Best ever ODI bowler

[akilana]

?

didn't see your post when I posted that.. what I meant there was that 98 matches are too little to derive anything from just like GP's 22 tests aren't enough to make him an ATG.

 

[AaronK]

Nowadays, I am considering this one as my All-Time ODI XI:

Brian Lara
Sachin Tendulkar
Viv Richards*
Zaheer Abbas
Ricky Ponting
Mahendra Dhoni+
Kapil Dev
Shaun Pollock
Richards Hadlee
Wasim Akram
Muttiah Muralitharan

Wasim Akram batting at no. 10, and yet I have 5 top quality specialist bowlers!

Shocker.. Gilly not in ODI

I would also drop Ricky for Inzamam Ul Haq

 

[Prince EWS]

I would also drop Ricky for Inzamam Ul Haq

We wouldn't expect anything less.

 

[smash84]

We wouldn't expect anything less.

I'm going to go off on a bit of a mathematical tangent here. Garner's average is really a lot better than Wasim's. Five runs doesn't seem a huge amount, but bowling averages don't change linearly, so once the averages get that good, it kinda is.

It's a little more obvious if you look at their respective strike rates and economy rates. Garner was conceding a good 25% less runs than Wasim, while taking almost exactly the same number of wickets. That's a good ten runs a match less that your batsmen have to chase down. Obviously it's not comparable to Bradman's statistical dominance, but it's pretty significant.

I don't think it's a good idea to go down the statistical route in ODIs, but I thought it was worth pointing out.

Don't you think it would be a better comparison if economy rates of the eras that they played in were factored into the analysis. The game had changed tremendously since Garner retired and the era during which Wasim played most of his ODIs. IIRC there was some overlap in the earlier days of their careers but most of Wasim's ODI career spanned the post 80s era. So it would be unfair to look at Garner's ER in isolation.

Also Garner didn't even play a 100 ODIs. That sample is a little small. For e.g take the first 100 ODIs of Saqlain and Waqar and just look how awesome they are.

 

[smash84]

Apart from Garner striking quicker whilst being more economical and hence having a much better record you mean?

Looking at Hadlee's and Garner's records there would you really say that Garner is head and shoulders above Hadlee in ODIs??? Better, yes but head and shoulders above Hadlee????

 

[Athlai]

Here is my alltime ODI XI*
*of players who are always forgetten that were exceptional in one day cricket and never get added to these lists and would challenge most of the lineups people put out there:

Nick Knight
Rahul Dravid+
Ramnaresh Sarwan
Martin Crowe*
Andrew Symonds
Roger Twose
Chris Harris/Ravi Shastri
Brad Hogg
Heath Streak
Craig McDermott
Lasith Malinga


12th man Jeetan Patel

 

[smash84]

Here is my alltime ODI XI*
*of players who are always forgetten that were exceptional in one day cricket and never get added to these lists and would challenge most of the lineups people put out there:

Nick Knight
Rahul Dravid+
Ramnaresh Sarwan
Martin Crowe*
Andrew Symonds
Roger Twose
Chris Harris/Ravi Shastri
Brad Hogg
Heath Streak
Craig McDermott
Jason Gillespie


12th man Jeetan Patel

This line-up would try to challenge the other line-ups and then after a few thrashings will be forgotten just as quickly .......

 

[Athlai]

I really don't think so, all-time great ODI lineups are nowhere near as infallable as Test ones.

 

[smash84]

I really don't think so, all-time great ODI lineups are nowhere near as infallable as Test ones.

Even taking that into account

 

[thierry henry]

Shaun Pollock

Nah probably not, just giving him a mention as I'm always amazed by how good his record is (in tests as well) and how little regard he gets.

I also think it's because all through his career I never recall having undue concern when playing him. Interestingly enough, I looked up his stats v Australia and NZ (90% of the cricket I watch involves either NZ or Australia) and he averages 28 (as opposed to a career average of 24) against NZ and Australia (over 88 matches) and 33 IN NZ and Australia (33 matches). So I wasn't imagining it...he just wasn't very dangerous down here.

