Richards, Smith, Lara, Hammond

[Slifer]

From DoG’s peak thread a while ago.

(5 years and 40+ innings min req)

Viv (76-81) 45 innings 3256 runs @ 75.72
Hammond (35-46) 41 innings 2629 runs @ 75.11

Other players in this poll:
Smith (14-19) 87 innings 5709 runs @ 77.15
Lara (01-06) 83 innings 5029 runs @ 62.09

And the other 3 big boys
Sobers (58-63) 45 innings 3064 runs @ 78.56
Tendulkar (97-02) 69 innings 4335 runs @ 69.92
Hobbs (10-25) 47 innings 3006 runs @ 68.32


And of course our biggest boy of all
Bradman (34-48) 40 innings 3772 runs @ 114.30

Impressive in terms of length of time for Hobbs, Bradman and Hammond. Impressive in terms of innings for Smith and Lara. Impressive in terms of other factors for the others, but Lara clearly falls a bit short in this particular measure imo (relatively)

If it's his average, it's because Lara has very few not outs compared to the others. But he churned out the same RPI (more or less) as a few of the others: Sachin, Hammond, Hobbs.

 

[ma1978]

Love how these guys are classified as “second tier” or “third tie”. Any one of these could be considered the best after Bradman depending on one’s taste

 

[kyear2]

Was he really that bad against pace? I didn't feel he was too troubled by quick bowling, although you could argue his genius was on show more against spin.

Yes and no. He nor Tendulkar were particularly successful vs the elite pacers of the '90's, but at times Lara did look particularly uncomfortable vs the likes of White Lightning. But that's the difference between Lara and the likes of Hammond. Lara struggled vs the 2 Ws and Donald. Hammond, vs Constantine and Martindale, and who were the guys he did dominate?

 

[kyear2]

Love how these guys are classified as “second tier” or “third tie”. Any one of these could be considered the best after Bradman depending on one’s taste

Most of them, definitely. And it's not like they are in the teens, this is 5th through 7th or 8th. I personally have Viv in that top tier, but last time I said that it was met with some opposition. Smith and Lara not far off, but yeah, an elite 7 and depending on perspective can be seen as the best after Bradman.

For example, I'll always maintain that Lara was the best I've ever seen.

 

[kyear2]

Yawn

The more statements you make like this, the less objective you stance appears, lol

He's not Ponting and the the fact that he's arguably the best ever player of pace and the rate of knots that he could take over or turn the tide of a game vs quality bowling is unparalleled.

If you rate that guy 15th, it begs questions.

 

[subshakerz]

If it's his average, it's because Lara has very few not outs compared to the others. But he churned out the same RPI (more or less) as a few of the others: Sachin, Hammond, Hobbs.

Lara's was in a very friendly batting era though.

 

[kyear2]

Lara's was in a very friendly batting era though.

They played in the exact same era, Sachin just continued on a little longer.

 

[subshakerz]

They played in the exact same era, Sachin just continued on a little longer.

Tendulkar's peak started earlier, mid-90s, a much more bowling friendly time.

Lara had a short early 90s peak, then 5 years dip, then 2001-2006 peak again which is being discussed.

 

[kyear2]

Tendulkar's peak started earlier, mid-90s, a much more bowling friendly time.

Lara had a short early 90s peak, then 5 years dip, then 2001-2006 peak again which is being discussed.

That still coincided with Australia's dominance, but understood.

And again, don't believe in the more bowling friendly discussion, just the great bowlers mostly retired.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Imo:

Bradman

Grace
Hobbs
Tendulkar
Sobers

Smith
Lara
Gavaskar
Richards
Hutton
Hammond
Headley
Chappell
Sutcliffe
Pollock

 

[honestbharani]

Lara > Sachin >Smith > Viv - as far as next to Bradman is concerned.

 

[subshakerz]

That still coincided with Australia's dominance, but understood.

And again, don't believe in the more bowling friendly discussion, just the great bowlers mostly retired.

