What if - Kapil had played in a better team

[trundler]

I was talking about him getting tired and being bowled into the dust.

 

[Flem274*]

yeah but then you wrote this bit

This is like claiming slow scoring is better because bowlers get tired. C'mon. Playing in a better team obviously helps your stats.

 

[trundler]

yeah but then you wrote this bit

That's another nerdy CW objection that no one really believes. All else equal, quick scoring is better and I don't think anyone outside CW has ever suggested 400 in two days on a road is better because the bowlers get tired more. I respect batsmen who graft when necessary or make it despite limitations.

 

[Flem274*]

That's another nerdy CW objection that no one really believes. All else equal, quick scoring is better and I don't think anyone outside CW has ever suggested 400 in two days on a road is better because the bowlers get tired more. I respect batsmen who graft when necessary or make it despite limitations.

it's situational, and unfortunately for internet nerds is hard to pin down in posts and spreadsheets.

also i think cricket has really lacked cynical min-maxing by targeting bowler workload across a series. if cricket were less up its own arse we absolutely would have seen some ashwin level cynicism by now from captains electing to bat opposition bowlers into early graves over 5 days on pitches like napier.

 

[trundler]

it's situational, and unfortunately for internet nerds is hard to pin down in posts and spreadsheets.

also i think cricket has really lacked cynical min-maxing by targeting bowler workload across a series. if cricket were less up its own arse we absolutely would have seen some ashwin level cynicism by now from captains electing to bat opposition bowlers into early graves over 5 days on pitches like napier.

On pitches where there's movement you can either have a go and get out or stick around and try to graft your way to a respectable score. In that case obviously scoring is better than not scoring but on neutral or batting friendly tracks scoring quickly is more valuable and Its upsides greatly outweigh than scoring slowly just like playing in a better team versus playing in a weak team.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

I don't want to anger all the Indian posters, or come across as a Kapil basher but...

Greenidge
Viv
Dujon
Marshall
Garner
(perhaps any of Lloyd, Holding, Walsh)

Hayden
Ponting
S Waugh
Gilchrist
Warne
McGrath

Agree with Viv and Marshall.

( Mcgrath and Warne too ( +Gilly may be ) if you take opinion of the majority.. And that is the maximum.. 3 better players )

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

c'mon. Seriously. People just keep spouting 'der yeah, better team better stats' with as little logic to back it up as I threw out there to consider the other side. Truth is, that you really don't know. Are there good examples of players who got better as their team got better, that aren't equally balanced by the opposite? Truth is you really don't know. I'd like to think Dev would have been better, but really...who knows.

Yeah... Its impossible to know who was better between Viv and Aravinda.. Because they played for different teams, against different opponents, in different time periods..we dont know how would have they performed If they switch their team and time period .
But then we use logic and agree on Viv being better.. Even though its not 100% certain.

 

[mr_mister]

I agree Kapil is definitely a better bowler than Lee but Lee had sooo much hype. Every kid wanted to bowl like him. His little duel with Shoaib for the speed record, how dramatic it was when he actually put it in the right spot and knocked the stumps back, all those Weet bix ads. Honestly there's more that goes into selection then merit, which I don't agree with but look at Starc lol. He was never getting dropped despite imo not being one of our best 3 test quicks for long periods once he got that reputation as the big enforcer quick while simultaneously featuring in 20 ads each summer.

there were better bowlers during Lee's career that couldn't get him out of the team, so yeah not sure Kapil takes his spot. The people plumped for Lee

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

I agree Kapil is definitely a better bowler than Lee but Lee had sooo much hype. Every kid wanted to bowl like him. His little duel with Shoaib for the speed record, how dramatic it was when he actually put it in the right spot and knocked the stumps back, all those Weet bix ads. Honestly there's more that goes into selection then merit, which I don't agree with but look at Starc lol. He was never getting dropped despite imo not being one of our best 3 test quicks for long periods once he got that reputation as the big enforcer quick while simultaneously featuring in 20 ads each summer.

there were better bowlers during Lee's career that couldn't get him out of the team, so yeah not sure Kapil takes his spot. The people plumped for Lee

Dont be silly.. You are talking about
An Anderson class bowler + 35 avg batsman capable of destroying great bowling attacks + ATG fielder combo..
Its just 2-3 players like Sobers and Imran stops Kapil Dev from being a serious alltime 11 contender.

