Jacques Kallis vs Jack Hobbs

[subshakerz]

As I said, if you're looking at actual value, no one's ahead if Sobers and Kallis, but now many besides you voted Kallis top 5, far less top 3.
I said early in that you're the only one who was consistent in your philosophy, the rest showed a disconnect and voted favorites and God knows what else.
If you're going total value, which you're doing if Imran is no. 3, then the same applies even more for Kallis. Period.

Stop repeating this as if it's a fact when it's very much debatable and you're probably the minority view.

 

[kyear2]

Again, if we assume bare minimum specialist spinner bowler standards who is first or second change, I think he makes it.


We assume Imran's entire bowling stats when we account for his bowling career, including his end batting phase. So why should we exclude his end batting stats when assessing him as a bat? You can't have it both ways otherwise if we cut him off at his bowling prime, he averages 21 with nearly 5WPM and suddenly he should be rated higher.

And also, even if we cut off at his bowling prime, he still averages 33/34 with more tons than Logie. He clearly, obviously is lower order batting specialist standards by the 80s era. You don't seem to want to take the era into account.

This argument is getting ridiculous. Logie was a poor batsman, he didn't play most of the era, he played only 52 tests, because again, he was a poor, below test standard batsman. This shouldn't have to be explained to you, you know this.

You chose the only batsman you could find the fit your argument. Test standard means test standard.
His numbers were soft, and that's not taking into consideration that he piled on runs in less than critical situations.

Yes he was the best bowling all rounder ever, doesn't mean he's making good teams as a batsman, definely not while he was bowling...

 

[subshakerz]

Lillee beat out McGrath for the spot for the Cricinfo team. When you listen to the guys there, they believe Lillee was better.

I personally disagree, but they were swept up with Lillee and Warne's charisma. It is what it is.

The Wisden team, his slot was taken by Barnes and the team was a tad Anglo centric, but they wanted to represent the history of the game, hence Grace as well.

For guys like Marshall and McGrath, I don't know what it is, but they aren't nearly as celebrated as much as their own colleagues, Richards and Warne, and it no doubt has to do with their personalities. They weren't as flamboyant or had as dominant personalities as Richards, Lillee, Imran, Warne, Tendulkar etc.

One voter said, and some here may agree that Lillee could do everything that McGrath could but kilometers faster. I guess for them it's like my opinion of Punter, you had to watch him live.

You are just gosh galloping and didnt address his point. How can you sustain McGrath being no.2 bowler of all time if he is so ignored, yet dispute Imran being no.3 player by the same logic?

Now the distinction between our arguments is that you're saying your guy is the equal to Bradman and Sobers, and to some, no. 2, hence above at least one of them. If you're the equal of those two, and universally seen to be top 3, you make these teams, all teams.

NOBODY HERE IS MAKING THAT ARGUMENT.

My argument, which Subz has seemingly, temporarily agreed to, is that that player doesn't exist. There isn't anyone close to the status of Bradman or Sobers and there is no consensus no. three. That's it.

No, that's not what you are arguing. You are arguing that Imran isn't a credible no.3 candidate because he wasn't selected in two ATG XIs you decided are all-important.

 

[subshakerz]

This argument is getting ridiculous. Logie was a poor batsman, he didn't play most of the era, he played only 52 tests, because again, he was a poor, below test standard batsman. This shouldn't have to be explained to you, you know this.

That's not how it works. Below test standards bats don't play over 50 games mostly uninterrupted in the best team in the world. He gets dropped after a few tests and then you have several other players who are tried for that position.

The simple indisputable fact is that Logie was considered an acceptable no.6 bat by 80s standards.

You chose the only batsman you could find the fit your argument. Test standard means test standard.

Like I said, I can find lower order bats in other teams around Imrans level who played for stretches. You had someone like Jeff Crowe for NZ. Or even early career Steve Waugh. I chose Logie because it's the freaking best team in the world, which you ignore.

 

[kyear2]

Stop repeating this as if it's a fact when it's very much debatable and you're probably the minority view.

How is it not.

It's an inconsistent analysis.

Atg batsman, ATG bowler, neither on the absolute top tier, both had their drawbacks. But ATG

Kallis bowling was good for what it was required for, so was Imran's batting, Kallis had his catching which even takes arguably takes him past.

He was an ATG batsman at the premier no 4 spot, where during the length of his career he matched Tendulkar's production: Quite often the 2nd change bowler and effective at it as well, with the odd match winning spells : When he wasn't bowling he was performing at an ATG level at the most critical fielding position.

