Imran Vs McGrath

[Jumno]

Who is the better cricketer?

 

[kyear2]

Pigeon McGrath

 

[Arachnodouche]

Glenn McGrath is the book you read as a kid and are bored senseless by, read again in your late teens to feel smart and brag to your friends about but knowing full well that you understood maybe 30% at best of what was contained inside, then read again in your thirties/forties if you haven't already been consumed and spat out in chunks by a fat wife and mewling kids, and realize that in this musty, dog-eared, distinctly unsexy bastard was concealed all along the meaning of life.

 

[subshakerz]

Glenn McGrath is the book you read as a kid and are bored senseless by, read again in your late teens to feel smart and brag to your friends about but knowing full well that you understood maybe 30% at best of what was contained inside, then read again in your thirties/forties if you haven't already been consumed and spat out in chunks by a fat wife and mewling kids, and realize that in this musty, dog-eared, distinctly unsexy bastard was concealed all along the meaning of life.

He isn't that bad.

 

[smash84]

Who is the better cricketer?

As a cricketer, it's Imran easily.

As a bowler, McGrath is better.

 

[ataraxia]

@kyear2 you have voted Sobers > Bradman and McGrath > Imran.

The batting difference between Bradman and Sobers is far greater in size than the bowling difference between McGrath and Imran. So therefore to have voted the way you have – moving to the less important secondary disciplines – you must think that the value of Sobers' bowling is far greater than Imran's batting. "Far greater" is far greater: it's the extent to which Bradman is above his closest batting competitors. The 10–12% difference that the difference between Imran's and Sobers' fielding makes, already lessened by the fact that Bradman was an above average fielder and McGrath a below average fielder, is insufficient to change things significantly here. I'm struggling to see how this view is plausible?

 

[smash84]

@kyear2 you have voted Sobers > Bradman and McGrath > Imran.

The batting difference between Bradman and Sobers is far greater in size than the bowling difference between McGrath and Imran. So therefore to have voted the way you have – moving to the less important secondary disciplines – you must think that the value of Sobers' bowling is far greater than Imran's batting. "Far greater" is far greater: it's the extent to which Bradman is above his closest batting competitors. The 10–12% difference that the difference between Imran's and Sobers' fielding makes, already lessened by the fact that Bradman was an above average fielder and McGrath a below average fielder, is insufficient to change things significantly here. I'm struggling to see how this view is plausible?

Now, just watch kyear2 make a hideously long reply without actually answering your question.

 

[subshakerz]

@kyear2 you have voted Sobers > Bradman and McGrath > Imran.

The batting difference between Bradman and Sobers is far greater in size than the bowling difference between McGrath and Imran. So therefore to have voted the way you have – moving to the less important secondary disciplines – you must think that the value of Sobers' bowling is far greater than Imran's batting. "Far greater" is far greater: it's the extent to which Bradman is above his closest batting competitors. The 10–12% difference that the difference between Imran's and Sobers' fielding makes, already lessened by the fact that Bradman was an above average fielder and McGrath a below average fielder, is insufficient to change things significantly here. I'm struggling to see how this view is plausible?

He also believe Hadlee > McGrath as a cricketer.

 

[kyear2]

@kyear2 you have voted Sobers > Bradman and McGrath > Imran.

The batting difference between Bradman and Sobers is far greater in size than the bowling difference between McGrath and Imran. So therefore to have voted the way you have – moving to the less important secondary disciplines – you must think that the value of Sobers' bowling is far greater than Imran's batting. "Far greater" is far greater: it's the extent to which Bradman is above his closest batting competitors. The 10–12% difference that the difference between Imran's and Sobers' fielding makes, already lessened by the fact that Bradman was an above average fielder and McGrath a below average fielder, is insufficient to change things significantly here. I'm struggling to see how this view is plausible?

Yes, yes I have.

Do I ask you to justify your selections?

Imran being rated as highly as he is is also hilarious to me, but it's one you have.

He's been consistently voted the 8th best bowler, based on the on going vote isn't even making the forums all time team, saw a poll from January for best old ball bowler and he didn't even get a single vote. Yet when it comes to player rankings he jumps to 3rd or fourth.
He is, according to someone this evening, not even making his AT team, but a top 4 player... How does that work? How does a top 4 player not make the team? Simply because he isn't.

