Jacques Kallis vs Ricky Ponting

[subshakerz]

You have raised the impact of minnows on average repeatedly. It creates a delta of one run in average between the two.

There is a delta of 3 runs between their career averages.

3 is more than 1. So are you intentionally raising meaningless points about minnows, or should we consider Kallis to have a very meaningfully higher career average?

Yes so without minnow it closes the gap, and factoring in end career stuff closes it further.

The point always was not to take Kallis raw average as indicating of any superiority over Ponting since with context it becomes clear it's inflated, similar to Sanga.

Whatever extenuating circumstances apply to Pontings end dip apply more so to Kallis' early performances. Look at this and tell me.if you think AUS were hurting more for bats than RSA?

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

No it doesn't because what Kallis faced wasn't unique by the standards of great bats.

 

[Bolo.]

Yes so without minnow it closes the gap, and factoring in end career stuff closes it further.

The point always was not to take Kallis raw average as indicating of any superiority over Ponting since with context it becomes clear it's inflated, similar to Sanga.


No it doesn't because what Kallis faced wasn't unique by the standards of great bats.

You seem a bit more obsessed with their career averages than most. Going on about a 1 point swing is crazy talk. 3 points is something, but not much. The relative respect for Kallis in terms of averages comes primarily from there being a very big gap in away averages, and the very big gap in difficultly of conditions. Nobody on CW takes career averages at face value.

Nobody has claimed Kallis faced unique difficulties. Just that he has a stronger case for extenuating circumstances than Ponting. Kallis, the fact that he was crap with the bat for his first few years notwithstanding, was playing alongside a bunch of bats averaging in the teens and 20s. And was taking cheap wickets. Pontings performances actually hurt his for his last couple of years. If the argument is helping out his team, I don't see why you think this is in Ponting's favour.

 

[subshakerz]

You seem a bit more obsessed with their career averages than most. Going on about a 1 point swing is crazy talk. 3 points is something, but not much. The relative respect for Kallis in terms of averages comes primarily from there being a very big gap in away averages, and the very big gap in difficultly of conditions. Nobody on CW takes career averages at face value.

I don't care that much about averages. I rate Viv higher here than most and he barely averages over 50.

But this partis just working and why I made this argument.

Nobody has claimed Kallis faced unique difficulties. Just that he has a stronger case for extenuating circumstances than Ponting. Kallis, the fact that he was crap with the bat for his first few years notwithstanding, was playing alongside a bunch of bats averaging in the teens and 20s. And was taking cheap wickets. Pontings performances actually hurt his for his last couple of years. If the argument is helping out his team, I don't see why you think this is in Ponting's favour.

That's not the argument. The argument is that we can be a bit charitable in assessing Pontings overall average as a bat knowing it took a hit by playing in circumstances that he normally would have retired earlier in.

I do the same in looking at Imran's late career bowling. I also take this into account for Tendulkar and Akram debuting as teens.

 

[Coronis]

I don't care that much about averages. I rate Viv higher here than most and he barely averages over 50.

But this partis just working and why I made this argument.


That's not the argument. The argument is that we can be a bit charitable in assessing Pontings overall average as a bat knowing it took a hit by playing in circumstances that he normally would have retired earlier in.

Nobody forced him. The team wasn’t in dire straits. He made his own choice to keep playing. You’re just using this bs as a crutch to justify ranking him ahead. (Which btw, is completely unnecessary, I don’t think anyone is saying there is a huge difference between them, there are plenty of legitimate arguments you can actually make, and I don’t think anyone here has a major issue with someone rating Kallis over Ponting or vice versa)

 

[subshakerz]

Nobody forced him. The team wasn’t in dire straits. He made his own choice to keep playing. You’re just using this bs as a crutch to justify ranking him ahead. (Which btw, is completely unnecessary, I don’t think anyone is saying there is a huge difference between them, there are plenty of legitimate arguments you can actually make, and I don’t think anyone here has a major issue with someone rating Kallis over Ponting or vice versa)

I mentioned that argument to just account for average difference. And sure nobody forced him but I am not dogmatic to suggest that a delayed retirement impacted his record.

Anyways we don't need to debate this further, my standard arguments for Ponting over Kallis have always been better rep and more dominant playing style, which aren't as debatable.

Kallis' playing style is below ATG standard.

 

[Bolo.]

That's not the argument. The argument is that we can be a bit charitable in assessing Pontings overall average as a bat knowing it took a hit by playing in circumstances that he normally would have retired earlier in.

Nobody has claimed Kallis faced unique difficulties. Just that he has a stronger case for extenuating circumstances than Ponting. Kallis, the fact that he was crap with the bat for his first few years notwithstanding, was playing alongside a bunch of bats averaging in the teens and 20s. And was taking cheap wickets. Pontings performances actually hurt his for his last couple of years. If the argument is helping out his team, I don't see why you think this is in Ponting's favour.

