Who is the Best "Cricketer" Ever?

[Plumbinfront]

His, X, Y, Z's...it doesn't matter. I am calling someone who for the majority of their career averaged upwards of 40 runs per wicket and struck them at upwards of 100 balls for those wickets as garbage. Whether it is Sobers' or Mick Lewis'...it doesn't matter. A fair standard should apply for all.

Below are figures during Sobers' career. Keep in mind that Sobers' combined record of bowling pace and spin is still poorer than the average bowler who bowled just spin.

[B]Overall              AVG       SR
[/B]Sobers:             34.03     91.9
World avg:          31.18     79.8
Spinner avg:        32.71     88.9

These numbers are meaningless without context. You seem to place too much emphasis on numbers and stats (when out of context and when they are distorted to support your viewpoint). If you haven't seen the legend in action you might want to just not post on the matter at all because you are denigrating one of the game's greatest players. Someone posted stats of McGill and Warne when their careers overlapped and the former had better numbers. Strictly by numbers that would seem to suggest that Warne's bowling was garbage relative to Stuart's but that would be incorrect. Stats would show that pointing was garbage in India compared to even some tail end batsmen. Stats would show that ponting's average away from home is comparable to known flat pitch bullies like Sehwag and Sanga, that does not mean they were even remotely comparable away from home. Stats would show that Ponting averaged ZERO whenever he played Wasim and Waqar together in a test. Should we jump to conclusions from it? No I am not going off topic, I am just trying to tell you that stats are never the be all and end all. Ever. Period. Please stop posting ridiculous arguments when you do not have any valid points to make.

 

[kyear2]

Nice.

 

[watson]

These numbers are meaningless without context. You seem to place too much emphasis on numbers and stats (when out of context and when they are distorted to support your viewpoint). If you haven't seen the legend in action you might want to just not post on the matter at all because you are denigrating one of the game's greatest players. Someone posted stats of McGill and Warne when their careers overlapped and the former had better numbers. Strictly by numbers that would seem to suggest that Warne's bowling was garbage relative to Stuart's but that would be incorrect. Stats would show that pointing was garbage in India compared to even some tail end batsmen. Stats would show that ponting's average away from home is comparable to known flat pitch bullies like Sehwag and Sanga, that does not mean they were even remotely comparable away from home. Stats would show that Ponting averaged ZERO whenever he played Wasim and Waqar together in a test. Should we jump to conclusions from it? No I am not going off topic, I am just trying to tell you that stats are never the be all and end all. Ever. Period. Please stop posting ridiculous arguments when you do not have any valid points to make.

I disagree with the idea that questioning the ability of a cricketer is 'denigrating' them. In fact to analyse and debate a cricketers record is to pay them an indirect complement. After all, virtually no one could be bothered analysing and debating the bowling record of Vic Marks as nice a bloke as he was.

Indeed, when people say, "Don't 'denigrate my cricketer" what they really mean is - 'Don't disgree with my cherished belief because that hurts my feelings'. To that I simply say - "Harden Up!"

But back to Sobers. When I estimate a bowler I tend to look at the batsman he dismissed. That is, did he regularly dismiss top-order ATG batsman, or were a large percentage of his wickets low quality batsman like tailenders?

The top-3 victims of Sober's bowling were Barrington (7), Boycott (7), and Edrich (6). And overall, 34.9% of his victims could be described as top-order batsman (1-3). This compares favourably to a benchmark bowler like Malcolm Marshall as 33.2% of his victims were top-order batsman.

http://www.howstat.com.au/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerWicketAnalysisGraph.asp?PlayerID=1652
http://www.howstat.com.au/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerWicketAnalysisGraph.asp?PlayerID=1090
http://www.howstat.com.au/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerDismissBowl.asp?PlayerID=1652

Therefore, while the bowling Average and Strike Rate of Sobers are not anywhere near ATG status we would still have to conclude that his inherent (proven) ability to dismiss top-order batsman makes him a very desirable change-bowler indeed!

 

[the big bambino]

Are you sure about that? I'd be surprised if Maco's % of top order wickets wasn't much higher than that.

 

[watson]

Are you sure about that? I'd be surprised if Maco's % of top order wickets wasn't much higher than that.

Just added the relevent links to the post.

 

[kyear2]

I disagree with the idea that questioning the ability of a cricketer is 'denigrating' them. In fact to analyse and debate a cricketers record is to pay them an indirect complement. After all, virtually no one could be bothered analysing and debating the bowling record of Vic Marks as nice a bloke as he was.

