DoG's Top 100 Test Batsmen Countdown Thread

[vcs]

What has helped Sanga so much in this exercise compared to Kallis? Not a big difference in averages, both didn't have much of a decline before they retired.

 

[OverratedSanity]

The way Sanga seemed to just keep getting better was so gun. Will never forgot in his final year of international cricket, that double century in New Zealand against world class swing bowlers, and the four consecutive ODI centuries in the World Cup. Neither the opposition/conditions in NZ, or the ODI game, were traditional strengths of his batsmanship (relatively speaking) but by then it didn't matter; he was just a complete, all conquering batting master. WAG.

This is why I hold it against him that he retired when he did. Even a declining Sanga would've been an immense asset to a team that was struggling as badly as it was in the batting department. He clearly had a lot left to offer even at that stage.

 

[ankitj]

Great show my Smith entering in top 5 of all time. Very well deserved too. WAG.

 

[mr_mister]

Your Smith?

 

[Gob]

Great show my Smith entering in top 5 of all time. Very well deserved too. WAG.

Imagine going back to 2011 and saying Smith would be a better bat than Tendulkar

 

[stephen]

I've always thought that Sanga was underrated, though equally I feel this exercise over rates him.

 

[ankitj]

Your Smith?

by*

 

[ankitj]

Imagine going back to 2011 and saying Smith would be a better bat than Tendulkar

Would have been more believable that Smith will be better leg spinner than Kumble

 

[honestbharani]

This is why I hold it against him that he retired when he did. Even a declining Sanga would've been an immense asset to a team that was struggling as badly as it was in the batting department. He clearly had a lot left to offer even at that stage.

TBF though you cannot discount the issues that SLC have always had. It is something that we can never factor in accurately but I have always felt that blokes like Sanga, Lara and even AB would have fared so much better if they were in a Big 3 set up, just due to the amount of politics and bureaucratic **** they have to put up with, with their respective boards.

 

[Slifer]

That Steve Smith is already rated so highly is most definitely deserved and I hope that he maintains his intensity for sometime yet.

Me, I'm more of a fan of Kohli and his technique but there's no denying the machine aka Steve Smith.

 

[ankitj]

Then Sachin's average in the 90s collapses to 36.9 (compared to 58 listed by the other poster).
I wanted to say the same thing but meltdown of this thread would have started in real earnest.

View attachment 25043

These things can be misleading too. For example in 3 matches that Tendulkar played against Wasim/Waqar in 98/99, he was dismissed by Saqlain 4 times, Akhtar once and run out once. Not that getting out to Saqlain repeatedly shouldn't be held against him but you don't have evidence that he failed against Wasim/Waqar from that.

 

[Coronis]

That Steve Smith is already rated so highly is most definitely deserved and I hope that he maintains his intensity for sometime yet.

Me, I'm more of a fan of Kohli and his technique but there's no denying the machine aka Steve Smith.

Sounds like McCabe and Bradman.

 

[_00_deathscar]

These things can be misleading too. For example in 3 matches that Tendulkar played against Wasim/Waqar in 98/99, he was dismissed by Saqlain 4 times, Akhtar once and run out once. Not that getting out to Saqlain repeatedly shouldn't be held against him but you don't have evidence that he failed against Wasim/Waqar from that.

Yea it's a pretty silly stat with a relatively small sample size.

I.e. here's a 72 test sample size involving any of the following players (generally considered the best bowlers during Sachin's entire career): Donald, Pollock, Waqar, Akram, Walsh, Ambrose, Warne, McGrath, Muralitharan.
Only missing Bond etc because sample size is too small. Maybe I could throw in Jimmy Anderson etc in there I suppose.
His average is 47.07.

Keep the same as per above, but only the 1990s (obviously Steyn is irrelevant) and his average is now 53.37 over 37 tests.

Ignore his early years, starting 1994, and his ridiculous decline, finishing 2011, and his average is 47.56 over 60 tests (but still covering his mid years when he was pretty poor/injured etc).

It all starts getting a bit ridiculous when you filter it down to these crazy levels.

 

[ankitj]

These things can be misleading too. For example in 3 matches that Tendulkar played against Wasim/Waqar in 98/99, he was dismissed by Saqlain 4 times, Akhtar once and run out once. Not that getting out to Saqlain repeatedly shouldn't be held against him but you don't have evidence that he failed against Wasim/Waqar from that.

Correction: by Saqlain 3 times, Mushtaq Ahmed once, Akhtar once and run out once.

 

[Days of Grace]

What has helped Sanga so much in this exercise compared to Kallis? Not a big difference in averages, both didn't have much of a decline before they retired.

