Gilchrist v Dhoni

[Ikki]

Interestingly, Dhoni averages 14 points more...which is far from insignificant.

I'd still go Gilchrist easily, but Dhoni has had a great start.

That's partly due to a lot of not-outs. Gilchrist opens, Dhoni is further down the order. Gilchrist scores only 2 less runs than Dhoni per innings.

As high as I rate Gilchrist, I tend to think he is a bit overrated amongst Australian batsmen. He won the best Australian ODI player ever and I think he isn't close to Bevan and it's debatable he is better than Ponting and many others.

 

[asty80]

Averages dont really matter to certain players because of their X factor and the fact that it has lasted so long. But whats important is that you have witnessed those knocks to know the true impact.

If Gilchrist played like this in the 40's ,and we didnt have any video evidence of his knocks, he would not be in any all time list because of his avg. But today, having witnessed the impact of Gilly, I'll ALWAYS pick him over ANY wicketkeeper to have played so far.

 

[Manee]

That's partly due to a lot of not-outs. Gilchrist opens, Dhoni is further down the order. Gilchrist scores only 2 less runs than Dhoni per innings.

Dhoni does not complete many of his innings though (as you noted), and it must be considered that an uncompleted innings has a lot more potential for more runs, especially when they have come from the successful chasing of a target.

 

[Ikki]

Dhoni does not complete many of his innings though (as you noted), and it must be considered that an uncompleted innings has a lot more potential for more runs, especially when they have come from the successful chasing of a target.

Yes, but it's kinda like comparing apples and oranges. Conversely, it's just very tough for a batsman who opens to see out an innings, successful chase or not. Especially one like Gilchrist who blasts from ball one.

 

[Manee]

Yes, but it's kinda like comparing apples and oranges. Conversely, it's just very tough for a batsman who opens to see out an innings, successful chase or not. Especially one like Gilchrist who blasts from ball one.

Yes. That is true, I'm not passing a judgement on this comparison as I disagree, on the whole, with the comparison of a current player with one who has finished their international career. However, I do feel that Dhoni is statistically stronger at this point in time and that to disagree with this would be to over-analyse.

 

[honestbharani]

Dhoni does not complete many of his innings though (as you noted), and it must be considered that an uncompleted innings has a lot more potential for more runs, especially when they have come from the successful chasing of a target.

I don't buy this "completed innings" theory, tbh.. When you go out chasing a score or to bat out time, you ALWAYS know how much time/overs/runs you have to bat till... And once the game is over, that IS a completed innings AFAIC... There is as much chance the guy would get out next ball as there is that the guy would go on and make a big score. The probability is that the field set up, bowlers etc would have changed had there not been that much time left in the game... So there is no point in classifying innings as such. Say a batsman comes in with 50 needed to win and gets in a nice 30 not out... Would it have been the same had it been 150 needed.. Bowlers' and fielders' morale would be different, fielding side might try harder, field set ups would be different and perhaps more attacking.. As I said, it is a complete waste arguing either way. That is why I feel not outs are completed innings too...

 

[Jono]

I'd choose Gilly now, but Dhoni could be better. Surely has a lot more ODI cricket in him, if the format survives

Five years from now would be interesting.

 

[Nate]

I'd choose Dhoni.

 

[Uppercut]

It's hard to criticise Dhoni for the not-outs. He nearly always ends up not-out because he's seen his side home.

Still averages more than Gilly if all his not-outs are treated (completely unfairly) as outs, ftr.

 

[Richard]

Agree with those saying it's rather difficult to compare them right now. I reckon it's quite likely Dhoni will eventually be the better pick, but right now Gilchrist still has far more already in the bank.

 

[0RI0N]

Interesting thread.
Both capable of playing the blockbuster innings no doubt.
I'm gonna give to Gilchrist because he set the platform for many 0Z Innings.
And those midwicket swivel pulls for 6.
And 3 WC Final scene stealers
This here thread needs a bump after the 2015 WC for a better analysis, but for now

Gotta be Gilly...

 

[Cruxdude]

Right now Gilly. But believe with time Dhoni will become better. I voted for Dhoni because of that.

 

[Furball]

Gilchrist, because in my opinion him and Tendulkar are far and away the best two openers to have played the game.

Dhoni's a fantastic ODI batsman mind.

 

[Furball]

Dhoni can rotate the ball, then strike the ball miles in the death. He has played some terrific ODI knocks as well. Gilchrist gives you 35 runs @ SR of 95. Dhoni gives you 50 runs @ SR of 90. I don't think it is clear who is superior.

You can't just look at averages in this case.

Gilchrist almost always opened, Dhoni has spent a significant chunk of his career in the lower middle order.

In ODIs, averaging 40 in the top 3 and averaging 40 batting lower than that are two very different things.

 

[Furball]

In matches where Gilchrist has opened the batting and Australia have won, he averages 41 at a strike rate of 99.62.

They're absolutely unbelievable numbers.

 

[Uppercut]

You can't just look at averages in this case.

Gilchrist almost always opened, Dhoni has spent a significant chunk of his career in the lower middle order.

In ODIs, averaging 40 in the top 3 and averaging 40 batting lower than that are two very different things.

I agree, but 15 average points is a hell of a lot. If Dhoni were to keep this up for the rest of his career, such qualifications would be worthless.

Big "if" that, but we'll see.

 

[Isura]

Dhoni can rotate the ball, then strike the ball miles in the death. He has played some terrific ODI knocks as well. Gilchrist gives you 35 runs @ SR of 95. Dhoni gives you 50 runs @ SR of 90. I don't think it is clear who is superior.

The averages are misleading for 2 reasons:

1) Gilly opens and Dhoni gets many more not outs.

2) Openers face the new ball, and generally the stronger bowlers. Dhoni faces the 4th and 5th bowling options for a significant % of his innings.

edit; Gilchrist 11 Not outs in 187 innings. Dhoni 34 not outs in 130 innings.

 

[thierry henry]

Dhoni

Gilchrist is the third most overrated human ever behind Richards and Sobers

 

[thierry henry]

Just a point on "averages in ODI cricket for middle-order batsmen"- there seems to be an assumption that Bevan/Hussey/Dhoni's averages don't count because of all of the not-outs.

Given that these three are damn near the only players in ODI history to have their averages boosted by this phenomenon, I daresay there's a little more to it than that.

 

[Richard]

Gilchrist, because in my opinion him and Tendulkar are far and away the best two openers to have played the game.

Simply cannot understand how anyone thinks Gilchrist is one of the two best-ever ODI openers, never mind streets ahead of anyone else. I'd pick at least 6-7 people to open in modern-day ODIs before Gilchrist, regardless of his wicketkeeping.