DoG's Top 100 Test Batsmen Countdown Thread

[TheJediBrah]

Isn't that some of the metrics the new English selectors are going by? Didn't they come up with something like "getting to 30" or similar when they selected the first Ashes team?

That was Justin Langer's Australia IIRC

Yeah, can give you a good idea of a batsman's survivability. In isolation it definitely has more value than strike rate as a statistic imo. I should start a petition for stats sites to include this.

The only issue I can think with it as a stat is that along with average and strike rate, those 3 stats all determine each other. If you have average and strike rate, then you know what balls per dismissal is, and vice versa. Not that it's a reason not to display it though

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Balls per dismissal should be used more than it is as a statistic imo. I'd like to see it right next to average and strike rate in career stats on cricinfo.

coming to you soon as a market-spun concept named "scoring triangle" (if you have any two of batting average, strike rate and balls per dismissal, you can work out the third)

 

[OverratedSanity]

Well you can, but technically you can also work out average from runs /(innings-not outs), but why would you want to?

 

[harsh.ag]

A batsman's Avg-SR-BpD(balls per dismissal) trifecta is the bowler's equivalent of Avg-Econ-SR.

Avg : Avg
SR : Econ
BpD : SR

 

[Spark]

This is a good point.

It's not entirely true IMO. He was dropped in 2011 and came back early-ish 2013, so two summers out of the Test side, which is not a huge amount of time. And he didn't exactly smash the door down in the Shield in the intervening period, although he did obviously improve his game a fair bit and impress close watchers (the non one-eyed ones who hated him, anyway) by finding a way to score on consistently green pitches around that time. But it was really luck and every single plausible competitor in front of him shitting the bed in one way or another (homework-gate) which almost left him in the side by default and *even then* I suspect the fact that he was considered capable of sending down a few overs and better against spin was the main reason he got selected.

The major development of his batting from "okay" to "awesome" came between Mohali 2013 and Centurion 2014, at Test level, IMO. It's well documented that the critical changes to his technique which enabled him to absolutely dominate fast bowling and become near impossible to get out at times happened during the twin Ashes series that year.

 

[honestbharani]

Well, my simple point his average wont be where it is if he had played test cricket during that period. And while his technique may have evolved post 2013, I remember saying he looked the best batsman in the Aussie side even during that series right here at CW. I don't think it was the same player who was dropped in 2011.

 

[Spark]

No reason to believe that. Those were the Clarke summers, he'd have been a reasonable chance to score a few runs coming in at 4/250 with a god-mode Clarke at the other end. Michael Hussey certainly made hay during those times, and he was clearly on the decline by then.

 

[honestbharani]

No reason to believe that. Those were the Clarke summers, he'd have been a reasonable chance to score a few runs coming in at 4/250 with a god-mode Clarke at the other end. Michael Hussey certainly made hay during those times, and he was clearly on the decline by then.

"During that series" is kinda key in that statement. Clarke was not the same after the first test and still had loads of luck through the series. Smith just looked better at least in the games he played.

 

[Spark]

Yeah I think most people immediately saw him as a much improved player in 2013, and no doubt having some time away from the spotlight helped him hone his technique a bit in a lower-pressure environment. But still, it's not as if he missed a huge chunk of Test cricket in which he would have scored no runs. His average would be more or less the same as it is IMO.

 

[h_hurricane]

Yeah HB, that’s a very poor take on his Ashes series tbh.

Anyway, presumably Tendulkar next in this list. Certainly not a top tenner imho.

Tendulkar had no business playing cricket after the series in Australia 2011-12. He scored his 100th century a short while later and quoted that it will be selfish for him to retire immediately after that. So what does he do ? Not play any ODIs in the next 9 months and retire from that format

If he comes short in this exercise, that is about right, and should be held against for him for being such a selfish ****.

