Sachin Tendulkar vs Jacques Kallis

[kyear2]

You should drop Viv for Hammond IMO.

Why?

My middle order is Sachin and Viv, the stability is provided by the former, the explosion is uniquely provided by the latter.

If Hammond is to come into my team his style and role is considerably closer to that of Sachin's, so a one for one swap make more sense there.

Additionally Richards is one of the three best 3rd slips I've seen, it doesn't make sense to strengthen the first slip position while weakening the 3rd. Not to add, when not in the cordon he's one of the greatest fielders of all time.

So no, if Hammond comes in it's for Sachin.

 

[kyear2]

He won't even though by his logic he should.

No, by your logic I should.

 

[kyear2]

He is in your ranking.


Yes because he is the best third bowling option in an ATG XI.


Need a reverser who doesn't spray it as third seamer. Imran fits naturally.

[/B]
Pick the best slippers out of the specialists who make the team.


No compromise. Imran is a perfect third pacer for an ATG XI.


Yeah except in how you promote Kallis over Hammond. Or Gilly over Knott. Etc.

I've explained countless times I rate the top 4 basically the same and list them based on the attacks they faced. If I were to be forced to list them, based on greatness or domination of their era the only surety is that Hobbs would be best after Bradman and heading the 4.

Is he though? Hadlee and Steyn are better overall and Wasim more suited for the role. Not saying he's not in the running, but definely not definitively the best.

Again he fits naturally because you want him to. He's more highly regarded here than anywhere and still he doesn't get a plurality of support for the spot. Most don't see the need of a "reverser" and just go Hadlee and when they do, Wasim is seen equally viable for the spot. The only reason Imran is preferred by those who do, is because he can bat. He's very much a personal preference pick for you the same way Barry is for me.

And I do that for the no. 8 as well. I pick which I think is the best attack and the no. 8 is the best batter of the group, with the options available, there's guaranteed to be a viable one. The difference though, is that I wouldn't select a team (as I've seen @DrWolverine do recently) without at least 3 above standard options for the cordon, one of three reasons Barry is a lock for me.

Again, he's in the running, perfect or undeniable he isn't. Very subjective.

First off, I rate Hammond just over Kallis, what you're talking about is for the literal "all rounder spot"
There are literally two all rounder spots for any team, it's just how one balances the roles for both. The wicketkeeper position has been an all round one since the game resumed after the war, the difference is that I still weigh keeping in that equation higher than most here and require a certain world class standard to even qualify.
Hammond I rate 10th, Kallis 14th, and Kallis the much more used and effective bowler. In the cordon it's closer, but yeah, Hammond definely ahead, so combined Hammond is ahead. But for a designated all rounder role, which the no. 6 position literally is, Kallis has the advantage.

 

[halba]

Tendulkar. Faced better attacks especially he started earlier when the attacks was tough in the early 90s. Kallis never had to face his own attack(which was #1 or #2 throughout both the careers)

 

[OverratedSanity]

Tendulkar is a perfectly good slip fielder, don't agree with the idea being implied that he's unviable there. He did it less often than Dravid and VVS because they were better and partly because Sachin was more mobile and had a great throwing arm (especially in the first half of his career). I genuinely don't think you lose much just putting him and Hammond/Kallis/Sobers in the slips in an ATG XI instead of Viv if you think he's a significantly better batsman than Viv (which I think @Prince EWS and @Coronis do).

Ultimately, this is why I think @kyear2 misrepresents my opinion on this entire dumb slip fielders in ATG XI selection thing. My actual opinion is not that slip fielding isn't important, it very obviously is. Rather, that there is huge diminishing value the better the slip fielder is. Going from incopetent to competent is a huge jump in value for a slip fielder, going from competent to elite is going to affect results less. Imo, as long as the slips are competent, it's more than good enough. Wanting the elite of the elite to be in your slip cordon at any perceived sacrifice of batting is a waste.

 

[subshakerz]

My actual opinion is not that slip fielding isn't important, it very obviously is. Rather, that there is huge diminishing value the better the slip fielder is. Going from incopetent to competent is a huge jump in value from one slip fielder, going from competent to elite is going to affect results less. Imo, as long as the slips are competent, it's more than good enough.

Yes you nailed it and I have tried to explain this to him as well. Elite slips are not a prerequisite for a team, they are an added bonus.

Of course, he considers Smith to be an elite slipper, so not exactly sure which standard he is following.

