How much would a batsmen need to average to overtake Bradman?

[subshakerz]

Assuming a modern bat with a career of over 100 tests, how much should they average to be rated for you ahead of Bradman?

 

[Shady Slim]

99.95

 

[Migara]

70-75 with 50+ in every condition

 

[subshakerz]

70-75 with 50+ in every condition

That's where I am.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Would have to be over 95 to even be worth consideration

 

[Coronis]

1.67x his competition’s average

 

[TheJediBrah]

1.67x his competition’s average

Best answer, wish I'd thought of it

 

[the big bambino]

Bradman played most of his games against his strongest opponent. Playing proportionately more games against the larger number of weaker or minnow teams of this era would see a modern version accelerate his average to about 120. Probably more.

 

[Athlai]

Bradman played most of his games against his strongest opponent. Playing proportionately more games against the larger number of weaker or minnow teams of this era would see a modern version accelerate his average to about 120. Probably more.

Not sure if this logic really holds up. Certain conditions they're not comfortable in can have a bigger impact on player's records than the strength of their opposition. And the 'strength' of the opposition could also be in areas where you prosper.

During the period of Australian dominance, Tendulkar averaged more vs them than he did against the far weaker SL and NZ.


And while he smashed Bangers and Zimbabwe during that period, his overall average from 98-08 vs Aus was 60 and against all teams combined was only 55.

 

[Coronis]

Not sure if this logic really holds up. Certain conditions they're not comfortable in can have a bigger impact on player's records than the strength of their opposition. And the 'strength' of the opposition could also be in areas where you prosper.

During the period of Australian dominance, Tendulkar averaged more vs them than he did against the far weaker SL and NZ.


And while he smashed Bangers and Zimbabwe during that period, his overall average from 98-08 vs Aus was 60 and against all teams combined was only 55.

I mean, thats why its celebrated, no? Raising your level against the best?

 

[Athlai]

It is laudable but it is also not some kind of statistical fact that because you are good against one team that you will be better against others. Averaging 120 in the scenario bambino suggested is super flawed.

His FC record is lower than his Test record ffs.

 

[The Sean]

True, there's no guarantees either way. Though he did average (rounding) 90 against England and 140 collectively against everyone else, so there might be something in the idea of an increase under the circumstances of getting to play the other countries more often.

Main takeaway, Bradman cashed in against minnows and choked like a hack against the very best.

 

[Johan]

say they average 85, They're still as far off as Atherton off Lara and I doubt anyone thinks Atherton is close to Lara, so atleast 96-97 for there to be a discussion. 70-75 would be too pathetic, that's as far off Bradman as someone like Crawley is off Tendulkar, actually, an even bigger disparity!

 

[honestbharani]

I get the spirit of your point but come on man, HUGE difference between averaging 39 and 53 Vs averaging 85 and 99... Its not the same.

 

[Johan]

I get the spirit of your point but come on man, HUGE difference between averaging 39 and 53 Vs averaging 85 and 99... Its not the same.

F O U R T E E N
O
U
R
T
E
E
N

 

[Athlai]

True, there's no guarantees either way. Though he did average (rounding) 90 against England and 140 collectively against everyone else, so there might be something in the idea of an increase under the circumstances of getting to play the other countries more often.

Main takeaway, Bradman cashed in against minnows and choked like a hack against the very best.

His record is also only in Australia & England, might have had a harder time vs the minnows in their home countries.

Certain countries can present conditions that just don't favour you (but also sometimes you just get odd statistical anomalies because you only get 4 matches somewhere like Tendulkar averaging his worst in Zimbabwe of all places).

 

[Johan]

If the lad averages 87, the gap between him and the Don is about the same as the one between Graham Thorpe and Garfield Sobers.

 

[Coronis]

I get the spirit of your point but come on man, HUGE difference between averaging 39 and 53 Vs averaging 85 and 99... Its not the same.

You’re right. Its more like 78 and 106

 

[The Sean]

His record is also only in Australia & England, might have had a harder time vs the minnows in their home countries.

Certain countries can present conditions that just don't favour you (but also sometimes you just get odd statistical anomalies because you only get 4 matches somewhere like Tendulkar averaging his worst in Zimbabwe of all places).

Maybe, I think you've just got to make reasonable assumptions. Like, he would have failed in NZ because everyone ****ing does.

On the other hand, he missed the tour to South Africa. On that tour McCabe (career average 48) averaged 84, Fingleton (career average 42) averaged 80, and Brown (career average 46) averaged 60. I don't think it's an unreasonable assumption that, had he been on that tour, Bradman's average was going anywhere but up.

 

[Coronis]

Maybe, I think you've just got to make reasonable assumptions. Like, he would have failed in NZ because everyone ****ing does.

On the other hand, he missed the tour to South Africa. On that tour McCabe (career average 48) averaged 84, Fingleton (career average 42) averaged 80, and Brown (career average 46) averaged 60. I don't think it's an unreasonable assumption that, had he been on that tour, Bradman's average was going anywhere but up.

Its quite amusing that Bradman was expected to not continue his runmaking in England in 1930 considering his performance there. Averages higher than at home, and much higher vs England than at home. 102.84 vs 78.46 (85 if anyone’s gonna whinge about Bodyline)