Building a 'Peak XI'

[subshakerz]

One of the drawbacks when picking an ATG is that each cricketer normally has a period of their career when they dipped, and when you end up picking it is hard to tell which phase of their career you are picking them based on, or the sum of their career in general.

In this exercise, rather than select them based on being ATGs, we select an XI based on those who scaled the highest of peak performances in cricket, with a minimum cut off period of 33 tests (based on the article: https://www.thecricketmonthly.com/story/1057899/the-best-stats-measure).

In essence, you are not selecting them on career but on the best level of cricket achieved (also looking at conditions), and this XI would be the highest performing one possible to face off against a Martian XI.

The only exceptions here are Barnes and Bradman, whose entire careers were peaks basically.

To begin, here is my XI:

Hayden (2001 - 2004)
Graham Gooch (1990 - 1994)
Viv Richards (1976 - 1980/1)
Tendulkar (1997 - 2001/2)
Steve Waugh (1993 - 1997/8)
Sobers (1961 - 68)
Gilchrist (1999 - 2003)
Botham (1977 - 81)
Imran (1982 - 86/7)
Marshall (1984 - 88)
Murali (2003 - 2006)

 

[_00_deathscar]

Even if Smith’s career dips, this is one XI he should 100% be a part of.

 

[ankitj]

May be relevant in this thread:

Painstakingly calculated peak 10 calendar year bowling averages for best bowlers of last 50 odd years.

Bowler	10 years	Mat	Wkts	WPM	Avg
Imran	1979-1988	55	258	4.69	18.74
Hadlee	1979-1988	54	302	5.59	19.27
Murali	1998-2007	84	588	7.00	19.62
Marshall	1981-1990	60	304	5.07	19.66
Ambrose	1990-1999	71	309	4.35	20.14
McGrath	1995-2004	97	458	4.72	20.47
Akram	1988-1997	55	269	4.89	21.13
Steyn	2007-2016	76	385	5.07	21.18
Waqar	1989-1998	55	275	5.00	21.57
Donald	1992-2001	70	328	4.69	21.77
Pollock	1995-2004	89	361	4.06	21.88
Lillee	1972-1981	56	307	5.48	22.79
Walsh	1992-2001	82	345	4.21	24.19
Warne	1993-2002	102	479	4.70	25.30

Edit: Added Pollock

 

[Daemon]

Voges

 

[OverratedSanity]

May be relevant in this thread:

Lillee's WPM is incredibly impressive

 

[CricAddict]

Being very good batsmen and also topping these bowling charts, Imran and Hadlee are unbelievable. They should seriously be the first names on the sheet in the ATG XI.

 

[ankitj]

Donald is same age as Akram. Akram's peak started 4 years before Donald could debut. So we probably missed out on roughly4 years of Donald's peak probably.

 

[Teja.]

May be relevant in this thread:

Imran was missing 2+ years due to injury in those 10 years so didn't have to play as much as the others. So it isn't as much of a '10 year peak' as some of the other bowlers in the list.

 

[trundler]

Hayden
Sehwag
Ponting
Richards
Sobers
Gilchrist
Botham
Imran
Waqar
Murali

 

[trundler]

Imran was missing 2+ years due to injury in those 10 years so didn't have to play as much as the others. So it isn't as much of a '10 year peak' as some of the other bowlers in the list.

Surely most fast bowler would have upwards of an year on the sidelines in any ten year period. Even McGrath was out for a while after that ankle injury.

 

[Teja.]

Donald is same age as Akram. Akram's peak started 4 years before Donald could debut. So we probably missed out on roughly4 years of Donald's peak probably.

Wasim had a very ordinary 1987-1990 period. In 1988 and 1989 combined, he took 29 wickets @ 30. His extended 'peak' started in 1990, 2 years before Donald's debut and not 1988.

 

[Teja.]

Surely most fast bowler would have upwards of an year on the sidelines in any ten year period. Even McGrath was out for a while after that ankle injury.

Imran played slightly less than 2/3rd (55/83) of Pakistan's tests in that period. Missing a test for every two you play in a peak decade is a pretty huge variation from most of the other players in the list and is very notable IMO.