The runs, wickets and catches, hell, the man of the match awards, no one but Sobers comes close to matching all of that.

If you want to look at cumulative value, they are the same, any objective analysis shows that.

 

[subshakerz]

How is it not.

It's an inconsistent analysis.

Atg batsman, ATG bowler, neither on the absolute top tier, both had their drawbacks. But ATG

Kallis bowling was good for what it was required for, so was Imran's batting, Kallis had his catching which even takes arguably takes him past.

He was an ATG batsman at the premier no 4 spot, where during the length of his career he matched Tendulkar's production: Quite often the 2nd change bowler and effective at it as well, with the odd match winning spells : When he wasn't bowling he was performing at an ATG level at the most critical fielding position.

The runs, wickets and catches, hell, the man of the match awards, no one but Sobers comes close to matching all of that.

If you want to look at cumulative value, they are the same, any objective analysis shows that.

This is your opinion. It's your take. Don't present it as if uncontested fact when most of the board disagrees and rates Imran well ahead.

 

[Bolo.]

Again, if we assume bare minimum specialist spinner bowler standards who is first or second change, I think he makes it.


We assume Imran's entire bowling stats when we account for his bowling career, including his end batting phase. So why should we exclude his end batting stats when assessing him as a bat? You can't have it both ways otherwise if we cut him off at his bowling prime, he averages 21 with nearly 5WPM and suddenly he should be rated higher.

And also, even if we cut off at his bowling prime, he still averages 33/34 with more tons than Logie. He clearly, obviously is lower order batting specialist standards by the 80s era. You don't seem to want to take the era into account.

Come on. You would not want someone with a record like Sobers with as a specialist. Unless you only look at his peak, or assume he will take on a bigger workload. Like Kallis.

If you want to look at Sobers bowling spin specifically, he takes a bit more than 1 WPM at an average in the upper 30s and a SR probably north of 100.

Why would you consider Imran's batting phase in the context of this discussion? It's a conversation about secondary disciplines, and batting was his primary at these times. You have recently argued for excluding his bowling from his record in context that made much less sense than here.

You are fudging the numbers, but yes, Imran the bowler should be considered better than his numbers suggest if you include his specialist bat phase. I rate him higher as a player with his batting phase included so I don't ingore the phase (other than within contexts it makes sense to do so in, like this or picking an AT team).

I am considering era. Imran was a HTB. On batting, I would consider Pollock ahead of Imran the bowler without era- very similar overall record, but huge difference in home/away splits.

 

[Bolo.]

That's kinda my point. If you can't make the team and contribute, then.....

The game is structured a certain way, I don't know, it's 2am and I need to sleep, but the same way with the others, if you can't get on the field, does it matter?

May rephrase that when I'm fully awake

A 22 average bowler is a better player than a low 30s averaging bat, irrespective of who makes the team more. All getting in shows is that you need to pick a team around role even more than quality.

There isn't an AT team to get into. It's hypothetical. Missing a team that could never have existed is not important.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Lillee beat out McGrath for the spot for the Cricinfo team. When you listen to the guys there, they believe Lillee was better.

I personally disagree, but they were swept up with Lillee and Warne's charisma. It is what it is.

The Wisden team, his slot was taken by Barnes and the team was a tad Anglo centric, but they wanted to represent the history of the game, hence Grace as well.

For guys like Marshall and McGrath, I don't know what it is, but they aren't nearly as celebrated as much as their own colleagues, Richards and Warne, and it no doubt has to do with their personalities. They weren't as flamboyant or had as dominant personalities as Richards, Lillee, Imran, Warne, Tendulkar etc.

One voter said, and some here may agree that Lillee could do everything that McGrath could but kilometers faster. I guess for them it's like my opinion of Punter, you had to watch him live.

Now the distinction between our arguments is that you're saying your guy is the equal to Bradman and Sobers, and to some, no. 2, hence above at least one of them. If you're the equal of those two, and universally seen to be top 3, you make these teams, all teams.

My argument, which Subz has seemingly, temporarily agreed to, is that that player doesn't exist. There isn't anyone close to the status of Bradman or Sobers and there is no consensus no. three. That's it.

This a complete word salad brother . Address the actual point concisely : These ATG teams you cited ( cricinfo and wisden particularly ) all had Wasim in the team as a pacer over Mcgrath. Do you agree then that Wasim is a superior bowler and that Mcgrath is not worthy to be in that "top tier" of pacers you keep mentioning?

 

[ankitj]

And that's different from a fictitious top ten list how?

Bruh!

