Third name in an AT world XI

[subshakerz]

In terms of ranking of selections:

Bradman and Sobers - obvious

Hobbs - top tier bat and unanimously agreed best opener

Gilly - unanimously agreed best wicket keeper bat with only one possible contender who is a niche option

Warne - arguably best spinner ever with one serious contender, but unlike him, Warne can bat

Marshall - best pacer ever but several rivals in terms of peer rating like Lillee and Barnes and it depends how one varies their pace attack

Tendulkar - generally seen as 2nd best bat ever but several closely ranked rivals vying for his spot

 

[kyear2]

Sachin and Warne don't belong in this conversation for my money. I'm picking both, but they are both marginal picks, especially Warne.

As much as Gilly is a no-brainer for me, I would rather lose him than any of Marshall, Imran, or Hadlee. I'm not sure which of those 3 would be the biggest loss and my 3rd pick.

It's like saying that Gilly would be the first name of the Australian 2002 team over McGrath or Warne.

At some point value of position and contribution has to factor in. As much as he's a lock is he the 3rd most important player on the team?

And I know I've been consumed with the NFL draft and it's the argument of talent or premium position, but no one's taking a safety or guard over a quarterback or an edge defender. It's the same here for me.

To say if you only get 3 choices and after Bradman and Sobers, the next one is Gilchrist is kinda asinine.

 

[subshakerz]

Actually, the one I consider the biggest challenger for Gilly is Sangakkara.

Yeah but to be frank, I don't think it's right to do so given we don't know what sort of bat we would be getting. He never batter that deep nor can we know how much the load would affect him in batting prime and take off his average.

 

[capt_Luffy]

In terms of ranking of selections:

Bradman and Sobers - obvious

Hobbs - top tier bat and unanimously agreed best opener

Gilly - unanimously agreed best wicket keeper bat with only one possible contender who is a niche option

Warne - arguably best spinner ever with one serious contender, but unlike him, Warne can bat

Marshall - best pacer ever but several rivals in terms of peer rating like Lillee and Barnes and it depends how one varies their pace attack

Tendulkar - generally seen as 2nd best bat ever but several closely ranked rivals vying for his spot

I would go:

Don
Sobers
Hobbs
Hadlee
Gilchrist
Marshall
Tendulkar
Imran
Grace
Murali
Richards (heaviest contest here)

 

[Prince EWS]

It's like saying that Gilly would be the first name of the Australian 2002 team over McGrath or Warne.

It's not like that at all because if you don't have Warne or a McGrath there you end up with MacGill and Bichel. That's not like swapping Marshall for Hadlee.

If I only get to pick three players and I have no idea what the rest of the team is then I'm definitely picking Marshall way over Gilchrist, but if I'm offered Marshall+Knott or Hadlee+Gilchrist I'm definitely taking the latter.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Yeah but to be frank, I don't think it's right to do so given we don't know what sort of bat we would be getting. He never batter that deep nor can we know how much the load would affect him in batting prime and take off his average.

Large reason I don't. But still think it's safe to say Sangakkara was a significantly better batsman and highly likely, would had performed better with the bat even while keeping on his peak like he did in ODIs. But it's quite speculative, and Gilly is a perfect no 7 while he just isn't a no 7. Also, more importantly, Gilly was a better glovesman.

 

[subshakerz]

It's like saying that Gilly would be the first name of the Australian 2002 team over McGrath or Warne.

At some point value of position and contribution has to factor in. As much as he's a lock is he the 3rd most important player on the team?

Dude nobody is saying Gilly is the third most important player. They are saying he is the 3rd easiest selection to make given his competition (should be Hobbs, but anyways).

This is basic logic.

My counter is that based on philosophical perspective, Knott is making it as a better glove man, and there's only one spot, plus wk is a relatively low impact position on the team.

You are contradicting yourself by suggesting we need to go with the better gloveman while simultaneously saying the keeper isn't as important anyways. If a keeper is a low impact position you might as well go with the better bat.

By the way, it's frickin hilarious that after all that brouhaha about the importance of slips you end up downplaying keeper value while selecting Knott based on 'philosophy'.

My argument is for Marshall as the spearhead of the attack, and if I can only pick 3 guys to help win a match or series, he has to be the pick.

Dude the entire exercise is picking a team of ATGs capable of winning games so why create this entirely unrelated criteria to shoehorn Marshall as a lock?

