Steve Smith vs Brian Lara

[PlayerComparisons]

Two top 10 batsmen

 

[subshakerz]

Smith I think at this point unless his decline is precipitous.

 

[ataraxia]

Smith, but only just and requiring some degree of wilful ignorance of longevity on my part.

 

[Coronis]

Still hesitant to rate Smith against others he is closely comparable to until his career is ended - the same was true of Steyn (I knew I’d have him top 5 pacers of all time but not where I’d exactly place him).

Likely will end up being Smith, both right around 5ish.

 

[Slifer]

Smith I think at this point unless his decline is precipitous.

I'm curious to know why.

 

[subshakerz]

I'm curious to know why.

More consistent than Lara, undisputed best of his time and better across countries. Slightly more assured against pace IMO and has mega series like Lara as well.

Caveat is that Smith's career isn't finished. Another couple of bad years and then I might think about Lara.

 

[shortpitched713]

Smith is the BBB, unless he messes up in some way which puts into question his whole approach to being this dominant, which yes it would be possible to have happen.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Smith is the BBB, unless he messes up in some way which puts into question his whole approach to being this dominant, which yes it would be possible to have happen.

So Smith > hayden > Tendulkar for you. Interesting. Do you have Lara ahead or behind Hayden?

 

[Slifer]

More consistent than Lara, undisputed best of his time and better across countries. Slightly more assured against pace IMO and has mega series like Lara as well.

Caveat is that Smith's career isn't finished. Another couple of bad years and then I might think about Lara.

So then I assume you'd rank him above Sachin as well since he's equally as consistent, great against all countries, assured vs pace and spin but has monster series unlike Sachin.

 

[subshakerz]

So then I assume you'd rank him above Sachin as well since he's equally as consistent, great against all countries, assured vs pace and spin but has monster series unlike Sachin.

Sachin has longevity and better technique advantages over Lara which makes it closer with Smith, and he also played a higher proportion against better pacers than Smith.

If Smith has another great couple of years I would put him over Sachin.

 

[Slifer]

Sachin has longevity and better technique advantages over Lara which makes it closer with Smith, and he also played a higher proportion against better pacers than Smith.

If Smith has another great couple of years I would put him over Sachin.

Fair enough. Just wanted to pick your brain. Reasonable answer.

 

[Slifer]

Huge Lara fan, but Smith at his peak, was unprecedented in my lifetime of watching cricket. So Smith it is.

 

[BazBall21]

Smith pretty much just needs to avoid a collapse. His consistency rate and away record are both well out in front.

 

[The_CricketUmpire]

More consistent than Lara, undisputed best of his time and better across countries. Slightly more assured against pace IMO and has mega series like Lara as well.

Caveat is that Smith's career isn't finished. Another couple of bad years and then I might think about Lara.

Steve Smith has scored 500+ runs in Test series 4 times. Brian Lara scored 500+ runs in Test series 7 times.

 

[ma1978]

Impossible to separate on accomplishments, Lara because of style and beauty

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Lara would have been bigger superstar if played in Smith era

 

[subshakerz]

Steve Smith has scored 500+ runs in Test series 4 times. Brian Lara scored 500+ runs in Test series 7 times.

Lara played more tests.

 

[Victor Ian]

I'm not a fan of using undisputed best to mean much. Warne would easily be undisputed best in any other era. This title assumes two greats can't coincide. Not a big thing. But it's still a thing.

 

[subshakerz]

I'm not a fan of using undisputed best to mean much. Warne would easily be undisputed best in any other era. This title assumes two greats can't coincide. Not a big thing. But it's still a thing.

Well, in Smiths case, rather than competing, he was a level ahead of a peak Kohli in the title of best batsman of the world. So it does mean something.

 

[Coronis]

Well, in Smiths case, rather than competing, he was a level ahead of a peak Kohli in the title of best batsman of the world. So it does mean something.

Its not meaningless but requires context. e.g If you had someone dominating their era are they better than someone who wasn’t dominant or were there just less high quality players playing at that time.

e.g Steyn vs 80’s/90’s pacers