Best Test opener of the 21st Century?

[TheJediBrah]

There is nothing magical about 2000 to 2009 period

Bro you're not listening

 

[Gob]

There is nothing magical about 2000 to 2009 period in SA though so you don't need to limit your period to that just to exclude his 90s failing. You are just picking the best two of his three series in the country to make him seem better. He literally only has one series in SA where he averaged above 40.

Smith faced Johnson in Godlike form in a couple of series as well, worth mentioning.

Hayden became a regular in the team after 2000 (also established as a test quality batsman).

Also this was repeated many times by several people that Hayden from 92 was not as good as Hayden from 2000 to 2008. The assumption is that Hayden from 2000 to 2008 would average 40 plus if he was South African. He did that as a touring Australian over two test serises. Can't understand how this is so difficult for to process

Also just facing God like Johnson does not get him anywhere. Did absolutely bugger all against Australia at home for 10 tests

 

[subshakerz]

Hayden became a regular in the team after 2000 (also established as a test quality batsman).

Also this was repeated many times by several people that Hayden from 92 was not as good as Hayden from 2000 to 2008. The assumption is that Hayden from 2000 to 2008 would average 40 plus if he was South African. He did that as a touring Australian over two test serises. Can't understand how this is so difficult for to process

I never stated that period. I said if Hayden played his entire career as opener in SA, he wouldnt average 40. His career was from 93 to 2008. Again, because we are comparing this to Smith's entire career performance as opener in SA. The way you are approaching this is to assume Hayden would debut at his peak in 2001. Why?

Career means highs and lows, not just a peak period you decide to snip. I understand he took time to establish himself as a quality batsman, but that time still counts.

 

[Gob]

I never stated that period. I said if Hayden played his entire career as opener in SA, he wouldnt average 40. His career was from 93 to 2008. Again, because we are comparing this to Smith's entire career performance as opener in SA.

Career means highs and lows, not just a peak period you decide to snip. I understand he took time to establish himself as a quality batsman, but that time still counts.

Wouldn't average 40 in SA or as an opener in general?

 

[subshakerz]

Wouldn't average 40 in SA or as an opener in general?

In SA.

I find it strange how confident posters are that Hayden would outperform Smith in SA, when opening in such conditions is one of the most difficult tasks. At the same time, I don't begrudge posters who feel Smith's should have averaged higher here and downgrade him because of that.

 

[Raz0r6ack]

There is nothing magical about 2000 to 2009 period in SA though so you don't need to limit your period to that just to exclude his 90s failing. You are just picking the best two of his three series in the country to make him seem better. He literally only has one series in SA where he averaged above 40.

Smith faced Johnson in Godlike form in a couple of series as well, worth mentioning.

The bowlers were better in the 1990s then the 2000s.

96 of 103 of Hayden's Tests played was in the 2000s. If he was South African he would've mostly played against 2000s bowlers on South African pitches, not against 1990s bowlers on South African pitches.

Most bowling attacks during the 2000s were worse then the ones he averaged 49 against South Africa during in the 2000s. India, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, New Zealand (without Bond) and West Indies were all worse attacks. It's fair to assume he would've performed better against all these countries in South African conditions.

At worse he would've had to face McGrath/Gillespie/Warne (all of whom he smashed in domestic cricket) once and Shoaib/Asif once. Apart from that, nothing coming close to approximating Donald, Pollock, Schultz and de Villiers from the 1990s.

 

[_00_deathscar]

Subshakerz is a tit. What’s new?

 

[subshakerz]

The bowlers were better in the 1990s then the 2000s.

96 of 103 of Hayden's Tests played was in the 2000s. If he was South African he would've mostly played against 2000s bowlers on South African pitches, not against 1990s bowlers on South African pitches.

Most bowling attacks during the 2000s were worse then the ones he averaged 49 against South Africa during in the 2000s. India, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, New Zealand (without Bond) and West Indies were all worse attacks. It's fair to assume he would've performed better against all these countries in South African conditions.

At worse he would've had to face McGrath/Gillespie/Warne (all of whom he smashed in domestic cricket) once and Shoaib/Asif once. Apart from that, nothing coming close to approximating Donald, Pollock, Schultz and de Villiers from the 1990s.

There are a lot of assumptions here. Would Hayden have been able to even establish himself as an opener in SA conditions is one? Should we include Bangladesh, Zimbabwe and WI is another since we are excluding them it seems for Smith? Would Hayden perform as well against McGrath/Gillespie in SA conditions as compared to domestic cricket in Australia?

Your entire thesis boils down to Hayden's performance in the 2001 series in SA to prove he would average over 40 as opener in his career there, because outside of that he averaged 12 and 34 in his other two series. I personally don't find that convincing though, I think he benefitted from a low ebb time in SA cricket and an attack in disarray, but over a longer stretch would struggle to be prolific in those conditions.

 

[Raz0r6ack]

I find it strange how confident posters are that Hayden would outperform Smith in SA, when opening in such conditions is one of the most difficult tasks. At the same time, I don't begrudge posters who feel Smith's should have averaged higher here and downgrade him because of that.

Because when they played on the same pitches in South Africa that's what happened:

 

[subshakerz]

Because when they played on the same pitches in South Africa that's what happened:

View attachment 32792

Smith's career didn't end in 2006.

 

[Gob]

In SA.

I find it strange how confident posters are that Hayden would outperform Smith in SA, when opening in such conditions is one of the most difficult tasks. At the same time, I don't begrudge posters who feel Smith's should have averaged higher here and downgrade him because of that.

