McGrath/Tendulkar or Imran/Kallis

[Sunil1z]

@Nintendo
Please run a simulation of 2 teams

Team A
6 Sachin + 4 McGrath + Haddin as keeper

Team B
6 Kallis + 4 Imran + Dhoni as a keeper

 

[TheJediBrah]

For real though I understand your logic, you don't have to keep trying to find new ways to explain it.

The point of difference is that you look at Kallis v Sachin and see 2 guys of close to equivalent batting skill, and likewise with McGrath and Imran with bowling. That's not the case, career averages don't tell the real story.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

You're playing chess, and you think I'm playing checkers, but I'm actually playing 3d chess. I'm working on a whole level you can't even comprehend my friend

I think you meant 4d chess. Almost everybody plays 3d chess.

 

[subshakerz]

For real though I understand your logic, you don't have to keep trying to find new ways to explain it.

The point of difference is that you look at Kallis v Sachin and see 2 guys of close to equivalent batting skill, and likewise with McGrath and Imran with bowling. That's not the case, career averages don't tell the real story.

Kallis and Tendulkar have a bigger gulf than McGrath and Imran.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I think you meant 4d chess. Almost everybody plays 3d chess.

I don't actually play chess at all and apparently am not sufficiently familiar with the concept of dimensions

Kallis and Tendulkar have a bigger gulf than McGrath and Imran.

Maybe if you let Imran have 2 Pakistan umpires and free reign to alter the condition of the ball

 

[ataraxia]

This I fully agree with.

Those top 3 or 5 pacers and top group after Bradman had that little extra something that transcended the difference in average.

Ah, I see, it's transcendental.

I'm sorry, I still don't understand how for a real life cricket team McGrath would be better than Imran. My answer to every question on the list below would be Imran otherwise (as, after all, the greatest cricketer of all time), so to make it more fun say McGrath averaged 18 rather than 21.5.

Who would Pakistan prefer? Imran. (7 Imran looks better than 7 Sajid)
Who would India prefer? McGrath.
Who would Sri Lanka prefer? Don't know.
Who would Bangladesh prefer? McGrath.
Who would South Africa prefer? Imran.
Who would the West Indies prefer? Imran. He'd be your best bat.
Who would Australia prefer? @TheJediBrah probably would replace Green with Imran. But McGrath.
Who would New Zealand prefer? Imran.
Who would England prefer? I think I need TJB's help with this one – who would fit in better with the blokes?

Hmm, seems tight. Shame McGrath averaged 3.5 more.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I'm sorry, I still don't understand how for a real life cricket team McGrath would be better than Imran.

I know you don't champ

 

[ataraxia]

I know you don't champ

Yeah it's just such a preposterous proposition. But really, it is. I still can't believe that people actually think so.

 

[subshakerz]

Maybe if you let Imran have 2 Pakistan umpires and free reign to alter the condition of the ball

Ah ok then just be clear with your school of thought in the first place. You won't accept Imran on merit.

 

[TheJediBrah]

You're blinded by the concept of "career average" being the defining aspect of a player's worth:

so to make it more fun say McGrath averaged 18 rather than 21.5.

comments like this give it away. You could have a bowler that averaged 18 and still not be as valuable as McGrath. Maybe they took a large proportion of tail end wickets, maybe they played weaker teams, or on more friendly wickets, etc.

If McGrath was English he might well have averaged around 18

 

[ankitj]

Actually this top 3 idea with 'no holes' is pretty much based on numbers on a screen.

Exactly. If we rated players based on what we "see" Wasim Akram would be treated as elite level bowler like he is by most folks outside CW.

 

[TheJediBrah]

The stronger your opposition the difference between McGrath and Imran as bowlers grows exponentially

Same with Sachin (or Lara especially) and Kallis

 

[ankitj]

The stronger your opposition the difference between McGrath and Imran as bowlers grows exponentially

How can you say that? McGrath never played against an ATG team, Imran did.

 

[TheJediBrah]

How can you say that? McGrath never played against an ATG team, Imran did.

McGrath's record against the best players. I've never seen anyone able to level the playing field like him, except maybe guys like Shoaib Akhtar or Shane Bond in ODIs when they were having a really good day

 

[Sunil1z]

How can you say that? McGrath never played against an ATG team, Imran did.

Sorry in 2001 series Indian batting was at ATG level and McGrath averaged around 18 .

 

[ankitj]

And Imran was player of the series thrice against one of the greatest teams ever assembled. LMAO at the idea that he is not elite level against the best of best.

 

[ataraxia]

You're blinded by the concept of "career average" being the defining aspect of a player's worth:

comments like this give it away. You could have a bowler that averaged 18 and still not be as valuable as McGrath. Maybe they took a large proportion of tail end wickets, maybe they played weaker teams, or on more friendly wickets, etc.

If McGrath was English he might well have averaged around 18

Ok now you're not even grazing the point. Seriously, I simply adjusted his average down to demonstrate "what if he was that much better" – keeping everything else the same. I think he's the no. 1 bowler. I could equally have given him a rating of 100, Marshall 98, Hadlee 97, Ambrose 95, and adjusted that up to 106/107 to demonstrate the exact same point, but that might confuse you. Not at any point did I imply his raw average was his worth, unless you're straining to find it (which you might have been tbf).

Re the bolded, he'd have had to bowl against the ATG Aus batting lineup rather than the English numpties. A factor that's tough to ignore.

 

[ataraxia]

And Imran was player of the series thrice against the one of the greatest teams ever to be assembled. LMAO at the idea that he is not elite level against the best of best.

Were performances outside Australia and England tbf, you can't expect TJB to know about those.

 

[ankitj]

Sorry in 2001 series Indian batting was at ATG level and McGrath averaged around 18 .

I do rate McGrath as the better bowler between the two. But I reject the idea that Imran would progressively become less effective as the opposition grows stronger. He is the kind of cricketer who raised his game against the best and actually skipped tours to weaker teams to prepare for bigger challenges.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Re the bolded, he'd have had to bowl against the ATG Aus batting lineup rather than the English numpties. A factor that's tough to ignore.

I don't know tbh. He would have exposed issues they didn't even know they had. The Aussies of the 00s are lucky they didn't have to deal with someone of McGrath's level

edit: I'm pushing it a bit now aren't I