 

[marc71178]

Looking at Hadlee's and Garner's records there would you really say that Garner is head and shoulders above Hadlee in ODIs??? Better, yes but head and shoulders above Hadlee????

Yes, I would, if one of the economy or strike rate were the other way then there is more of a case for them being more equal, but in real terms neither are actually that close, hence the overall record is a lot different.

 

[Ikki]

I don't think it's a good idea to go down the statistical route in ODIs, but I thought it was worth pointing out.

5 runs is a lot, but what is it with respect to their eras - how much better were they than their eras? I think that will make the difference smaller.

 

[smash84]

5 runs is a lot, but what is it with respect to their eras - how much better were they than their eras. I think that will make the difference smaller.

maybe we can ask ankit or the other stats guy to do some era wise analysis for garner and wasim.

 

[weldone]

Mine will probably look like this:

Adam Gilchrist+
Sachin Tendulkar
Viv Richards*
Zaheer Abbas
Andrew Symonds
Micheal Bevan
Lance Klusener
Shaun Pollock
Wasim Akram
Joel Garner
Muthiah Muralitharan

Well I wanted a pure hitter at number 7 who can also take up a fair share of bowling. Not too many names around who can do that sort of job.

His cutters and yorkers are fairly good and underrated in ODI's generally IMO. With Garner, Pollock, Akram, Murali, Viv and Symonds in the side I think he'll balance the side out well. As for his batting, I think he's been a fantastic hitter and hits em clean more often than not. Never seen a player who wins matches on his own based on pure hitting quite like him.

The only other one who I would consider ahead of him is probably Kapil. Just feel that Klusener is a better hitter at that slot than Kapil and considering the other bowling options available, he seemed like a better pick on the whole.

Great team. Perfect.

 

[Cevno]

Murali has been the best spinner in ODIs without doubt and there is daylight between him and the rest of the spinners but I am not sure Murali was as good in the death overs as Wasim IMO. Did Murali always bowl in the last 6 to 8 overs??? I remember a lot of matches where he usually didn't bowl in the last 6-8 overs. I am not sure though since he has played a lot of ODIs.Can somebody shed a bit more light on that?

Saqlain Musthaq disagrees big time.

 

[weldone]

Saqlain Musthaq disagrees big time.

It's fine as long as it's only him who disagrees.

 

[Ikki]

maybe we can ask ankit or the other stats guy to do some era wise analysis for garner and wasim.

Decided to do it quickly myself:

Firstly, there was a period in which their ODIs overlapped. Between 23 Nov 1984 and 28 Mar 1987.

Wasim: avg. 21.63 er. 3.69 sr. 35.1; 2 4 fers, 1 5fer
Garner: avg. 18.59 er. 3.07 sr. 36.2; 1 4fer, 1 5fer

During their eras:

Overall: avg. 32.37 er. 4.45 sr. 43.6
Wasim: avg. 23.52 er. 3.89 sr. 36.2

Overall: avg. 29.59 er. 4.00 sr. 44.3
Garner: avg. 18.84 er. 3.09 sr. 36.5

 

[Ikki]

It's fine as long as it's only him who disagrees.

Warne probably disagrees as well.

 

[Howe_zat]

During their eras:

Overall: avg. 32.37 er. 4.45 sr. 43.6
Wasim: avg. 23.52 er. 3.89 sr. 36.2

Overall: avg. 29.59 er. 4.00 sr. 44.3
Garner: avg. 18.84 er. 3.09 sr. 36.5

That's unbelievably close. Can we not agree that we're splitting hairs here, and you'd pick one depending on what type of bowler he is and the role he has in your side?

 

[vcs]

I think it's like Tendulkar vs. Richards in ODIs, close enough but most people would take Viv. Ideally, you'd have both.