Virat Kohli, the greatest ODI bat ever?

[h_hurricane]

1. Statistically, ABDV is the best Odi batsman during Kohli career. It's a simple fact.

2. Kohli needs to maintain his century domination (43%) another 11-12 years to match Sachin Tendulkar's.
It's a myth braking analysis.

I don't see any torturing there.

The issue with this kind of era adjustment is that, if 500 becomes a norm in ODIs 10 years from now, some future bat will have to average 100 with a strike rate of 200 to draw comparisons with Tendulkar or Kohli.

 

[h_hurricane]

**** PFK's world being turned upside down at the realisation that he can't only era adjust Kapil's batting and leave his bowling as it is

I for one think Kapil's stats would have been better in today's era playing for a significantly superior team. He would have been Hardik Pandya with the bat and Mohammed Amir with the ball stats wise which is still awesome. PFK is exaggerating though.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

The issue with this kind of era adjustment is that, if 500 becomes a norm in ODIs 10 years from now, some future bat will have to average 100 with a strike rate of 200 to draw comparisons with Tendulkar or Kohli.

Only If other future top bats avgng 90 at 190.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

**** PFK's world being turned upside down at the realisation that he can't only era adjust Kapil's batting and leave his bowling as it is

No issues there , he was consistently ranked among top 10 bowlers ( if not top 5) for most his career.

Top 20 bat + top 10 bowler , works for any era .

 

[TheJediBrah]

No issues there , he was consistently ranked among top 10 bowlers ( if not top 5) for most his career.

Top 20 bat + top 10 bowler , works for any era .

You realise you've completely changed your parameters there right?
You adjust his batting for era so he seems better, but if you did the same with his bowling he wouldn't be top 10 today, but you say that doesn't matter because he was too 10 in the 80s so he would be today.

 

[h_hurricane]

Only If other future top bats avgng 90 at 190.

If batsmen are judged purely based on how much they trump over the next best bats, why do you rate Sachin above Viv ? After all, if you era adjust, Viv would be 25% better than Sachin. That is too much of a gulf even if you attribute points to longevity.

 

[Burgey]

Can someone please start another thread about who’s the best odi player ever? We haven’t discussed it enough

 

[Logan]

The greatest ODI batsman ever is either Viv, Sachin or Kohli. All of them have their own arguments why they are the best. They are the best batsmen of their generation.

 

[h_hurricane]

Can someone please start another thread about who’s the best odi player ever? We haven’t discussed it enough

I suspect your top 5 will look like Viv, Mcgrath, Akram, Garner and Gilchrist.

 

[Logan]

I can understand the other four but Gilchrist??

 

[Anil]

The greatest cricketer (batting, bowling, fielding you name it) ever was AA, why is this even a discussion?! weird!

 

[h_hurricane]

I can understand the other four but Gilchrist??

2 WC final fifties, 1 hundred. What more you want ! The only matches that matter under god's green earth.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

You realise you've completely changed your parameters there right?
You adjust his batting for era so he seems better, but if you did the same with his bowling he wouldn't be top 10 today, but you say that doesn't matter because he was too 10 in the 80s so he would be today.

I didn't.
I compare players with their peers first, then calculates how good they would be in another era by comparing era standards.

And Kapils bowling and batting underrated even for his era.

 

[vcs]

With appropriate era adjustment, the 82% I scored in High school 20 years ago is worth at least 95% now.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

If batsmen are judged purely based on how much they trump over the next best bats, why do you rate Sachin above Viv ? After all, if you era adjust, Viv would be 25% better than Sachin. That is too much of a gulf even if you attribute points to longevity.

It's better to remove Sachin's teenage years when comparing with Viv. That gives you two exactly same length careers to analyse. AVG and SR almost same .. but after era adjustment Viv stats obviously better but not by that huge margin you think.
Then , Sachin played for a weaker team , faced better bowlers , was an opener , adapted to different eras , scored centuries like no one else in the history , and lasted 24 years.. 7yrs more than Viv.

Abdv has the best stats in Kohli era , but I don't mind people rating Kohli higher .. same applies to Sachin and Viv.

Sachin and Viv were peerless, Kohli and Abdv not .

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

The greatest ODI batsman ever is either Viv, Sachin or Kohli. All of them have their own arguments why they are the best. They are the best batsmen of their generation.

Kohli case is arguable..
Since Kohli debut , ABDV Avg-SR easily better.. just like Ponting Vs Dravid.

 

[trundler]

With appropriate era adjustment, the 82% I scored in High school 20 years ago is worth at least 95% now.

I sense an open wound...

 

[_00_deathscar]

Kohli case is arguable..
Since Kohli debut , ABDV Avg-SR easily better.. just like Ponting Vs Dravid.

I'm genuinely baffled that you don't see the flaw in your own argument - how are you comparing a set ABdV to the stats of a young Kohli?

Kohli didn't play his 50th ODI until 2011, and his ODI stats were decent from the start, but they didn't really *take off* until 2012 (68.40 that year). Before that, he was averaging 46.88 from 74 matches. Which means he's actually averaging an insane 66.61 in 165 matches since.

