Who was better: Hadlee or McGrath?

[Prince EWS]

How so? If anything, in McGrath's career run-rates have increased quite a bit and there are inflated averages everywhere. Yet McGrath still holds an economy that is even better than Hadlee's.

My point was in reply in the economy-rates-of-support-bowlers argument. 2.93 during McGrath's career is probably a similar if not better economy rate than 2.71 during Hadlee's. I voted for McGrath but I don't think that direct comparison shows as much as you might think.

 

[Ikki]

My point was in reply in the economy-rates-of-support-bowlers argument. 2.93 during McGrath's career is probably a similar if not better economy rate than 2.71 during Hadlee's. I voted for McGrath but I don't think that direct comparison shows as much as you might think.

Oh okay, well still, then 2.5 from McGrath is absolutely great if you go by that standard. Which essentially means kind of the same thing anyway: McGrath was less helped by his peers in trying to keep the run rate down.

It doesn't necessarily show you a huge thing, but for McGrath to still be that good is very impressive because with that kind of help then you'd expect, if he was equal to Hadlee, for him too to be 2.93, yet he is half a run lower. And then you factor in how much more McGrath's support would deny him wickets, as opposed to Hadlee's which kept the run rate down but just weren't as prolific, and it is quite a good indicator for McGrath that he is still only 1 ball slower than Hadlee.