Is Dhoni greatest OdI cricketer off all-time

[harsh.ag]

I'd put Pollock at 7 if I think the #7's batting doesn't matter all and want 5 frontline bowlers. Kapil is too middle of the road compared to other ATGs whether you prioritise batting or bowling for the all rounder. Shaky Bull, Flintoff or Klusener for me.

Not when you consider he would have a strike rate of 120+ by modern standards. Hardly anyone has that and it's perfect for a number 7 if you have a Pollock at number 8.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Total number of wickets don't mean much. And where each bowler stands by the rank doesn't mean much too. What means is the raw numbers. Ranks are relative, raw numbers are not.

I rate Kapil highly, but he will be struggling to replace Jayasuriya, Mathews or Shakib from their all rounder position, even at Asian level. And the discussion doesn't need to be extended to Klusener, Kallis or Pollock.

And it's refreshing to see another person agrees with me that Warne was never the second best ODI spinner.

Thats your viewpoint, mine is different. For example, if I want a proper allrounder as a 5th bowler... my choice would be Kapil. That way I can strengthen the batting without compromising in bowling quality. Kapil and Imran are the only 2 players in this category.
Someone brought RPI argument in this discussion against Kapil which actually helped his case, because Klusner scored 26 runs per innings at a SR of 90, while Kapil scored 22 at 102 in 80s, after era adjustment (calculated from the stats of top 10 run scorers )
Kapil 23.5 at 110 vs Klusner 26 at 90.. very close numbers.

 

[h_hurricane]

I believe a good way of comparing ODI allrounders is giving equal weightage to batting average, batting strike rate, bowling average and bowling economic rate. No era adjustments required here as well. Extreme examples like averaging 5 at SR of 200, if they exist are not going to help the player concerned one bit. So if we create a metric called allrounder proficiency factor(APF) i.e (batting average*batting strike rate)/(bowling average*bowling economic rate), anyone above APF of 1 is an above average allrounder.

Kapil ends up with an APF of 1.33. Klusener has a much higher APF of 1.58.

Interestingly though, between the exact age that Klusener debuted(i.e 24 years and 4 months), and retired (i.e 33 years 0 months), if we look into Kapil's record, he has an APF of 1.63, making him a moderate upgrade over Lance. Note that this is not a conveniently picked period.

Having watched Kapil Dev in action, I would certainly say that he was a pale shadow of his former self from 1991 or so in ODIs. Likewise for Klusener in 2004, but he retired before going into steep decline.

I rate Lance Klusener highly and do not have a problem with anyone rating him over Kapil Dev. Just that I believe Kapil is really in the discussion for the best ODI allrounder ever.

 

[honestbharani]

I guess I am one of those who tends to put blokes like Pollock, Kapil, Imran, and Flintoff above Klusener, but there is no real reason to not have him in that discussion. I guess what holds me from putting him there is that to me, he is a lesser bowler than all the other 4 and I do want the allrounders at 7 and 8 to be good bowlers first.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Kapil bowling ability > stats
Klusner batting ability < stats

 

[Burgey]

Thats your viewpoint, mine is different. For example, if I want a proper allrounder as a 5th bowler... my choice would be Kapil. That way I can strengthen the batting without compromising in bowling quality. Kapil and Imran are the only 2 players in this category.
Someone brought RPI argument in this discussion against Kapil which actually helped his case, because Klusner scored 26 runs per innings at a SR of 90, while Kapil scored 22 at 102 in 80s, after era adjustment (calculated from the stats of top 10 run scorers )
Kapil 23.5 at 110 vs Klusner 26 at 90.. very close numbers.

I find it somewhat disconcerting that someone would rate Angelo Mathews a better LO cricketer than Kapil Dev.

 

[stephen]

Kapil bowling ability > stats
Klusner batting ability < stats

Spoken like someone who never saw him bat.

 

[Daemon]

I find it somewhat disconcerting that someone would rate Angelo Mathews a better LO cricketer than Kapil Dev.

you quoted the wrong post but yes. hardly surprising who it came from though.

 

[TheJediBrah]

you quoted the wrong post but yes. hardly surprising who it came from though.

Was it Angelo Mathews?

 

[Burgey]

you quoted the wrong post but yes. hardly surprising who it came from though.

I didn’t quote the wrong post. I was passing comment on the discussion the quoted post was part of.

Don’t correct me again, son. Ever.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I doubt Daemon is old enough to be your son

 

[Migara]

Kapil bowling ability > stats
Klusner batting ability < stats

We re getting to the land of ridiculousness.

