Gilly, Dhoni or AB?

[G.I.Joe]

Doesn't Dhoni have a lot of not outs in chases, though? Combined with his position down the order, explains the low second innings rpi stat.

 

[Eclipse]

Honestly, at this point it's more like the only reason you don't have Dhoni ahead of Gilly in the ODI side (assuming only one of them were available) is if you thought Gilly's keeping was that much better than Dhoni's.

Gilly was a better batsman in my opinion. It's hard to average 45 opening the batting especially when you strike at around 100.

 

[viriya]

Gilchrist struck at 80 with a 47 average, what's your point?

yes, such a massive difference between 49.3 @ 82 and 47.6 @ 82. truly vast.

My bad - thought he struck 65-70 in tests for some reason.. Gilly and Sehwag become very comparable in that sense, although Sehwag had much more of an impact as an opener in Tests imo. And Gilly had the benefit of being able to downhill ski after a platform was set already as well.

 

[Eclipse]

My bad - thought he struck 65-70 in tests for some reason.. Gilly and Sehwag become very comparable in that sense, although Sehwag had much more of an impact as an opener in Tests imo. And Gilly had the benefit of being able to downhill ski after a platform was set already as well.

This thread is not about Shewag,

And for the record it's highly debatable who had more impact. Gilly was the first ever batsman to score at that rate in test cricket.

 

[Spark]

except that gilchrist wasn't known for downhill skiing at all

 

[viriya]

except that gilchrist wasn't known for downhill skiing at all

His average point of entry suggests that he benefited from it - not saying he depended on it since he did have some great backs-to-the-wall innings. He probably came to bat with the team in a good situation more often than not more than anyone batting at his position in the history of cricket (considering Australia's batting line-up of the time).

 

[Eclipse]

His average point of entry suggests that he benefited from it - not saying he depended on it since he did have some great backs-to-the-wall innings. He probably came to bat with the team in a good situation more often than not more than anyone batting at his position in the history of cricket (considering Australia's batting line-up of the time).

Except he used to throw his wicket away in most cases when Australia where in a good position like that. Save probably his 57 ball hundred and one he scored against Zimbabwe as notable exceptions

 

[viriya]

Except he used to throw his wicket away in most cases when Australia where in a good position like that. Save probably his 57 ball hundred and one he scored against Zimbabwe as notable exceptions

I fail to see how "throwing his wicket away" can be taken as a positive.

 

[Eclipse]

It's not... Just saying he didn't benefit much from Australia's strong platforms because he used to get out cheaply often in those cases

 

[Spark]

I fail to see how "throwing his wicket away" can be taken as a positive.

because it meant that he didn't try to protect his average rather than doing what the team needed, which was get as many runs as quickly as possible.

 

[viriya]

It's not... Just saying he didn't benefit much from Australia's strong platforms because he used to get out cheaply often in those cases

When he batted at 7 (which he did for the majority of his career), he came in to bat when the scoreboard read 249/5 on average. I wouldn't say that's a team in trouble.

 

[Furball]

Doesn't Dhoni have a lot of not outs in chases, though? Combined with his position down the order, explains the low second innings rpi stat.

Yep. For a finisher not outs are much more relevant than strike rate, because scoring the necessary runs is important, not how quickly you score them.

There was a period in 2008 where India's ODI performance was literally Dhoni not out batting 2nd, jndia win, Dhoni out batting 2nd, India lose.

 

[Spark]

i thought that through most of 2010-2012 tbh

 

[Riggins]

When he batted at 7 (which he did for the majority of his career), he came in to bat when the scoreboard read 249/5 on average. I wouldn't say that's a team in trouble.

How does his average compare when the team score was lower than that base compared to higher?

 

[Furball]

When he batted at 7 (which he did for the majority of his career), he came in to bat when the scoreboard read 249/5 on average. I wouldn't say that's a team in trouble.

It's not exactly plain sailing from that position. 249/5 can quite easily turn into 270 all out if you're not careful.

I would expand on this more but it's quite clear reading your posts that while you're a whizz with scorecards and spreadsheets you have no actual understanding of how the game actually works so it would be a waste of time typing out the reply.

 

[Furball]

i thought that through most of 2010-2012 tbh

What is his average in successful chases these days anyway? At one point it was in excess of 100.

 

[viriya]

It's not exactly plain sailing from that position. 249/5 can quite easily turn into 270 all out if you're not careful.

I would expand on this more but it's quite clear reading your posts that while you're a whizz with scorecards and spreadsheets you have no actual understanding of how the game actually works so it would be a waste of time typing out the reply.

It's not a perfect position - but compared to an average batsman coming in at 7, that's a great position. Do you think the current Australia #7 doesn't come in with the team at a tougher position? It's not hard to accept that Gilly benefited from that situation.

 

[viriya]

How does his average compare when the team score was lower than that base compared to higher?

When entering at <= 249/5:
Average = 48.21
Strike Rate = 83.35

When entering at > 249/5:
Average = 45.21
Strike Rate = 85.09

Really not much of a difference to claim that he just had a go when the team was in a good position imo. Maybe slightly but -3 Avg +1.5 SR isn't that significant of a difference.

 

[Eclipse]

When he batted at 7 (which he did for the majority of his career), he came in to bat when the scoreboard read 249/5 on average. I wouldn't say that's a team in trouble.

Not the point though.

It would be interesting to look at what position Australia where at when he made some of his 100s and 50s.

 

[Riggins]

When entering at <= 249/5:
Average = 48.21
Strike Rate = 83.35

When entering at > 249/5:
Average = 45.21
Strike Rate = 85.09

Really not much of a difference to claim that he just had a go when the team was in a good position imo. Maybe slightly but -3 Avg +1.5 SR isn't that significant of a difference.

So in what way did he benefit?