In the real games they played, Kallis had a greater impact on his team than Hobbs, he probably also had a greater impact on his team outside of any cricketer not named Sobers. Premier batting position, 2nd change bowler and and premier catching position.

Good to know you understand Kallis' value

But in my mind was he a better cricketer than Hobbs? No, Hobbs reached a level in his primary skill that I don't think Kallis did. I think Hobbs has a argument to be seen as the best bar Bradman, Kallis doesn't. Think that counts for something.

You can use that argument, that's fine by me. Just don't use the argument that player X is chosen in ATG XIs and player Y is not. No cricketer ever played to qualify in ATG XIs. They played to help their teams win matches. Simple af.

 

[subshakerz]

Come on. You would not want someone with a record like Sobers with as a specialist. Unless you only look at his peak, or assume he will take on a bigger workload. Like Kallis.

If you want to look at Sobers bowling spin specifically, he takes a bit more than 1 WPM at an average in the upper 30s and a SR probably north of 100.

I am not suggesting Sobers is some great bowler. But yes, he is a bear minimum specialist level first/second change bowler based on his era.

Why would you consider Imran's batting phase in the context of this discussion? It's a conversation about secondary disciplines, and batting was his primary at these times. You have recently argued for excluding his bowling from his record in context that made much less sense than here.

Again, it depends on which standard we are using. If we are using the standard that all his batting and bowling reflect Imran, then we don't ignore his late career batting. If we say only his prime AR phase counts, then we ignore both his batting and bowling after and he is a notably better bowler. I can accept either standard but not discounting late batting but including late bowling.

You are fudging the numbers, but yes, Imran the bowler should be considered better than his numbers suggest if you include his specialist bat phase. I rate him higher as a player with his batting phase included so I don't ingore the phase (other than within contexts it makes sense to do so in, like this or picking an AT team).

Imran meets the era's standard of a lower order bat regardless of whether you want to include his last couple of years. You are just ignoring the lower batting standards of that era for some odd reason to suit your argument. Again, Logie is the best indicator but virtually every other team had a similar quality lower order bat.

I am considering era. Imran was a HTB. On batting, I would consider Pollock ahead of Imran the bowler without era- very similar overall record, but huge difference in home/away splits.

Nonsense. Imran averaged mid-30s in England and Aus with tons and multiple good batting series in both. Was good in India too with an MOS based on his batting in 87. Calling him a home bully means you haven't actually looked at his record, the same way you made up him averaging 30 runs a game and then conveniently ignored it when your mistake was pointed out.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

20 overs a game is well below even a 4th seamer.

Please show me all these 4th seamers who are bowling significantly more overs than that in a 4 pace 1 spin attack.

Tbf, Neil Wagner usually bowled almost that many in 1 spell.

 

[Coronis]

Tbf, Neil Wagner usually bowled almost that many in 1 spell.

Yeah Wagner was a bit of an anomaly.

 

[Bolo.]

I am not suggesting Sobers is some great bowler. But yes, he is a bear minimum specialist level first/second change bowler based on his era.


Again, it depends on which standard we are using. If we are using the standard that all his batting and bowling reflect Imran, then we don't ignore his late career batting. If we say only his prime AR phase counts, then we ignore both his batting and bowling after and he is a notably better bowler. I can accept either standard but not discounting late batting but including late bowling.


Imran meets the era's standard of a lower order bat regardless of whether you want to include his last couple of years. You are just ignoring the lower batting standards of that era for some odd reason to suit your argument. Again, Logie is the best indicator but virtually every other team had a similar quality lower order bat.


Nonsense. Imran averaged mid-30s in England and Aus with tons and multiple good batting series in both. Was good in India too with an MOS based on his batting in 87. Calling him a home bully means you haven't actually looked at his record, the same way you made up him averaging 30 runs a game and then conveniently ignored it when your mistake was pointed out.

What team in the world currently would you pick a record like Sobers for long term?

Counting primary as secondary does not work. You know I give credit to Imran when it makes any sense. It doesn't make sense in this context.

He averaged 39.6 RPT in his first 74 tests. This figure would drop a bit with the addition of his mid 80s specialist bat tests. So I said 30 something. Not 30. After 74 his wicket tally falls below specialist levels.

His bowling phase is the same batting average as Pollock, with a slightly higher RPT than Pollock's 35. 9 higher home average and 6 lower away average. So, relative to Pollock, he was a HTB. And I am giving him era credit. I clearly prefer Pollock's record by a small margin without it.

He's a notably better bat than Pollock overall, and I give him credit for this too. But not in the context of discussing his secondary.

 

[subshakerz]

What team in the world currently would you pick a record like Sobers for long term?