If you are only picking 3 players to win a series you might not even have Sobers then, maybe have two pacers and Bradman.

 

[subshakerz]

I would go:

Don
Sobers
Hobbs
Hadlee
Gilchrist
Marshall
Tendulkar
Imran
Grace
Murali
Richards (heaviest contest here)

I don't see how Hadlee is more guaranteed a spot than Gilly but it's ok we each have our own teams.

 

[subshakerz]

It's not like that at all because if you don't have Warne or a McGrath there you end up with MacGill and Bichel. That's not like swapping Marshall for Hadlee.

If I only get to pick three players and I have no idea what the rest of the team is then I'm definitely picking Marshall way over Gilchrist, but if I'm offered Marshall+Knott or Hadlee+Gilchrist I'm definitely taking the latter.

He is confused what a lock actually means when he created this thread.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I don't see how Hadlee is more guaranteed a spot than Gilly but it's ok we each have our own teams.

I pretty much rate Hadlee as equivalent to McGrath as a bowler, and him averaging mid 20s makes him a no brainer for me.

 

[subshakerz]

I pretty much rate Hadlee as equivalent to McGrath as a bowler, and him averaging mid 20s makes him a no brainer for me.

Sure. But there is a reason he doesn't appear in most ATG XIs. Because if you are selecting a seamer you pick McGrath and bowling AR you pick Imran.

 

[Prince EWS]

Sure. But there is a reason he doesn't appear in most ATG XIs. Because if you are selecting a seamer you pick McGrath and bowling AR you pick Imran.

Yeah and if you're selecting a seamer for his batting you go with Garner.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Sure. But there is a reason he doesn't appear in most ATG XIs. Because if you are selecting a seamer you pick McGrath and bowling AR you pick Imran.

I just don't see it that way. From a team's POV, I value the output. I think he and McGrath as bowlers were around equal and him averaging a good 27 with the bat is a substantial upgrade. Don't think having Imran or Marshall makes it redundant. Can argue less essential, but defo not redundant.

 

[subshakerz]

I just don't see it that way. From a team's POV, I value the output. I think he and McGrath as bowlers were around equal and him averaging a good 27 with the bat is a substantial upgrade. Don't think having Imran or Marshall makes it redundant. Can argue less essential, but defo not redundant.

Sure but you can understand the other point of view.

if the criteria is 'pick your best pacers and pick the one best suitable for no.8' you might end up with Imran or Wasim at 8 and Marshall, McGrath or Barnes among the pacers. Which already happens.

And I would argue that variation is why Hadlee isn't in more ATG XIs. Hence why I don't call him a lock.

 

[shortpitched713]

Large reason I don't. But still think it's safe to say Sangakkara was a significantly better batsman and highly likely, would had performed better with the bat even while keeping on his peak like he did in ODIs. But it's quite speculative, and Gilly is a perfect no 7 while he just isn't a no 7. Also, more importantly, Gilly was a better glovesman.

Agree with all except Gilly being a better glove man. Maybe to pace, but Murali considered Sanga the best that kept to him, and I rate Sanga very highly when he did take the gloves, especially to spin.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Don Bradman


First name: Opener 1 (probably Hobbs)
Second name: Opener 2 (probably Hutton)
Third name : No 3 - definitely Bradman

 

[Bolo.]

Sure. But there is a reason he doesn't appear in most ATG XIs. Because if you are selecting a seamer you pick McGrath and bowling AR you pick Imran.

You do.

I think Hadlee is the best quick purely on primary. Or first amongst equals with Marshall and Mcgrath. And the difference between his batting and Mcgrath's is significantly bigger than the difference between Gilly and Knott's.

 

[Xix2565]

Who're the other first name with Bradman here? Sobers?

 

[subshakerz]

You do.

I think Hadlee is the best quick purely on primary. Or first amongst equals with Marshall and Mcgrath. And the difference between his batting and Mcgrath's is significantly bigger than the difference between Gilly and Knott's.

Ok but when we say lock we are saying a selection is beyond any reasonable contention and Hadlee is not as you can have an attack without him, in fact most ATG XIs do.

 

[Bolo.]

Ok but when we say lock we are saying a selection is beyond any reasonable contention and Hadlee is not as you can have an attack without him, in fact most ATG XIs do.

It's my personal opinion in response to yours. Neither Hadlee nor Mcgrath are locks according to everyone in this thread.

But Hadlee should be.