Indeed, when people say, "Don't 'denigrate my cricketer" what they really mean is - 'Don't disgree with my cherished belief because that hurts my feelings'. To that I simply say - "Harden Up!"

But back to Sobers. When I estimate a bowler I tend to look at the batsman he dismissed. That is, did he regularly dismiss top-order ATG batsman, or were a large percentage of his wickets low quality batsman like tailenders?

The top-3 victims of Sober's bowling were Barrington (7), Boycott (7), and Edrich (6). And overall, 34.9% of his victims could be described as top-order batsman (1-3). This compares favourably to a benchmark bowler like Malcolm Marshall as 33.2% of his victims were top-order batsman.

HowSTAT! Wickets by Batting Order Graph
HowSTAT! Wickets by Batting Order Graph
HowSTAT! Player Bowling Analysis

Therefore, while the bowling Average and Strike Rate of Sobers are not anywhere near ATG status we would still have to conclude that his inherent (proven) ability to dismiss top-order batsman makes him a very desirable change-bowler indeed!

I think people are thinking that he is being referenced as a great bowler, no one is saying that, what he would be is an excellent "change" or 5th bowler, which is what his role would be.

Good research Watson. As usual putting in the research to support your arguments. Whether I agree with your specific argument or not, respect has to be given for that.

 

[the big bambino]

Just added the relevent links to the post.

Thanks for that. I glossed over the 1-3 qualification. His record against the top 7 is more what I was expecting.

 

[kyear2]

Separate note, anyone else surprised that Kallis is still tied with Sir Garry in the poll. Is there a growing trend on CW where Kallis is moving past Sobers?

 

[watson]

Separate note, anyone else surprised that Kallis is still tied with Sir Garry in the poll. Is there a growing trend on CW where Kallis is moving past Sobers?

Only among the lager louts. To the connoisseurs Sobers wins by a reasonable margin.

 

[kyear2]

Was just wondering. For me Sobers wins the batting comparrison hands down and as bolwers they played completely different roles in totally different conditions. Fielding and catching is as far as I am concerned is a no contest.

Of course I know they would be others with differing opinions.

 

[the big bambino]

Btw if Vannie Holder could make a test side as a bowler so can Sir Garry. And thats not to put down Holder either just to tell you what Sobers brought to the bowling crease as an extra to the attack!

 

[akilana]

Kallis > Sobers

 

[Pothas]

Sobers bowling has now gone past Murali v Warne etc for most boring argument on CW.

 

[the big bambino]

And about time too.

 

[kyear2]

Kallis > Sobers

Care to expand? Would like to understand your reasoning.

 

[MartinB]

Are you sure about that? I'd be surprised if Maco's % of top order wickets wasn't much higher than that.

Maco's did not do that well against the top 3, he really excelled against lower middle order, allrounders.

Interesting comparison is with McGrath:
McGrath: HowSTAT! Wickets by Batting Order Graph
Marshal: HowSTAT! Wickets by Batting Order Graph

 

[Coronis]

Murali.

 

[marc71178]

Was just wondering. For me Sobers wins the batting comparrison hands down and as bolwers they played completely different roles in totally different conditions. Fielding and catching is as far as I am concerned is a no contest..

Yes, Sobers played as a frontliner, Kallis did not. It's a no contest in all disciplines for me.

 

[smash84]

Was just wondering. For me Sobers wins the batting comparrison hands down and as bolwers they played completely different roles in totally different conditions. Fielding and catching is as far as I am concerned is a no contest.

Of course I know they would be others with differing opinions.

Yes, I would beg to differ.

Why do you say that fielding and catching is a no contest? Kallis is an awesome fielder himself. Some egs

Jacques Kallis *Incredible Catch* Pakistan v South Africa final at Sharjah 2000 - YouTube

Jacques Kallis Fantastic Reflex Catch - YouTube

Fantabulous catch from Jacques Kallis (ENG vs SA: T3D3 - Basil D'Oliveira Trophy 2012) - YouTube

Or you meant that Kallis is a better fielder?

Secondly, Sobers didn't have people like Shaun Pollock and Allan Donald at the other end most of the time else I am sure Sobers wouldn't really be needed all that would he?

 

[the big bambino]

But he did have Hall and Griffith and Gilchrist for a while.