The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[Coronis]

Once the avg has come below 60 the records pf many of the modern greats seem to look similar at the point where Steve has reached now.





Steve Smith

102

181

22

9320

239

58.61

32

39

Sachin Tendulkar

102

163

16

8499

217

57.81

30

34

10

Ricky Ponting

102

170

23

8547

257

58.14

14486

59.00

30

33

Jacques Kallis

102

172

28

8033

189*

55.78

18755

42.83

24

40

Kumar Sangakkara

102

171

12

8972

287

56.42

16388

54.74

26

37

Rahul Dravid

102

172

21

8810

270

58.34

20864

42.22

23

43

So what you’re saying is he could improve his record like Sanga, worsen it like Ponting or have it remain much the same like Kallis - and we should probably wait til his career is actually finished before passing overal judgement.

No way!

 

[Coronis]

Better 4th innings average

Oh shut the **** up

 

[Adorable Asshole]

Oh shut the **** up

Lol at taking the bait.

 

[trundler]

Better 4th innings average

Hayden and Sehwag killed the game in the first innings which is equally, if not more, important.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

Hayden and Sehwag killed the game in the first innings which is equally, if not more, important.

Only on flat tracks. Hayden and Sehwag both average sub 35 in 3 countries and Smith 0.

 

[kyear2]

All wrong.

Hobbs, Hutton, Sutcliffe, Gavaskar are better than them all.

I was just referring to the middle order tbh

 

[honestbharani]

So what you’re saying is he could improve his record like Sanga, worsen it like Ponting or have it remain much the same like Kallis - and we should probably wait til his career is actually finished before passing overal judgement.

No way!

Yeah, he is no better than those 3 is the most reasonable conclusion anyone can come up with and therefore not in the same level as Lara and Sachin.

 

[trundler]

Only on flat tracks. Hayden and Sehwag both average sub 35 in 3 countries and Smith 0.

Totally not arbitrary. You somehow managed to pick a worse argument than 4th innings average. Smith was better on non flat decks but he was worse on flat pitches by an equivalent degree. It's not like we're talking about Len Hutton here anyway. The guy averaged 37 in SA without ZimBang and had a very obvious weakness against left arm pace. He wasn't some technically supreme defier of minefields. I have no qualms with rating him ahead of Hayden and Sehwag because he's more balanced but he's not distinctly better.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

Totally not arbitrary. You somehow managed to pick a worse argument than 4th innings average. Smith was better on non flat decks but he was worse on flat pitches by an equivalent degree. It's not like we're talking about Len Hutton here anyway. The guy averaged 37 in SA without ZimBang and had a very obvious weakness against left arm pace. He wasn't some technically supreme defier of minefields. I have no qualms with rating him ahead of Hayden and Sehwag because he's more balanced but he's not distinctly better.

It far less arbitrary than any of your arguments.

Sehwag averages 25 in SA and Hayden 34. So even you cherrypicking that stat doesn't make any sense.

Smith had a problem against left arm pace but both Hayden and Sehwag had problem against any kind of movement.

 

[trundler]

Sehwag averages 25 in SA and Hayden 34. So even you cherrypicking that stat doesn't make any sense.

Sehwag was bad, Hayden was underwhelming and Smith was marginally less underwhelming in SA. Sehwag turned certain draws into wins on flat wickets, Hayden was brutal too and Smith was less good than both. It all evens out.

And no, that last line is just blatantly false. Both Hayden and Sehwag were far better players of spin than Smith.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Best after Bradman for me has always been either Hobbs or Sobers with Smith very slightly below.

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

Sehwag turned certain draws into wins on flat wickets, Hayden was brutal too and Smith was less good than both. It all evens out.

Hayden and Smith's strike rates in Tests are virtually the same, don't think you can give Hayden an advantage there.

I agree with you that Smith isn't on a different plane above the other two though, there's not much to split the 3 other than personal preference.

