James Anderson GOAT

[Teja.]

I ran a couple of statsguru searches out of curiosity.

List of pace bowlers since 1970 with most wickets taken after the age of 35:



List of pace bowlers since 1970 with most wickets taken after the age of 36:



List of pace bowlers since 1970 with most wickets taken after the age of 37:



Walsh was such a ****ing gun - clearly the best at multiple divisions in the 35+ age bracket and a huge gap between him and the other stand outs in the old man stakes, Hadlee and Anderson. The fact that he took nearly 150 wickets averaging 20.9 after the age of 36 is astounding. The next most prolific bowler, Anderson is far away with 86 wickets after 36.

Ftr, if we increase age to 38+ , Walsh/Anderson/Hadlee all have about 35 wickets each playing about 10 tests each and @ 39+, only D'Olivera has more than 10 wickets @ 39+ ftr. Expecting Anderson to remedy that very soon though.

 

[Bahnz]

Yeah, Walsh probably did more than any other player to prop up the crumbling WI dynasty. Took 100 more wickets than Curtly from 1995 onwards and did it at a ridiculous average.

Interesting to see Chris Martin appearing favourably, particularly in the 36+ ranks. What a champ, held on just long enough for Southee and Boult to come to the team's rescue.

 

[Calm_profit]

Walsh should be the ambassador of Duracell.

 

[wpdavid]

Walsh should be the ambassador of Duracell.

I suppose he always was a bunny when he came out to bat.

 

[wpdavid]

Only D'Olivera has more than 10 wickets @ 39+ ftr. Expecting Anderson to remedy that very soon though.

D'Oliveira would be flattered to be considered a pace bowler; gentle medium pace would be more accurate. The other point about D'Oliveira is to be careful with his age. I don't know which DOB is used by cricinfo, but he did admit to lying about his age when he came to England because be didn't want to put off the selectors for the national team. He may well have taken more wickets when aged 39+ than your search suggests.


EDIT
Cricinfo says October 1931, which is more accurate than what D'Oliveira said when he arrived in England. However, the true DOB may be three years earlier than that. This from Pat Murphy, who wrote a book about his life:
"Basil had to lie about his age because he thought if they realised how old he was they would not pick him for England. So he came down from born in 1935 at that time, solidifying his place in the team as 1933 born and when I wrote his book in 1980 he finally conceded he was born in 1928."

 

[_00_deathscar]

I ran a couple of statsguru searches out of curiosity.

List of pace bowlers since 1970 with most wickets taken after the age of 35:

View attachment 28945

List of pace bowlers since 1970 with most wickets taken after the age of 36:

View attachment 28947

List of pace bowlers since 1970 with most wickets taken after the age of 37:

View attachment 28946

Walsh was such a ****ing gun - clearly the best at multiple divisions in the 35+ age bracket and a huge gap between him and the other stand outs in the old man stakes, Hadlee and Anderson. The fact that he took nearly 150 wickets averaging 20.9 after the age of 36 is astounding. The next most prolific bowler, Anderson is far away with 86 wickets after 36.

Ftr, if we increase age to 38+ , Walsh/Anderson/Hadlee all have about 35 wickets each playing about 10 tests each and @ 39+, only D'Olivera has more than 10 wickets @ 39+ ftr. Expecting Anderson to remedy that very soon though.

Are there genuinely people who believe Anderson > Walsh? (And I'm even beginning to like/respect Anderson - great skill).

 

[Furball]

Are there genuinely people who believe Anderson > Walsh? (And I'm even beginning to like/respect Anderson - great skill).

It's like you've not read the thread title.

 

[ma1978]

In all seriousness though, is Anderson amongst the top seven fast bowlers in the world.

Definitely Better:

Cummins
Bumrah
Rabada
Jamieson

Probably Better:

Hazlewood
Wagner
Nortje
Sharma
Siraj

Could even argue for Southee and Boult here

Has he ever been a top three bowler for any sustained period?

