Steve Smith vs Sachin Tendulkar

[Saket1209]

Look, Kallis is a very fine player and an all-timer in his own right, but Tendulkar is head and shoulders a better batsman than him. And there's no shame on Kallis in me saying that.

Sachin and Lara were touch above during their Generation. Having a higher average doesn't make someone better. Lara had an average of 52 still he was the fastest to reach 10000 runs along with sachin and sanga. Average also improves with no. of not out and playing in a dominant team always help to improve personal records.

 

[Burgey]

indeed

 

[Silver Line]

remove Zimbabwe and Bangladesh from it, and Sachin Tendulkar’s average during this period drops to 56

using the same metric for Kallis, his period shows an average drop to 58.5

Im not contesting Sachin as a bad test batsman where the margin between them was large. But Kallis had a slight upperhand in tests as a batsman. This all rounder tag of his is really undermining him as a batsman lower than sachin tch

 

[Socerer 01]

looks like we have a r/cricket user here with their love for Kallis

 

[Coronis]

Smith has been averaging 65.14 since 2014. I highlight this year because thats when he eliminated the bowling all rounder tag from himself and got the respect to move up and everyone started taking him as a serious bat.

all this talk about Tendulkar, but half his career came in the easiest test era for batting. Even in his decade of prime his peak does not touch smith’s.

moreover sachin has alot of runs against bangladesh and zimbabwe in comparision to smith (yet doesnt touch smiths average with it).

stand-alone knocks of smith’s are more highly rated too.

with all due respect sachin was not the best test batsman from his fab 4 or 5 lot either. It was Kallis. Kallis’s test batsmanship can compete against Smith’s

Its really sad, this was a decent post til you tried to shoehorn Kallis above Tendulkar fsr.


I’m as big a Kallis fan as anyone here, and no, he is not comparable to Tendulkar.

People do not rate Virat Kohli above Smith in tests, even diehard Indian fans either. The confusion comes from when you ask an average cricket fan, who ith either the questioner not being test specific, or the answerer not having watched much test cricket compared to shorter formats.

 

[honestbharani]

As of now, in the tier below Bradman (TBB), I would go

1. Sobers
2. Lara
3. Sachin
4. Smith
5. Richards (Viv)

Of course, the only thing keeping me from putting Smith below Sobers is the fact that he has not yet completed his career.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Tier below Bradman

1.Hobbs
2.Smith
3.Sobers
4.Hammond
5.Sachin

Don’t think Smith has surpassed Hobbs.

 

[Silver Line]

I would like to clear some misconceptions regarding Walter Hammond.

hammond was a great batsman but he is not as great as his stats suggest. They are inflated from tonking a very weak Saffers side.

hammond in his prime years (1927-1939) averaged 51 against AUS+WI (the two actual capable cricketing sides at that time)
Hammond a great batsman, should be in the tier of Inzamam, Dravid etc and not subjected to BSB conversations.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I would like to clear some misconceptions regarding Walter Hammond.

hammond was a great batsman but he is not as great as his stats suggest. They are inflated from tonking a very weak Saffers side.

hammond in his prime years (1927-1939) averaged 51 against AUS+WI (the two actual capable cricketing sides at that time)
Hammond a great batsman, should be in the tier of Inzamam, Dravid etc and not subjected to BSB conversations.

Some truth to that but also, Hammond's stats suffered because of his handful of tests he played after WW2 when he was a geriatric. Hammond, Dravid and Inzamam should all be in different tiers imo.

 

[Silver Line]

Some truth to that but also, Hammond's stats suffered because of his handful of tests he played after WW2 when he was a geriatric. Hammond, Dravid and Inzamam should all be in different tiers imo.

this is why i quoted his average from his prime years above. Already catered for that before posting

 

[Silver Line]

Some truth to that but also, Hammond's stats suffered because of his handful of tests he played after WW2 when he was a geriatric. Hammond, Dravid and Inzamam should all be in different tiers imo.

If tests alone, then I disagree as Inzamam averages 54 in Tests from 1994-2005 (basically his first and last two years deducted)

with the same metric of using Dravid’s prime years only, Dravid averaged the same 54. In Tests they are in the same tier.
But as all format batsmen i agree with you, Inzamam is in a different league as his ODI career was brilliant. Rahul odi career is plagued with strike rate issues as i recall many indian fans wanting him dropped from odis numerous times for being slow when he used to play.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

I would like to clear some misconceptions regarding Walter Hammond.

hammond was a great batsman but he is not as great as his stats suggest. They are inflated from tonking a very weak Saffers side.

hammond in his prime years (1927-1939) averaged 51 against AUS+WI (the two actual capable cricketing sides at that time)
Hammond a great batsman, should be in the tier of Inzamam, Dravid etc and not subjected to BSB conversations.

That South African team won the series in England.And India with Nissar,Singh,Amarnath was pretty good bowling attack.
Hammond’s weakness was more against Constantine.His comeback when he was way past his best probably balances his stats for some minnow bashing.Also arguably the greatest player on bad wickets.
I don’t really see any genuine reason for not having Hammond as a top 5.

 

[Coronis]

Someone please post a Hammond vs Inzamam thread….

 

[ataraxia]

Bradman








Tendulkar
Hobbs
Hutton
Sobers
Smith
Viv / Lara

 

[Chrish]

Viv is the second best batsman ever..

 

[TheJediBrah]

remove Zimbabwe and Bangladesh from it, and Sachin Tendulkar’s average during this period drops to 56

using the same metric for Kallis, his period shows an average drop to 58.5

Im not contesting Sachin as a bad test batsman where the margin between them was large. But Kallis had a slight upperhand in tests as a batsman. This all rounder tag of his is really undermining him as a batsman lower than sachin tch

Averages don't tell the whole story. If average was all that mattered then Kallis would be on par with Sachin and Lara, or at least Ponting

 

[Coronis]

Viv is the second best batsman ever..

In your opinion, which is far from consensus.

 

[loterry1994]

lol come on Smith would of been a leg spinner had he played in Sachins eras

 

[Chrish]

In your opinion, which is far from consensus.

Not really. Viv’s record it pretty impeccable IMO.

PS I don’t consider Smith in these debates before he is done.

 

[Chrish]

lol come on Smith would of been a leg spinner had he played in Sachins eras

wtf does that mean ?