Kapil Dev vs Imran Khan

[Prince EWS]

But Imran was a batting specialist at 5/6 but the point is in a regular team of his era you wouldn't need an extra bat and hence can afford an extra bowler or extra allrounder.

If your #5 batsman is opening the bowling you don't need to pick more than four more specialist bowlers, surely. That's the point. Then you probably end up with two specialist batsmen or a specialist batsman and a keeper at 6-7, and they might even be better than Imran but have to bat below him because he's not really useful as a finisher. I think Kapil's batting adds more value than Imran's for this reason - it's easier to fit into a normal team structure if a bowling allrounder bats 7.

As you will well know I'm no rabid Imran hater either.

 

[subshakerz]

If your #5 batsman is opening the bowling you don't need to pick more than four more specialist bowlers, surely. That's the point. Then you probably end up with two specialist batsmen or a specialist batsman and a keeper at 6-7, and they might even be better than Imran but have to bat below him because he's not really useful as a finisher. I think Kapil's batting adds more value than Imran's for this reason - it's easier to fit into a normal team structure if a bowling allrounder bats 7.

As you will well know I'm no rabid Imran hater either.

View attachment 37119

No worries.

I think in ODIs I almost always have at least two all-rounders in my side for flexibility, and six bowling options. It's my preference but I have seen that formula behind the success of almost all great ODI teams. Hence for me Imran in the batting order allows me to pick my more bowling options or an extra AR.

I would also point out that seeing which player fits in your hypothetical team isn't the best criteria to decide who is a better cricketer for me at least.

 

[Prince EWS]

I've thought a lot about Pollock vs Flintoff as ODI cricketers. Both guns, top 10 easily for me. Pollock's bowling was marginally better but his lower economy is a tad misleading as he played a bigger percentage of his games before strike rates kicked up around 2001, and he got better bowling conditions than Flintoff at home as well. Which one was better could well come down to a marginal difference in batting.

Comparing just their batting: in a below par team where Flintoff would be comfortably one of the best two or three bats I think he would add much more value, but as the standard of the teams goes up I think the gap between Pollock's value as a finisher and Flintoff's as a middle overs innings builder really starts to close in, to the point where I think I'd rather have Pollock's batting than Flintoff's if we're talking about a good batting lineup where they're going to bat 7-8 anyway.

I think Kapil vs Imran is in some ways the 80s/90s version of that of that debate.

 

[subshakerz]

I've thought a lot about Pollock vs Flintoff as ODI cricketers. Both guns, top 10 easily for me. Pollock's bowling was marginally better but his lower economy is a tad misleading as he played a bigger percentage of his games before strike rates kicked up around 2001, and he got better bowling conditions than Flintoff at home as well. Which one was better could well come down to a marginal difference in batting.

Comparing just their batting: in a below par team where Flintoff would be comfortably one of the best two or three bats I think he would add much more value, but as the standard of the teams goes up I think the gap between Pollock's value as a finisher and Flintoff's as a middle overs innings builder really starts to close in, to the point where I think I'd rather have Pollock's batting than Flintoff's if we're talking about a good batting lineup where they're going to bat 7-8 anyway.

I think Kapil vs Imran is in some ways the 80s/90s version of that of that debate.

Yes. I would admit that there are teams in which Kapil may be more suitable but other teams in which Imran would be.

I just think Imran was a better bowler for most of his career, and to me for him to be a regular bat is a bigger achievement than Kapil's SR

 

[Prince EWS]

Yes. I would admit that there are teams in which Kapil may be more suitable but other teams in which Imran would be.

I just think Imran was a better bowler for most of his career, and to me for him to be a regular bat is a bigger achievement than Kapil's SR

I rate them about equally as ODI bowlers, so it comes down to the batting for me. It's really close - I thought about it for a while - but I think Kapil's batting would be of more value to more teams overall.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Imran got much much better and Kapil got worse.

Kapil - normal career decline
Imran - abnormal stats boosting for a short period.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

The difference in their batting can be equated to the difference between Afridi and Robin Singh.

 

[subshakerz]

Kapil - normal career decline
Imran - abnormal stats boosting for a short period.

Here is where you show clear double standards. In any other normal situation, the player who still carries batting form right until the end should get extra points compared to the other who declined.

Whereas you penalise Imran for being a good bat right until the end with a WC triumph whereas Kapil gets off for being a burden on his team leading to his retirement.

 

[subshakerz]

The difference in their batting can be equated to the difference between Afridi and Robin Singh.

Only if Robin Singh averaged much higher.

Afridi's batting, like Kapil's, is ridiculously overrated. Not to state the obvious again, but there is no way either of them could be in their sides as batters alone, unlike Imran.