 

[subshakerz]

I've explained countless times I rate the top 4 basically the same and list them based on the attacks they faced. If I were to be forced to list them, based on greatness or domination of their era the only surety is that Hobbs would be best after Bradman and heading the 4.

So you place Hobbs ahead of Tendulkar? Got it.

Is he though? Hadlee and Steyn are better overall and Wasim more suited for the role. Not saying he's not in the running, but definely not definitively the best.

Again he fits naturally because you want him to. He's more highly regarded here than anywhere and still he doesn't get a plurality of support for the spot. Most don't see the need of a "reverser" and just go Hadlee and when they do, Wasim is seen equally viable for the spot. The only reason Imran is preferred by those who do, is because he can bat. He's very much a personal preference pick for you the same way Barry is for me.

Again I am giving my reasoning. Hadlee gives more of the same as McGrath. Steyn will definitely spray it as third seamer. Wasim is a pretty decent option, but I rate Imran ahead as a destructive reverser and bowler overall even if Wasim was more skilled.

The difference though, is that I wouldn't select a team (as I've seen @DrWolverine do recently) without at least 3 above standard options for the cordon, one of three reasons Barry is a lock for me.

Which specialists would you drop based on slips?

But for a designated all rounder role, which the no. 6 position literally is, Kallis has the advantage.

Yeah so you do promote Kallis for solely his 5th bowling over Hammond, who you admit is a better slipper, yet follow the opposite logic to not have Miller in your ATG Aus side in favor of Simpson as a fifth bowler.

 

[honestbharani]

Tendulkar is a perfectly good slip fielder, don't agree with the idea being implied that he's unviable there. He did it less often than Dravid and VVS because they were better and partly because Sachin was more mobile and had a great throwing arm (especially in the first half of his career). I genuinely don't think you lose much just putting him and Hammond/Kallis/Sobers in the slips in an ATG XI instead of Viv if you think he's a significantly better batsman than Viv (which I think @Prince EWS and @Coronis do).

Ultimately, this is why I think @kyear2 misrepresents my opinion on this entire dumb slip fielders in ATG XI selection thing. My actual opinion is not that slip fielding isn't important, it very obviously is. Rather, that there is huge diminishing value the better the slip fielder is. Going from incopetent to competent is a huge jump in value for a slip fielder, going from competent to elite is going to affect results less. Imo, as long as the slips are competent, it's more than good enough. Wanting the elite of the elite to be in your slip cordon at any perceived sacrifice of batting is a waste.

Sachin was between serviceable to good. Some of the other great bats in that tier next to Bradman were probably better slip fielders though.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Sachin was between serviceable to good. Some of the other great bats in that tier next to Bradman were probably better slip fielders though.

Regarding Sachin's catching (not just slip but overall), my father always said you don't generally expect him to grab quarter chances like Ponting or Kallis, but he was a very safe catcher.

 

[kyear2]

You didn't respond to either of the two points.

This is why it's so frustrating conversing with you.

At least others we can disagree but they engage with the argument.

Can it be useful, yes. Crazy to think no.

You believe Imran is obvious because he's the best bowling option and the best batsman. What if one doesn't believe the former.

In any event, in a lineup with literally the best bats of all time and Gilchrist at 7, two points.

1. Do they need to focus on batting with your bowlers as well.

2. If that batting lineup is struggling, how large an impact is Imran going to consistently make? Yeah he might average 22 ish, but the other guys might be averaging what, 15?

With regards to Sobers and needing the tail to wag, in my lineup there's Gilchrist, Wasim, Marshall and Warne. They are all more than competent with the willow in their hands.

Your 2nd argument is this is genuine rest with his inconsistency. You say I prefer Simpson over Miller, yes, becuse with the batting all rounders, the primary job is batting, and Simpson's and Border's batting is way better than Miller's. Don't know how that's devaluating anything.
I'm also happy with Warne or Cummins at 8. Don't get your point tbh. Wouldn't bat Miller at 8 either, they're better bowling options.

Is that engaging enough?

 

[subshakerz]

In any event, in a lineup with literally the best bats of all time and Gilchrist at 7, two points.

1. Do they need to focus on batting with your bowlers as well.

2. If that batting lineup is struggling, how large an impact is Imran going to consistently make? Yeah he might average 22 ish, but the other guys might be averaging what, 15?

No, I am assuming at least a 10 point drop in average against an ATG bowling lineup. Imran mid-20s (roughly where he was against WI in his day) the others far lower.

