Peak steve smith vs peak tendulkar

[capt_Luffy]

The others aren't debatable at all.

You have guys like Waughs bros, Clarke, Martyn, Hussey, Gilly, Langer. Far more batting firepower for Aus.

Waugh bros retired early 2000s. Back then SRT still was the best.

 

[Johan]

Graeme Pollock

not top ten

 

[capt_Luffy]

not top ten

Top 10 post War IMO

 

[capt_Luffy]

And @Johan I am pretty sure we account for wanker runs given no other Top 10 batsman averages 50.

 

[subshakerz]

Waugh bros retired early 2000s. Back then SRT still was the best.

Name me a point in the 2000s until McGrath retired when you reckon India had a better batting lineup.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Name me a point in the 2000s until McGrath retired when you reckon India had a better batting lineup.

2001 BGT

 

[subshakerz]

2001 BGT

Is that a joke?

Top 7s:
Das
Ramesh
Tendulkar
Dravid
Ganguly
Laxman
Mongia

Slater
Hayden
Langer
Mark Waugh
Steve Waugh
Ponting
Gilly

 

[Johan]

And @Johan I am pretty sure we account for wanker runs given no other Top 10 batsman averages 50.

I'm really struggling to get what your point here is, we both know that 70s and 80s were more bowler friendly, we both know Viv didn't minnow bash, and we both agree that other top ten Batsmen had some flat eras or did some minnow bashing or both, what's the disconnect?

 

[capt_Luffy]

I'm really struggling to get what your point here is, we both know that 70s and 80s were more bowler friendly, we both know Viv didn't minnow bash, and we both agree that other top ten Batsmen had some flat eras or did some minnow bashing or both, what's the disconnect?

The disconnect is here. I don't think the 80s, without WI, were bowler friendly. Not batsmen friendly either necessarily, but perfectly average overall. No point in deducting anything here like from the 2000s lot but nothing to add there imho

 

[Johan]

The disconnect is here. I don't think the 80s, without WI, were bowler friendly. Not batsmen friendly either necessarily, but perfectly average overall. No point in deducting anything here like from the 2000s lot but nothing to add there imho

more is a comparative/relative statement, even if you don't think it was bowler dominant (I'd argue the first half definitely was), that doesn't mean anything as you're saying that it's less batter friendly than 2000s anyway, so there's no disconnect there, you're literally agreeing with me.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Iirc Viv’s standardized average was around 47 while Sachin and Lara were around 53/54

Not saying those are 100% accurate but I’d agree with Viv not really having it that tough. It’s his strike rate which separates him from other ATGs.

 

[capt_Luffy]

more is a comparative/relative statement, even if you don't think it was bowler dominant (I'd argue the first half definitely was), that doesn't mean anything as you're saying that it's less batter friendly than 2000s anyway, so there's no disconnect there, you're literally agreeing with me.

Yeah, but I am saying we really aren't comparing Viv with 2000s batsmen as well here. And Viv kinda tanked the early 80s after 81.

 

[Johan]

Yeah, but I am saying we really aren't comparing Viv with 2000s batsmen as well here. And Viv kinda tanked the early 80s after 81.

he still made the tough runs in late 80s tho, Pakistan/New Zealand runs are obvious, his 100 against England in 86 was against a mediocre bowling but was still an all timer and one of the most unprecedented feats in Cricket history when it was achieved, his 100 in India was also very high class and his runs in Australia in 88 were't against a bad lineup either. Other than 81 India, he only tanked a couple serieses, mostly the ones where he could've made easy runs like 83 India and 88 England.

 

[capt_Luffy]

he still made the tough runs in late 80s tho, Pakistan/New Zealand runs are obvious, his 100 against England in 86 was against a mediocre bowling but was still an all timer and one of the most unprecedented feats in Cricket history when it was achieved, his 100 in India was also very high class and his runs in Australia in 88 were't against a bad lineup either. Other than 81 India, he only tanked a couple serieses, mostly the ones where he could've made easy runs like 83 India and 88 England.

Good Lord, you can read my posts. I never said 80s were easy, I just said 80s without WI weren't tough. Almost factual. No comparison to 2000s were made.

 

[Johan]

Good Lord, you can read my posts. I never said 80s were easy, I just said 80s without WI weren't tough. Almost factual. No comparison to 2000s were made.

My guy, my point revolves around other ATG bats having 2000s, 1960s and 1920s as batting eras, which is true! I never said 80s (or 90s for that matter) were super tough.

 

[akilana]

The man made runs all over the world. Please stop this crap about inflated home averages. At his peak, Smith made runs in India, NZ, England and RSA etc

like sachin doesn't have the indian flattest decks to benefit from. Those guys act like sachin was batting in SA half his career.

 

[Johan]

Tendulkar is more about long term consistency and greatness than any smaller peak period. Whereas Smith is in the argument for greatest peak ever amongst mortals.

see, this is why Hobbs is best of both worlds, insane 65 avg peak in late golden era for 5 years, 22 years of greatness/longevity.

 

[kyear2]

Playing and doing decently as a teenager is better than not playing as a teenager. So it adds to his legacy compared to players who weren't even good enough to play as teenagers.

Playing and doing decently as a teenager has a small negative effect on his overall average even though he was adding positive value to his team compared to a player who wasn't even good enough to play as a teenager. So it should be kept in mind when comparing raw averages.

It actually makes perfect sense unless you think sitting at home masturbating at age 16 is better than being good enough to play test cricket.

Yeah, don't even get what you're trying to say here.

It's an overall net positive to his career, so don't see the need to add the caveats. All I'm saying.

 

[kyear2]

He is also the bowler you will expect the most wickets from

Situationally perhaps. Like day 5 scenario?

He's probably to be the bowler with the smallest impact on the first go around.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

like sachin doesn't have the indian flattest decks to benefit from. Those guys act like sachin was batting in SA half his career.

Brother I agree but sometimes it's not worth it arguing with some people.