 

[ankitj]

Imran Khan's SR was same as Dean Jones' who played in same era and is seen as one of the ODI greats. I don't think you can knock Imran down for SR.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Here is where you show clear double standards. In any other normal situation, the player who still carries batting form right until the end should get extra points compared to the other who declined.

Whereas you penalise Imran for being a good bat right until the end with a WC triumph whereas Kapil gets off for being a burden on his team leading to his retirement.

Nobody is penalising Imran for being a good batsman in the final phase of his career, only saying.. He was not that good before this phase and his bowling quality declined by the time he became better batsman than Kapil. So there is no way Imran was better Bat-Ball combo at any phase of his career than Kapil's peak 10 years.

 

[ankitj]

Pollock's bowling was marginally better but his lower economy is a tad misleading as he played a bigger percentage of his games before strike rates kicked up around 2001

How can you not know that Pollock's ER was extraordinary in 2000s.

Bowling records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

 

[ankitj]

I rate them about equally as ODI bowlers, so it comes down to the batting for me. It's really close - I thought about it for a while - but I think Kapil's batting would be of more value to more teams overall.

But why does that matter? What they did in the teams they played in and the role they played alone should matter.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Imran Khan's SR was same as Dean Jones' who played in same era and is seen as one of the ODI greats. I don't think you can knock Imran down for SR.

Kapil was galaxies ahead though.

Kapil with his lightning knocks helped India many a times to reach a respectable total before running out of partners. No one else could have done that, including Imran.

Imagine a situation, you are needed to chase down a big total and no specialist batsman available. The result is uncertain if Kapil still in the crease.
Imran instead of Kapil in this situation is.. Meh

 

[trundler]

Kapil - normal career decline
Imran - abnormal stats boosting for a short period.

Dumbest thing I've read. Imran became a proper middle order batsman + 5th bowler whereas Kapil became a tailender who was an ok bowler. Bits and pieces. Stokes Vs Afridi as I said. Imran was much more valuable.

Imagine a situation, you are needed to chase down a big total and no specialist batsman available. The result is uncertain if Kapil still in the crease.
Imran instead of Kapil in this situation is.. Meh

Yeah Kapil's 19(20) is really going to win you a lot of matches. The bloke averaged 23. He's not going to win you big chases any more frequently than Afridi did. Imran's batting would be more useful in pretty much every other situation as well.

 

[subshakerz]

Kapil was galaxies ahead though.

Kapil with his lightning knocks helped India many a times to reach a respectable total before running out of partners. No one else could have done that, including Imran.

Imagine a situation, you are needed to chase down a big total and no specialist batsman available. The result is uncertain if Kapil still in the crease.
Imran instead of Kapil in this situation is.. Meh

Again, he averaged 23. You are remembering all the knocks when he clicked and ignoring his countless failures in between. Same with Afridi, in hindsight people just remember the times he clicked as a series of highlights.

Imran was more dependable and consistent which matters more in the final analysis. And he could step up and accelerate if he needed to. He was just a better quality bat.

Again, if Kapil averaged late 20s we could have a conversation, but 10 runs difference is way too much.

 

[subshakerz]

Nobody is penalising Imran for being a good batsman in the final phase of his career, only saying.. He was not that good before this phase and his bowling quality declined by the time he became better batsman than Kapil. So there is no way Imran was better Bat-Ball combo at any phase of his career than Kapil's peak 10 years.

Except I just showed you the stats in his career when he was averaging in the 30s with the bat while a worldclass bowler in the 80s. He declined as a bowler 90 onwards.

 

[ma1978]

Only if Robin Singh averaged much higher.

Afridi's batting, like Kapil's, is ridiculously overrated. Not to state the obvious again, but there is no way either of them could be in their sides as batters alone, unlike Imran.

why was Kapil consistently higher in the ICC ratings a batsman vs Imran?

 

[ma1978]

Nobody is penalising Imran for being a good batsman in the final phase of his career, only saying.. He was not that good before this phase and his bowling quality declined by the time he became better batsman than Kapil. So there is no way Imran was better Bat-Ball combo at any phase of his career than Kapil's peak 10 years.

and this is what the icc ratings say

through the large majority of their careers, Kaps was rated higher as a batsman and bowler

 

[trundler]

why was Kapil consistently higher in the ICC ratings a batsman vs Imran?

Why was Kepler Weasels in the top 5 batsmen throughout his career despite being straight up bad?


Imo, this is like Steyn and Morkel. I used to think Steyn was better in tests and Morkel was better in ODIs but really Steyn was much better in tests and still better in ODIs. The fact that Morkel wasn't near Steyn in tests made me somehow overrate him in ODIs. Same thing here.