But while I'm watching the semi final I'll indulge you further.

My top 8 is made up of players that have mastered their primary skills and in the top tiers of same.
Bradman, Sobers, Tendulkar, Richards and Hobbs. Marshall, McGrath and Hadlee.

You're not making my top tier as a player if you're not making the top tier as a bowler. You don't have to agree, and that's been my position consistently for quite a while.

So McGrath for me is clearly ahead of Imran as a cricketer. He walks into my AT team as my opening bowler and for me clearly the 2nd best bowler of all time.

Now, re Bradman and Sobers. For me Sobers is at worst the 3rd best batsman of all time, and unlike most, I don't believe Bradman is worth two batsmen or twice as good as the next group of batsmen. This is also not new.
No doubt he's the best ever, but never faced even nearly the level of bowlers that Sachin, Sobers or Richards did.

Then there's Sobers bowling (which is for me is superior and more impactful than Imran's batting) which brings him closer in value if not surpassing that of Bradman's. When you add in his brilliance at the games most important barehanded fielding position, Sobers takes it.
Chappell noted it, Keith Miller of all people said it.

There was once a series where Sobers averaged over 100, took 20 wickets @ 27 and held 10 catches. In his prime was averaging upper 60's, 28 with the ball and catching everything.

Even if both are in your team who's more important? The brilliant no 3, or the almost as good batsman, who's your most versatile bowler (4th seamer or 2nd spinner) and who mans the critical 2nd slip position to the pacers, 1st for Warne.
Imran's not in this argument because he's likely not making my team. It's also no secret that I don't rate lower order batting anywhere close to as much as you do. Not to mention his soft batting average and his less than ATG away bowling performances.

I hope that's to your approval, if not, that's fine as well. And to Smali, you're warmly invited to **** off.

 

[kyear2]

He also believe Hadlee > McGrath as a cricketer.

Yup, just above, 5th and 6th. Becuse both are in the top tier of bowlers.

It's not hard.

 

[kyear2]

@kyear2 you have voted Sobers > Bradman and McGrath > Imran.

The batting difference between Bradman and Sobers is far greater in size than the bowling difference between McGrath and Imran. So therefore to have voted the way you have – moving to the less important secondary disciplines – you must think that the value of Sobers' bowling is far greater than Imran's batting. "Far greater" is far greater: it's the extent to which Bradman is above his closest batting competitors. The 10–12% difference that the difference between Imran's and Sobers' fielding makes, already lessened by the fact that Bradman was an above average fielder and McGrath a below average fielder, is insufficient to change things significantly here. I'm struggling to see how this view is plausible?

And if I recall correctly, and I'm sure I do. You literally rate Imran ahead of Bradman which makes considerably less sense than Sobers being over him.

And we're not even getting into the home umpiring and blatant tampering.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

As a test cricketer(which is the unsaid assumption in these comparisons): Imran easily

 

[subshakerz]

Yes, yes I have.

Do I ask you to justify your selections?

Imran being rated as highly as he is is also hilarious to me, but it's one you have.

He's been consistently voted the 8th best bowler, based on the on going vote isn't even making the forums all time team, saw a poll from January for best old ball bowler and he didn't even get a single vote. Yet when it comes to player rankings he jumps to 3rd or fourth.
He is, according to someone this evening, not even making his AT team, but a top 4 player... How does that work? How does a top 4 player not make the team? Simply because he isn't.

But while I'm watching the semi final I'll indulge you further.

My top 8 is made up of players that have mastered their primary skills and in the top tiers of same.
Bradman, Sobers, Tendulkar, Richards and Hobbs. Marshall, McGrath and Hadlee.

You're not making my top tier as a player if you're not making the top tier as a bowler. You don't have to agree, and that's been my position consistently for quite a while.

So McGrath for me is clearly ahead of Imran as a cricketer. He walks into my AT team as my opening bowler and for me clearly the 2nd best bowler of all time.

Now, re Bradman and Sobers. For me Sobers is at worst the 3rd best batsman of all time, and unlike most, I don't believe Bradman is worth two batsmen or twice as good as the next group of batsmen. This is also not new.
No doubt he's the best ever, but never faced even nearly the level of bowlers that Sachin, Sobers or Richards did.