 

[trundler]

Hayden and Smith's strike rates in Tests are virtually the same, don't think you can give Hayden an advantage there.

I agree with you that Smith isn't on a different plane above the other two though, there's not much to split the 3 other than personal preference.

I meant Hayden was more likely to make a massive score and put the game out of the opposition's reach on flat decks.

Agree with your second paragraph. That's all I was getting at.

 

[JBMAC]

Best after Bradman for me has always been either Hobbs or Sobers with Smith very slightly below.

Consider Neil Harvey

 

[TheJediBrah]

Hayden and Sehwag killed the game in the first innings which is equally, if not more, important.

1st innings average is waaaaaay more important than 3rd/4th innings. If you've got 2 similar players but one does better in the 1st innings and the other does better in the 2nd dig, the 1st player is comfortably more valuable, and will win you more games of cricket.

Most games are won in the 1st dig and a lot of the time the 2nd innings is junk time, irrelevant or downhill skiing

 

[Bolo.]

Smith being promoted to a level above Hayden and Sehwag because he had tougher home conditions when he averages sub 40 without Zimbos in those tough conditions is bizarre. He was a flawed but destructive opener with a marginally longer career and marginally worse average with the home/away disparity flipped because his home conditions were the toughest. Don't see how that makes him so much better when it amounted to pretty much the same output in the same era.

Average above x in country y excluding country z is the kind of statistical nitpick that you would use to tear Subshakers a new arsehole for if you weren't making it yourself.

That and your numbers are wrong. He averages 41 without Zim.

 

[trundler]

Average above x in country y excluding country z is the kind of statistical nitpick that you would use to tear Subshakers a new arsehole for if you weren't making it yourself.

That and your numbers are wrong. He averages 41 without Zim.

Fair enough to exclude minnows. It was a sample of 50+ tests. Statsguru gave me 37 without ZimBang.

 

[peterhrt]

Consider Neil Harvey

English critics reckoned Harvey was the best Australian on a bad wicket after Trumper. There were plenty of bad wickets during his time.

Harvey's 151* at Durban on a turning pitch in 1950 was one of the great match-winning fourth innings knocks. Australia had been all out for 75 in their first innings and were chasing 336.

 

[Bolo.]

Fair enough to exclude minnows. It was a sample of 50+ tests. Statsguru gave me 37 without ZimBang.

You didn't exclude minnows. You excluded Zim and gave a wrong average... It's 41 without them.

Ignoring minnows is kinda understandable. Shouldn't be fully done, but I don't exactly disagree with it. Ignoring minnows in a single country is getting dodgier. Even then, I wouldn't be objecting to it if you had just said Smith averages 38 without minnows at home without them. But sub 40 is not some magical number... 38 vs 40 is far less of a delta in averages than a single Hayden 380 vs Zim would create in comparison to a regular innings. Which also leads to the question of why Smith should be singled out for cashing in against minnows for- minnows have a similar impact on all of his, sehwag and Haydens averages.

 

[trundler]

You didn't exclude minnows. You excluded Zim and gave a wrong average... It's 41 without them.

Ignoring minnows is kinda understandable. Shouldn't be fully done, but I don't exactly disagree with it. Ignoring minnows in a single country is getting dodgier. Even then, I wouldn't be objecting to it if you had just said Smith averages 38 without minnows at home without them. But sub 40 is not some magical number... 38 vs 40 is far less of a delta in averages than a single Hayden 380 vs Zim would create in comparison to a regular innings. Which also leads to the question of why Smith should be singled out for cashing in against minnows for- minnows have a similar impact on all of his, sehwag and Haydens averages.

That's what I meant, he averages 38 at home without minnows. Hayden and Sehwag still average 50+ at home without minnows which is comparable to Smith's away record and Smith's home record is on par with their away records. My point is that Smith can't get so many bonus points for having tougher home conditions when he was ok in them as to put him on a different plane than the other 2 great openers of his time.