 

[subshakerz]

Nobody has claimed Kallis faced unique difficulties. Just that he has a stronger case for extenuating circumstances than Ponting. Kallis, the fact that he was crap with the bat for his first few years notwithstanding, was playing alongside a bunch of bats averaging in the teens and 20s. And was taking cheap wickets. Pontings performances actually hurt his for his last couple of years. If the argument is helping out his team, I don't see why you think this is in Ponting's favour.

I think you would agree with the argument I am making for Ponting, just that we disagree on threshold. For example if it was an utterly crap team and he played until his 40s still worth being in the top 6 despite medium form, you would be more liable to give him a pass for his end years.

 

[Bolo.]

I think you would agree with the argument I am making for Ponting, just that we disagree on threshold. For example if it was an utterly crap team and he played until his 40s still worth being in the top 6 despite medium form, you would be more liable to give him a pass for his end years.

I don't mind where the threshold is drawn, as long as it is above the line of helping your team. I do find myself rating bats lower who are above the line, but I also kinda think it's a bit dumb to do so.

Anyway, regardless of where the line gets drawn, I think early Kallis is on the greener side of it than late Ponting. Which is not to say that early Kallis was a better bat than late Ponting. I'm just responding to the parameters you are drawing.

 

[subshakerz]

I don't mind where the threshold is drawn, as long as it is above the line of helping your team. I do find myself rating bats lower who are above the line, but I also kinda think it's a bit dumb to do so.

Anyway, regardless of where the line gets drawn, I think early Kallis is on the greener side of it than late Ponting. Which is not to say that early Kallis was a better bat than late Ponting. I'm just responding to the parameters you are drawing.

I disagree but we have both said our pieces. Thanks for the exchange.

 

[BazBall21]

Have changed to Kallis

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Would take Kallis in most conditions and he was great for longer too

 

[Randomfan]

1995 - 2015 : top 5 test teams




Here is away record of Kallis, Ponting and Sanga in tests involving top 5 teams:



Ponting did not have a great away record against top teams taken together. Dropping below 40 should be a negative. Ponting did average 48 at home against same teams, but those Aus pitches were tailormade for making runs in that period. Everyone gets different home conditions and you can't compare them, but all players do play away in all kinds of conditions and it's more of a equal footing than home.


-------------

Sanga gets a bit overrated too. Sanga and Jayawadene played together. We can't compare Sl home conditions to non-SL conditions but here both played together home and away. Some one will say that Sanga was better away, but Jaya was so much better home that he is literally averaging 9-10 points higher for home+ away combined.



Anyone cites raw career avg in a period, it's best to look if batsmen did well against peer group in matches involving top 5 sides of that given period. Sanga was outbatted by his own team mate when you see home and away combined.

Sanga was a very fine batsman but a tad over rated for what he actually produced against good teams.

I have always believed that the best players of generation stand out against the best teams of their generation. Doing bottom/minnow bashing does not add to greatness. It's surely nothing and it does help in raw career numbers but it's not really greatness.

 

[Randomfan]

I will take kallis in all kinds of conditions.

If it's a belter then attacking batsman like Ponting may be a better option.

 

[Johan]

1995 - 2015 : top 5 test teams

View attachment 44409


Here is away record of Kallis, Ponting and Sanga in tests involving top 5 teams:

View attachment 44411

Ponting did not have a great away record against top teams taken together. Dropping below 40 should be a negative. Ponting did average 48 at home against same teams, but those Aus pitches were tailormade for making runs in that period. Everyone gets different home conditions and you can't compare them, but all players do play away in all kinds of conditions and it's more of a equal footing than home.


-------------

Sanga gets a bit overrated too. Sanga and Jayawadene played together. We can't compare Sl home conditions to non-SL conditions but here both played together home and away. Some one will say that Sanga was better away, but Jaya was so much better home that he is literally averaging 9-10 points higher for home+ away combined.

View attachment 44412

Anyone cites raw career avg in a period, it's best to look if batsmen did well against peer group in matches involving top 5 sides of that given period. Sanga was outbatted by his own team mate when you see home and away combined.

Sanga was a very fine batsman but a tad over rated for what he actually produced against good teams.

I have always believed that the best players of generation stand out against the best teams of their generation. Doing bottom/minnow bashing does not add to greatness. It's surely nothing and it does help in raw career numbers but it's not really greatness.

now this is weird to me.

Ponting's output in England is better than Kallis's output in England, Ponting's work in Sri Lanka is also higher level than Kallis's, Kallis's work in India is obviously far superior to Ponting's in India, and Ponting's work in South Africa is definitely compareable to Kallis's in Australia considering the nature of pitches.