ABdV had already played 59 ODIs by 2008 (Kohli's debut year, his actual debut date was mid August, so it's probably even more ODIs by that point), and around 120 ODIs by the end of 2012 (when Kohli's stats started taking off, as per above).

Co-incidentally, ABdV's stats don't take off until 2010 either (80.33 that year). Before that, he was averaging 39.64 from 93 matches.
64.20 in 135 matches since.

But that's obviously reflected in the career average stats anyway...(!). I just had to dig these up to prove a point. It's not like their careers were 30 years apart for era adjustments to have had THAT much of an impact.

You're right about S/R though, but that's also because ABdV bats lower and has a very different function to Kohli. Kohli's S/R is mighty impressive considering the function he performs - and seeing as people were too focused on Kohli's failures during the World Cup, one thing it did show is that he consistently maintains a good S/R throughout the innings and it doesn't go through large changes which can put pressure on the scoreboard - it's precisely why Kohli got out *AT LEAST* twice, because his partner(s) at the other end were clogging up the scoring.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

I'm genuinely baffled that you don't see the flaw in your own argument - how are you comparing a set ABdV to the stats of a young Kohli?

Kohli didn't play his 50th ODI until 2011, and his ODI stats were decent from the start, but they didn't really *take off* until 2012 (68.40 that year). Before that, he was averaging 46.88 from 74 matches. Which means he's actually averaging an insane 66.61 in 165 matches since.

ABdV had already played 59 ODIs by 2008 (Kohli's debut year, his actual debut date was mid August, so it's probably even more ODIs by that point), and around 120 ODIs by the end of 2012 (when Kohli's stats started taking off, as per above).

Co-incidentally, ABdV's stats don't take off until 2010 either (80.33 that year). Before that, he was averaging 39.64 from 93 matches.
64.20 in 135 matches since.

But that's obviously reflected in the career average stats anyway...(!). I just had to dig these up to prove a point. It's not like their careers were 30 years apart for era adjustments to have had THAT much of an impact.

You're right about S/R though, but that's also because ABdV bats lower and has a very different function to Kohli. Kohli's S/R is mighty impressive considering the function he performs - and seeing as people were too focused on Kohli's failures during the World Cup, one thing it did show is that he consistently maintains a good S/R throughout the innings and it doesn't go through large changes which can put pressure on the scoreboard - it's precisely why Kohli got out *AT LEAST* twice, because his partner(s) at the other end were clogging up the scoring.

2008 - 18

Kohli 59.83 at 92.88 , 49 runs / innings
ABDV 60.48 at 105.46, 48 runs / innings

That's 11 years .
Kohli had 11 years to overtake ABDV especially considering Abdv was on decline in last few years and ODis becoming more and more easier for batsmen . ( Avgng 60 now is same as avgng 50 in 2010 ).


Kohli strike rate is good , but not impressive as ABDV , Viv or Sachin.
Agreed they had different roles .. but I don't know how it selectively helps ABDV stats. Because his AVG and SR better than Kohli while maintaining comparable RPI.

One thing is clear , ABDV is in the league of Kohli in terms of AVG and RPI and Miles ahead in SR.

 

[srbhkshk]

2008 - 18

Kohli 59.83 at 92.88 , 49 runs / innings
ABDV 60.48 at 105.46, 48 runs / innings

That's 11 years .
Kohli had 11 years to overtake ABDV especially considering Abdv was on decline in last few years and ODis becoming more and more easier for batsmen . ( Avgng 60 now is same as avgng 50 in 2010 ).


Kohli strike rate is good , but not impressive as ABDV , Viv or Sachin.
Agreed they had different roles .. but I don't know how it selectively helps ABDV stats. Because his AVG and SR better than Kohli while maintaining comparable RPI.

One thing is clear , ABDV is in the league of Kohli in terms of AVG and RPI and Miles ahead in SR.

Why do you insist on chopping off ABs debut years? Does a player start of as an ATG from Day1 or do they take time to develop?

Let's do a clean comparison since their debut - (AB's numbers vs Kohli's numbers)

Year 1 - 16 @ 67 , 32 @ 67
2 - 42@85 , 54 @ 84
3 - 45 @ 92 , 47 @ 85
4 - 36 @ 78 , 48 @ 86
5 - 54 @ 93 , 68 @ 94
6 - 80 @ 102 , 53 @ 98
7 - 52 @ 105 , 59 @ 100
8 - 107 @ 109 , 37 @ 81
9 - 51 @ 97 , 92 @ 100
10 - 73 @ 114 , 77 @ 99
11 - 80 @ 140 , 134 @ 103
12 - 42 @ 91 , 64 @ 96

Years 6 & 8 - ABD Clearly better.
Years 1,2,4,5,9 & 12 - Kohli Clearly better
Rest - Comparable.

You can do your era whatever - and give the edge to ABD in comparable years (even though the numbers are separated by just 3 years) - but you can't just chop off the first 5 years of ABDs career (basically his whole bad period and claim that he was better - sure his peak was better than Kohli's whole career, but you can do a similar exercise by taking Kohli's numbers from 2016 and claim that ABD was trash compared to him.)