 

[Bijed]

Thing is, I don't think even English fans of him (like me) tend to think that he's been outright the best bowler in the world for longer than a little while at a time. We just love that he's been bloody good and won us tests for absolutely ages

 

[Blenkinsop]

Whether Jimmy is the best pace bowler in the world or not, I think he's by far the best to watch. The skill and subtlety and control he has are unmatched.

Comparisons are pointless because none of those other guys will have a career half as long as Anderson's. What are the chances of Cummins or Bumrah playing 150+ Tests?

 

[ma1978]

No question the longevity is exceptional and career value wise, he is elite

 

[Daemon]

In all seriousness though, is Anderson amongst the top seven fast bowlers in the world.

Definitely Better:

Cummins
Bumrah
Rabada
Jamieson

Probably Better:

Hazlewood
Wagner
Nortje
Sharma
Siraj

Could even argue for Southee and Boult here

Has he ever been a top three bowler for any sustained period?

You left out Rubel from the list

 

[ma1978]

You left out Rubel from the list

Some things don't need to be written, their truth is both obvious and ackonwledged.

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

In all seriousness though, is Anderson amongst the top seven fast bowlers in the world.

Definitely Better:

Cummins
Bumrah
Rabada
Jamieson

Probably Better:

Hazlewood
Wagner
Nortje
Sharma
Siraj

Could even argue for Southee and Boult here

Has he ever been a top three bowler for any sustained period?

Gonna be less polite than Bijed was in his response and say this is a bad take.

Obviously much of his career overlapped with Steyn and he is no Steyn. And after Steyn there's been Cummins, and Cummins is better. But Anderson has been a constant in the mix for '2nd best' in the world for longer than most of the players in your list have been bowling. Lots of bowlers have had particular purple patches where you'd say they were bowling better than Anderson for a time but Anderson has had his own ridiculous purple patches as well.

As for being a top 3 bowler for a sustained period, since the start of England's 2014 home season he has 283 wickets as 21.61. This is the best average amongst all bowlers with 50+ wickets in the period, ahead of even Cummins. Those are ATG figures.

Is Jimmy Anderson, right now, one of the top seven fast bowlers in the world? Maybe? This is a stacked moment in time for pace bowling and he's still in the conversation. That's pretty crazy for a 39 year old.

 

[Uppercut]

He is properly beautiful to watch. I can't think of many better now that Steyn's retired.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Cummins is the only one clearly better right now.

 

[honestbharani]

Yeah, he seems an absolute dickhead of a person at best but that should not take away the fact that he is a champion bowler. And an excellent fielder as well which means he would have been an asset for most sides, cloudy skies or not.

Being #2 to Steyn and Cummins is no slight for any bowler and Anderson is definitely a great bowler AFAIC.

 

[_00_deathscar]

Yea from that list only Cummins is definitely better than Anderson.

 

[hendrix]

Yeah, Walsh probably did more than any other player to prop up the crumbling WI dynasty. Took 100 more wickets than Curtly from 1995 onwards and did it at a ridiculous average.

Interesting to see Chris Martin appearing favourably, particularly in the 36+ ranks. What a champ, held on just long enough for Southee and Boult to come to the team's rescue.

Chris Martin is a could-have-been IMO, would have legite been a gun bowler if he had a Southee or a Boult at the other end. Some runs on the board would have helped too.

 

[hendrix]

In all seriousness though, is Anderson amongst the top seven fast bowlers in the world.

Definitely Better:

Cummins
Bumrah
Rabada
Jamieson

Probably Better:

Hazlewood
Wagner
Nortje
Sharma
Siraj

Could even argue for Southee and Boult here

Has he ever been a top three bowler for any sustained period?

At this moment in time yes Southee is better. But not over their careers.

Boult is not better. Siraj is not better. Nortje is not better. Sharma and Wagner are arguably better only because of the roles they play for their teams but it's very debateable. Bumrah maybe, Rabada maybe. Jamieson hasn't proved enough.