26

Virender Sehwag (India) 808

Quality Points: 743
Career Points: 65

Career/Runs: 2001-2013, 8503 (rank 32)

Overall average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate: 45.82 (49.43) 44.28 (47.77) 75.19 (82.18) (rank 21)
50 Innings Peak Average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate (2008-2010): 59.21 56.84 86.09 (rank 24)
Non-Home Average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate: 40.87 39.49 73.13 (rank 65)
Quality Opposition Average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate: 45.33 44.33 75.66 (rank 33)

Write-up by OverratedSanity
There was a glorious bluntness to everything Sehwag. Whether it was his infamous press conferences in the tests against Bangladesh (bluntly calling them a very ordinary team who wrent capable of taking 20 wickets) or his answer to a question about whether Greg Chappell helped his batting during his time as coach ("No"), or his idea of how to keep Amla off strike in a test India were trying to win with time running out (intentionally throwing the ball over the boundary rope). Sehwag's answer to all of these was the most obvious one yet one which no one else would dare choose. And his batting was exactly the same. He's probably higher on this list than most of us snobs would like but its appropriate that a batsman who completely broke the accepted norms about batting would sort of break the formula in a statistical exercise as well.

 

[honestbharani]

Never forget the fact that he once hit Abdul Razzaq out of the park to ensure they got a different ball which will not reverse swing.