Yes, we know teams can be strong without ARs. We also know that when a team has quality ARs, they get better. I'm not saying this team is weak without Imran. I'm saying it's better with him.
What do you mean by diminishing returns in this context? Runs are runs. Unless you mean something like the chance of everyone batting twice? I'm prefectly happy not having the lower order being given a chance to contribute in innings where they are not needed. I care about the innings in which runs are needed from them.
Quality all rounders yes, but something that was consistently mentioned in the thread about if no. 8 runs matter, and that is, what are you giving up for it.
The key to winning matches is taking 20 wickets, anything that takes away from that objective is a net negative.
And I've seen this in increasing regularity, you give up bowling to shore up the lower order, and then they don't score runs and still don't contribute with the ball, and you overwork the other bowlers which then has a snowball effect.
Then there's the inconsistency. To believe that they're going to show greater consistency that the top order and be the contingency in the case of a collapse is a fallacy. That they're going to show up every match, or in critical moments or in helpful bowling conditions and that they will outperform a batting lineup made up of the greatest batters ever is at best unlikely.
With regards to diminishing returns, the lower a batter bats, the less times he bats.
During his career Imran Khan batted primarily at no. 7 and in 88 matches he batted in a total of 126 innings.
Malcolm Marshall batted consistently at no. 8, and in 81 matches he came to the crease 107 times.
As we drop down to a player like McGrath coming in at no. 11..... In a 124 matches Glenn McGrath took guard a total of 138 times.
It's not worth it.
