Kapil Dev vs Courtney Walsh

[subshakerz]

23 and 26 are also "close numerical values", you just don't get the ODI game and are blaming me for making the choice every team would make in the world, in ODIs, Kapil>Imran

Imran also had a bowling SR of 35 while Kapil is 42. So as wicket takers they aren't close at all but their ER is close.

With Kapil you get an outright inferior bowler.

 

[capt_Luffy]

You might be thinking of T20.

and 3.68 and 3.88 are definitely close numerical values, so seeing no argument for Imran might be indicating that you should consume more Vit-A and wear glasses.

He said no argument as an all-rounder, not a bowler

 

[Johan]

iirc taking wickets also is a part of ODI cricket.

And do you really think 23 and 26 are as close as 3.68 and 3.88?

never said it wasn't, it takes a clear backseat to economy rate

They've relative value in ODI cricket, if the pushes comes to the shove, the 26 averaging more economical bowler would be picked over the 23 averaging bowler

 

[subshakerz]

I think McGrath is better than Pollock but the gap is negligible, unless you think Pollock was a choker.


they're even stevens as bowlers, Kapil definitely ahead at ODI batting

I don't think you really believe McGrath is just a negligibly better ODI bowler than Pollock. It's like you are choosing to forget that wicket taking is also important in ODIs.

Honestly I find you glossing over their bowling differences very odd for someone who screens stats like you.

 

[sayon basak]

never said it wasn't, it takes a clear backseat to economy rate

They've relative value in ODI cricket, if the pushes comes to the shove, the 26 averaging more economical bowler would be picked over the 23 averaging bowler

Man their economy is almost the exact same. After a 10 over spell, Kapil's gonna have a 2 run advantage, while Imran strikes much faster.

 

[subshakerz]

never said it wasn't, it takes a clear backseat to economy rate

They've relative value in ODI cricket, if the pushes comes to the shove, the 26 averaging more economical bowler would be picked over the 23 averaging bowler

No he doesn't man. No captain on Earth is going to bench a worldclass wicket-taker because of a 0.2 ER difference.

This board has been affected by ODIs in the 2000s that they simply forgot how it was played before that. Teams actively looked to bowl out their opposition not do damage control.

 

[sayon basak]

He said no argument as an all-rounder, not a bowler

shut up.

 

[Johan]

Imran also had a bowling SR of 35 while Kapil is 42. So as wicket takers they aren't close at all but their ER is close.

With Kapil you get an outright inferior bowler.

ok? Imran was a better wicket taker, Kapil more economical, economy>wicket taking in ODIs.

barely inferior one, with Kapil you get a Maxwell esque Batsmen and a more economical bowler than Imran, with Imran you get a Markram esque Batsmen and a better wicket taker than Kapil, it obvious asf what teams would choose

 

[sayon basak]

ok? Imran was a better wicket taker, Kapil more economical, economy>wicket taking in ODIs.

Do you realize that 3.88-3.68=0.2?

 

[Johan]

I don't think you really believe McGrath is just a negligibly better ODI bowler than Pollock. It's like you are choosing to forget that wicket taking is also important in ODIs.

Honestly I find you glossing over their bowling differences very odd for someone who screens stats like you.

Dude, I rate people like Flintoff and Pollock over literally any bowler in ODIs as Cricketers, that's literally my viewpoint on the one day game.

I'm nitpicky with tests, my views on ODI games are completely different as well as my standards.

 

[Srinath P]

For what period was Imran a fully functioning All-Rounder?

Imran had only 8 years as a proper all rounder (in the sense 100 runs and ten wickets in a year where he played reasonable no. of games), and Imran averaged above 30 with the ball in half of those years.

Kapil had 13 proper years as an All Rounder. Tho his batting fell off badly after the late 80s.

 

[sayon basak]

Dude, I rate people like Flintoff and Pollock over literally any bowler in ODIs as Cricketers, that's literally my viewpoint on the one day game.

I'm nitpicky with tests, my views on ODI games are completely different as well as my standards.

Do you also rate Willis over Akram in ODI's?

 

[subshakerz]

ok? Imran was a better wicket taker, Kapil more economical, economy>wicket taking in ODIs.

You are being disingenuous man. Imran was a notably better wicket-taker while being nearly as miserly.

And in the 80s context, captains wanted to bowl out teams, they weren't worried about 300 run bashings.

 

[Johan]

Do you also rate Willis over Akram in ODI's?

this is a stupid argument, Willis and Akram played in different eras of ODI and Akram's was MUCH higher scoring, and there's also the factor of 80 wkts vs 508 wkts, Having Kapil over Imran isn't anything out of ordinary, on this very site Imran was voted as 39th best ODI bowler to Kapil's 27th

 

[subshakerz]

Dude, I rate people like Flintoff and Pollock over literally any bowler in ODIs as Cricketers, that's literally my viewpoint on the one day game.

I'm nitpicky with tests, my views on ODI games are completely different as well as my standards.

The issue is when you are viewing Kapil and Imran you are ignoring the 80s context they played in entirely and superimposing a modern runfest view they doesn't care about wickets.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I think overall though Kapil is a better bowler than Imran in ODIs clearly. He has a better average and economy rate.
For instance, in the ODI bowler's polls, Kapil made it at 27 while Imran did at 39.

 

[subshakerz]

this is a stupid argument, Willis and Akram played in different eras of ODI and Akram's was MUCH higher scoring, and there's also the factor of 80 wkts vs 508 wkts, Having Kapil over Imran isn't anything out of ordinary, on this very site Imran was voted as 39th best ODI bowler to Kapil's 27th

Lol you are jumping up and down about eras but Kapil and Imran played in an era that ER wasn't a big deal.

You don't seem to acknowledge that.

 

[subshakerz]

I think overall though Kapil is a better bowler than Imran in ODIs clearly. He has a better average and economy rate.

Lol he doesn't.

 

[DrWolverine]

Debatable but Imran is clearly a better bowler.

Yes

Kapil Dev offers the X factor in batting

 

[Johan]

You are being disingenuous man. Imran was a notably better wicket-taker while being nearly as miserly.

And in the 80s context, captains wanted to bowl out teams, they weren't worried about 300 run bashings.

hampering the volume of runs to lead your side to victory was a perfectly known tactic, most bowlers can't take 4-5 wickets consistently in 10 overs, 2/40 has about as much impact as a 1/35