Elite Pacers vs Batters vs Spinners vs ARs - Who ranks highest in your top tier list?

[subshakerz]

What would be your order of ranking as the level of greatest cricketers of the below. I am excluding specific names as the point of the exercise is to see where each of you gives weightage to in ATG specialisations.

A top 3 pacer of all time

A top 5 bat of all time, aside from Bradman

A top 1-2 spinner of all-time

An ATG allrounder (of Kallis/Miller level)

 

[kyear2]

In comparisons I give weight to the primary skill before I even consider them being all rounder, but I know how this forum works, we're apparently compelled to list all rounders higher.
The recent lust of greatest of the 21st century has (last I checked) Kallis with a healthy lead, despite not being seen by anyone as the best bat of the era.

If you have someone who is the best bat or bowler ever, I rate them over an all rounder who ranks below them in the primary discipline. I know that's not the consensus here.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Taking Bradman aside,Top Tier All -rounders are more valuable to the team than Top Tier specialists.

I am definitely taking any Top Tier All-rounders (Sobers, Imran, Miller, Kallis etc.) in the team ahead of any specialist (McGrath, Viv, O’Reilly, Murali etc)

 

[subshakerz]

Taking Bradman aside,Top Tier All -rounders are more valuable to the team than Top Tier specialists.

I am definitely taking any Top Tier All-rounders (Sobers, Imran, Miller, Kallis etc.) in the team ahead of any specialist (McGrath, Viv, O’Reilly, Murali etc)

Ok. I just mentioned Kallis/Miller level since Hadlee, Imran and Sobers are all top tier in batting or bowling anyways.

How do you rate the top tier batters vs pacers vs spinners?

 

[subshakerz]

In comparisons I give weight to the primary skill before I even consider them being all rounder, but I know how this forum works, we're apparently compelled to list all rounders higher.
The recent lust of greatest of the 21st century has (last I checked) Kallis with a healthy lead, despite not being seen by anyone as the best bat of the era.

If you have someone who is the best bat or bowler ever, I rate them over an all rounder who ranks below them in the primary discipline. I know that's not the consensus here.

Preaching to the choir, bro.

So what would your order be then out of the four categories?

 

[Coronis]

Taking Bradman aside,Top Tier All -rounders are more valuable to the team than Top Tier specialists.

I am definitely taking any Top Tier All-rounders (Sobers, Imran, Miller, Kallis etc.) in the team ahead of any specialist (McGrath, Viv, O’Reilly, Murali etc)

So your All Time XI has Sobers, Imran, Miller and Kallis?

 

[kyear2]

Taking Bradman aside,Top Tier All -rounders are more valuable to the team than Top Tier specialists.

I am definitely taking any Top Tier All-rounders (Sobers, Imran, Miller, Kallis etc.) in the team ahead of any specialist (McGrath, Viv, O’Reilly, Murali etc)

How does Miller improve a team over McGrath. Glenn is a match winner and much better bowler than Miller was and I believe his bowling brings more to the team than a statistically and anecdotally better bower and lower end test standard batsman. So it's a good batsman and bowler vs an ATG pacer, I'm going with McGrath all day.

 

[kyear2]

So your All Time XI has Sobers, Imran, Miller and Kallis?

Because if he doesn't he's just spouting **** at this point.

 

[subshakerz]

How does Miller improve a team over McGrath. Glenn is a match winner and much better bowler than Miller was and I believe his bowling brings more to the team than a statistically and anecdotally better bower and lower end test standard batsman. So it's a good batsman and bowler vs an ATG pacer, I'm going with McGrath all day.

Again it depends on the spot in the team. I would take Miller over McGrath if it's 6/7/8 since batting would be more valued then but below that would take McGrath.

Better criteria to decide would be to weigh their difference in bowling and decide if it's made up by Millers batting. IMO, it wouldn't, Miller is a league or two below McGrath as a bowler.

 

[kyear2]

Again it depends on the spot in the team. I would take Miller over McGrath if it's 6/7/8 since batting would be more valued then but below that would take McGrath.

