Kohli vs MS Dhoni

[Pap Finn Keighl]

An record average of 60 at a SR of 93

More than 20+ centuries while chasing

A century every 5.2 innings



How some people are even thinking about picking Dhoni is beyond me?

When Dhoni was in his prime ,his numbers looked awesome too .
If it was not for the era difference , Dhoni's SR would have been higher than Kohli. Also Kohli yet to see his decline.

And there is a small matter of wicket keeping.

 

[h_hurricane]

Tendulkar scored more centuries per match after era adjustment , and he did it for longer.

Tendulkar also ran faster between the wickets than Kohli era adjusted. He was also a lot angrier than Kohli era adjusted.

 

[Jack1]

When Dhoni was in his prime ,his numbers looked awesome too .
If it was not for the era difference , Dhoni's SR would have been higher than Kohli. Also Kohli yet to see his decline.

And there is a small matter of wicket keeping.

It's an ODI, not a test match. Your mother could keep wicket in an ODI and not get overly tired.

 

[Logan]

Nobody is denying Dhoni is one of the greatest WK batsmen in ODI cricket. But Virat Kohli is light years ahead of Dhoni.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Dhoni is 'e'
Kohli is "Pi'

 

[h_hurricane]

Dhoni is 'e'
Kohli is "Pi'

I guess Kohli is some 16% better than Dhoni then. In line with their career averages.

 

[venkyrenga]

This thread is not really fair on Dhoni. Kohli is at his peak, while Dhoni's best days are behind him (think Ponting circa 2012).

Batting in ODIs is far easier today than it was even five years ago. Players all around the world are putting up monster numbers. Dhoni was ahead of his contemporaries by about the same amount as Kohli is today, but he had the keeping and captaincy strings to his bow that both made him more valuable (as I said, I don't rate Kohli's captaincy much). Dhoni also performed in the only World Cup win India have had in the last 30 years. Kohli's world cup numbers are ordinary compared to his contemporaries.

If you asked me to pick a player right now it's easily Kohli. If you asked me to pick a player based on the weight of their career, it's Dhoni.

Nah, not even close. He was behind De villiers by a considerable margin. Slightly higher average with less not outs(oh ! I didn't say this) and much better strike rate. He was a superman. On the other hand Dhoni's strike rate was lesser than even Sachin's during that period.

 

[Jack1]

Nah, not even close. He was behind De villiers by a considerable margin. Slightly higher average with less not outs(oh ! I didn't say this) and much better strike rate. He was a superman. On the other hand Dhoni's strike rate was lesser than even Sachin's during that period.

Dhoni's S/R is pedestrian that's for sure. He's no where near Kohli and that must be blindingly obvious for an Indian fan. AB De Villiers was a magician with the cricket bat..mr 360..even he's behind Kohli.

 

[venkyrenga]

Dhoni's S/R is pedestrian that's for sure. He's no where near Kohli and that must be blindingly obvious for an Indian fan. AB De Villiers was a magician with the cricket bat..mr 360..even he's behind Kohli.

I disagree with that part. But I see your point.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

It's an ODI, not a test match. Your mother could keep wicket in an ODI and not get overly tired.

That makes Mark Waugh greater player than Gilly. Fine.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Dhoni's S/R is pedestrian that's for sure. He's no where near Kohli and that must be blindingly obvious for an Indian fan. AB De Villiers was a magician with the cricket bat..mr 360..even he's behind Kohli.

ABDV SR >>> Dhoni SR
Dhoni SR > kohli SR
ABDV avg-SR >> Kohli avg-SR > Dhoni avg-SR

 

[h_hurricane]

That makes Mark Waugh greater player than Gilly. Fine.

Gilchrist was a better ODI batsman than Waugh.

 

[h_hurricane]

Dhoni SR > kohli SR

From where did you get this ?

Dhoni's strike rate in ODIs(in last few years) tells a beautifully poor story. The guy would come to the crease with a perfectly manageable required run rate of 6, then would limp to 10 of 30 balls. Once the match is out of control, he would hit a few boundaries here and there(which neither the opposition cares nor does his team), and increase his "Strike rate" to a misleading 90. A not out which inflates his average is a massive bonus.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

From where did you get this ?

