Better batsman : Ian Botham vs Imran Khan

[CodeOfWisden]

Botham is easily ahead of Imran Khan.
This is like comparing Stokes and Jadeja as batsman, even though Jadeja averages a bit higher he has 4 test tons to Stokes 13.

Imran and Jadeja are very much comparable with the bat, Jadeja has bailed us out a lot of times in Indian conditions and in the last half a decade he has picked up his away average too.

 

[Johan]

Again starting at 1982 doesn't make sense to me but whatever. He has a high quality hundred before that. He has several series of performing with bat and ball. He has a good average.

Ok so RPI is low but it sounds like just because of that you want to dismiss what is objectively a very impressive achievement for a lower order bat. His average for that position is very good while being a great bowler.

I believe his career batting should be looked at in three phases. 71 to 79, 80 to 88 and 89 to 92. So I don't like using the last decade entirely.

They start at 1982 because they don't want to start at 1981 as the average would go lower. I agree that Imran should've three phases, debut to first hundred, then 1980 to 88 and then the batting purple patch, there's no reason to pull it back to 1982 while sacrificing the brilliance of his purple patch

 

[Johan]

Well let's compare him to Saleem Malik during that period in the games they played together

Malik

	Span	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	100	50	0
unfiltered	1982-1999	103	154	22	5768	237	43.69	15	29	12	Profile
filtered	1982-1988	28	35	4	987	107	31.83	2	4	1

Imran

	Span	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	100	50	0
unfiltered	1971-1992	88	126	25	3807	136	37.69	6	18	8	Profile
filtered	1982-1988	28	34	6	1223	135*	43.67	3	6	2

Imran is still comfortably better than the specialist bat batting 1 spot higher than him

not a good measure of his skill and Malik was a baby at the time, on top, Maalik had one big year in the time IE 1984, where he made hundreds against New Zealand B, England B, Sri Lanka and a garbage Indian attack.

from 1985-1988, he averaged 31 and made one hundred in 29 Tests, that too on an oval road against a bad attack. Rhat is literally Zak Crawley level minus the fact Crawley opens, in his first two years he averaged 32 and made 2 hundreds in 12 tests, one an unbeaten one against Sri Lanka.

Considering after 50 Tests in 1988 he had made six hundreds, averaged 37, had the runoutput of 31 and such, Yeah, he probably wasn't that good at the time, likely a Zak Crawley of the middle order until his purple patch from 1989 to 1994.

Coronis is right to make the Zak Crawley analogy, because other than one year in 1984, Maalik wasn't very good at the time.

 

[Johan]

Besides for the fact that I already addressed that the bottom part isn't my point.

I think the 82-88 Imran batsman who averaged over 43 from almost 50 innings is being done a disservice here. He's not a specialist, because well he was carrying a bowling load at this time, but definitely he was one of the more useful number 7s for his team in the game's history.

Sure it's not the same as a number 3 averaging that 43, with presumably a higher RPI, but RPI isn't really what you can expect from a number 7 anyway. It's a much more situational batting role, but Imran had the quality to do it very, very well for a big chunk of his career. And to say he is propped up by his later specialist batting numbers isn't really true. It was simply a different role. Regardless of role Imran was clearly improving by leaps and bounds throughout his career from his early mediocre but occasionally handy lower order work, into solid number 7, into exceptional (albeit shortlived) specialist number 6 days.

It's a batting career track that definitely justifies comparisons with the likes of Botham and Miller, even if qualitatively very different.

Again, the trick won't work anymore, stop trying to attach those years to pretend he was an excellent batsmen for an extended period of time.

He wasn't a consistently 43 averaging batsman either, His average was under 35 for 4 of those 7 years, he also made just three hundreds and as I mentioned, one hundred came against a terrible Indian bowling after there were already multiple centurions, one came against England on an oval road where 700+ runs were made and the game drew before the fourth innings, and one came in the infamous India vs Pakistan series where India intentionally made wickets to draw the games, not one great hundred because you sacrified his best innings in 1980 to extend his batting peak.

you may not like the fact I mention the RPI but it doesn't mean it's invalid, for example in the 1982 home series against Australia, he averaged 64 with the bat, but then you look into it and his highest score was 39*, he made a quickfire 24* and 39* before declaration, had he had to bat and even doubled that and got out, he wouldn't have gotten close to a 64 batting average.