With regards to Sobers and needing the tail to wag, in my lineup there's Gilchrist, Wasim, Marshall and Warne. They are all more than competent with the willow in their hands.

No they aren't against an ATG bowling attack, they will hardly average anything to make an impact.

Your 2nd argument is this is genuine rest with his inconsistency. You say I prefer Simpson over Miller, yes, becuse with the batting all rounders, the primary job is batting, and Simpson's and Border's batting is way better than Miller's. Don't know how that's devaluating anything.
I'm also happy with Warne or Cummins at 8. Don't get your point tbh. Wouldn't bat Miller at 8 either, they're better bowling options.

You can't push for Simpson over Miller by suggesting 5th bowling is not that critical and then pick Kallis over Hammond.

 

[shortpitched713]

I'm not sure why some folks seem to think it crazy to go for Kallis over Tendulkar here.

Obviously, a big part comes down to how big a difference there is, if any, in their batting with that being their primary skill set.

However, that difference should very clearly be possible to make up in terms of value, as an all-rounder. And I don't even rate Kallis quite as high as others in the all-rounder rankings (have him just behind Botham and Hadlee, former of which is not really much of a value pick).

For a pace batting all-rounder for the overwhelming majority of career, Kallis had absolute monster career longevity, so I can't even give Tendulkar that much of an advantage for longevity either like I could in most batting only comparisons (Tendulkar can come out ahead over anyone not named Bradman, depending how you rate longevity).

The list of great all-rounders in the pantheon of Test cricket greats is certainly top heavy, as can be shown in the recent polling, and declining interest after top 20-25 or so. However, the top 7 all-rounders I think can hang in terms of greatness with top 7 in batting (barring Bradman), easily in my mind. And Kallis and Tendulkar fall squarely in both of those brackets.

 

[kyear2]

Yes.


And the difference is, Imran is the 9th greatest bowler ever, while Kallis is 17th in my batters list (even if you push hard enough, you won't be able to put him much above top 15). I rate Imran ahead of McGrath, just like how I rate Sobers ahead of Sachin and Kallis ahead of Lara, but Sachin and Kallis is too far apart in the primary discipline.

2nd vs 9th is definitely closer than 2nd vs 17th, and Imran is definitely better in the secondary discipline than Kallis.

This is honestly a lot of saying nothing.

I have Kallis 14th and that isn't even high enough to place him above Hammond, far less Lara.

I have Imran 8th, I don't think any secondary skill is enough to jump a tier and 7 bowlers not to add 8 batsmen to get to top 3 or 5. He jumps some, but not the ones at the very top.

 

[kyear2]

9th best bowler taking the top 2 is nowhere close to the 17th best batter taking the top 2. And I consider Imran's secondary discipline better than that of Kallis.

And please don't expect others to rate slip catching as high as secondary discipline. I do rate slip catching (that's why I rate Simpson pretty highly), but definitely not as high as secondary discipline.

I know Subz has ingrained the idea of secondary and tertiary, but secondary is anything that's secondary to a players primary skill.

Additionally, for someone like Simpson it's not even debatable as to which of his secondary disciples he was more skilled at nor which held greater value for his team.

So not telling anyone what to value, but is it that we are looking at impact and said value or arbitrary labels?

 

[subshakerz]

This is honestly a lot of saying nothing.

I have Kallis 14th and that isn't even high enough to place him above Hammond, far less Lara.

I have Imran 8th, I don't think any secondary skill is enough to jump a tier and 7 bowlers not to add 8 batsmen to get to top 3 or 5. He jumps some, but not the ones at the very top.

Dude we have gone over this a million times, others look at the top bowlers way closer than you do. They don't see Imran as a tier behind in bowling ability so it's easier for them to make the jump ahead.

 

[subshakerz]

I know Subz has ingrained the idea of secondary and tertiary, but secondary is anything that's secondary to a players primary skill.

Additionally, for someone like Simpson it's not even debatable as to which of his secondary disciples he was more skilled at nor which held greater value for his team.

So not telling anyone what to value, but is it that we are looking at impact and said value or arbitrary labels?

It's quite simple. You have never given any evidence that elite slip catching (beyond general competent slip catching most teams have) has the same value as secondary runs or wickets. You arguments boils down to anecdotes and 'trust me bro'.

 

[kyear2]

I never argued that Kallis was below par for a 5th/6th bowler. But that is comparable to a 7/8th bat.

I argue Imran was a 6/7th bat level based on 80s standard.

Sobers was a 4/5th bowler overall. Level ahead of Kallis.