Comparing Kapil and Lee is same as Comparing Kallis and Ganguly.

 

[trundler]

Shami and Ishant got better with better support. Lyon got better with better keeping support. Couple of recent examples that spring to mind. I'm sure there are more.

 

[Victor Ian]

Yeah... Its impossible to know who was better between Viv and Aravinda.. Because they played for different teams, against different opponents, in different time periods..we dont know how would have they performed If they switch their team and time period .
But then we use logic and agree on Viv being better.. Even though its not 100% certain.

I'm talking, relative to themselves. Viv is better. But if he played for Sri Lanka I'm saying he would not obviously fare worse. Same as I think it's a stretch to presume desilva becomes Viv if he played for the Windies.

 

[Coronis]

Not by that much maybe but they'd be probably as good as guys who are rated more highly but played in stronger teams. Seems like motivated reasoning. The way I see it it's no coincidence Marshall and McGrath played for the strongest teams of their era and that Hadlee, Akram etc are as good.

Or did Marshall and McGrath make their teams the strongest of the era?

 

[Lillian Thomson]

I'm talking, relative to themselves. Viv is better. But if he played for Sri Lanka I'm saying he would not obviously fare worse. Same as I think it's a stretch to presume desilva becomes Viv if he played for the Windies.

I've always been of the opinion (and yes it's baseless and unprovable) that Viv would have made more runs in a weaker side. In 1976 when the West Indies were recovering from a mauling in Australia and not yet established as the best side he was prepared to bat forever - and nearly did. When his runs were less needed he was less dedicated. He also had moments when he batted like Ben Stokes did this summer, just hitting at everything without playing himself in. His distain for the bowling was also his undoing. He didn't seem to believe that the likes of Devon Malcolm should have had the cheek to bowl to him even in his late 30's.

 

[Jayro]

Shami and Ishant got better with better support. Lyon got better with better keeping support. Couple of recent examples that spring to mind. I'm sure there are more.

It's largely true, add Bumrah to an Indian attack and suddenly all the bowlers start to look different hehe take him away and certain mediocrity starts to kick in.

 

[Anil]

Dont be silly.. You are talking about
An Anderson class bowler + 35 avg batsman capable of destroying great bowling attacks + ATG fielder combo..
Its just 2-3 players like Sobers and Imran stops Kapil Dev from being a serious alltime 11 contender.

Comparing Kapil and Lee is same as Comparing Kallis and Ganguly.

no throwaway references please, any kallis comparison deserves its own brand new thread...please start one, it's an unwritten but strictly enforced forum rule...

 

[Anil]

as to the thread topic, i would think his bowling average would have improved appreciably if he had been part of the great west indian or aussie attacks, less wickets overall but would have gone up the ranks in all-time lists...i don't know if his batting stats would have changed significantly...that part of his game was always in hyperdrive regardless of the pressure of any given situation...he may have been able to bat with even greater abandon but as to whether that would have helped him score more or average better...i have my doubts on that...

 

[h_hurricane]

In a better team, he wouldn't be able to play classics like the below, as the teams wouldn't be in such a bad position.

They were 31/6 and he scores 129, the second highest score being 17 !

Can't help but feel that in spite of all his greatness, Kapil underachieved with the bat.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

In a better team, he wouldn't be able to play classics like the below, as the teams wouldn't be in such a bad position.

They were 31/6 and he scores 129, the second highest score being 17 !

Can't help but feel that in spite of all his greatness, Kapil underachieved with the bat.

He was the best batsman of a major ODI team ? ( 80s India.. Kapil was the best ranked batsman)

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Dont be silly.. You are talking about
An Anderson class bowler + 35 avg batsman capable of destroying great bowling attacks + ATG fielder combo..

Not as good as Anderson with the ball (although close to Trent Boult) + a 31 avg batsman. Cairns, in comparison was a 33.5 avg batsman.

 

[mr_mister]

Dont be silly.. You are talking about
An Anderson class bowler + 35 avg batsman capable of destroying great bowling attacks + ATG fielder combo..
Its just 2-3 players like Sobers and Imran stops Kapil Dev from being a serious alltime 11 contender.

Comparing Kapil and Lee is same as Comparing Kallis and Ganguly.

I did say Kapil was a better bowler in my first sentence...

He'd replace Dizzy before Lee imo, for... reasons I stated in my post that I feel you didn't read