Yup. In many ways, early 90s Lara may have been better than early 2000s Lara.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Smith>Sachin>Viv=Lara

Hammond is so overrated I'm not even including him here.

 

[Slifer]

Tendulkar's peak started earlier, mid-90s, a much more bowling friendly time.

Lara had a short early 90s peak, then 5 years dip, then 2001-2006 peak again which is being discussed.

In the more bowler friendly but his runs were made vs lesser attacks. Not WWs, not McWarne and not Donald. One series vs a declining Ambrose and the rest vs lesser attacks. Nice try though...

 

[kyear2]

Smith>Sachin>Viv=Lara

Hammond is so overrated I'm not even including him here.

Not going to argue with any order for these guys, Smith has been immense. Perosnally I just rate the bowlers the others have faced to be better.

And agree on Hammond, I rate Hutton and others above him.

 

[subshakerz]

In the more bowler friendly but his runs were made vs lesser attacks. Not WWs, not McWarne and not Donald. One series vs a declining Ambrose and the rest vs lesser attacks. Nice try though...

Tendulkar did make runs against the top bowlers though in that peak, but yeah he cashed in much more on the lesser attacks, which is like every batsman out there. And the pitches were not that flat generally then.

Lara on the other hand from 2001 onwards didn't have Donald or WWs. He didn't even play Shoaib against Pakistan. He played Bond (flopped) and the English pace quartet (the monumental 400 on a flat pitch aside, he didn't score much in the seven other tests he played against them). Scored against Pollock, McGrath, Murali and Warne though.

So yeah, Lara's peak is not nearly as impressive as Tendulkar's IMO, given that the latter faced top bowling more consistently and ended up averaging better overall.

 

[kyear2]

Tendulkar did make runs against the top bowlers though in that peak, but yeah he cashed in much more on the lesser attacks, which is like every batsman out there. And the pitches were not that flat generally then.

Lara on the other hand from 2001 onwards didn't have Donald or WWs. He didn't even play Shoaib against Pakistan. He played Bond (flopped) and the English pace quartet (the monumental 400 on a flat pitch aside, he didn't score much in the seven other tests he played against them). Scored against Pollock, McGrath, Murali and Warne though.

So yeah, Lara's peak is not nearly as impressive as Tendulkar's IMO, given that the latter faced top bowling more consistently and ended up averaging better overall.

First to frame, no one (besides HB) is saying he's better than Tendulkar but to say he didn't really face anyone then name 3 top 7 bowlers and a top 15 one doesn't add up. Lara also didn't have the minnows that Tendulkar faced, to feed on to the extent that he did to help offset his numbers.

 

[Slifer]

Tendulkar did make runs against the top bowlers though in that peak, but yeah he cashed in much more on the lesser attacks, which is like every batsman out there. And the pitches were not that flat generally then.

Lara on the other hand from 2001 onwards didn't have Donald or WWs. He didn't even play Shoaib against Pakistan. He played Bond (flopped) and the English pace quartet (the monumental 400 on a flat pitch aside, he didn't score much in the seven other tests he played against them). Scored against Pollock, McGrath, Murali and Warne though.

So yeah, Lara's peak is not nearly as impressive as Tendulkar's IMO, given that the latter faced top bowling more consistently and ended up averaging better overall.

Fair assessment.

 

[subshakerz]

First to frame, no one (besides HB) is saying he's better than Tendulkar but to say he didn't really face anyone then name 3 top 7 bowlers and a top 15 one doesn't add up. Lara also didn't have the minnows that Tendulkar faced, to feed on to the extent that he did to help offset his numbers.

I didn't say that. I just said that 2000s was a more batting friendly era, which to me is a combo of less great bowlers around and flatter pitches.

I will agree, Tendulkar faced more minnows in his peak though. But he faced a greater share of quality bowlers. And he ended up averaging better than Lara too in their peaks.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Zimbabwe weren't full on minnows in the late 90s. Especially in this context when India were losing tests to them.