None but for his era most teams.

Counting primary as secondary does not work. You know I give credit to Imran when it makes any sense. It doesn't make sense in this context.

I say just have a consistent standard. We disagree then.

He averaged 39.6 RPT in his first 74 tests. This figure would drop a bit with the addition of his mid 80s specialist bat tests. So I said 30 something. Not 30. After 74 his wicket tally falls below specialist levels.

So to clarify, do you consider none of his final 14 tests as applicable to his bowling record? Are you willing to judge him as a bowler based on just 74 tests only? Because if you're not, then it's clear to me you are just making your own double standard just to deconstruct Imran.

His bowling phase is the same batting average as Pollock, with a slightly higher RPT than Pollock's 35. 9 higher home average and 6 lower away average. So, relative to Pollock, he was a HTB. And I am giving him era credit. I clearly prefer Pollock's record by a small margin without it.

He's a notably better bat than Pollock overall, and I give him credit for this too. But not in the context of discussing his secondary.

Man, you are seriously disappointing. You ignore all my points on the era standard with examples and his away batting record. At least address them.

You jump to Pollock who batted in the best era for batting ever where 40 plus was the batting standard, and scored just two tons with little knocks of substance. That's just a bogus comparison.

Please tell me how you can ignore Logie but downgrade Imran.

Frankly you seem confused how to judged Imran the bat and are making it up on the fly. It's quite straightforward: overall in his career, would Imran qualify as a lower order bat internationally in his era? Easy yes.

 

[kyear2]

You are just gosh galloping and didnt address his point. How can you sustain McGrath being no.2 bowler of all time if he is so ignored, yet dispute Imran being no.3 player by the same logic?


NOBODY HERE IS MAKING THAT ARGUMENT.


No, that's not what you are arguing. You are arguing that Imran isn't a credible no.3 candidate because he wasn't selected in two ATG XIs you decided are all-important.

Umm, I swear no one reads....

No, I'm saying it's proof he isn't the undisputed no. 3 player that he's purported as being.

For me it's so much simpler. He isn't in my top tier of primary guys and my no. 8 bowler can't be my no. 3 player.

I don't expect you to agree, but if the names were different you would see it differently.

 

[subshakerz]

No, I'm saying it's proof he isn't the undisputed no. 3 player that he's purported as being.

Yes that is your actual argument, it is Imran specific. Not the one you were giving before that.

And please address regarding McGrath

 

[Bolo.]

None but for his era most teams.


I say just have a consistent standard. We disagree then.


So to clarify, do you consider none of his final 14 tests as applicable to his bowling record? Are you willing to judge him as a bowler based on just 74 tests only? Because if you're not, then it's clear to me you are just making your own double standard just to deconstruct Imran.


Man, you are seriously disappointing. You ignore all my points on the era standard with examples and his away batting record. At least address them.

You jump to Pollock who batted in the best era for batting ever where 40 plus was the batting standard, and scored just two tons with little knocks of substance. That's just a bogus comparison.

Please tell me how you can ignore Logie but downgrade Imran.

Frankly you seem confused how to judged Imran the bat and are making it up on the fly. It's quite straightforward: overall in his career, would Imran qualify as a lower order bat internationally in his era? Easy yes.

Let's stop the pendantry on Sobers. He and Kallis would both be bad picks as specialist bowlers for pretty much any team based on their actual career bowling records. Sobers is a less bad pick. Any assumption on how they would have bowled as specialists applies to both, but more so to Kallis.

I definitely don't think the games Imran played as a pure bat should count towards his bowling record. I do apply something you could call double standards for these in giving him credit towards his batting for these while not taking away from his bowling, but I think this is fair. Games he bowled a bit in are a grey area. I don't think it matters much if they are included or not. There aren't enough to have a major impact on his record, and what impact there is applies both positively and negatively to batting/bowling, so I don't think it matters.

Pollock and Imran (as a bowler) have very similar records. Imran has slightly more runs per test, but that's batting position. It's a wash for me as batting actually gets harder going down from 7ish. You are going to run out of partners when set. I think Bradman would probably average in the 40s batting 11.

For the majority portion of Pollock's games that fell in a batting era, he had an easier job away. Imran had an easier job at home. Both of these facts are reflected in their home/away average splits, as well as the overall averages and splits of specialist bats from their era. I think that the relative advantages each had are close. I'm not ignoring either.

You are beating the wrong bush when it comes to Imrans career batting here. I'm not sure that there is anyone other than you who rates it higher than me. I just also rate the secondaries of other players highly. Like Kallis, I rate him as mediocre specialist quality, who was not used in a specialist role.