 

[Migara]

Was it Angelo Mathews?

He is a bits 'n pieces cricketer who incidentally averages 42 with the bat and 33 with the ball. Useless fella he is.

 

[TheJediBrah]

tbf Sri Lankan players' stats need to be adjusted to be properly analysed, given how often they play minnows and other factors like doctored home pitches and various manner of stretching the rules

I'd say minus 10 from a batting average and plus 10 for bowling average to standardise. So Mathews was a 32 avrge batsman and 43 avrge bowler.

 

[Migara]

Thats your viewpoint, mine is different. For example, if I want a proper allrounder as a 5th bowler... my choice would be Kapil. That way I can strengthen the batting without compromising in bowling quality. Kapil and Imran are the only 2 players in this category.
Someone brought RPI argument in this discussion against Kapil which actually helped his case, because Klusner scored 26 runs per innings at a SR of 90, while Kapil scored 22 at 102 in 80s, after era adjustment (calculated from the stats of top 10 run scorers )
Kapil 23.5 at 110 vs Klusner 26 at 90.. very close numbers.

1. I would have Shakib in a blink of an eye. Proper batsman, proper spinner. That will strengthen batting without compromising the bowling. On other hand if you have a Jayasuriya or A Shane Watson opening the batting and doing 5th bowlers work, you's pick four out and out attacking bowlers in your side with a sixth bowler (Sachin fits the bill nicely).

2. If you are worried with RPI, then Shakib takes the cake without any issues.

3. Selecting Kapil infact compromises batting instead of selecting someone like Kallis, who has similar bowling capabilities, but a solid #3. Shaun Pollock can do the same at #8.

If I wanted to make a World XI I'd go for

Jayasuriya / Shane Watson
Tendulkar
Richards (c)
Kohli
AB DeVilliers
Dhoni (wk)
Klusener
Pollock
Murali
Garner / Wasim
McGrath

line up. Klusener nicely fits in that lineup which has quite a number of bowlers to share 5th bowlers duties.

 

[trundler]

Garner, McGrath and Pollock are all somewhat similar and super economical bowlers. That's in order of awkward bounce.

 

[Daemon]

I didn’t quote the wrong post. I was passing comment on the discussion the quoted post was part of.

Don’t correct me again, son. Ever.

Yes daddy

 

[Migara]

Garner, McGrath and Pollock are all somewhat similar and super economical bowlers. That's in order of awkward bounce.

And people don't recognize Murali for his out of the word ER for a spinner.

 

[Bolo.]

I believe a good way of comparing ODI allrounders is giving equal weightage to batting average, batting strike rate, bowling average and bowling economic rate. No era adjustments required here as well. Extreme examples like averaging 5 at SR of 200, if they exist are not going to help the player concerned one bit. So if we create a metric called allrounder proficiency factor(APF) i.e (batting average*batting strike rate)/(bowling average*bowling economic rate), anyone above APF of 1 is an above average allrounder.

Kapil ends up with an APF of 1.33. Klusener has a much higher APF of 1.58.

Interestingly though, between the exact age that Klusener debuted(i.e 24 years and 4 months), and retired (i.e 33 years 0 months), if we look into Kapil's record, he has an APF of 1.63, making him a moderate upgrade over Lance. Note that this is not a conveniently picked period.

Having watched Kapil Dev in action, I would certainly say that he was a pale shadow of his former self from 1991 or so in ODIs. Likewise for Klusener in 2004, but he retired before going into steep decline.

I rate Lance Klusener highly and do not have a problem with anyone rating him over Kapil Dev. Just that I believe Kapil is really in the discussion for the best ODI allrounder ever.

Your calculation method will favour more balaced ARs. If the purpose is to calculate allroundyness (yes, that is a technical term, Herath is proof), the calculation is likely fine, but I dont think it is going to give a proper picture of actual quality. At the extreme end of the picture, a bits and pieces hack is going to show up as a much better player than, say, Mcgrath. The impact is less apparent on actual ARs, but it is there

Klusenar had a poor 2004. He didnt retire and wasnt in terminal decline. He was butchering domestic cricket for the next few years while stating his desire to get back in the team. The issue was that the new captain didnt like him, and even admitted the issue was not quality. He averaged 73 with the bat in his last season, when he was older than Kapil at time of retirement.

You can give Kapil props for playing longer, but you can't just ignore his mediocre years. Klusenar was better in his actual playing years, and everything indicates he would have been better in his later years as well.

 

[Migara]

Lots of people would agree he wasnt 2nd best spinner. He is 1st

Even Hogg disagrees.