cnerd123
likes this
I'm not. Depends on the rest of the side. Do I need 15 more runs that badly that I drop the best keeper ever?
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
How good was Gilchrist?
- Thread starter Chrish
- Start date
Diminishing returns.
Hypothetically, the best keeper ever might drop a catch every 3 matches. An excellent keeper would drop one every 2 matches. At least disregarding the catches that they will both drop, which will increase depending on who they are keeping to.
That 15 runs per innings adds up when you are adding them up over muliple matches.
RossTaylorsBox
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
The hypothetical best keeper ever would also get you like an extra stumping/run out a game I reckon.
cnerd123
likes this
appreciate you trying to pull numbers out of thin air but it's a pointless exercise.
15 runs per innings might be value if we're playing in 200 vs 200 conditions and if I've got a massively long tail. If I've got 2 gun allrounders and we're playing 400 vs 400 cricket then I'd rather have the best keeper of all time. There is no universal right answer.
It isnt quantifiable, but you surely appreciate the idea of diminishing returns?
People are calling Boucher a poor keeper in this thread.
I really dont think he fumbled more than a catch every 2 games unless we are adding the spectacularly difficult ones that even the atgs will typically miss.
Healy, who people are calling an atg keeper probably fumbled a similar amount, and might take 1/4 of the spectacular ones that Boucher missed. Its a catch every few games.
Sure, Boucher and Healy arent fair comparisons on account of the bowling, as I have said. But this is the difference between guys ppl are calling poor and ATG, not excellent and atg as I am describing.
People are calling Boucher a poor keeper in this thread.
I really dont think he fumbled more than a catch every 2 games unless we are adding the spectacularly difficult ones that even the atgs will typically miss.
Healy, who people are calling an atg keeper probably fumbled a similar amount, and might take 1/4 of the spectacular ones that Boucher missed. Its a catch every few games.
Sure, Boucher and Healy arent fair comparisons on account of the bowling, as I have said. But this is the difference between guys ppl are calling poor and ATG, not excellent and atg as I am describing.
cnerd123
likes this
sure but i don't think there is 'more' diminishing returns for keeping than any other skill.
pulling imaginary numbers out of thin air isn't helping you make your point.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
Boucher was a good keeper. He regressed towards the end like most other players do. That is all.
You are a fiesty one today.
Diminishing returns for every skill set are a very real thing. The difference between a bat averaging 48 (who is typically regarded as atvg) and one averaging 52 (typically regarded as atg) is small.
The difference between a bat averaging 32 (or whatever knott did), as a keeper very respected as a bat and 48ish (gilly) is big. Diminishing returns come into play when we have a massive difference between the secondary skillset.
cnerd123
likes this
This statement is possibly not true if reading literally. But I think we are talking about proper keepers here. Nobody is seriously considering an akmal. But the difference between a healy and a gilly in keeping quality is pretty negligable, even if you consider healy one of the best and gilly merely very good. The gulf between their batting quality is huge. Diminishing returns as you get to the top.
cnerd123
likes this
that's not a question of diminishing returns tho. The gap between Gilly's batting and Healy's batting is bigger than the gap in their keeping.
Daemon's post suggests that if you have two players where the gap between their keeping skills is equal to the gap between their batting skills you should pick the better batsman. I disagree with that for many reasons.
Magrat Garlick
Global Moderator
the concept of diminishing returns is probaably real but nevertheless quite funny when considering bradman
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
As Bambino pointed out, that's not what I said at all, however a choice between Andy Flower and Wriddhiman Saha is actually pretty close. I might go with Saha tbh, because the alternative is still playing Flower as a batsman. You don't lose him all together.
In fact Zimbabwe did almost exactly that in the early-00's when Tatenda Taibu came on to the scene. He was a tiny kid who was a decent keeper and could hold a bat (but nothing special) and he was rushed in so that Flower didn't have to keep (or try to) anymore. I can guarantee you if Zimbabwe had Saha during Flower's career there's absolutely no chance that he would have been keeping in Test cricket
jimmy101
Cricketer Of The Year
No-one was better than Tariq!
Senile Sentry
International Debutant
I know Pakistanis are the last people to underrate Gilly, Stockholm Syndrome and all.
Cold fact is that Gilly was good but not extra ordinary in his last 48-50 tests as a batsman. He struggled more or less.against the top 3 teams in this period. Of course, still.head and shoulders above his peers during this period nevertheless.
I dont mean it as disrespect to.someone who is a legend when I say had he debuted at say 22 he would have averaged a Prior like 40. But he still.would have had those ATG knocks smattered therein. And not to mention a bucket load of career runs. His legend would have only enhanced and not diminished.
Senile Sentry
International Debutant
I know Pakistanis are the last people to underrate Gilly, Stockholm Syndrome and all.
Cold fact is that Gilly was good but not extra ordinary in his last 48-50 tests as a batsman. He struggled more or less.against the top 3 teams in this period. Of course, still.head and shoulders above his peers during this period nevertheless.
I dont mean it as disrespect to.someone who is a legend when I say had he debuted at say 22 he would have averaged a Prior like 40. But he still.would have had those ATG knocks smattered therein. And not to mention a bucket load of career runs. His legend would have only enhanced and not diminished.
Senile Sentry
International Debutant
Best stumper ever. And one of the best ever tp keep to spinners.
Coronis
Cricketer Of The Year
I’d go with Oldfield as the best stumper ever tbh. 52 stumpings in just 54 tests, still the record 80+ years later. Also had 263 in 245 first class matches.
Senile Sentry
International Debutant
Not comparable eras sorry.