Ben Foakes...next question.
Think you mean top 3, but yes the article isn’t ideal.
No, I meant top 30. IMO domestic cricket was full of specialist keepers better than Boucher, Gilchrist, Haddin and McCullum. Their batting is irrelevant when judging their keeping skills.
I’m aware of the article as mentioned , but when you someone says wicketkeeper I think of them as a player, he didn’t specify just keeping . If we are talking just about the keeping then gets more complicated and can get subjective. As far as I’m aware there’s no access for advanced data for keepers either to see how many chances they missed compared to caught, including missing stumps vs not and byes caused by errors (byes can also be saved by keepers capable of covering more ground - byes conceded by one keeper with no forced error may not be conceded by another) to try to eliminate subjectiveness as much as possible . Then you have to start trying to subjectively define the difficulty of each chances, bye save etc and the difficulty of keeping to certain bowlers, pitches etc - it gets too ridiculous for me to think about how you can be fair / confident about who’s better unless there’s an obvious gap and it gets less and less as the keeper gets “better”