His average is not a good depictor of his quality from 1982-88, and definitely not good enough to be attached to his actual purple patch to extend the duration of his batting excellence.

 

[shortpitched713]

Again, the trick won't work anymore, stop trying to attach those years to pretend he was an excellent batsmen for an extended period of time.

He wasn't a consistently 43 averaging batsman either, His average was under 35 for 4 of those 7 years, he also made just three hundreds and as I mentioned, one hundred came against a terrible Indian bowling after there were already multiple centurions, one came against England on an oval road where 700+ runs were made and the game drew before the fourth innings, and one came in the infamous India vs Pakistan series where India intentionally made wickets to draw the games, not one great hundred because you sacrified his best innings in 1980 to extend his batting peak.

you may not like the fact I mention the RPI but it doesn't mean it's invalid, for example in the 1982 home series against Australia, he averaged 64 with the bat, but then you look into it and his highest score was 39*, he made a quickfire 24* and 39* before declaration, had he had to bat and even doubled that and got out, he wouldn't have gotten close to a 64 batting average.

His average is not a good depictor of his quality from 1982-88, and definitely not good enough to be attached to his actual purple patch to extend the duration of his batting excellence.

You're strawmanning once again here, as I don't combine different batting patches for Imran, as I generally recognize he had stages and significant improvements throughout his career. But you have to do something in order to make a batsman x career vs batsman y career comparison. Otherwise Imran has at least 3 different batting careers. Do you suggest that we can't compare his batting quality to anyone else at all for that reason?

It's strange that we're discrediting the quickfire runs before a declaration. Presumably the declaration is made because they're trying to win. The later greatest number 7 bat Gilly had a number of such innings, don't really see him discredited for it? What a strange sort of criticism.

I'll repeat, over a long enough sample size (which Imran had), you can't horde not outs without very obvious shenanigans, of which there were none that anyone seems aware of during Imran's batting career.

 

[Johan]

You're strawmanning once again here, as I don't combine different batting patches for Imran, as I generally recognize he had stages and significant improvements throughout his career. But you have to do something in order to make a batsman x career vs batsman y career comparison. Otherwise Imran has at least 3 different batting careers. Do you suggest that we can't compare his batting quality to anyone else at all for that reason?

If you want to take one career to compare to another batsman's career, take the full thing, full stop, 1971 to 1992. If you want to break it, break it like Subs does, 1971-1979, 1980-1988, 1989-1990, stop with the deceptive breakdown that serves nothing but to make it seem his purple patch was longer than it actually was.

 

[shortpitched713]

If you want to take one career to compare to another batsman's career, take the full thing, full stop, 1971 to 1992. If you want to break it, break it like Subs does, 1971-1979, 1980-1988, 1989-1990, stop with the deceptive breakdown that serves nothing but to make it seem his purple patch was longer than it actually was.

Lol, I literally don't care where we mark the stage between "handy lower order bat" to "excellent number 7", I just picked 82, because I was quoting someone else. Point is he was consistently rapidly improving his batting from a rather humble and unremarkable start. It seems as if you're claiming that you couldn't see this actual progress until he gave up bowling because "lol not outs should actually count as if he got out", which would be rather asinine.

 

[Johan]

Lol, I literally don't care where we mark the stage between "handy lower order bat" to "excellent number 7", I just picked 82, because I was quoting someone else. Point is he was consistently rapidly improving his batting from a rather humble and unremarkable start. It seems as if you're claiming that you couldn't see this actual progress until he gave up bowling because "lol not outs should actually count as if he got out", which would be rather asinine.

He got better but not that much better where he is actually on the level of a 43 averaging batsman, and No, they shouldn't count as if he got out, but average is runs/dismissals, the divisor is lower because of his batting role and contextually that also means by extension that his average would be higher, largely down to batting role. We should downgrade Steve Waugh for noticeably lower output than other 50 averaging batsmen, let alone Imran Khan.

 

[OverratedSanity]

18. Remember kids, not outs hinder averages.

Everything else being the same, would it have been better if Imran had averaged 37 runs per innings with the bat instead of averaging 30 runs per innings?

 

[subshakerz]

He got better but not that much better where he is actually on the level of a 43 averaging batsman, and No, they shouldn't count as if he got out, but average is runs/dismissals, the divisor is lower because of his batting role and contextually that also means by extension that his average would be higher, largely down to batting role. We should downgrade Steve Waugh for noticeably lower output than other 50 averaging batsmen, let alone Imran Khan.

