DoG's Top 100 Test Bowlers Countdown Thread 100-1

[Starfighter]

And yet NEVER ranked number 1 once...

Funnily enough if you aren't disingenuous and actually include all the nineties Ambrose comes out better. And Pollock. And Bruce Reid too.

 

[Bolo]

1990 to 98
Best avg
2nd best strike rate
5 wpm

Seems to be an impressive period. There were a ton of great bowlers around at this time. With no set start or end dates you could end up with an overlap of 6+ bowlers who are the greatest bowler in the world. This choice of period is particularly problematic considering the timing and the team mate he has.Waqar 90-94 could be called the GOAT. So for most of the time that he is the best in the world he is below his own teamate, the GOAT. He's better than an injured Waqar for a few years but Waqar is better over longer timeframes.

He peaked at 2 in the world on the ICC ratings. 73rd best ever. Imran is three and Waqar is 11

 

[stephen]

Wasim Akram was an immense cricketer. Fans, peers and even ex-cricketers of his time were in awe of all the skills he possessed and his mercurial ability to change the balance of a match in a jiffy. But there were quite a few bowlers ahead of him in the pecking order on pure bowling. If I have to choose 2 world elevens below will be my choice of bowlers and their batting position. I am a bit greedy about lower order batting but also need the bowlers I choose to be at ATG levels.

World eleven 1:
8.Imran
9.Hadlee
10.Marshall
11.Warne

with Sobers as 5th bowler

World Eleven 2:
8. Akram
9. Steyn
10. Ambrose
11. Murali

with Kallis as 5th bowler. Akram ahead of Mcgrath,Garner and a few others only because he could bat at no.8.

That first XI tail has an unnecessary amount of batting. I think you're better off bringing in McGrath for Imran. Both sides are stronger by making that substitution.

I'd rather have Pollock, Ambrose, McGrath and Murali in 2nd XI, with Miller as 5th bowler.

That has a very long tail with 3 genuine number 11s. Pickling Miller over Kallis is hard to do when you already have a long tail. I also think it's unnecessary to have a genuine strike bowler batting in your top 6if you already have an attack that had Murali and Ambrose in it.

I think h_hurricane's teams are better but swapping Imran for McGrath makes both sides stronger.

 

[stephen]

As part of swapping Ingram for McGrath you bring Imran into the second team over Akram.

 

[Burgey]

It’s quite interesting how Anderson is berated daily for his away record here but rabada’s massive difference in home and away records is overlooked.

Anderson has had a decade to remedy his away record. Arvada has had 18 months.

 

[Burgey]

I just went through batting version of this list . And as far as i am concerned this statistical analysis massively favours players who played most of their games in favourable conditions.

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-chat/60352-dog-s-top-100-test-batsmen-top-25-a-27.html

Tendulkar ranked 10th and Sangakkara ranked 9.

Kohli has more runs outside Asia at a better average than Sangakkara.
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo

No wonder players like Ashwin, Jadeja, Rabada and Herath are ranked so high. These type of analysis will never favour players like Warne, Tendulkar who have most of their career runs, wickets in unfavourable circumstances.

Sunilz in charging in to defend an Indian batsman over any other shocker. Grist to the mill.

 

[smash84]

As part of swapping Ingram for McGrath you bring Imran into the second team over Akram.

Not really. By bringing in Imran for McGrath he gets a lot more batting depth for a marginal decline in bowling quality

 

[Days of Grace]

I just went through batting version of this list . And as far as i am concerned this statistical analysis massively favours players who played most of their games in favourable conditions.

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-chat/60352-dog-s-top-100-test-batsmen-top-25-a-27.html

Tendulkar ranked 10th and Sangakkara ranked 9.

Kohli has more runs outside Asia at a better average than Sangakkara.
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo

No wonder players like Ashwin, Jadeja, Rabada and Herath are ranked so high. These type of analysis will never favour players like Warne, Tendulkar who have most of their career runs, wickets in unfavourable circumstances.

That list has a different methodology and was posted five years ago. So it has no relevance here.

I will do a batting list with the current methodology next year.

 

[stephen]

Not really. By bringing in Imran for McGrath he gets a lot more batting depth for a marginal decline in bowling quality

The batting quality of the tail is not as important as the batting quality of the top 6 when you're up against an ATG attack.

Against sustained bowling pressure even good tail enders aren't going to add much. And if Imran is being picked as a bowler, his batting isn't going to be as great as his stats suggest anyway. Better off picking the one guy who has a proven track record of dismissing some of the best batsmen in history instead.

You might disagree and that's fine but for my money, Hadlee, Marshall, Warne, McGrath is a better attack than Imran, Hadlee, Marshall, Warne and doesn't lose much at all in the bowling stakes.

With Ambrose and Murali in the second XI attack a case for Imran is much stronger.

 

[smash84]

The batting quality of the tail is not as important as the batting quality of the top 6 when you're up against an ATG attack.

Against sustained bowling pressure even good tail enders aren't going to add much. And if Imran is being picked as a bowler, his batting isn't going to be as great as his stats suggest anyway. Better off picking the one guy who has a proven track record of dismissing some of the best batsmen in history instead.

You might disagree and that's fine but for my money, Hadlee, Marshall, Warne, McGrath is a better attack than Imran, Hadlee, Marshall, Warne and doesn't lose much at all in the bowling stakes.

With Ambrose and Murali in the second XI attack a case for Imran is much stronger.