Career/Runs:
Sangakkara 2000-2015, 12400 (91.29 points)
Kallis 1995-2013, 13206 (100.00 points)

Overall average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate:
Sangakkara 52.95 (57.41) 49.08 (53.22) 48.72 (54.19) (445.19 points)
Kallis 51.56 (55.25) 44.32 (47.50) 42.88 (45.98) (419.99 points)

50 Innings Peak Average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate:
Sangakkara 69.85 61.47 52.13 (187.77 points)
Kallis 72.69 53.79 43.66 (182.87 points)

Non-Home Average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate:
Sangakkara 50.62 47.83 47.51 (79.20 points)
Kallis 48.67 41.46 41.12 (73.12 points)

Quality Opposition Average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate:
Sangakkara 50.81 47.72 49.97 (81.96 points)
Kallis 48.71 43.95 44.40 (77.08 points)

Sangakkara is just a little better across all quality criteria. He has a greater RPW and strike-rate than Kallis which makes the difference.

 

[Bijed]

This is why I hold it against him that he retired when he did. Even a declining Sanga would've been an immense asset to a team that was struggling as badly as it was in the batting department. He clearly had a lot left to offer even at that stage.

That's fair, although on the whole I think it's also fair to say that after 594 international matches, he'd more than done his bit for his team

 

[Coronis]

Career/Runs:
Sangakkara 2000-2015, 12400 (91.29 points)
Kallis 1995-2013, 13206 (100.00 points)

Overall average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate:
Sangakkara 52.95 (57.41) 49.08 (53.22) 48.72 (54.19) (445.19 points)
Kallis 51.56 (55.25) 44.32 (47.50) 42.88 (45.98) (419.99 points)

50 Innings Peak Average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate:
Sangakkara 69.85 61.47 52.13 (187.77 points)
Kallis 72.69 53.79 43.66 (182.87 points)

Non-Home Average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate:
Sangakkara 50.62 47.83 47.51 (79.20 points)
Kallis 48.67 41.46 41.12 (73.12 points)

Quality Opposition Average/Runs per innings/Strike-rate:
Sangakkara 50.81 47.72 49.97 (81.96 points)
Kallis 48.71 43.95 44.40 (77.08 points)

Sangakkara is just a little better across all quality criteria. He has a greater RPW and strike-rate than Kallis which makes the difference.

Is there an upper limit for career points?

 

[pardus]

These things can be misleading too. For example in 3 matches that Tendulkar played against Wasim/Waqar in 98/99, he was dismissed by Saqlain 4 times, Akhtar once and run out once. Not that getting out to Saqlain repeatedly shouldn't be held against him but you don't have evidence that he failed against Wasim/Waqar from that.

Nah, I am not attempting to prove that Sachin was Wasim/Waqar's bunny. It is probably hyper-defensive reaction from Sachin fans that is assuming such insinuations from me.
The other poster posted 90s batting stats showing how much better Sachin was than other great batsmen "when bowling attacks were the toughest in the 90s" (his own words).
Data I provided refuted his false claims.I didn't need to play filtering gymnastics just to show Sachin in bad light. That wasn't my intention in the first place.
For those who followed Sachin's career keenly and objectively in the 90s, it was well known that he rarely had a stellar series against a formidable bowling attack.
That doesn't automatically mean Sachin was hopeless & crap against those great bowlers. No need to jump between extremes. He was usually decent but almost never stellar.

Regarding the low sample size of Wasim/Waqar, that's kinda expected in this level of flitering. Low sample size also indicates how less often Sachin had to face great attacks in that
decade compared to say Waugh or even Lara.

In any case, feel free to remove Waqar/Wasim from the filter, it doesn't improve things much (Sachin still averages 38.5 against Donald/McGrath/Ambrose led attacks in the 90s).
Again, I am not claiming that Sachin was a failure against these bowlers, but the fact still remains that his stats were more often less than stellar against formidable attacks in the
90s (and if it makes you feel any better, the same can be said for several other great batsmen of that era).

I don't get one thing. All sorts of stats filterings were used by Sachin fans to question Sanga's rank in this list (like his performance inside Asia & outside Asia etc.) or
to question Barrington's rank in the list. Then why the defensive whining & assumed insinuations when similar approach is used for Sachin?
As Stannis says - hard truths cut both ways.

 

[sunilz]

Who are those Sachin fans whom you are referring to ?
Steve Waugh has even lower ranking than Sachin against quality opposition if he was so good against Donald/Ambrose/ Akram

Forget Tendulkar, Sangakkara is even ranked higher than Viv Richards , Ponting, Hutton etc
Pointing out that Sangakkara has total 5 centuries in SA,ENG,AUS and IND is not stats filtering . This is his entire career.
Kohli already has more centuries, more runs at better average outside Asia than Sangakkara. All now he needs to is keep playing Pakistan, Bangladesh in Asia to be ranked as better than Tendulkar

 

[honestbharani]

These things can be misleading too. For example in 3 matches that Tendulkar played against Wasim/Waqar in 98/99, he was dismissed by Saqlain 4 times, Akhtar once and run out once. Not that getting out to Saqlain repeatedly shouldn't be held against him but you don't have evidence that he failed against Wasim/Waqar from that.

That makes no sense. Getting out against an attack includes all bowlers of the attack. How do you know the presence of Wasim and Waqar did not impact the way he played Saqlain or the Ws themselves? The stat is to figure out runs against attacks that included quality bowlers based on generally accepted definition of the word "quality". I don't see how what you posted is relevant at all as pardus did not say Sachin struggled against the Ws alone specifically.