 

[subshakerz]

Let's stop the pendantry on Sobers. He and Kallis would both be bad picks as specialist bowlers for pretty much any team based on their actual career bowling records. Sobers is a less bad pick. Any assumption on how they would have bowled as specialists applies to both, but more so to Kallis.

Ok I can let it go there

I definitely don't think the games Imran played as a pure bat should count towards his bowling record. I do apply something you could call double standards for these in giving him credit towards his batting for these while not taking away from his bowling, but I think this is fair. Games he bowled a bit in are a grey area. I don't think it matters much if they are included or not. There aren't enough to have a major impact on his record, and what impact there is applies both positively and negatively to batting/bowling, so I don't think it matters.

Yeah I think that I can accept if you give Imran a bonus for late career batting while ignoring the bowling. The thing is that without those last 14/15 tests, he averages 21 with the ball with a much better WPM and better away/home split. It could put him favorably against both Steyn or Ambrose who he generally falls short against. However, I don't go as far as to say we should definitely ignore those late tests as long as we acknowledge that his overall bowling career is a bit better than the figures show.

Let me put it this way: in giving a summation of Imran the bat, maybe we can fully accept the late end numbers but we can't fully discard them either. Maybe somewhere in between is fairer.

Pollock and Imran (as a bowler) have very similar records. Imran has slightly more runs per test, but that's batting position. It's a wash for me as batting actually gets harder going down from 7ish. You are going to run out of partners when set. I think Bradman would probably average in the 40s batting 11.

For the majority portion of Pollock's games that fell in a batting era, he had an easier job away. Imran had an easier job at home. Both of these facts are reflected in their home/away average splits, as well as the overall averages and splits of specialist bats from their era. I think that the relative advantages each had are close. I'm not ignoring either.

You are beating the wrong bush when it comes to Imrans career batting here. I'm not sure that there is anyone other than you who rates it higher than me. I just also rate the secondaries of other players highly. Like Kallis, I rate him as mediocre specialist quality, who was not used in a specialist role.

I agree, Imran is the bare minimum lower order bat specialist to me, not some good bat at all. But he crosses that threshold easy. Not so Kallis, and we disagree there.

I disagree it gets harder down the order. To me runs up the order are always more better rated for me (fresher bowlers, chance for longer innings and less not outs, general pressure of specialist expectations).

I still think bringing up Pollock when you have comparable lower order 6/7 bats in his era doesn't make any sense.

 

[Bolo.]

Ok I can let it go there


Yeah I think that I can accept if you give Imran a bonus for late career batting while ignoring the bowling. The thing is that without those last 14/15 tests, he averages 21 with the ball with a much better WPM and better away/home split. It could put him favorably against both Steyn or Ambrose who he generally falls short against.

Let me out it this way: in giving a summation of Imran the bat, maybe we can fully put the late end numbers but we can't fully discard them either. Maybe somewhere in between is fairer.


I agree, Imran is the bare minimum lower order bat specialist to me, not some good bat at all. But he crosses that threshold easy. Not so Kallis, and we disagree there.

I disagree it gets harder down the order. To me runs up the order are always more better rated for me (fresher bowlers, chance for longer innings and less not outs, general pressure of specialist expectations).

I still think bringing up Pollock when you have comparable lower order 6/7 bats in his era doesn't make any sense.

I'm happy putting Imran over Ambrose, whether cutting only his non-bowling tests or more. That's mostly a style preference.

Engineering Imrans record by cutting the games 14 games that best suit him still leaves him at a 22 average and 25 away, with a Steyn WPM. His home record gets ridiculous, but Steyn is still a bunch better away. Strikes a lot faster, and is the only top bowler with just about his entire career in the flat pitch/good bat era. More away wickets per match. I regard away performances as a better measure of quality, but even if I didn't I'd still take Steyn's overall record.

Exactly how many games get trimmed doesn't make much difference to me.

Depending on quality and style of a bat, it gets easier down to 5-7ish. After that it gets tougher for bats with any degree of quality. First new ball is gone either way. 2nd new ball and reverse could hit the lower or the lower middle harder. Bowlers are a little less fresh, but the amount of extra overs makes progressively less of a difference as the game goes on.

Everyone gets out cheaply before getting set to all sorts of bowling. Then cash in relative to career average once set. Lower order bats are missing out on chances to cash in when set by running out of partners/strike farming/swinging.

Pollock is pretty comparable in style and quality to the bowling phase of Imrans career. The other ARs differ on at least one. He is a player you have already brought up and is an easier comparison to Kallis as teamates.