Smith's meaningful average in SA is 33 (not very difficult to outperform that)

Hayden was one of the most prolific opening batsmen of all time

People actually watched Hayden beyond the spread sheet and saw how good a player he was at cashing in when batting conditions were good. He would cash in on a pitch like port Elizabeth

Had no issues with the short ball/extra bounce/tennis ball bounce (main reason why SA a difficult place to bat) or extra pace since he became a test quality player

Hayden only played seven games in the 90s (sample sized as ****) but more than his own failures, it was down to Aust having a very good opening pair (Slater/Taylor)

Hayden played for queensland on a pitch know known to be of the same color as the out field and scoring truck loads of runs in a first class competition which probably had better teams than most international teams and dominating bowlers from his own national team for a long period

Making significant contributions with the bat for his team to win serieses in SA especially when the serieses were alive

Those are the ones from the top of my head. Maybe able to think of few more later. Without checking, I'd assume Hayden must be averaging 55 plus at home (Australia). Conditions in SA are the closest it gets to Australia (similar pace, similar bounce more movement). More this hypothetical Hayden plays for/in SA, more he get acclimatised to the home conditions (its not that difficult for an Australian to get used to SA conditions really. Check David Warner's record there)

So assuming that his actual home record would come crashing down by 15 points based on a 3 test match series in 1992 when Hayden was a significantly poor player (saying this for the zillionth ****ing time) a far more extraordinary/unlikely assumption than its not happening

 

[Socerer 01]

I agree that production at home is probably a bit undervalued

it is very undervalued. A player like Chandimal has a number of very good knocks on tough pitches in Asia in tough scenarios but since it’s either home conditions or similar to it none of it apparently matters. If we had such performances by a SENA batsman in pace friendly conditions it would lauded and deservedly so

 

[_00_deathscar]

Just a reminder (again) that Sehwag's overall averages are hurt by his very poor form at the end.

Between his debut to end of 2010, it reads:
81 tests
7,291 runs
55.23 average
83.16 S/R

vs Aus: 48.36
vs Eng: 31.50 - he seems to have an England problem, not a moving ball problem. He struggles vs England at home more than he does away from home.
vs NZ: 45.62
vs SA: 54.65

He's also one of a few to have a slightly less home skewed record - 38 at home vs 43 abroad - unlike someone like Jimmy Anderson.

Yes a lot of it is bashing at home - he actually averages more IN Aus (59) and England (39.5) than he does at home vs them, but very poor records vs NZ and SA granted. Part of which is just some poor starts to his career.

From 2003-2010, his record reads a staggering:
71 tests
6,670 runs
57.50 average
84.10 S/R

Yes some of those same weaknesses are present, but with a more even 35/37 home/away split, you're winning a fair of your home games if your bloke up top is smashing the ball around at a rate that is around about what our ODI openers today go at, if lucky.

 

[Coronis]

Just a reminder (again) that Sehwag's overall averages are hurt by his very poor form at the end.

Between his debut to end of 2010, it reads:
81 tests
7,291 runs
55.23 average
83.16 S/R

vs Aus: 48.36
vs Eng: 31.50 - he seems to have an England problem, not a moving ball problem. He struggles vs England at home more than he does away from home.
vs NZ: 45.62
vs SA: 54.65

He's also one of a few to have a slightly less home skewed record - 38 at home vs 43 abroad - unlike someone like Jimmy Anderson.

Yes a lot of it is bashing at home - he actually averages more IN Aus (59) and England (39.5) than he does at home vs them, but very poor records vs NZ and SA granted. Part of which is just some poor starts to his career.

From 2003-2010, his record reads a staggering:
71 tests
6,670 runs
57.50 average
84.10 S/R

Yes some of those same weaknesses are present, but with a more even 35/37 home/away split, you're winning a fair of your home games if your bloke up top is smashing the ball around at a rate that is around about what our ODI openers today go at, if lucky.

I mean everyone’s peak stats look pretty great do they not?

 

[TheJediBrah]

I mean everyone’s peak stats look pretty great do they not?

I don't know about you but I didn't average 55 in Test cricket at my peak

 

[Prince EWS]

I don't know about you but I didn't average 55 in Test cricket at my peak

lol you kid

 

[BazBall21]

Hayden>Smith in Australia, South Africa.
Smith>Hayden in England, New Zealand.

 

[Coronis]

I don't know about you but I didn't average 55 in Test cricket at my peak

Probably too late for tests but I can recommend a good batting seminar if you’re interested?

 

[Bolo.]

There is some seriously bad number crunching going on in this thread. If you don't have complicated data, like game by game quality of opponents, do this:

1 Compare away records of 2 bats, excluding in each others home countries
2 Compare home records by judging how they performed in relation to other bats from their sides, which you need to adjust according to the quality of the other bats. Use step 1.
3 Compare records in each other's countries. You are going to need to use step 2 as well as some idea of quality of each others bowling attacks. This is going to be a very small factor relative to 1 and 2.

There are going to be other factors at play, like era and batting position, but they don't make much difference in this comparison. Obviously there are other factors at play, but this process gets rid of a lot of the waffle in the thread.

You are also going to need to make a call on how much better away record is in assessing quality... the answer can be big or small, but if it's zero or less than zero, give up on numbers and just go with whoever you prefer.

 

[Victor Ian]

Or you' could just send them to a bakeoff.