How is one supposed to look at their records in the countries you handpicked and come away thinking Kallis is far superior? I myself am considering going to Kallis's side but your argument here doesn't really make a whole lot of sense when Ponting is decisively better in two of the four countries you picked, Kallis greatly better in one and their eecords in each other's home nations is comparable.

just to be clear, I'm in the neutral on Kallis vs Ponting right now, just kind of taken off by the argument.

now regarding Jayawerdene and Sangakkara, Sanga is clearly far superior and I won't really bother debating it.

 

[Randomfan]

now this is weird to me.

Ponting's output in England is better than Kallis's output in England, Ponting's work in Sri Lanka is also higher level than Kallis's, Kallis's work in India is obviously far superior to Ponting's in India, and Ponting's work in South Africa is definitely compareable to Kallis's in Australia considering the nature of pitches.

How is one supposed to look at their records in the countries you handpicked and come away thinking Kallis is far superior? I myself am considering going to Kallis's side but your argument here doesn't really make a whole lot of sense when Ponting is decisively better in two of the four countries you picked, Kallis greatly better in one and their eecords in each other's home nations is comparable.

just to be clear, I'm in the neutral on Kallis vs Ponting right now, just kind of taken off by the argument.

now regarding Jayawerdene and Sangakkara, Sanga is clearly far superior and I won't really bother debating it.

Showing Sanga and Jaya was not to compare those two. It was to show that Sanga wasn't really producing that great output against good teams and it was not that hard for good SL bastmen to do well at home against good teams. Sanga's get over rated at time by many due to truck load of runs against bottom/minnow teams.


---------------


I have actully thought about the point you are making. You could be bad or good in one venue. Your aggregate performance captures how good or bad you were in those venues taken together. You are not getting extra points for one opposition and you are not penalized for being poor against one. Your bad and good, everything is included there. Ponting could have compensated for doing poorly in India by hitting it out of the park in other venues, but he did not do it.

To make my point more obvious by putting an absurd example,

Batmen A can avg: 50, 50, 50, 50 in 4 venues'
Batsmen B can avg: 52, 52,48, 2 in 4 venues

Chelcklist like you are using will show that hey one was better in 2 and another was superior in 2 so it's a wash. I don't think it's a wash. If it's a real wash then we should be able to see aggregate avg close for all venues taken together for batsman A and B.

Other things being equal, if I don't know the conditions, I will pick a batsman who is not likely ot fail anywhere. As you pointed out, other things were more closer except India. Aggregate avg does the same job. It tells us that Punter must have done poorly in 1 or 2 venues to not have average of 40. It tells us that without looking at break up of his avg in all venues.

 

[Johan]

Showing Sanga and Jaya was not to compare those two. It was to show that Sanga wasn't really producing that great output against good teams and it was not that hard for good SL bastmen to do well at home against good teams. Sanga's get over rated at time by many due to truck load of runs against bottom/minnow teams.


---------------

Yeah but I don't think you should subtract their new Zealand performances, Sangakkara made runs against Bond on some proper greentops and then later a double ton against Boult and Southee, batting at three while the rest of Sri Lanka got packed up for like 100 or so, a lot more meaningful than scoring on flatties against Ishants and Zaheers of the world if you ask me

I have actully thought about the point you are making. You could be bad or good in one venue. Your aggregate performance captures how good or bad you were in those venues taken together. You are not getting extra points for one opposition and you are not penalized for being poor against one. Your bad and good, everything is included there. Ponting could have compensated for doing poorly in India by hitting it out of the park in other venues, but he did not do it.

To make my point more obvious by putting an absurd example,

Batmen A can avg: 50, 50, 50, 50 in 4 venues'
Batsmen B can avg: 52, 52,48, 2 in 4 venues

Chelcklist like you are using will show that hey one was better in 2 and another was superior in 2 so it's a wash. I don't think it's a wash. If it's a real wash then we should be able to see aggregate avg close for all venues taken together for batsman A and B.

Other things being equal, if I don't know the conditions, I will pick a batsman who is not likely ot fail anywhere. As you pointed out, other things were more closer except India. Aggregate avg does the same job. It tells us that Punter must have done poorly in 1 or 2 venues to not have average of 40. It tells us that without looking at break up of his avg in all venues.

Yeah, I don't agree with this.

Your forumla fundamentally punishes Ponting for failing in India which is fair as Ponting in India might be the worst any ATG batsmen has been in any major nation but it also fundamentally falls under generalizations and thus doesn't reward Ponting for being considerably superior in two other venues, I don't think making 500 runs in England while making 200 in India fixes records, while checklisting then sure I guess but it's fairer to say at that point, that he was great in England while trash in India.

same principal applies, their good and bad is included in your approach but you could and should break it down further to make a more accurate assessment, when you take four countries, get their numbers in those countries and make a judgement then inevitably some of the pivotal context would be lost and thus the outcome would be just contextless numbers in X countries. If you wanna look at their performance away from home.