I would have agreed with your premise if the batting gap between imran and mcg would have been small. But mcg batted like the meme tailender. Against an atg bowling attack you need all the batting you can get without much compromise on bowling quality. Plus with Hadlee in the side there is already a metronome. With imran I get the added dimension of reverse swing. That's my reasoning

 

[trundler]

Marshall
Steyn
Warne
McGrath

This attack has grown on me recently. Veering terribly off topic at this point tho.

 

[Days of Grace]

No.16

Ravichandran Ashwin (India) 844

Quality Points: 749
Career Points: 95

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vX-YJ9SJDuI

Career: 2011-
Wickets: 336
Gold Performances: 7
6/47 vs. West Indies at Delhi 2011 (15.29)
7/103 vs. Australia at Chennai 2013 (18.04)
7/66 vs. South Africa at Nagpur 2015 (16.17)
6/81 vs. New Zealand at Indore 2016 (15.00)
7/59 vs. New Zealand at Indore 2016 (15.47)
6/112 vs. England at Mumbai 2016 (15.35)
6/41 vs. Australia at Bengaluru 2017 (17.62)
Silver Performances: 16
Bronze Performances: 4

Overall Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 23.46 (25.45) 55.31 (53.13) 5.98 (rank 14)
50 Innings Peak Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings (2012-2016): 19.84 46.67 7.15 (rank 11)
Non-Home Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 28.92 65.03 4.26 (rank 61)
Quality Opposition Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 26.07 62.83 5.74 (rank 34)

The long wait for Ravi Ashwin to appear is over. The fastest Indian bowler to every notable wicket-taking landmark up to 300, and the fastest in the world to 250 wickets. It is true that he has struggled overseas (a PPI of 4.26 is still respectable, mind you), but Ashwin should be given credit for being arguably the most dominant bowler in his own conditions in the history of test cricket. Unless you totally discounted home performances, which would be ridiculous, Ashwin will always rank highly in a statistical analysis which measures impact as well as the traditional average and strike-rate.

Non-fans of Ashwin, of which there are myriad on CricketWeb, can rest assured that Ashwin is actually dropping down the list. Since achieving his peak in 2016, in his most recent 25 matches he has taken 116 wickets, compared to 220 wickets in his first 39 tests.

Matches 1-39: 22.29 51.30 6.67 (854 overall points)
Matches 40-64: 25.67 62.92 4.95

 

[trundler]

Ashwin does have better stats in Asia than even Waqar, Imran, Wasim and Murali!

I do think away performances should maybe count for 20%.

 

[Days of Grace]

Ashwin does have better stats in Asia than even Waqar, Imran, Wasim and Murali!

I do think away performances should maybe count for 20%.

Then you should put quality opposition up to 20% as well.

Which only leaves 60% to play with for the other factors.

Career 10%
Overall 30%
Peak 20%
Non-Home 20%
Quality Opposition 20%

Overall being worth less than 2x of other quality factors looks wrong. Also, if you boost non-home by so much you'll have posters moaning in the batting list than Ken Barrington is too high.

Overall should be 50%. And career 10%. The remaining three factors can be adjusted.

 

[trundler]

You're right that 30% looks too little for overall stats. Hadn't considered that. I guess some bowlers have benefited disproportionately from the recent batting decline since they're lumped in the post 2000 era. Plus the favourable home conditions.

I imagine Trueman will receive a massive SR boost.

 

[Borges]

Overall being worth less than 2x the other quality factors looks wrong.

It is terribly wrong.

 

[Days of Grace]

You're right that 30% looks too little for overall stats. Hadn't considered that. I guess some bowlers have benefited disproportionately from the recent batting decline since they're lumped in the post 2000 era. Plus the favourable home conditions.

I imagine Trueman will receive a massive SR boost.

The RPW for the 21st century (2000-2024) will likely drop to 33 if the current trend keeps up. I estimate that 21st century bowlers will drop about 10-20 points in their overall ratings.

 

[ankitj]

The batting quality of the tail is not as important as the batting quality of the top 6 when you're up against an ATG attack.

Against sustained bowling pressure even good tail enders aren't going to add much. And if Imran is being picked as a bowler, his batting isn't going to be as great as his stats suggest anyway. Better off picking the one guy who has a proven track record of dismissing some of the best batsmen in history instead.

You might disagree and that's fine but for my money, Hadlee, Marshall, Warne, McGrath is a better attack than Imran, Hadlee, Marshall, Warne and doesn't lose much at all in the bowling stakes.

With Ambrose and Murali in the second XI attack a case for Imran is much stronger.

Yet you want advocate replacing Murali with Warne in ATG ODI XI for ... batting depth? That when Warne has done **** all with bat in ODIs compared to Imran in tests.

 

[ankitj]

With last 4 entries all the players with supposedly ratings too high are out of the way. Now down to undisputed champions in top 15

 

[stephen]

Yet you want advocate replacing Murali with Warne in ATG ODI XI for ... batting depth? That when Warne has done **** all with bat in ODIs compared to Imran in tests.

ODIs are a different beast to tests.

And I was advocating to pick Warne over Murali in a tail consisting of Akram, Garner and McGrath. You don't want to be left with 3 genuine number 11s in your ODI batting lineup. It means the top order have to play more cautiously and you'll leave runs out there.

In tests you have to take 20 wickets. It's much harder to start in tests and tail enders struggle, particularly in non- home conditions.

Your number 10 and 11 are far less likely to make a meaningful contribution, even if they are good since they tend to run out of partners sooner. So it's not really Imran vs McGrath, it's Imran + Hadlee vs Marshall + Hadlee at 8 and 9. Imran + Hadlee is better but not by a huge amount.

Having Marshall at 10 and Warne at 11 seems wasteful since both were genuine number 8s during their careers.