Richard Hadlee vs Dale Steyn

[Gob]

There are few threads running with similar discussions but i'd like to see people's opinions on these two specifically. Their numbers are uncannily similar as were their bowling styles although Steyn may have been slightly faster. Both have good cases to be regarded as the next best thing to MM or even ahead of him

Hadlee

Format	Mat	Inns	Balls	Runs	Wkts	BBI	BBM	Ave	SR	4w	5w	10w
Test	86	150	21918	9611	431	9/52	15/123	22.29	50.80	25	36	9

Steyn

Format	Mat	Inns	Balls	Runs	Wkts	BBI	BBM	Ave	Econ	SR	4w	5w	10w
Test	93	171	18608	10077	439	7/51	11/60	22.95	3.24	42.30	27	26	5

 

[Flem274*]

Dale Steyn outperformed his contemporaries by a very large margin. His direct competitors were James Anderson and Ryan Harris for most of his career. I'm giving it to Steyn.

 

[Starfighter]

Dale Steyn outperformed his contemporaries by a very large margin. His direct competitors were James Anderson and Ryan Harris for most of his career. I'm giving it to Steyn.

Having worse contemporaries doesn't make one better than someone else who had less crap contemporaries.

 

[Flem274*]

Having worse contemporaries doesn't make one better than someone else who had less crap contemporaries.

It makes you infinitely more valuable to your side during your playing days, which is all that matters IRL.

Also we don't really admit it down here but Hadlee did get his fair share of juicy home decks. Steyn's early rise to ATGhood was during the pitch homogenization era.

 

[Gob]

It makes you infinitely more valuable to your side during your playing days, which is all that matters IRL.

Also we don't really admit it down here but Hadlee did get his fair share of juicy home decks. Steyn's early rise to ATGhood was during the pitch homogenization era.

RSA pitches weren't too shabby either tbh

 

[ankitj]

Hadlee

 

[Starfighter]

It makes you infinitely more valuable to your side during your playing days, which is all that matters IRL.

I don't even know where you're going with this. You were comparing Steyn to contemporaries Anderson and Harris, neither of whom played for South Africa last time I checked, presumably implying that this makes Steyn better as Hadlee had Marshall etc. as contemporaries.
But now you're talking about value to own side. A bowler averaging 26 is much more valuable to a side where everyone else averages 40 than a bowler averaging 21 where everyone else averages 23, does that make the first bowler better?
Secondly, the average of the non-Hadlee NZ bowlers in matches where Hadlee played was 37.04, while the equivalent for Steyn was 31.71, and Hadlee took 35.7% of the wickets while Steyn took 28.5%. Steyn had far more competent support right through his career.
Overall your own metrics, when you're not contradicting yourself, prove that Hadlee was significantly more valuable.

Also we don't really admit it down here but Hadlee did get his fair share of juicy home decks. Steyn's early rise to ATGhood was during the pitch homogenization era.

Home/away split doesn't really support this.

 

[h_hurricane]

Hadlee by a whisker for me, though I wouldn't argue against anyone rating Steyn higher. Both absolute elite bowlers.

I don't really think though, that either benefitted much by having spicy home pitches. Both have been great in a variety of conditions across the globe.

 

[subshakerz]

Both have great records, but Steyn was taken apart even in his prime years many times. He would take a 10-fer in one test and look listless in the next. Hadlee was a more consistent performer in that regard.

 

[indiaholic]

Steyn had the whole Destroyer of Worlds vibe going for him. Hence Steyn.

 

[sunilz]

Sir Ravindra Jadeja

 

[_00_deathscar]

Sir Ravindra Jadeja

Bowls quicker than both too

 

[Zinzan]

Hadlee quite clearly for mine, even though it's not by a lot. Steyn was probably more consistent over his whole career, but Hadlee the bowler between around 1980-1990 was almost incomparable, with the exception of MM.

Hadlee's my number 2 of all-time, Steyn 4 or 5.

 

[Slifer]

Nice comparison but for me, Sir Richard Hadlee and Glenn McGrath are about the only two pace bowlers I'd rank above Malcolm so Hadlee for me. Great great bowler and overall cricketer.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Hadlee

 

[Daemon]

Steyn bowled during the era of flat decks to generally better batting lineups imo. He was incredibly far ahead of anyone else around him too for the majority of his career. Slightly ahead for mine.

Childhood favourite so I’m biased though.

 

[Chrish]

Steyn for me but perhaps I am biased not having seen anything from Hadlee other than YT clips..

Steyn’s performance was otherworldly though. In the era where almost every team was getting white-washed, RSA didn’t loose a single away series for almost a decade and this “domination” was built on a back of Steyn’s bowling performances. That has to count for something.

 

[Smudge]

Dale Steyn outperformed his contemporaries by a very large margin. His direct competitors were James Anderson and Ryan Harris for most of his career. I'm giving it to Steyn.

Hand in your passport, ****.

 

[Smudge]

It makes you infinitely more valuable to your side during your playing days, which is all that matters IRL.

Also we don't really admit it down here but Hadlee did get his fair share of juicy home decks. Steyn's early rise to ATGhood was during the pitch homogenization era.

Also, as many juicy home decks you contend there were in NZ, there were equally as many low and slow mudpits.

 

[SteveNZ]

Hadlee, for me, based on incredibly longevity. The guy took 1490 FC wickets, played Test cricket and was still taking Test five-fors as a 39 year old Sir. He played back to back to back to back to back summers with massive workloads, and hardly ever broke down. When he did, he had to remodel his approach and slow himself down, but was still incredibly effective. He also claimed to be able to control seam movement both ways, which sounds like a bit of a Sir Richard-ism but I like it.

Steyn was incredible too, and obviously a different bowler with different strings to his bow.