The stats do not do him justice!
Which cricketers that you've seen either live or footage of (surely this subject requires you have seen them! lol) have records which do not do justice to how good they really were/are?
I'll do a couple of my lifetime and wait for others to post Gower and Viv Richards' names. Lol.
SACHIN TENDULKAR- Simply the best batsman I've seen "live" all things considered. I don't think I need to convince anyone on here of how good he was, and still is (though not the player of the 90's and early 00's).
His talent is deserving of a test average of 60, possibly more so in comparison to the guys of yesteryear based on how great a player of spin he was/is (and the wickets doing more for spin in the uncovered era).
Hopefully he reaches 50 centuries in Tests and ODI's. He deserves to have the highest individual score in both tests and ODI's. A 401* in tests (against Australia. lol) and maybe a double century in the ODI format would be the icing on the cake for him.
MARK WAUGH- 1 of the most aesthetically pleasing batsmen I've ever seen and was Australia's version of Atlas during the early to mid 90's in both forms of the game. His 153* at Bangalore in 1998 following a 400+ innings by India and an awesome century by Sachin Tendulkar with all the pressure was typical Mark Waugh. India weren't going to get him out in a month of Sundays during that test.
I can't think off the top of my head a (realistic) area of the field he couldn't play an elegant stroke for 4 to. His talent was deserving of a test average of 50 IMO.
JONTY RHODES- A few people I've talked to don't see what the fuss is about with Jonty Rhodes. You probably would've had to see him to know how good he was. I'd put him comfortably above the best fielders in the world today- and remember he played at a time when Herschelle Gibbs was at peak.
Jonty probably saved more runs than he scored and is responsible for making awesome fielding mandatory for South African cricketers. Gibbs, de Villiers, Duminy, vd Merwe I'm sure will all point to Jonty being the reason they've taken fielding so seriously and spent time on it.
Batting wise, his record isn't as good as he was a batsman imo. The average should be touching 40 and I'm sure he feels he deserved a few more centuries to his name. Between 1998 and 2000, he averaged 47 in tests and between 2000 and 2002 averaged 57 in ODI's including a run of 4 half-centuries against Australia. That's a better indicator of Rhodes' batting ability than before he altered his technique IMO.
I can go on all night (ask my girlfriend...... maybe not) but I let you peeps have a go.