Here is my breakdown so we can get to clarity:

Imran between 71 to 79 was a useful no.8 level bat. Better than a tailender.

Imran between 80 to 88 was a better than median standard specialist bat of that era along with being the best bowler in the world. Do recall in this time he played series as a pure bat too and scored well, like the 83 WC.

Imran from 89 to 91 was a true worldclass middle order bat.

Overall career, Imran was a borderline specialist level lower order bat based on the standards of a difficult batting era.

He is slightly below Botham overall because of Botham greater output and batting higher but deserves credit since he had a longer run of consistency than Botham and was better at sticking at the crease when needed, and was always improving his entire career.

Do you agree with the above?

 

[Johan]

Here is my breakdown so we can get to clarity:

Imran between 71 to 79 was a useful no.8 level bat. Better than a tailender.

Imran between 80 to 88 was a better than median standard specialist bat of that era along with being the best bowler in the world. Do recall in this time he played series as a pure bat too and scored well, like the 83 WC.

Imran from 89 to 91 was a true worldclass middle order bat.

Overall career, Imran was a borderline specialist level lower order bat based on the standards of a difficult batting era.

He is slightly below Botham overall because of Botham greater output and batting higher but deserves credit since he had a longer run of consistency than Botham and was better at sticking at the crease when needed, and was always improving his entire career.

Do you agree with the above?

I do agree mostly.

 

[subshakerz]

I do agree mostly.

Good.

 

[ataraxia]

Everything else being the same, would it have been better if Imran had averaged 37 runs per innings with the bat instead of averaging 30 runs per innings?

For Pakistan? Yes.
For evaluating how good Imran was? No. (I accept that this differing from the first answer is a heterodox opinion.)

 

[ataraxia]

Imran between 71 to 79 was a useful no.8 level bat. Better than a tailender.

Imran between 80 to 88 was a better than median standard specialist bat of that era along with being the best bowler in the world. Do recall in this time he played series as a pure bat too and scored well, like the 83 WC.

Imran from 89 to 91 was a true worldclass middle order bat.

Overall career, Imran was a borderline specialist level lower order bat based on the standards of a difficult batting era.

I think that conclusion from those three statements is bonkers tbh. It punishes Imran for having a much longer career than the vast majority of batsmen.

 

[subshakerz]

I think that conclusion from those three statements is bonkers tbh. It punishes Imran for having a much longer career than the vast majority of batsmen.

A few points bro:

- There are virtually no other ARs who are ATG in primary and specialist level in their secondary discipline. The only other who can claim that perhaps is Sobers. This is a big distinction for him.

- Imran benefitted from a longer career to have his late career batting boost.

- The conclusion of him being a median bat or so is simply a reflection of the sum of his career phases, useful tail + worldclass bat + above average bat

 

[capt_Luffy]

A few points bro:

- There are virtually no other ARs who are ATG in primary and specialist level in their secondary discipline. The only other who can claim that perhaps is Sobers. This is a big distinction for him.

- Imran benefitted from a longer career to have his late career batting boost.

- The conclusion of him being a median bat or so is simply a reflection of the sum of his career phases, useful tail + worldclass bat + above average bat

Would say Imran qualifies, and ofcourse Grace. Miller too if you rate his bowling ATG level.

 

[subshakerz]

Would say Imran qualifies, and ofcourse Grace. Miller too if you rate his bowling ATG level.

Miller is a bowling great but not ATG. Grace is N/A.

 

[Johan]

Root is an ATG Batsman and probably the best spinner who plays for England IE an international standard spinner

 

[subshakerz]

Root is an ATG Batsman and probably the best spinner who plays for England IE an international standard spinner

Not in terms of career.

 

[bagapath]

What does bowling burdened mean?
Imran averaged 37 overs per match
Botham averaged 36 overs per match
I dont understand what this term implies

on topic...

Botham was a better batsman easily on talent, achievement and impact.
Imran was a very capable bat whose numbers look better because of the sheet anchor role he played: that kept him unbeaten a good many times
Botham actually scored big runs on more occasions than him

Of the four all rounders Imran would come in third behind Beefy and Kapil as a batsman
(and a very very very narrow second as a bowler. Hadlee and he are virtually inseparable in terms of talent and achievement as pace bowlers)