In absolutely no scenario am I taking a good test level batsman and niche fast bowler over an ATG and someone I rate as the second best bowler of all time.

 

[subshakerz]

In absolutely no scenario am I taking a good test level batsman and niche fast bowler over and ATG and someone I rate as the second best bowler of all time.

I am saying team selection is not the best way to determine who is the better cricketer. I agree McGrath is better.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

So your All Time XI has Sobers, Imran, Miller and Kallis?

I meant for Average team or Team in history that actually played together rather than ATG Xi.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Regarding Miller/McGrath, If I am picking a player among any of the two without knowing the team sheet, I am definitely picking Miller every time.

Could lead the attack to go with ability to bat in the top 6.

 

[kyear2]

Regarding Miller/McGrath, If I am picking a player among any of the two without knowing the team sheet, I am definitely picking Miller every time.

Could lead the attack to go with ability to bat in the top 6.

From contemporary reports, he primarily had short bursts with the new ball and basically waited till it came around again. Also back then the new ball was renewed much faster (55 overs) and this was the world post Bradman when they (W. I. aside) finally decided to spice up the tracks.

For an average team, averaging 40 is decent, not giving up one of my top 3 bowlers to get it. In an ATG contest, that average means even less and McGrath's bowling even more

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Regarding Miller/McGrath, If I am picking a player among any of the two without knowing the team sheet, I am definitely picking Miller every time.

Could lead the attack to go with ability to bat in the top 6.

80S West Indies will prefer Miller over Akram, Steyn or Mcgrath

00s Australia wouldn't be the same force if Miller replacing Mcgrath.

So whom do we really need is..
P R O C T E R

Sobers, Procter and Hadlee.. No team says No to them

 

[subshakerz]

From contemporary reports, he primarily had short bursts with the new ball and basically waited till it came around again. Also back then the new ball was renewed much faster (55 overs) and this was the world post Bradman when they (W. I. aside) finally decided to spice up the tracks.

For an average team, averaging 40 is decent, not giving up one of my top 3 bowlers to get it. In an ATG contest, that average means even less and McGrath's bowling even more

Yeah but if in your ATG team, if you have three McGrath level pacers already, then Miller's selection makes sense.

Hence why determining the better cricketer based on a hypothetical team is difficult.

 

[subshakerz]

Regarding Miller/McGrath, If I am picking a player among any of the two without knowing the team sheet, I am definitely picking Miller every time.

Could lead the attack to go with ability to bat in the top 6.

Based on that logic, you will always pick an all-rounder.

 

[Ali TT]

From contemporary reports, he primarily had short bursts with the new ball and basically waited till it came around again. Also back then the new ball was renewed much faster (55 overs) and this was the world post Bradman when they (W. I. aside) finally decided to spice up the tracks.

For an average team, averaging 40 is decent, not giving up one of my top 3 bowlers to get it. In an ATG contest, that average means even less and McGrath's bowling even more

These days it's replaced after about 30 overs.

 

[Coronis]

Yeah but if in your ATG team, if you have three McGrath level pacers already, then Miller's selection makes sense.

Hence why determining the better cricketer based on a hypothetical team is difficult.

Why would McGrath be in the picture if you already have 3 ATG pacers?

 

[shortpitched713]

Would take Ambrose over both Warne and Lara.

Generally taking the bowlers over specialist batsmen. And of them, I don't think anyone outside the top 3 spinners of Murali, Warne, Ashwin can compete with seam bowlers in the roughly top 20.

Edit: Didn't see the ATG allrounder part at first. For them I judge first on the primary attribute, so that brings down ones like Kapil/Greig below every genuine ATG specialist in about the top 30-35 or so. But for the ones like Imran, Sobers, Miller, etc. it comes down to the individual case. For example Sobers ranks 2nd behind Bradman, because he could just be the BBB, and then you add on his useful, and workmanlike bowling, it's very hard to argue against that level of greatness from any specialist. But for Miller, you can consider he wasn't even the best bowler on his team, and it becomes a bit less straightforward to pick him over ATG specialists.