Better method to rate cricketers?

[Adorable Asshole]

Alternatively Lillee vs Hoggard

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

Reverse alphabetical order (by surname).

 

[subshakerz]

Checklist because it's more contextualized.

 

[Starfighter]

Reverse alphabetical order (by surname).

Monde Zondeki best ever bowler?

 

[ataraxia]

Reverse alphabetical order (by surname).

Solid contender. Second best among these options I reckon.

In unrelated news, I'm a massive fan of Bryan Yuile.

 

[BazBall21]

Checklist. Standardised average is useful but it's one of the many useful tools. A range of things matter.

 

[ataraxia]

Alternatively Lillee vs Hoggard

Define standardised average please, so I know what I'm defending here.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

Define standardised average please, so I know what I'm defending here.

Average adjusted based on the era they bowled in @Prince EWS

 

[ataraxia]

Average adjusted based on the era they bowled in @Prince EWS

Adjusted based on opposition quality too? Adjusted based on longevity?

 

[Adorable Asshole]

Adjusted based on opposition quality too? Adjusted based on longevity?

Not sure about the former but probably no. Yes on the later.

 

[ataraxia]

Not sure about the former but probably no. Yes on the later.

PEWS adjusts for opposition quality – is this just PEWSian ratings v. analysis by checklist? Because by Jove that's an easy call.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

PEWS adjusts for opposition quality – is this just PEWSian ratings v. analysis by checklist? Because by Jove that's an easy call.

Yes

 

[honestbharani]

People may seem to like whatever method but nothing beats the biased eye test.

 

[Coronis]

Strike Rate is the best method to rate both batsmen and bowlers. However its usefulness decrease as you go to shorter formats.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

People may seem to like whatever method but nothing beats the biased eye test.

I use the "objective" eye test, but only look out one eye when any NZers are batting or bowling.