DoG's Top 100 Test Batsmen Countdown Thread

[Migara]

Oh dear me. This is the problem with automated stats systems, they don't account for the true impact a player had.

Automated systems >> Subjective assessments

 

[Days of Grace]

No.23

Younis Khan (Pakistan) 810

Quality Points: 729
Career Points: 81

Career/Runs: 2000-2017, 10099 (rank 12)

Overall average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate: 48.36 (52.05) 44.04 (47.41) 47.23 (52.12) (rank 30)
50 Innings Peak Average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate (2005-2009): 61.45 55.31 51.33 (rank 36)
Non-Home Average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate: 47.73 42.96 46.63 (rank 39)
Quality Opposition Average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate: 50.21 46.65 49.07 (rank 25)

The recently retired Younis Khan is Pakistan's top ranked batsman and deservedly so. His record has no weak points. Even if you consider his matches in the U.A.E. as home matches (this analysis does not) he still averages 46.29 (48.86) away, which is very respectable. Along with Mishab-ul-Haq, he was Pakistan's rock up to his retirement in 2017 and seemed to get better with age, one of his greatest innings being at The Oval in 2016, which you can check out in the link below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78WLOVwGo2s

 

[Days of Grace]

Automated systems >> Subjective assessments

 

[Burgey]

Automated systems >> Subjective assessments

No system is automated if you attach variable weighting to different factors. It can’t be. The only reason there isn’t a genuine argument over who’s the best batsman ever is because bradman is such an outlier that no one else is even in the discussion. Him aside, you can put these same fellas‘ careers with different emphases on the variables and come up with a different outcome.

It’s a great credit to DoG that he’s transparent about what weighting he gives to which variables. So his ratings system is admirably open.makes for good discussion

 

[honestbharani]

I honestly think we should have these on the CW main page.

 

[Logan]

In ideal world, yes.

But there is bound to be bias on subjective assessments. Whether it is towards fellow countrymen or favourite cricketers.

 

[OverratedSanity]

In ideal world, yes.

But there is bound to be bias on subjective assessments. Whether it is towards fellow countrymen or favourite cricketers.

What makes you think statistical analysis don't have biases involved? Maybe not biases in terms of players but which factors you favour more. Some exercises will weight longevity more, some will place a higher weight on strike rate, some on away records, etc. Different people worship different statistical gods. Just because numbers are involved doesn't mean it isn't subjective.

 

[Logan]

At least there is some amount of objectivity in stats. Subjective assessments don’t have even that.

 

[ankitj]

Pointless debate. Enjoy the work that DoG has done. At the very least it gives insights into careers of various batsmen on the list.

 

[honestbharani]

Younis Khan - best Pak batsman I have seen. No fuss, juz accumulated runs using the best method for each wicket. Main reason Pak got their hands on the mace for however long they did.

 

[h_hurricane]

Pointless debate. Enjoy the work that DoG has done. At the very least it gives insights into careers of various batsmen on the list.

Yeah, no statistical exercise is going to please everyone here. DoG has done a fabulous job, no glaring over-rating or under-rating of any cricketer. Those write ups have been excellent as well.

There were at least 3-4 cricketers in this list whom I haven't heard much. Great insights into the careers of some unknown players.

 

[Logan]

Yes. DoG has done a maginificient work. Kudos.

 

[Migara]

It’s a great credit to DoG that he’s transparent about what weighting he gives to which variables. So his ratings system is admirably open.makes for good discussion

Everything that is not about subjective assessment.

 

[Burgey]

No **** Sherlock. But how you weight different statistical variables influences your outcome, and your weighting’s are invariably subjective. I mean, I hate maths. It’s ****ing the most lamentable, boring turd of a subject/ vocation in all human endeavour, and yet even I know that.

 

[The Battlers Prince]

No **** Sherlock. But how you weight different statistical variables influences your outcome, and your weighting’s are invariably subjective. I mean, I hate maths. It’s ****ing the most lamentable, boring turd of a subject/ vocation in all human endeavour, and yet even I know that.

But maths and by relation physics have given the greatest social achievements of your life.

 

[Burgey]

No they have not. But even if they have, that’s a discussion for another time and place and it still doesn’t preclude me from being bored shitless at the thought of it, does it?

 

[stephen]

I think DoG needs to post the next on the list .

 

[OverratedSanity]

I think DoG needs to post the next on the list .

My bet's on Chanderpaul

 

[ankitj]

Or de Villiers

 

[h_hurricane]

Pretty fair chance for Steve Waugh as well. Very similar record to Allan Border.