ODI bowlers: how they stand

[Days of Grace]

DWTA.

Bond ripping through the order of the opposition gives the batsmen confidence. He influences the whole team. He's a HUGE loss, and t.b.h. I will never forgive NZ cricket for totally ****ing up his career. I think NZ fans have allowed them to get away with it, as NZ cricket were never really roundly criticised.

 

[weldone]

Bond ripping through the order of the opposition gives the batsmen confidence. He influences the whole team. He's a HUGE loss, and t.b.h. I will never forgive NZ cricket for totally ****ing up his career.

Same feeling from me...

 

[funnygirl]

Edit.

 

[weldone]

The graphs are interesting (and well done )...The rest (rankings) are not of much use as they do not take into account quality of opposition and longetivity...For example, one may be higher in the rankings playing for 3 years mostly against lesser teams than 1 who played for say 15 years mostly against great batsmen but with slightly worse adjusted figures than the first bowler...

 

[funnygirl]

It's very difficult to judge the top bowler without a system that accounts for all these stats. As you say Bond may appear at the top, but, I have my money on Garner.

The surprising thing is Wasim Akram does not appear in any of the lists. Is he overrated as an ODI bowler? McGrath appears in all three lists, and I think he is very underrated as an ODI bowler.

After playing 356 ODIs ,still having an econmoy of 3.89 is very impressive .Wasim's econmy in the time 1998-2003 is 4 ,thats also exremely good considering plenty of games he played in subcontinent for an atrocious fielding side.Plus he was nearing to his career end .

this is wasim's ODI statistics in the last part that is 2002-2003

played 33 ODIs ,56 wickets at an average of 20 ,sr of 29 ,economy 4.2.That is even better than his career average and in the beginning of his career . So what makes u think that his average will get poorer had he played in this era ,in his fulll prime young age .

?Especially when he has the same economy lie many including Bond in the last two years .And his career economy similar to Mcgrath

 

[Richard]

DWTA.

Bond ripping through the order of the opposition gives the batsmen confidence. He influences the whole team. He's a HUGE loss, and t.b.h. I will never forgive NZ cricket for totally ****ing up his career. I think NZ fans have allowed them to get away with it, as NZ cricket were never really roundly criticised.

ITBT, Bond was unlikely to play a hell of a lot more anyway.

If he'd been 26 at the time the problems arose, then yes, you could say that. But he's 33 now, still gets injured loads, and bowlers of his type rarely last much long beyond 35 or so anyway. At best it cost NZ a couple of useful years in some fairly meaningless ODIs, and very possibly not even that.

BTW, why's it DWTA and not d.w.t.a.?

 

[GGG]

DWTA.

Bond ripping through the order of the opposition gives the batsmen confidence. He influences the whole team. He's a HUGE loss, and t.b.h. I will never forgive NZ cricket for totally ****ing up his career. I think NZ fans have allowed them to get away with it, as NZ cricket were never really roundly criticised.

Not me, I have always thought and said that Justin Vaughn has to take resposibility and resign over the Bond debacle, either that or play Bond and see what happens.

 

[Days of Grace]

.

BTW, why's it DWTA and not d.w.t.a.?

dear oh dear, does it really matter??

I wouldn't lose any sleep over it, Rich.

 

[Richard]

No, nor would I - just wondering.

Always strikes me as odd when people use different styles for acronyms\abbreviations, rather than the same for all.

 

[Migara]

After playing 356 ODIs ,still having an econmoy of 3.89 is very impressive .Wasim's econmy in the time 1998-2003 is 4 ,thats also exremely good considering plenty of games he played in subcontinent for an atrocious fielding side.Plus he was nearing to his career end .

this is wasim's ODI statistics in the last part that is 2002-2003

played 33 ODIs ,56 wickets at an average of 20 ,sr of 29 ,economy 4.2.That is even better than his career average and in the beginning of his career . So what makes u think that his average will get poorer had he played in this era ,in his fulll prime young age .

?Especially when he has the same economy lie many including Bond in the last two years .And his career economy similar to Mcgrath

You have completely miss the point. Although McGrath has a similar ER to Wasim, McGrath played in a era where batsmen scored more quickly. That's why he has come in front on adjusted ER list.

In fact Muralitharan who's second in the all time ODI wicket list has better Average, better strike rate and even better economy rate than Wasim, if you ponder on stats 100%

We all know Wasim was a legend in ODI cricket. McGrath is not quite given the same place as a ODI bowler as Akram, despite have superior stats, nor Murali.

 

[andruid]

On Richard's point on Prosper Utseya needing a better cricket team, one could also argue that on Peter Ongondo could probably have developed into a seriously World Class seamer given how much his bowling improved from 2005 onwards despite his playing for a team that was almost competely inactive from 2003

 

[S.P. Fleming]

great to see Bond up there but I also think that he was getting older and his body was crumbling. It is painfull without him at the moment but he would only of been around for a yea or two even if his body held up.

Prosper Utseya is an awesome one day bowlerand I think he still would have feard alright had he been in a decent team

 

[funnygirl]

In fact Muralitharan who's second in the all time ODI wicket list has better Average, better strike rate and even better economy rate than Wasim, if you ponder on stats 100%

We all know Wasim was a legend in ODI cricket. McGrath is not quite given the same place as a ODI bowler as Akram, despite have superior stats, nor Murali.

[/QUOTE]

I din't miss any point at all .Mcgrath also played for a team with superior fielders and more help ful conditions .Had he ever played in the pancake pitch in sharjh for over 100 ODIs ?. Wasim is a legend because he played 356 ODIs .And he took 500+ wickets at average of 23.5 and economy of 3.89 .

