Greater cricketer: Wasim Akram or Jacques Kallis

[subshakerz]

He clearly was the best bat in the world for the 4 years. Look up his record if you don't remember. Was scoring hundreds for fun. Averages 43 in SL. But 63+ in the other 6 (non minnow) countries he played in. Averaged exactly the same away (86) as Ponting and Hayden (the two other guys you said we're peaking for this full time) put together. Averages more than Hayden in RSA and Aus, more than Ponting in RSA, and nearly as much in Aus. There comes a point where you can't ignore numbers, even if you don't like the style.

Yes, someone else is better if you make the periods longer. But if you are happy accepting a period of less than 4 years for one (or more) of Lara, Sachin and Waugh, 4 should be enough for Kallis too.

You are missing the point. I am not even talking about numbers here which we can debate.

Was he actually recognized as the best batsman in the world, better than Ponting, Dravid, Lara, etc., by peers, pundits and global cricket fans in the period you indicated?

Answer, no. He never was even considered in the top three even likely. Because of the reasons I cited earlier, he was seen as an accumulator of soft runs and low impact. And no ATG batsman in history would ever be so lowly rated in his prime. Kallis ain't a ATG level bat.

 

[honestbharani]

These are PEWS’s standardized averages and longevity for Kallis and his peers.

Tendulkar - 53.10 (22.62 years)
Kallis - 55.78 (15.92 years)
Lara - 54.42 (13.86 years)
Sangakkara - 53.76 (14.43 years)
Dravid - 50.60 (15.94 years)
Waugh - 47.88 (15.65 years)
Ponting - 46.38 (14.82 years)

Daily Reminder that Lara > Sachin.

 

[Bolo.]

You are missing the point. I am not even talking about numbers here which we can debate.

Was he actually recognized as the best batsman in the world, better than Ponting, Dravid, Lara, etc., by peers, pundits and global cricket fans in the period you indicated?

Answer, no. He never was even considered in the top three even likely. Because of the reasons I cited earlier, he was seen as an accumulator of soft runs and low impact. And no ATG batsman in history would ever be so lowly rated in his prime. Kallis ain't a ATG level bat.

He can't be the best bat because people do not recognize that he is the best... Despite being the best? No. Entirely inconsistent argument.

If he was the best and people were not recognizing it, those people are wrong.

Many people did recognize him as the best at that stage. Many did not, primarily due to there being guys doing well who had peaked earlier and had better careers to date. Compare to Ponting vs Sachin. Ponting had much better form in the early 2000s, but sachin had clearly had a better career. If you want to recognise that ponting was, for a time, the best bat in the world, despite being inferior overall, you need to recognize that the same is true of Kallis.

 

[BazBall21]

I like that longevity contributes to the score. An age curve would be good too.

 

[BazBall21]

Dexter managed a standardised average north of 50 but his poor longevity rightly dragged him down

 

[OverratedSanity]

Daily Reminder that Lara > Sachin.

1 standardized run higher in 10 fewer years. Meh.

 

[The Sean]

I'm sure it has been explained somewhere, but I'm surprised that Waugh takes such a hit to his standardised average.

 

[BazBall21]

I'm sure it has been explained somewhere, but I'm surprised that Waugh takes such a hit to his standardised average.

Playing a poor England team so much doesn't help him in these exercises. Australia is a good place to bat too. Still think his away record should lift him up more.

 

[The Sean]

Playing a poor England team so much doesn't help him in these exercises. Australia is a good place to bat too. Still think his away record should lift him up more.

Yeah that's fair enough about England. Though most of his career on Australian pitches was before they turned into roads.

 

[BazBall21]

Yeah that's fair enough about England. Though most of his career on Australian pitches was before they turned into roads.

Yeah Australian pitches in the 90s were definitely more sporting. I was always surprised that Waugh played a relatively low percentage of his tests against better than median attacks, then I remembered he played all those matches against a poor England bowling lineup. If the Prince included some kind of batting position tax, Waugh would slip further!

 

[Coronis]

I like that longevity contributes to the score. An age curve would be good too.

@Prince EWS see people love it

 

[number11]

By far the best barometer is peer review. As stated before, Akram enjoys golden peer review. He is a lock in an AT Test XI [almost]. Kallis is not in the same league insofar as being 'great' goes. I suspect many here are young - pouring through stats. STATS ARE FOR PRATS [within reason].

I'd wager that Wasim and Gilchrist are the 2 closestto ATG XI locks from the modern period.

 

[number11]

This is the point. Akram is seen by most of his peers as the best pacer of his era. Kallis is not close to that as a batsman, he was just a regular great along with the bunch of Dravid, Hayden, Sehwag, Yousuf, Clarke, Sanga, Inzi, Jaya, etc.

He gets it.

 

[Coronis]

By far the best barometer is peer review. As stated before, Akram enjoys golden peer review. He is a lock in an AT Test XI [almost]. Kallis is not in the same league insofar as being 'great' goes. I suspect many here are young - pouring through stats. STATS ARE FOR PRATS [within reason].

I'd wager that Wasim and Gilchrist are the 2 closestto ATG XI locks from the modern period.

What do you count as modern period?

 

[number11]

What do you count as modern period?

Generally I take it from the start of covered wickets. Now they were phased in, so I put 1970 as a simple starting point.

 

[Coronis]

Generally I take it from the start of covered wickets. Now they were phased in, so I put 1970 as a simple starting point.

lol so Wasim is closer to a lock than Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Imran, Steyn, Ambrose, warne, Murali, Tendulkar, Richards etc

 

[number11]

lol so Wasim is closer to a lock than Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Imran, Steyn, Ambrose, warne, Murali, Tendulkar, Richards etc

Yes as he is a LH quick & faces no competition for his type. Lots of great RH quicks. Batsmen are a different convo. Gilly & Akram face no [real] competition.

 

[Coronis]

Yes as he is a LH quick & faces no competition for his type. Lots of great RH quicks. Batsmen are a different convo. Gilly & Akram face no [real] competition.

Which is not a required position for an ATG team at all. Hell by that logic Warne and Murali face no competition from each other because they’re a leg spinner and an off spinner.

 

[number11]

Which is not a required position for an ATG team at all. Hell by that logic Warne and Murali face no competition from each other because they’re a leg spinner and an off spinner.

Most AT XI play 1 specialist spinner: if you want a leggie, it's going to be SKW, no? And offie - [probably] Murali. So of course one doesn't have to pick a LH quick but if you do [for variation], it's [almost certainly] Akram.

Gilly is a lock. Period.

 

[Bolo.]

Most AT XI play 1 specialist spinner: if you want a leggie, it's going to be SKW, no? And offie - [probably] Murali. So of course one doesn't have to pick a LH spinner but if you do [for variation], it's [almost certainly] Jadeja.

Gilly is a lock. Period.

FTFY