Better combo round II. Sobers & Marshall vs Sachin and Imran

[capt_Luffy]

I include WSC when I make comments about Viv's peak, regardless Viv has a 5 year peak when he was averaging 10 points over genuine great ATG bats like Chappel and Gavaskar, immensely higher strike rate, Javed is a little padded due to not outs but regardless, with WSC Viv would've 4781 @ 65

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

stats.espncricinfo.com

Marshall comparatively had a 8 year peak, if you think Marshall being elite for 3 more years outweighs Viv's far greater longevity, greater peak and his 84-88 run, be my guest.

So you now rate Viv>Marshall?? Marshall being elite for 3 more years is definitely very valuable as is the fact WSC weren't Tests, can't do them 1-0-1. They are equivalent to FC games, though good ones. Viv played 35 Tests in his peak, anyways you look at it, it's low. Yes for WSC, but I don't really award much points for it. Marshall had the better peak afaic.

 

[Johan]

So you now rate Viv>Marshall?? Marshall being elite for 3 more years is definitely very valuable as is the fact WSC weren't Tests, can't do them 1-0-1. Viv played 33 Tests in his peak, anyways you look at it, it's low. Yes for WSC, but I don't really award much points for it. Marshall had the better peak afaic.

I don't rate any batter except obviously Don and Hobbs over Marshall in primary, but with all the complaints about his longevity then it also means someone like Viv or Sobers are also better, I just chose Viv out of the two to make the point, regardless Viv was elite for three more years too after surgery.

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

stats.espncricinfo.com

so if you really value longevity, Viv with a higher peak, higher longevity, further ahead of peers pre-pterygium than Marshall ever was and so forth.

still, I don't think bowlers vs batters comparisons can be this one-one imo, it has to be done via comparing them with their other fellow ATGs and comparing their standing in their field instead of direct comparisons.

Hobbs also played less than 30 games in his prime, doesn't stop us from rating it.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I don't rate any batter except obviously Don and Hobbs over Marshall in primary, but with all the complaints about his longevity then it also means someone like Viv or Sobers are also better, I just chose Viv out of the two to make the point, regardless Viv was elite for three more years too after surgery.

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

stats.espncricinfo.com

so if you really value longevity, Viv with a higher peak, higher longevity, further ahead of peers pre-pterygium than Marshall ever was and so forth.

still, I don't think pacers vs batters comparisions can be this one-one imo, it has to be done via comparing them with their other fellow ATGs and comparing their standing in their field instead of direct comparisons

I won't say Sobers or Viv stands no chance, but I will take Marshall. I think even by standings, I will say not counting Don, Marshall is slightly closer to McGrath and Hadlee for me than Sachin is to anyone but Hobbs (whom I have just higher). I get your Viv argument, but I just don't see longevity the same for pacers and batters. Even among ATG pacers Marshall's regular longevity was on the weaker side while Post War Tendulkar's is unmatched.

 

[Johan]

I won't say Sobers or Viv stands no chance, but I will take Marshall. I think even by standings, I will say not counting Don, Marshall is slightly closer to McGrath and Hadlee for me than Sachin is to anyone but Hobbs (whom I have just higher).

my point was never that you should've Viv higher or you should've Marshall lower or yada yada, just that 1:1 comparisons don't work, if they did almost all ATG bowlers are probably ****ed.

 

[capt_Luffy]

my point was never that you should've Viv higher or you should've Marshall lower or yada yada, just that 1:1 comparisons don't work, if they did almost all ATG bowlers are probably ****ed.

Tbf Hadlee did played for 17 years. WAG.

My point was, I get it. I am not asking Marshall to play 24 years, but that does counts especially since his longevity wasn't special.

 

[Johan]

Tbf Hadlee did played for 17 years. WAG.

My point was, I get it. I am not asking Marshall to play 24 years, but that does counts especially since his longevity wasn't special.

Elite ATG McGrath life or death with the average good Batsmen on longevity dude

 

[capt_Luffy]

Elite ATG McGrath life or death with the average good Batsmen on longevity dude

The primary reason I rate him (and Hadlee) equal to Marshall. I think qualitatively Marshall was just better, but they make up the longevity.

 

[Johan]

The primary reason I rate him (and Hadlee) equal to Marshall. I think qualitatively Marshall was just better, but they make up the longevity.

I guess it's fine, just think Batter vs Bowler comparisons are too complex for this method to work 1:1, I don't even mind having Sachin or Viv or Len or anyone above Marshall really, my problem was only with the methodology, not the outcome.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I guess it's fine, just think Batter vs Bowler comparisons are too complex for this method to work 1:1, I don't even mind having Sachin or Viv or Len or anyone above Marshall really, my problem was only with the methodology, not the outcome.

Batters vs Bowlers are **** comparison unless big enough discrepancy.

 

[Johan]

Batters vs Bowlers are **** comparison unless big enough discrepancy.

completely agreed tbh

 

[subshakerz]

Maco is my pick for best pacer but he did not stand out among his peers between 1983-1991 whereas Sachin was the undisputed best between 1993-2002.

To be fair, Lara was better 93 to 95.

 

[Johan]

93-96

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

stats.espncricinfo.com

 

[OverratedSanity]

To be fair, Lara was better 93 to 95.

Over smaller slices, you can make arguments that Waugh/Lara were better, but for that 93-2002 period as a whole it's definitely Tendulkar imo.

 

[Johan]

feel like either Waugh or Lara were the best until 1996 and then Sachin took over in 1997 and was the best until 2002 New Zealand series, then Ponting/Dravid took over.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

Maco is my pick for best pacer but he did not stand out among his peers between 1983-1991 whereas Sachin was the undisputed best between 1993-2002.

Up until 96 or so, Lara was very much in the mix with Sachin. Sachin pulled ahead between 96 to 01. Lara had his 2nd wind starting with the SL series and got back into the mix. Then there's Steve Waugh from the 90s who did better vs the stronger attacks. Sachin was not the undisputed best for those 10 years.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Up until 96 or so, Lara was very much in the mix with Sachin. Sachin pulled ahead between 96 to 01. Lara had his 2nd wind starting with the SL series and got back into the mix. Then there's Steve Waugh from the 90s who did better vs the stronger attacks. Sachin was not the undisputed best for those 10 years.

Overall those 10 years as a whole, imo he was. Averages around 10 runs more than both of them.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

Overall those 10 years as a whole, imo he was. Averages around 10 runs more than both of them.

Averages aren't everything. Waugh as mentioned b4 did much better vs the better attacks. And during the 90s he was something like 5 or 6 runs ahead of Waugh not 10. I'll concede on Brian though.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Averages aren't everything. Waugh as mentioned b4 did much better vs the better attacks. And during the 90s he was something like 5 or 6 runs ahead of Waugh not 10. I'll concede on Brian though.

7. Waugh also had many more not outs and batted much lower down a strong unit.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

7. Waugh also had many more not outs and batted much lower down a strong unit.

Let's not bring not outs into this please. Imo, that's a slippery slope...

 

[capt_Luffy]

Let's not bring not outs into this please. Imo, that's a slippery slope...

Genuinely confused why?? Don't think accumulating too many not outs like Chanderpaul is a good sign. If you are batting down the order and have quite a few not outs despite being team's best batsman, then your team just isn't getting the maximum output from you and is a detriment.