Dhoni's strike rate in ODIs(in last few years) tells a beautifully poor story. The guy would come to the crease with a perfectly manageable required run rate of 6, then would limp to 10 of 30 balls. Once the match is out of control, he would hit a few boundaries here and there(which neither the opposition cares nor does his team), and increase his "Strike rate" to a misleading 90. A not out which inflates his average is a massive bonus.

Excluding those " last few years "

Dhoni and Kohli SRs are on a similar level .. especially after era adjustment , then I think Dhoni is naturally more aggressive player than Kohli , but he played lot more anchor roles in chasings which brought down his SR a level below than it is deserved . It is evident from first innings SR , Dhoni still leads Kohli there without any era adjustments.

 

[stephen]

Excluding those " last few years "

Dhoni and Kohli SRs are on a similar level .. especially after era adjustment , then I think Dhoni is naturally more aggressive player than Kohli , but he played lot more anchor roles in chasings which brought down his SR a level below than it is deserved . It is evident from first innings SR , Dhoni still leads Kohli there without any era adjustments.

It's the same issue people have with reading Bevan's stike rate. It looks relatively slow overall because they batted too win, not to appease the spreadsheets.

 

[h_hurricane]

Excluding those " last few years "

Dhoni and Kohli SRs are on a similar level .. especially after era adjustment , then I think Dhoni is naturally more aggressive player than Kohli , but he played lot more anchor roles in chasings which brought down his SR a level below than it is deserved . It is evident from first innings SR , Dhoni still leads Kohli there without any era adjustments.

I am curious to know what era adjustment is required for Dhoni vs Kohli. They have been contemporaries for over a decade. Or are you talking about those 3 years 2005-2008 when pitches were flat, scores were high just like the years after that ?

In addition to having a convincingly higher strike rate, Kohli also had to do the arduous task of building an innings(the kind of skill which forces one to play percentage cricket) and accelerating later. It isn't even close.

This is not a slight on Dhoni by the way, who remains one of the ATG ODI cricketers,

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Opening
Kohli 6 innings 27 AVG , 65 SR
Dhoni 2 innings 49 at 87

Number 3
Kohli 177 innings 64 at 94
Dhoni 16 innings 83 at 100

Number 4
Kohli 38 innings 56 at 90
Dhoni 30 innings 57 at 93

Number 5
Kohli 4 innings 32 at 83
Dhoni 83 innings 50 at 86

Number 6
Kohli 1 innings 23 not out at 209
Dhoni 129 innings 47 at 84

Number 7
Kohli 4 innings 13 at 131
Dhoni 34 innings 45 at 94

I rate Kohli clearly better batsman than Dhoni , but the difference is not huge as people claiming. Especially considering Dhoni's versatility ( no other batsman managed great stats both in Lower order and top order AFIK ), era differencces and Anchor role disadvantages.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

I am curious to know what era adjustment is required for Dhoni vs Kohli. They have been contemporaries for over a decade. Or are you talking about those 3 years 2005-2008 when pitches were flat, scores were high just like the years after that ?

In addition to having a convincingly higher strike rate, Kohli also had to do the arduous task of building an innings(the kind of skill which forces one to play percentage cricket) and accelerating later. It isn't even close.

This is not a slight on Dhoni by the way, who remains one of the ATG ODI cricketers,

Just check averages and strike rates of specialist batsmen in recent years.. it's sky rocketed from an already inflated levels.
It's like Ganguly and Dravid situation in 00s .. Dravid's peak in easy era hiding huge gap in the quality.

 

[h_hurricane]

All that matters about those numbers are Kohli at no.3 and Dhoni at 5 and 6. Everything else is small, misleading and not to be taken seriously. Why would any one look at Dhoni's 2 innings as opener and Kohli's 4 innings at no. 7.

At his frequent position, Kohli averages 64 at 94. Dhoni 49 at 85. The former is better than latter in both SR and average by a considerable margin.

 

[h_hurricane]

Just check averages and strike rates of specialist batsmen in recent years.. it's sky rocketed from an already inflated levels.
It's like Ganguly and Dravid situation in 00s .. Dravid's peak in easy era hiding huge gap in the quality.

Dhoni pretty much was part of "this sky rocketing average" era. He could not take advantage about it.

Dravid's peak happened in an era Ganguly played too. There was no huge gap in the quality between them. Ganguly was a moderate upgrade(a bit generous on him) on Dravid.