• Ponting was far superior in England, making four hundreds, great and iconic knocks at Old trafford and Headingley, averaging 41 while Kallis averages around 35 in England with one of his tons being the literal definition of downhill skiing.
• Ponting is decently superior in Sri Lanka with a hundred and a great 96 though Kallis has a great 80 somewhere in Sri Lanka.
• Kallis is far superior in India with 58 average and three hundreds while Ponting is awkwardly horrible in India, averaging 25 and having only a single century.
• both have pretty equivalent records in New Zealand.
• Ponting in South Africa averages 46 while Kallis 48 in Australia, given Australia is considerably easier I'd give this one a tie.
• Ponting hasn't played enough in UAE and Pakistan for a meaningful comparison.

these observations were easy to make, and I'd argue were a lot closer to describing the reality of their away records than just taking their records in four handpicked nations.

 

[Randomfan]

Your forumla fundamentally punishes Ponting for failing in India which is fair as Ponting in India might be the worst any ATG batsmen has been in any major nation but it also fundamentally falls under generalizations and thus doesn't reward Ponting for being considerably superior in two other venues, I don't think making 500 runs in England while making 200 in India fixes records, while checklisting then sure I guess but it's fairer to say at that point, that he was great in England while trash in India.

Actually it does reward Ponting for being superior in other two venues. It's just that he was not superior to compensate for being poor by a larger margin in some other places. It's still a short cut and I agree looking at individual venues can give you more clues.

Also, it's not randomly chosen 5 sides. I picked based on best 5 W/L. Otherwise poeple starts citing some knocks selectively and ingoring many failures.

Ponting actually has the same trend even if you include other decent teams,

From 1995 - 2015 [ only 7 teams have W/L above 0.5, quality falls a lot with WI ]






See collective performance away for Ponting versus many others in tests involving top 7 teams during career.

Ponting Avg 41, far below others.







Same trend even if you include WI and minnows:

Ponting averages 45, far below others.




You can see that Ponting away avg during one of the flatest periods,

39 in tests involving top 5 sides
41 in tests involving top 7 sides
45 in tests involving all sides.

It shows how he can increase his average as you go lower down the quality, but still far below his peers.

We all miss that when we start doing checklist for each venue and start declaring that one batsman is superior to another in 2 and vice versa. This aggregates involving top 5 sides, top 7 sides and all sides shows the same trend for Ponting. Ponting wasn't that great when playing outside home grounds. That's where looking at aggreagte top 5 or some criterion can help to see what did you actually produce taken together.

Some may argue that it's just poor in one venue which brings him down. Well, many batsmen in above list were poor in 1 and 2 or even 3 venues. They did make it up by being excellent in other venues and produced more than Ponting taken together.

I am not going to use this to rank all those batsmen above Ponting, but when comparing two batsmen of similar stature, it's a good factor to consider. It's still is just a factor with some flaws as you pointed out.

 

[Randomfan]

Yeah but I don't think you should subtract their new Zealand performances, Sangakkara made runs against Bond on some proper greentops and then later a double ton against Boult and Southee, batting at three while the rest of Sri Lanka got packed up for like 100 or so, a lot more meaningful than scoring on flatties against Ishants and Zaheers of the world if you ask me

I did not handpick based on my liking. I simply took 5 best test teams during his entire career and to avoid subjectivity I took the best 5 W/L. NZ did not appear there so I excluded NZ.

As per Sanga making runs on greentops against Bond goes, All of us remember some stand out in tougher conditions. But if you are so good then why not stand anywhere close to top over all agasint top teams of your career?

I don't think we should be ignoring Sanga not doing well in India. SL has yet to win a single test in India but won a few in NZ. That's where clubbing teams and seeing aggregate can help and we can avoid subjectively of only remembering good knocks and forgetting bad ones. We mostly rememeber good ones.

I put Ponting numbers for away. It's not not anywher close to best during that time. It does not mean that I will rate all other batsmen above him. His home runs off course counts, but it's a weakness and becomes easily visible when we see aggregate top 5, top 7 and all teams. It's not obvious when we start doing checklist for venues and compare two batsmen. We miss this weakness.

 

[Coronis]

So what I have learned from this is how great Graeme Smith is

 

[Randomfan]

So what I have learned from this is how great Graeme Smith is

He did struggle at home due to being an opener and SA conditions. But away, he was a big factor in SA doing well.

If we are picking a player with similar outputs and they differ only on home and away, I will always pick away performers. SImple reason, we get lots of HTBs but very few great away players. For any team, use of a great away player is more. Not many step up away but lots of players do well at home.

Graeme Smith is one of the best openers I have seen.