Then there's Sobers bowling (which is for me is superior and more impactful than Imran's batting) which brings him closer in value if not surpassing that of Bradman's. When you add in his brilliance at the games most important barehanded fielding position, Sobers takes it.
Chappell noted it, Keith Miller of all people said it.

There was once a series where Sobers averaged over 100, took 20 wickets @ 27 and held 10 catches. In his prime was averaging upper 60's, 28 with the ball and catching everything.

Even if both are in your team who's more important? The brilliant no 3, or the almost as good batsman, who's your most versatile bowler (4th seamer or 2nd spinner) and who mans the critical 2nd slip position to the pacers, 1st for Warne.
Imran's not in this argument because he's likely not making my team. It's also no secret that I don't rate lower order batting anywhere close to as much as you do. Not to mention his soft batting average and his less than ATG away bowling performances.

I hope that's to your approval, if not, that's fine as well. And to Smali, you're warmly invited to **** off.

The contortions at play here are staggering.

Bradman isn't in the same tier as a batsmen as Sobers. @kyear2 knows this, he won't acknowledge it though, because if he does, then he will have to accept his logic of ignoring secondary skills based on being in another tier will apply with Sobers vs Bradman, and his argument falls apart.

 

[OverratedSanity]

And if I recall correctly, and I'm sure I do. You literally rate Imran ahead of Bradman which makes considerably less sense than Sobers being over him.

Hmm, Imran > Bradman is wrong imo. But you could argue its more justifiable Sobers > Bradman.

Bradman was far better than Sobers at his primary discipline. Imran's primary discipline (pace bowling) is not directly comparable to Bradman batting, so if you value the match winning ability and impact of pace bowlers much higher than the impact of a single batsman, you could easily argue Imran's bowling (which includes maybe the greatest peak of any bowler) + his extra batting and captaincy is a better package. Again, I don't agree but I can see why people would think that. Sobers much worse than Bradman at his main skill, Imran isn't.

 

[subshakerz]

Hmm, Imran > Bradman is wrong imo. But you could argue its more justifiable.

Bradman was far better than Sobers at his primary discipline. Imran's primary discipline (pace bowling) is not directly comparable to Bradman batting, so if you value the match winning ability and impact of pace bowlers much higher than the impact of a single batsman, you could easily argue Imran's bowling (which includes maybe the greatest peak of any bowler) + his extra batting and captaincy is a better package. Again, I don't agree but I can see why people would think that. Sobers much worse than Bradman at his main skill, Imran isn't.

@kyear2 arguments are just reductionist claptrap framed around unnecessary anecdotes and filler.

'Imran is no.8 bowler, McGrath is no.2, so like, that's a huge difference man, ain't no batting fillin that gap'

'Bradman? Oh yeah, he's like no.1, but y'know Sobers is no.3, y'see they're close y'all, don'tcha know that Sobers took a buncha wickets and catches too? Bradman ain't that great anyways, justa buncha hype, Sobers is the real top G'

 

[capt_Luffy]

I don't think the question was whether Don is worth two batsmen @kyear2 ; I am sure nobody thinks Marshall, McGrath or Imran are worth two bowlers either. It's pretty simple really, the difference in the batting of Bradman and Sobers is higher than that of McGrath/Marshall and Imran. What rank they gets among elites truly doesn't matter, Sobers is definitely closer to Kohli as a batsman than Bradman.

 

[Coronis]

Do I ask you to justify your selections?

Yes, you constantly question people’s selections. “How can you rate x so high/low?”

 

[Zinzan]

McGrath clearly the better bowler, but as a cricketer, obviously it's Imran .

 

[Coronis]

Glenn McGrath is the book you read as a kid and are bored senseless by, read again in your late teens to feel smart and brag to your friends about but knowing full well that you understood maybe 30% at best of what was contained inside, then read again in your thirties/forties if you haven't already been consumed and spat out in chunks by a fat wife and mewling kids, and realize that in this musty, dog-eared, distinctly unsexy bastard was concealed all along the meaning of life.

Imran’s bowling is more like Harry Potter. Not quite at the top, but enthralled you as a child and still brings quality nostalgia. You found out the author is bigoted but most people can still seperate the greatness of the work from that.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

McGrath the better bowler, Imran clearly the better cricketer.