There is no such clear cut rule that Average will be on high ,U can compare his stats from 1984-93 ,then 1993-2003 .Same withMcgrath ,1993-2003 and then the rest .Both of them ,stats remained almost similar to their career average .

Also his stats defied ur argument of Average on a rise .His average wae mere 20 in the last season (2002-03)of his career ,same with his SR .How it happend .Same with so many bowlers there .Waqar's and many others's.

what makes u think that R Hadlee won't be successful as Mcgrath.

Mcgrath is a great ODI bowler ,who said he wasn't given .

If u think Mcgrath and Bond are superior bowlers ,be it ,but don't demean and devalue some one else' hardwork .,blood and sweat by manipulating without any sense .

Wasim started his career in 1984 and played till 2003 .What is his fault ,he born too early?Plus these are great bowlers we are talking about ,how do u know they wouldn't have adjusted to the situations in each era ?

How can u ''assume '' that their stats are going to be like this by adding few runs to their stats .

There is no way one can compare Wasim and Bond ,as they belong to diffrent eras.
When did Bond started playing 2002

Okay here is the maths

From Bond's debut to Wasim's retirement

Bond
26 matches 48 wickets at an average of 19 ,sr of 27 and economy 4.2

Wasim

33 matches 56 wickets at an average of 20 ,sr of 29 ,economy 4.2

A young and full of energy Bond is compared to Wasim of 37 years age ,have us een such earth shattering diffrence ?


I am not claiming wasim is the best ODI bowler ,but hating that ''overrated '' argument just because he just retired 3-4 years back before Mcgrath or Murli or whoever it is .The guy has played more ODIs than any one in that list .

 

[Matt79]

Yep anything disagreeing with your pet hobby horse must be due to distortions of statistics. Its not Wasim's "fault" that he played most of his cricket in the 80s and 90s, but the fact remains that batsmen have been able to score significantly more and faster in the last ten years in ODIs and hence you do need to factor that in when comparing stats.

I take your point about Bond being young and fit when Wasim was in his twilight, but by the same token, Bond was a callow youth finding his way in international cricket, while Wasim was bowling with all the experience and tricks learnt through a long career. Which was the bigger advantage?

I take what you say about not trying to prove Wasim is the best, but I think you're overreacting to what Migara's done here, and suggesting that somehow by trying to adjust stats he's targeting a particular player, which is rubbish IMO.

 

[funnygirl]

Yep anything disagreeing with your pet hobby horse must be due to distortions of statistics. Its not Wasim's "fault" that he played most of his cricket in the 80s and 90s, but the fact remains that batsmen have been able to score significantly more and faster in the last ten years in ODIs and hence you do need to factor that in when comparing stats.

I take your point about Bond being young and fit when Wasim was in his twilight, but by the same token, Bond was a callow youth finding his way in international cricket, while Wasim was bowling with all the experience and tricks learnt through a long career. Which was the bigger advantage?

I take what you say about not trying to prove Wasim is the best, but I think you're overreacting to what Migara's done here, and suggesting that somehow by trying to adjust stats he's targeting a particular player, which is rubbish IMO.

Batsmen scored faster in this era ,so what does that mean ? A particular bowler ''would have fared '' like this in this era .How can anyone one make such assumption ? Bowlers do tend to change their tactics according to situations and circumstances .Are they going to bowl the same way they used to bowl in 80's . Won't they change their bowling style .What about the quality of the fielding then ,the catching ? What is the probability that the Average will get better .

Moreover if a team scores 300+ ,a bowler may end up with 10-0-60-3 .Here economy is high ,still Average is 20 and Sr is 20 .So what is the point .

Why i brought Wasim's average during Bond's time ,because to prove that ''Average need not get higher as the time passess ,it can be lower which happend in Wasim's case ,his average became 20 contrary to his overall average of 23 . Didn't that contradict .

Also if Wasim have fine stats thats because of his experience and tricks ,so by that experience and trick it must be safe to assume that Wasim's stats are going to get better ? We are ''assuming '' things any way .

I was targetting a comment about ''How a particular bowler was overrated ''according to his ''assumptions ''.I have suggested that he had made ''wrong assumptions '' about all the bowlers ,not just Wasim .

 

[Matt79]

Batsmen had monster sized bats that hit the ball much further these days. There are an extra five overs of power plays. Grounds are 10 metres smaller in diameter because of how far the ropes are in. Teams much more regularly score more than 300. Don't try to deny that batsmen score more runs these days for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of bowling they're facing. That adversing affects the average and ER of bowlers who play today compared to their predecessors, so its fair enough to adjust those figures if you want to compare like with like in stats terms.

 

[funnygirl]

ER might be going high ,what about average ,is it necessary that it will go high ,since batsmen tend to take more risks .

PS : Let us have a graph regardingv Tests as well ,like Marshall's average wasn't 20 but 24 etc .

 

[Richard]

On Richard's point

You confused me there with my avatar and the multi-coloured sig.

 

[Matt79]

ER might be going high ,what about average ,is it necessary that it will go high ,since batsmen tend to take more risks .

The fact that teams end up getting higher totals suggests that batsmen are more often than not getting away with that risk. Plus they aren't really - a risk such as trying to drive at a ball that's not really there is actually alleviated because what would have been a catch at mid-off or cover suddenly goes for a boundary due to modern bats...

 

[Richard]

Yep anything disagreeing with your pet hobby horse must be due to distortions of statistics.