 

[vcs]

It would have been interesting to see how Smith would have gone against SA home and away in 2011 and 2012 if he was picked while still working out his game. Clarke and the top order were generally setting big platforms, while being prone to the occasional lollapse. Certainly he'd have made merry vs. the Indian tourists in 2012 if he'd played instead of Shaun Marsh.

 

[Spark]

It would have been interesting to see how Smith would have gone against SA home and away in 2011 and 2012 if he was picked while still working out his game. Clarke and the top order were generally setting big platforms, while being prone to the occasional lollapse. Certainly he'd have made merry vs. the Indian tourists in 2012 if he'd played instead of Shaun Marsh.

Well he'd certainly have done better than Marsh at any rate.

 

[vcs]

I do think the margin by which he's smashing these "fastest to 7k runs in terms of innings" records somewhat overstates how much better he is compared to the next guy. But he could keep averaging 65 for the rest of his career and prove me wrong.

 

[honestbharani]

To be fair, Smith can be his own biggest obstacle towards any such achievements. Guy can make it complicated for himself very easily. If at all any decline happens, I am willing to bet it will be much more his own doing than something outside.

 

[kyear2]

Also was a great player of fast bowling who hooked and pulled ferociously. Apparently being a complete bore puts people off everything else.

But doesn't it?

"The Majesty of this innings is beyond my command of English" Was on YouTube and the suggestion after watching highlights of Warner's innings was Sobers 254 vs Australia in '71. The above referenced comment was what the commentator said when he passed 250.

Hobbs vs Sutcliffe
Sobers vs Barrington
Tendulkar vs Kallis

All guys who played together or approximately in the same era where one is clearly seen as better despite having not dissimilar career numbers. It does matter.

Hobbs and Sutcliffe batted together and one was seen and known as the Master. The other was the no. 2. If your strike rate is in the late 30's to the low 40's it probably means you are not quite the batsman of your contemporary and in some cases, possibly can't change gears when or where needed.

 

[honestbharani]

Yeah I think most people immediately saw him as a much improved player in 2013, and no doubt having some time away from the spotlight helped him hone his technique a bit in a lower-pressure environment. But still, it's not as if he missed a huge chunk of Test cricket in which he would have scored no runs. His average would be more or less the same as it is IMO.

We will just agree to disagree. I think his average prior to the come back would have been closer to what he would have achieved had they kept him in the side.

 

[honestbharani]

Tendulkar had no business playing cricket after the series in Australia 2011-12. He scored his 100th century a short while later and quoted that it will be selfish for him to retire immediately after that. So what does he do ? Not play any ODIs in the next 9 months and retire from that format

If he comes short in this exercise, that is about right, and should be held against for him for being such a selfish ****.

Yeah the Sachin of 2011-2013 did not do himself any favors but I don't think that should be held against him, apart from including those stats in these exercises which obviously does pull him down.

 

[Coronis]

But doesn't it?

"The Majesty of this innings is beyond my command of English" Was on YouTube and the suggestion after watching highlights of Warner's innings was Sobers 254 vs Australia in '71. The above referenced comment was what the commentator said when he passed 250.

Hobbs vs Sutcliffe
Sobers vs Barrington
Tendulkar vs Kallis

All guys who played together or approximately in the same era where one is clearly seen as better despite having not dissimilar career numbers. It does matter.

Hobbs and Sutcliffe batted together and one was seen and known as the Master. The other was the no. 2. If your strike rate is in the late 30's to the low 40's it probably means you are not quite the batsman of your contemporary and in some cases, possibly can't change gears when or where needed.

However you seem to have no problem with Hutton’s strike rate in the late 30’s?

 

[shashy]

Same with Viv Richards then, who scored 1 century in the 1989-1991 period.

 

[Burgey]

To be fair, Smith can be his own biggest obstacle towards any such achievements. Guy can make it complicated for himself very easily. If at all any decline happens, I am willing to bet it will be much more his own doing than something outside.

He’s averaged 70 odd for about five years. Whatever complications he’s making, he should keep doing it