The average ATG fast bowler plays around 85% of the tests in their prime decade while guys like Hadlee and Walsh in that list played over 90% of the tests in the years mentioned. Even McGrath and Steyn played 83-84% of their tests despite those notorious injuries, for example.

If I have to pick someone as a pure pace bowler in a team to play for an entire decade, I think it's better to pick someone like Hadlee who will play nearly every test as opposed to Imran who won't be there a third of the time.

Only Lillee fares worse than Imran in the department of tests missed with pretty much everyone else a few miles ahead.

 

[ankitj]

Imran was missing 2+ years due to injury in those 10 years so didn't have to play as much as the others. So it isn't as much of a '10 year peak' as some of the other bowlers in the list.

That's right. For a bunch of players I had to enter empty rows.

Peak 10 year test bowling

docs.google.com

 

[Teja.]

The biggest weakness with peak-based methodology is cricketers who either have multiple peaks and troughs or who do not follow standard patterns for peaks and valleys but have great years interspersed with poor or average years in a somewhat random pattern.

As an example of the first, Lara's twin peaks from 1993-1995 and 2003-2005 totalling a period of six years and 58 tests:



His career in the remaining 9-10 years:

 

[subshakerz]

Imran was missing 2+ years due to injury in those 10 years so didn't have to play as much as the others. So it isn't as much of a '10 year peak' as some of the other bowlers in the list.

In the graph, it shows that Imran played pretty much the same number of tests as Hadlee, Lillee, Wasim and Waqar in those ten years.

 

[ankitj]

Warne is another example. Weak phase in middle and 2 peaks on either side.

 

[Teja.]

In the graph, it shows that Imran played pretty much the same number of tests as Hadlee, Lillee, Wasim and Waqar in those ten years.

He played 2/3rd of this allotted tests. Lillee played less than 60%. Wasim and Waqar played 75%-80%. The majority of ATG fast bowlers played 85%+ of tests in their peak decades which is 20%-30% more than Imran.

It's not useful to say Imran played as much as Hadlee because he missed a lot more. Absolute tests played cannot be used to absolve Imran as in absolute tests terms, McGrath played close to twice as many in a decade. The percentage of tests played is a more useful measure.

 

[subshakerz]

The biggest weakness with peak-based methodology is cricketers who either have multiple peaks and troughs or who do not follow standard patterns for peaks and valleys but have great years interspersed with poor or average years in a somewhat random pattern.

As an example of the first, Lara's twin peaks from 1993-1995 and 2003-2005 totalling a period of six years and 58 tests:

View attachment 29636

His career in the remaining 9-10 years:

View attachment 29638

Having great years with poor years is by definition not a peak. A peak is a sustained period.

And having multiple peaks doesnt mean all peak are equal. Tendulkar's peak of 1997-2002 is superior to his second peak of 2007-2011 given the bowling quality of the former.

 

[Teja.]

Having great years with poor years is by definition not a peak. A peak is a sustained period.

And having multiple peaks doesnt mean all peak are equal. Tendulkar's peak of 1997-2002 is superior to his second peak of 2007-2011 given the bowling quality of the former.

Yes, my point is that peaks can be a very limited way of measuring actual comparative quality of cricketers due to careers not following strict patterns wherein a cricketer's best cricket comes in one extended unbroken chain. Unbroken peaks as an interesting exercise within cricket discussion is obviously still fine.

 

[subshakerz]

Imran played slightly less than 2/3rd (55/83) of Pakistan's tests in that period. Missing a test for every two you play in a peak decade is a pretty huge variation from most of the other players in the list and is very notable IMO.

The average ATG fast bowler plays around 85% of the tests in their prime decade while guys like Hadlee and Walsh in that list played over 90% of the tests in the years mentioned. Even McGrath and Steyn played 83-84% of their tests despite those notorious injuries, for example.

If I have to pick someone as a pure pace bowler in a team to play for an entire decade, I think it's better to pick someone like Hadlee who will play nearly every test as opposed to Imran who won't be there a third of the time.

Only Lillee fares worse than Imran in the department of tests missed with pretty much everyone else a few miles ahead.

Imran was a fairly fit bowler in normal circumstances, his shin injury was an unusually bad one that stopped him from bowling for two years.

I am genuinely curious how Imran missed out 28 tests in that period, even with his two year absence.