What does AB De Villiers need achieve to surpass Viv Richards as the ODI's greatest

[honestbharani]

Well it seems eveyrone has run out of arguments on how AB could become bettert han Viv, and more relevantly, reach the spot above Ponting and/or Tendulkar. End the thread.

Man... what is this parallel universe CW you have been reading?

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

He needs a longer shelf life

 

[HashiraMadara]

This is exactly how people used to argue Kallis greater than Sobers.

Kallis greater than Sobers? I would be damned! Sobers is the greatest player of the game! He is even above Bradman!

 

[Pratters]

But stats, my dear friend.

 

[Daemon]

This has been a lovely read

 

[viriya]

Well it seems eveyrone has run out of arguments on how AB could become bettert han Viv, and more relevantly, reach the spot above Ponting and/or Tendulkar. End the thread.

AB >> Ponting and it's not even close.

Bringing up WC wins is the worst argument.

 

[viriya]

To come back to the original question, the biggest point people bring up to show how dominant Viv was is how his 90 SR was out of the world during his time. This is true, but this ignores how AB's SR is also similarly outrageous in this era.

To go into the nitty gritty:

Viv played from 1975-1991. During his career:
Mean Batting Average = 26.29
Mean Strike Rate = 66.04
Viv had a batting average (47) that was 79% higher than his peers and a strike rate (90.2) that was 37% higher.

AB played from 2005-2017. During his career:
Mean Batting Average = 28.8
Mean Strike Rate = 80.04
AB has a batting average (54.29) that is 89% higher than his peers and a strike rate (100.16) that is 25% higher.

If you multiply the average + SR ratios above their peers for both of them:
Viv = 1.79 * 1.37 = 2.4
AB = 1.89 * 1.25 = 2.4

It's a dead heat.

I can see people still picking Viv because of his WC performances, but in terms of numbers, it's a wash - even after adjusting for era. I would pick AB over Viv because he has done it for 40 more matches.

 

[Pratters]

To come back to the original question, the biggest point people bring up to show how dominant Viv was is how his 90 SR was out of the world during his time. This is true, but this ignores how AB's SR is also similarly outrageous in this era.

To go into the nitty gritty:

Viv played from 1975-1991. During his career:
Mean Batting Average = 26.29
Mean Strike Rate = 66.04
Viv had a batting average (47) that was 79% higher than his peers and a strike rate (90.2) that was 37% higher.

AB played from 2005-2017. During his career:
Mean Batting Average = 28.8
Mean Strike Rate = 80.04
AB has a batting average (54.29) that is 89% higher than his peers and a strike rate (100.16) that is 25% higher.

If you multiply the average + SR ratios above their peers for both of them:
Viv = 1.79 * 1.37 = 2.4
AB = 1.89 * 1.25 = 2.4

It's a dead heat.

I can see people still picking Viv because of his WC performances, but in terms of numbers, it's a wash - even after adjusting for era. I would pick AB over Viv because he has done it for 40 more matches.

Because he has done it for 40 more matches. Seriously? Good analysis otherwise.

 

[Pratters]

One should look at technique and other factors when deciding. Not raw stats like this though, sorry.

 

[Burner]

Technique of what? How are you going to compare techniques other than with stats? You can't just look at someone and say "ugh get the **** out of here" because they have an ugly/unorthodox technique. If that were the case Steve Smith would barely get a game.

 

[viriya]

Because he has done it for 40 more matches. Seriously? Good analysis otherwise.

You don't think playing 25% more matches with the same insane level of performance is a factor?

I do.

 

[stephen]

I for one would love to put a 1980s Viv into the modern game with current bat technology, power plays and roped in boundaries. He'd be the ODI version of Chris Lynn. 6s! 6s everywhere!

 

[viriya]

I for one would love to put a 1980s Viv into the modern game with current bat technology, power plays and roped in boundaries. He'd be the ODI version of Chris Lynn. 6s! 6s everywhere!

He would be AB.

 

[cnerd123]

Yeah Sachin was amaze in World Cups. Also a pioneer of opening along with Jayasuriya. Jayasuriya gets all the credit and, while he deserves a lot of it, some of it should go to Sachin as well. Began doing it two years ahead of Jayasuriya in 1994.

Found this thread late but need to point this out - Mark Greatbach deserves credit too

 

[Pratters]

You don't think playing 25% more matches with the same insane level of performance is a factor?

I do.

Doesn't matter if matches played in different eras varies.

 

[cnerd123]

Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Dhoni's average is spruced by not outs. So I would say Sanga fares better.

Wow yes lets hold it against a batsman for being so good that bowlers couldn't dismiss him.

There's a reason batting averages are calculated like this. Being not out at the end of an innings is, for the most part, a good thing.

Also I like this new guy lets keep him around. He's even inventing his own (flawed) statistical systems. I'm a fan.

 

[Daemon]

Wow yes lets hold it against a batsman for being so good that bowlers couldn't dismiss him.

There's a reason batting averages are calculated like this. Being not out at the end of an innings is, for the most part, a good thing.

While I agree with the principle of what you're saying, it's not right to completely ignore the effects of not outs, especially if you're doing a comparison across batting positions.

 

[cnerd123]

While I agree with the principle of what you're saying, it's not right to completely ignore the effects of not outs, especially if you're doing a comparison across batting positions.

There are extreme circumstances where you have tailenders who average 40 with the bat but a high score of 15 (i.e., me this season), all thanks to the effect of not outs, but to hold that against Dhoni? The man who built his career around finishing games?

He really needs to justify that MSD's record is filled with meaningless stat-inflating not out innings before making that clam. Same for Bevan. It's a weak argument against them IMO.

 

[cnerd123]

And like there is a whole inherent hypocrisy in trying to discount a lower/middle order batsman's not-outs because no one ever goes through their record to find all the times they got out cheaply slogging at the end of the innings and went "Hey, we should discredit this from their career analysis", do they?

 

[srbhkshk]

And like there is a whole inherent hypocrisy in trying to discount a lower/middle order batsman's not-outs because no one ever goes through their record to find all the times they got out cheaply slogging at the end of the innings and went "Hey, we should discredit this from their career analysis", do they?

Exactly, unless the player in question is a renowned game loser, not outs for a #6 are gold, not something to deride, and surely they'll have a better average if they don't get out, Nothing wrong with that.