Steve Smith vs Angelo Mathews

[indiaholic]

I am perfectly fine with that too, but I do think his mean is higher. Just that the average may not be showing a complete picture.

 

[vcs]

Looked a class apart when we toured there last year. I think he hasn't been that productive since then.

 

[Bijed]

Looking at his Cricinfo graph, it looks like a genuine dip/decline in form and not just a lack of not-outs to make his average look better. His low scores are generally single figures rather than getting out after a bit of start, whereas at the start of his career there was a mix and in the middle he was more often getting 15+ (obviously not exactly a great score, but a load of 15-20s will keep your average an appreciable bit higher than a load of 0-10s).

there shouldn't really have be a massive difference for him moving from 6 to 5. Maybe he is actually just getting more ****e and reverting to his mean

Without wishing to derail the thread or start an argument, but I'm not sure that's an appropriate concept (not the word I'm looking for) in this case and often not in general. How can you differentiate between a 'reversion to the mean' or a dip in form (lets not go into whether it exists or not) until sometime after the event. I mean, if he struggles from this point in his career onwards, his recent form will be seen as the former and if he averages 50 it'll be seen as the latter.

It makes more sense with someone like Voges who's had a short-ish test career but a long enough first-class career for people to say with some confidence that averaging 95 is anomalous and even that the 60-odd he averages now is higher than it 'should' be, but nearly 2/3 of Mathews' first-class matches have been tests.

That's not to say that I don't think he's genuinely getting worse (though I'm not really sure)

 

[viriya]

Angelo is 29 and should be hitting his peak soon so it's concerning that he has been below his best in the last year or so. Hopefully he stays injury-free and gets back to his best version.

 

[indiaholic]

Yeah me too. Excellent player to watch. Has there been a pattern to his low scores? Getting out in the same way or some such?

 

[smash84]

Looking at his Cricinfo graph, it looks like a genuine dip/decline in form and not just a lack of not-outs to make his average look better. His low scores are generally single figures rather than getting out after a bit of start, whereas at the start of his career there was a mix and in the middle he was more often getting 15+ (obviously not exactly a great score, but a load of 15-20s will keep your average an appreciable bit higher than a load of 0-10s).



Without wishing to derail the thread or start an argument, but I'm not sure that's an appropriate concept (not the word I'm looking for) in this case and often not in general. How can you differentiate between a 'reversion to the mean' or a dip in form (lets not go into whether it exists or not) until sometime after the event. I mean, if he struggles from this point in his career onwards, his recent form will be seen as the former and if he averages 50 it'll be seen as the latter.

It makes more sense with someone like Voges who's had a short-ish test career but a long enough first-class career for people to say with some confidence that averaging 95 is anomalous and even that the 60-odd he averages now is higher than it 'should' be, but nearly 2/3 of Mathews' first-class matches have been tests.

That's not to say that I don't think he's genuinely getting worse (though I'm not really sure)

I don't necessarily disagree. Which is why i said 'maybe". It's hard to put my finger on it but he has always come across to me as someone who was on shaky grounds. Kind of like Sehwag (i know that is an extreme example but that's what comes in my mind. Obviously technically he is nowhere near as bad as Sehwag) which is why i think his mean is lower and his average will get there once he is "exposed". Does that make sense?

 

[Bijed]

I don't necessarily disagree. Which is why i said 'maybe". It's hard to put my finger on it but he has always come across to me as someone who was on shaky grounds. Kind of like Sehwag (i know that is an extreme example but that's what comes in my mind. Obviously technically he is nowhere near as bad as Sehwag) which is why i think his mean is lower and his average will get there once he is "exposed". Does that make sense?

Yeah, your assessment seems pretty reasonable and you've probably seen far more of him that I have so will have a much better impression of him. Sorry if it came across as a jab at you, it wasn't meant to. It's more that that phrase gets used quite often and I've always thought it's used incorrectly/carelessly quite a lot so have wanted to go on a bit of a rant about it for a while and just chose now to do so.

 

[smash84]

Yeah, your assessment seems pretty reasonable and you've probably seen far more of him that I have so will have a much better impression of him. Sorry if it came across as a jab at you, it wasn't meant to. It's more that that phrase gets used quite often and I've always thought it's used incorrectly/carelessly quite a lot so have wanted to go on a bit of a rant about it for a while and just chose now to do so.

Haha. That's cool.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Funny to look back just a couple of years and there were not only people who thought Matthews and Smith were similar, but that actually rated Matthews higher.

 

[Zinzan]

Matthews easily the better batsman. He's head and shoulders above all of the other young Turks imo.

Wow, isn't hindsight a lovely thing.

FTR, I never rated Mathews as some did here a couple of years back when we were hearing how he was the best player of swing in the world.

The fact he's fallen off the pace compared with the Roots, Smiths & Kohlis of this world hasn't surprised me in the slightest.

 

[Daemon]

Wow, isn't hindsight a lovely thing.

FTR, I never rated Mathews as some did here a couple of years back when we were hearing how he was the best player of swing in the world.

The fact he's fallen off the pace compared with the Roots, Smiths & Kohlis of this world hasn't surprised me in the slightest.

Yeah it's bit like how people say Rahane is better than Kohli or whatever. I mean the dude is a gun but he's clearly not at their level.

tbf at the time of this thread I think they had pretty comparable records.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Wow, isn't hindsight a lovely thing.

FTR, I never rated Mathews as some did here a couple of years back when we were hearing how he was the best player of swing in the world.

The fact he's fallen off the pace compared with the Roots, Smiths & Kohlis of this world hasn't surprised me in the slightest.

Did you leave someone out deliberately?

 

[Zinzan]

Fair call, Warner's also been better than Mathews in the last couple of years.

 

[slippy888]

Mathews is the better player for me

 

[cnerd123]

Did you leave someone out deliberately?

Even the kiwis can't remember Kane Williamson and yet they get mad at the rest of us for forgetting him

 

[Mike5181]

Not mad, just disappointed.

 

[Howsie]

Even the kiwis can't remember Kane Williamson and yet they get mad at the rest of us for forgetting him

Zinzan doesn't like him because he's an ND boy.

 

[ImpatientLime]

for me the root's and smith's of this world

 

[fredfertang]

With a name like Angelo Mathews I can't get the image of 1970s US police dramas out of my head - Steve Smith on the other hand just sounds like a regular bloke, albeit one who's a bit special with a bat in his hand

 

[Gob]

lol that poll. And i made this