Yeah it's madness to compare New Zealand's bowling attack with Australia's. Even without Johnson, Australia are still comfortably better overall due to how much better Lyon is than Sodhi and the fact that Australia have about ten bowlers better than Wagner. I've been on the "New Zealand have quite a good attack" bandwagon longer than most but Australia's is clearly better.
There was a time, just before Australia went to England last year when you might've been able to justify NZ's attack being better on paper. Siddle was Australia's form bowler. Ryan Harris and James Pattinson were both coming back from injuries - it was particularly unclear whether Harris would be the same bowler. Starc was - and still is - prone to erraticism. Lyon had gone through the customary dropping. It really wasn't clear what bowlers Australia would pick, and what roles they'd occupy.
At the same time, critics were still optimistic about Doug Bracewell turning out to be a good bowler, either deposing or complementing Wagner. It looked like Southee, Boult, good Bracewell, and potentially a returning Vettori would make up the core of the attack.
Of course:
- Harris turned out to be just as good if not better than pre-injury
- Pattinson continued to impress
- Bird emerged
- Lyon convinced the selectors to give him some games
- They picked Mitchell Johnson
- All the bowlers appeared to understand and settle into their roles.
- Vettori died and NZ picked Sodhi
- Bracewell was crap
- Wagner was largely crap