DoG's Top 100 Test Batsmen: 50-26

[The Sean]

I've often heard the opposite, that Walcott was considered by many to be the greatest of the three Ws - he took longer than the other two to really get going at Test level (possibly due to his batting being affected by 'keeping early in his career), but he was phenomenal once the runs started flowing. CLR James refers to him assuming "an unrivalled supremacy" by the mid-50s, and Tom Graveney - the great English batsman who saw all the Ws close at hand - ranked him the best of the three. I believe that some of our West Indian contingent on CW are of the same opinion.

Either way, a wonderful player - and in a way it's disappointing that so many of his best innings didn't come in victories. Certainly, his performances against an excellent Australian attack at home in 1955 - 827 runs with five centures, including tons in each innings of a match twice - are unfortunate to be marked down because of his team's 3-0 series defeat.

 

[hendrix]

I'm probably in the minority that's happy to see MoYo in the top 30 and above Younis and Clarke

 

[Howe_zat]

I'm probably in the minority that's happy to see MoYo in the top 30 and above Younis and Clarke

Nah he's better than Younis. Had series where it just looked like the bowling side were going to have to work around him.

 

[smash84]

yep, he was definitely better than YK. Had he not dabbled too much into team and board politics he might have ended up being better than Inzy. Not to be

 

[The Sean]

Speaking of Inzy, it will be interesting to see how high he ends up. This study seems to give considerable weight (justifiably so) to performances which led to victories, and his average in Pakistan wins was ridiculously good.

 

[Days of Grace]

...and to innings in back to the wall situations which earned their team an honourable draw.

Basically, my system punishes those who got a large amount of runs against weak opposition and in high scoring draws.

 

[smash84]

Speaking of Inzy, it will be interesting to see how high he ends up. This study seems to give considerable weight (justifiably so) to performances which led to victories, and his average in Pakistan wins was ridiculously good.

...and to innings in back to the wall situations which earned their team an honourable draw.

Basically, my system punishes those who got a large amount of runs against weak opposition and in high scoring draws.

yeah I think Inzy was 2nd after Bradman in some crazy statistic like average in wins IIRC. I could be wrong. I will never ever forget Inzy's triple century precisely because it was against against Bangladesh AND Pakistan barely scraped through by 1 wicket. Would have been SOOO friggin embarrassing. I wonder how that will show up in your system DoG? Because he scored a ton of runs that led to a win BUT against a very weak opposition

 

[Coronis]

yeah I think Inzy was 2nd after Bradman in some crazy statistic like average in wins IIRC. I could be wrong. I will never ever forget Inzy's triple century precisely because it was against against Bangladesh AND Pakistan barely scraped through by 1 wicket. Would have been SOOO friggin embarrassing. I wonder how that will show up in your system DoG? Because he scored a ton of runs that led to a win BUT against a very weak opposition

Yep, averaged 78 in wins. Of the players left, Gavaskar is the standout, averaging just 44, with just 6 centuries in wins. Headley ~95, Pollock and Flower around 84, and Walcott with 79, all with small sample sizes though.

 

[ankitj]

MoYo clearly helped by his crazy peak. Does he have the highest peak points so far? (MoYo tops the group top 50 so far certainly).

 

[ankitj]

yeah I think Inzy was 2nd after Bradman in some crazy statistic like average in wins IIRC. I could be wrong. I will never ever forget Inzy's triple century precisely because it was against against Bangladesh AND Pakistan barely scraped through by 1 wicket. Would have been SOOO friggin embarrassing. I wonder how that will show up in your system DoG? Because he scored a ton of runs that led to a win BUT against a very weak opposition

Average in wins is a ****ed up statistic because....well I have explained that before, so won't repeat.

 

[kingkallis]

yeah I think Inzy was 2nd after Bradman in some crazy statistic like average in wins IIRC. I could be wrong. I will never ever forget Inzy's triple century precisely because it was against against Bangladesh AND Pakistan barely scraped through by 1 wicket. Would have been SOOO friggin embarrassing. I wonder how that will show up in your system DoG? Because he scored a ton of runs that led to a win BUT against a very weak opposition

I think his 300 was against Kiwis and not Bongs.

 

[kyear2]

To me Walcott was the best batsman of the 3Ws. His average in Australia was so low because he was injured in his only series there. What he did to Lindwall and Miller in '55 is unparrelled and among the greatest series of all time for a batsman. Though he waould have been listed above Sir. Everton.

 

[Days of Grace]

The last batsman of this section:

26. Matthew Hayden (Australia) (1994-2009)

Career Average: 50.73
Adjusted career average: 47.15
Adjusted away average: 41.17
Adjusted top-opposition average: 44.45
Top Tier centuries: 4
Second tier centuries: 13
Third tier centuries: 6
Significant innings: 45 (rank 9=)
Significant innings per match: 0.44 (rank 8=)

Great innings: 3
1st Test: Australia v Zimbabwe at Perth, Oct 9-13, 2003 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 15.95
2nd Test: Sri Lanka v Australia at Kandy, Mar 16-20, 2004 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 12.56
4th Test: Australia v England at Melbourne, Dec 26-28, 2006 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 13.23


Innings worth average: 3.16

25 Test peak adjusted average: 69.81 (2001-2003)
50 Test peak adjusted average: 57.33 (2000-2004)


Quality Points: 560
Career Points: 96
Peak Points: 146
TOTAL POINTS: 802

 

[MW1304]

Yeah that 5 off 9 was something special.

 

[morgieb]

Don't even see how his first innings counts as a great innings either. To me it's like taking a 3-fer when the side gets 5/700.

 

[Cabinet96]

Is that 54 the lowest score for a great innings?

 

[NUFAN]

That 54 is the worst best innings IMO. Martyn, Gilchrist and our bowlers made that 54 appear better than it was. I mean 54. Having said that, well done Haydos and I'm surprised none of his innings against India were great, because at the time I thought they were.

Also surprised this didn't make it Hayden 119 defeats Pakistan 59 & 53

 

[ankitj]

Far fewer great innings from Hayden than I'd have thought. He's the best Aussie opener though, seldom recognized as such. His peak points beat MoYo.

 

[kyear2]

Now for the reuely great batsmen.

Again, Great job D.O.G.

 

[NUFAN]

Far fewer great innings from Hayden than I'd have thought. He's the best Aussie opener though, seldom recognized as such. His peak points beat MoYo.

It seems as though its quite tough for an opener who plays in a successful team to produce great innings. Always comes in at 0/0, great teams normally have some other batsman who make good contributions. I still can't quite believe that the 54 which just made the great innings list beats out that 119 in the link I provided earlier. I'm impressed with his significant innings per match rating though.