Virat Kohli, the greatest ODI bat ever?

[OverratedSanity]

Look, it's fine if you want to do your mental gymnastics to rank Bevan higher, I don't even think I myself rate Dhoni above him because of how much his last few years have hurt the team.

Don't pretend it's not close though. Because it is. That's all anyone is really disagreeing with.

 

[CricAddict]

I, for one, have always rated Bevan higher than Dhoni. Probably because my mind is still stuck in the awesome 90s period of cricket. Ankit and a few other Indian fans rate him higher too.

I am not sure with whom Stephen is arguing here. Even if someone rates Dhoni higher, it is not misguided.

 

[CricAddict]

Oops. Mine and OS message crossed. Almost the same viewpoint.

 

[mr_mister]

Look, it's fine if you want to do your mental gymnastics to rank Bevan higher, I don't even think I myself rate Dhoni above him because of how much his last few years have hurt the team.

Don't pretend it's not close though. Because it is. That's all anyone is really disagreeing with.

This is the reverse Waugh-Sachin argument, except with a slightly shifted overton window

 

[Bolo]

Dhoni basically was statically as good as Bevan in an era that was way more batsman friendly.

If you are ignoring era like this, Dhoni's strikerate is a... moderate upgrade.

Hell, he was only the best bat in his team for a short while.

He has been competing with one of the (pretty much undisputed) top 4 bats in history for his entire career, and two of them at the same time for the majority of it, and still managed to be the best bat in his team for as long as Bevan.

Bevan's career also included a Dhoni- like decline in the last couple of years so arguing that Dhoni was much better than his stats for a long time is equally true for Bevan.

Dhoni's purple patch was as long as Bevan's career, and his slump has been nearly as long as Bevan's purple patch.

he's behind Bevan as a batsman.

I agree, but it's really close

but there are more Indian fans so there's that.

Thankfully we have your consistently handed, non-partisan opinions to save us from these fanatical Indians

 

[stephen]

I was mostly arguing with the people who up near the top of the previous page were picking some ridiculous teams worth both Gilchrist and Dhoni.

 

[Daemon]

And Dhoni from 2004- 8 March 2014 (the 8th March purely was for ease of statsguru) has virtually identical stats to Bevan's career.

Bevan - 53 @ 75
Dhoni - 53 @ 90

I don't think that's virtually identical, even adjusting for eras. It is close though.

 

[Bolo]

I was mostly arguing with the people who up near the top of the previous page were picking some ridiculous teams worth both Gilchrist and Dhoni.

That's the cricinfo team, which most people seem to agree is trash for more than 1 reason. I'm not sure anyone was seriously arguing that 2 keepers is a good idea, just that both keepers come (at least) close to making the team even without keeping.

You can't make room for Bevan in that team anyway just by dropping Dhoni. Dhoni (including captaincy but not keeping) is very comparable to Bevan. Ponting (including fielding) >> Gilchrist (excluding keeping). Opening isn't an issue with Lara already in.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Bevan 1994 - 2004
54 at 74

Dhoni 2004-2014
53 at 90

Dhoni better

 

[trundler]

If you are ignoring era like this, Dhoni's strikerate is a... moderate upgrade.

He has been competing with one of the (pretty much undisputed) top 4 bats in history for his entire career, and two of them at the same time for the majority of it, and still managed to be the best bat in his team for as long as Bevan.




Dhoni's purple patch was as long as Bevan's career, and his slump has been nearly as long as Bevan's purple patch.



I agree, but it's really close


Thankfully we have your consistently handed, non-partisan opinions to save us from these fanatical Indians

Doing the lord's work.

 

[Victor Ian]

I'm not here to big up either player, but there is more to the strike rate than just the era. Bevan played most of his games on bigger grounds. While he was good at hitting 4s when needed, his boundary count, hence strike rate, would probably have been better than the average strike rate increase since that time. But Bevan is a what if. Dhoni is a what was. He was brilliant at hitting those boundaries and bringing an unchasable target within range quickly. Bevan, while getting you there gave you heart palpitations in doing it.

 

[Victor Ian]

Also, unless dhoni is going to be captain, I don't think captaincy matters. I never thought he was a great tactical captain, anyways, but I did think he had an infectious something about him that made everyone near him better. So.... Maybe you just read some bull****.

 

[trundler]

Oh, he's absolutely a tactical genius in ODIs, especially how he maneuvers his spinners. They get him wickets at just the right time with eery regularity.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Also, unless dhoni is going to be captain, I don't think captaincy matters. I never thought he was a great tactical captain, anyways, but I did think he had an infectious something about him that made everyone near him better. So.... Maybe you just read some bull****.

Dhonis tactics always worked great in odis... No one better at applying the middle overs runchoke. Just like literally everything else about his game, his captaincy was much better suited to the limited overs format than tests.

 

[trundler]

And unlike Kohli he was still stuck with the archetypal subpar Indian bowlers.

 

[Malcolm]

Bevan 1994 - 2004
54 at 74

Dhoni 2004-2014
53 at 90

Dhoni better

No era adjustments ?

 

[Bolo]

Dhoni is literally the only LOs captain from my era who I can single out as something special. His bowlers were crud and he still got India to be clearly the best ODI team in the world+ outstanding tournament performances.

Look at what he's managed with CSK. They have never had the resources of other teams and still boss it.

The fact that he's not so tactically strong in tests might be influencing your idea of his odi tactical strength.

 

[trundler]

The best thing he could do with his ODI bowlers was to be defensive and choke runs. And it worked very effectively. Naturally, that sort of thing doesn't come off well in tests when batsmen aren't in a rush.

 

[vcs]

Dhoni is literally the only LOs captain from my era who I can single out as something special. His bowlers were crud and he still got India to be clearly the best ODI team in the world+ outstanding tournament performances.

Look at what he's managed with CSK. They have never had the resources of other teams and still boss it.

The fact that he's not so tactically strong in tests might be influencing your idea of his odi tactical strength.

I think CSK had plenty of money in the early seasons (and who knows what Meiyappan and co. were doing behind the scenes), but Dhoni's always known how to get that team to perform on the field in the IPL. Even now if you look at their personnel, it seems to be full of past-it players and international rejects, but they're topping the table comfortably.

 

[Bolo]

I think CSK had plenty of money in the early seasons (and who knows what Meiyappan and co. were doing behind the scenes), but Dhoni's always known how to get that team to perform on the field in the IPL. Even now if you look at their personnel, it seems to be full of past-it players and international rejects, but they're topping the table comfortably.

Thought everyone was spending the same amount every year tbh. Which would make quality of players a combination of good picks for the season plus an element of luck in long term because you can retain players.

Anyway, whatever the system is it's a whole lot more egalitarian than international cricket. There's no Aus/Zim talent comparison and you can probably read a lot more into the hazier factors like captaincy.