Both Sobers and Imran to me are borderline minimum standard specialist in their secondary disciplines which sets them apart from other ARs aside from being ATGs in their primary.

You need to stop repeating this because it's not true.

He didn't even bat at 6 at all for the vast majority of his career, and he batted at 7 and 8 more than he batted at 6.

So when you say Kallis's performances is the equivalent to a 7/8 bat, that's what Imran was. And again Kallis bowled more 2nd change (4th), than any other bowling position. The 2nd most was 3rd spot, then 5th. He hardly ever bowled 6th. You're basically just making this **** up.

And Sobers position where he bowled the most was 1st change, the 2nd most was opening.

Sobers wasn't a 4th / 5th bowler overall, he was a 3rd / 4th, especially after he started bowling pace.

 

[kyear2]

RPT is an unreliable way of measuring quality. It's a reliable way of measuring output.

If you want to measure quality, throw this discussion about runs and wickets per test/innings out the window. Both players are better than the numbers suggest.

If you want to be measure workload, we can look at these output numbers. If you want to be consistent, either compare WPT to RPT or WPI to RPI. If you want to be consistent and use the better method, compare WPT to RPT. I prefer to use the better method.

I've given you the maths that shows Kallis ahead, regardless of which method is picked. I know you aren't going to agree with what the answers are telling us. So either show an error in the maths with numbers of your own or attack the validity of the entire concept.

Makes sense

 

[kyear2]

Yeah I get your point. Kallis vs Imran is debatable in secondary discipline if we are only going by workload. I rate Imran higher in secondary discipline based on opposition and value to the team.

Guess I'm now gonna prepare the average of RPI and WPl of top 50 batters and bowlers respectively to answer your question. That should work imo.

Would you mind explaining value to the team?

It's already been established that Imran was primarily a no. 7 batsman, Kallis primarily the no. 4 bowler. So about equal there, if anything...

Kallis would often bowl 2nd change especially in conditions where it was too early or not conducive for the spinner. More than decent value there.

Subz keeps bringing up minnows, sure, but he still was bowling vital overs and maintaining the rotation.
Imran scored quite a few of his larger scores in less than critical circumstances, and almost always in draws. One might say in scenarios where a declaration may have been considered. I once saw the WI declare with Marshall on 43 to push for a win, wonder how many times that happened (not saying it didn't)

Now let it not be said that Imran didn't play some critical innings, he most definitely did, but Kallis had critically important performances as well, taking key wickets, breaking partnerships etc.

But there's this narrative that Imran was closer to Sobers than he was to Kallis and I don't think that's at all true. I would say he was a little better than Kallis, no one is disputing that, but he was definitely more comparable.

In older AT teams there were sometimes two spinners and it was assumed that Sobers would be the 3rd seamer, as was the role he often played. Though an attack including Murali and Warne, behind Marshall and McGrath even today isn't the worst idea.

 

[kyear2]

People tend to overestimate the impact of minnows on records for most players. The majority tend to hardly play against minnows. And underestimate the impact of who/when they were playing in relation.

Look at this breakdown of wicket value that @ankitj posted.

How valuable is that wicket!

Long time back I came across a comprehensive analysis of bowlers based on the "value"of the wickets they take. The approach was wonderfully elegant and very logical. The article is not online anymore. Nevertheless I decided to do the exercise again. I am happy to share the results of my hard...

www.cricketweb.net

The value of Kallis' wickets is ridiculously high, whatever type of minnow bashing he did. He also mainly bowled at set bats to break partnerships or hold the fort, with an old ball. Which probably had a significantly bigger impact. If his home country was anywhere other than RSA, I would probably upgrade his bowling average from meh to very good.

This is something not often brought up and speaks to quality.

The 4th and 5th bowlers don't get extended runs with the new ball, bowls the dog overs and hardly gets a chance at the tail. They bowl a lot to set partnerships and often manage to break them.

The quality of wickets is the exact opposite of guys who primarily prey on the tail and harder than the guys who gets the new ball.

So again the quality and value angle falls short.

People like to negatively compare Kallis's work load to Sobers's to then criticize. But Sobers was one of the full time, front line bowlers and the equivalent to a no. 5 of no. 4 batsman. He bowled 40 overs a match, a ridiculous amount for the team's best batsman.

And this is part is important, it's not something to be aspired to.

Kallis was handled well , his load reduced as he hit older, as it should have, and it extended his batting career, what happened to Imran's body and bowling?