At what point do we accept David Warner is...

[Flem274*]

...the most valuable cricketer on the planet?

He's not just the best opener in the world, he's on track to be one of the greatest opening batsmen to play the game during a time where almost everyone has a high quality new ball attack and almost nobody has an acceptable pair of opening batsmen.

Whilst we're praising Murali Vijay, Chris Rogers et al for putting together gritty performances against the best attacks around and averaging 35-40, David Warner is blasting those same attacks around the park.

 

[Athlai]

When we forgot about ten other blokes.

 

[ohnoitsyou]

3rd best bat in his side etc etc.

 

[Flem274*]

Nah he's better than Smith.

There are loads of good to great middle order batsmen around. Almost everyone has a stacked middle order. Even the Bravo-less West Indies have a Chanderpaul.

Everyone apart from Australia and India are struggling to find even one opener who can score runs somewhere.

Australia have an opener who scores tons at a good clip against the best attacks, even on green tops.

Bowling wise almost everyone has a new ball combo. Third seamers are thinner on the ground. There are enough spinners to fill some teams, though not all.

Warner is the MVP of the world.

 

[Jono]

So basically in a game of pick'em you're saying you'd choose Warner first.

Interesting. I'd still take Steyn I think, but Warner wouldn't be far off.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I'd pick Herath before Warner. There isn't a spinner close to his quality right now.

 

[Flem274*]

I'd pick Herath before Warner. There isn't a spinner close to his quality right now.

Shakib. Ashwin at home. Babar and Shah at home.

Shakib is more valuable than Herath imo. Still a good spinner, also a good batsman.

I also think the gap between Warner and the next best test opener is a lot wider than the gap between Herath and Shakib as pure bowlers.

 

[Swingpanzee]

Nah he's better than Smith.

There are loads of good to great middle order batsmen around. Almost everyone has a stacked middle order. Even the Bravo-less West Indies have a Chanderpaul.

Everyone apart from Australia and India are struggling to find even one opener who can score runs somewhere.

Australia have an opener who scores tons at a good clip against the best attacks, even on green tops.

Bowling wise almost everyone has a new ball combo. Third seamers are thinner on the ground. There are enough spinners to fill some teams, though not all.

Warner is the MVP of the world.

Pretty much this. And he's a Class A dick as well, 10/10 would bang

 

[Teja.]

Every side would rather have Steyn tbh.

Circumstances would have to be a lot more extreme for very good openers to be more valuable than ATG quicks.

 

[harsh.ag]

Steyn
Sangakkara
Matthews
Herath

ahead of Warner, plus a handful of others with a good shout.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Why'd you pick Mathews ahead of Warner?

 

[fredfertang]

Warner is a poor man's Adam Gilchrist

 

[Daemon]

Cricket isn't a draft. Steyn is going to bring more to your side than Warner, it doesn't matter what the next best alternatives are.

 

[harsh.ag]

Why'd you pick Mathews ahead of Warner?

Matthews is a dream cricketer as of now. Brings mad stability to the batting order, and always gets a wicket or two.

 

[Flem274*]

Mathews is the best batsman against swing bowling around, plus is heading the right way to be an ATG troll with the tail. I can see why he would be a contender for MVP when you add in that and the handy mediums.

Most people would pick Steyn first and most people would miss out on getting the only opener in the world capable of hitting Steyn or any current bowler you care to name out of the attack on a consistent basis.

Using Jono's idea for a minute, let's say the current top 8 or even all 10 test sides have a lunch time schoolyard game and I get to pick Warner first for my side. Barring a massive fast bowler bias I'm going to get my hands on a world class, probably top 10 bowler in round 2. Failing that, I pick Shakib or even go full India and swoop on Sangakkara or the like since all the ****s stole the bowlers. I'm not going to get Steyn, Harris, Johnson or Southee but I'm a reasonable chance of walking away from the first two rounds with Warner and someone like Morkel, Roach or Junaid.

Even without using that idea, Warner is a long way ahead of Rogers, Vijay and the out of form Cook. The gap between Steyn and Harris in terms of what they're sending down (don't mix this up with comparing careers) is much much smaller. You don't really lose too much if someone walks away with Steyn and you get Harris, Johnson or Southee. Steyn is obviously the best bowler in the world but if you pass up Warner you're fighting over decent openers and guys who aren't test standard as your openers. Steyn and all his world class buddies will walk all over them.

But they haven't walked all over Warner. He's my MVP.

 

[harsh.ag]

Why is a very good opener better than a ATG number 3 (Sangakkara)?

 

[Daemon]

Lol, we're not playing a draft ffs.

 

[Teja.]

This isn't a draft where you're trying to balance your team though - it's a pure value issue. A cricketer who averages 22 with the ball and takes on average 5 wickets a game and bats a bit is more valuable than a cricketer who averages 50 and general bowling and batting averages have to change a long, long way for this to be different.

In addition Harris is far more injury prone than Steyn and the other two are a decent way off the overall package offered by Steyn in terms of consistency, intensity, hauls and fitness. Other players are as good as Steyn in some aspects but Steyn is a decent amount ahead when you take everything into account.

 

[Flem274*]

Warner isn't better than Sangakkara or any ATG #3 in an absolute sense, he's more valuable.

Warner isn't the best cricketer in the world. That's probably Mathews, Johnson or Shakib because they can do one thing to a world class standard and something else to a useful standard. Warner is the most valuable because he is a rare player right now - an opener who can score a lot of runs and dominate any new ball attack in the world.

Sangakkara and Steyn are obviously ATG and very valuable players, but with the current depth in middle order batting and fast bowling they aren't as valuable as the best opener in the world by a considerable distance. They are greater than Warner in the grand scheme of things (especially since they're further into their careers than Warner), but right now they aren't more valuable.

It's a bit like how Kallis was never the best batsman in the world, but he was the most valuable player for most of his career.

 

[Flem274*]

This isn't a draft where you're trying to balance your team though - it's a pure value issue. A cricketer who averages 22 with the ball and takes on average 5 wickets a game and bats a bit is more valuable than a cricketer who averages 50 and general bowling and batting averages have to change a long, long way for this to be different.

In addition Harris is far more injury prone than Steyn and the other two are a decent way off the overall package offered by Steyn in terms of consistency, intensity, hauls and fitness. Other players are as good as Steyn in some aspects but Steyn is a decent amount ahead when you take everything into account.

Not when the batsman averaging 50 is an opener and the next best opener is who, Vijay or Rogers?

If Cook was scoring runs then this thread wouldn't be a thing but he isn't. Right now there is only one world class opener around and he's scary good.