How much would a batsmen need to average to overtake Bradman?

[The Sean]

I think it's worth mentioning here that for a topic which has - more or less in very similar form - been done numerous times before in these parts, and often not productively or in good faith, this has been a really good discussion.

 

[subshakerz]

Dominated but not break outs. Same with Lohmann.

I mean they were all statical outliers. Curiously all in pre war era.

 

[subshakerz]

I think it's worth mentioning here that for a topic which has - more or less in very similar form - been done numerous times before in these parts, and often not productively or in good faith, this has been a really good discussion.

Yup. I think for me I like to go into base assumptions we have regarding Bradman and how to navigate eras. Also the poll is interesting because it shows that there isn't a clear consensus on it.

 

[Coronis]

I mean they were all statical outliers. Curiously all in pre war era.

Hobbs pre-war 57.32
Others in his era
Faulkner 50.72
Bardsley 45.15
Trumper 44.78

Lohmann (excluding SA) 13.01
Others in his era
Barnes* 9.19 (allrounder, 21 wickets in 8 matches)
Ferris 14.25
Briggs 16.09
Turner 16.53

Barnes 16.43
Others in his era
Blythe 18.63
Trumble 18.67
Snooke* 20.48 (allrounder, 29 wickets in 23 matches)
Foster 20.97

Bradman pre war (since his main rivals were well past their best pre war and there was such a gap between tests) 97.94
Others in his era
Headley 66.71
Hammond 63.87
Paynter 59.23


Just to try and show the relative “outlier” levels.

 

[subshakerz]

Hobbs pre-war 57.32
Others in his era
Faulkner 50.72
Bardsley 45.15
Trumper 44.78

Lohmann (excluding SA) 13.01
Others in his era
Barnes* 9.19 (allrounder, 21 wickets in 8 matches)
Ferris 14.25
Briggs 16.09
Turner 16.53

Barnes 16.43
Others in his era
Blythe 18.63
Trumble 18.67
Snooke* 20.48 (allrounder, 29 wickets in 23 matches)
Foster 20.97

Bradman pre war (since his main rivals were well past their best pre war and there was such a gap between tests) 97.94
Others in his era
Headley 66.71
Hammond 63.87
Paynter 59.23


Just to try and show the relative “outlier” levels.

Wow others on the forum showed other numbers for Barnes and Hobbs. Guess they weren't so ahead.

 

[Coronis]

Wow others on the forum showed other numbers for Barnes and Hobbs. Guess they weren't so ahead.

Specifically, I was looking at their actual dated career period.

i.e for Hobbs from 1908-1914, for Barnes 1901-1914 and Lohmann 1886-1896

 

[the big bambino]

I mean they were all statical outliers. Curiously all in pre war era.

They weren’t. For example Hobbs was no more an outlier than Sobers or Steve Smith. All were about 20 runs ahead of their era’s batting average. Bradman was around 60-70 runs ahead of his.

 

[Line and Length]

No one has really addressed the point I made earlier. Who, apart from Verity, were the quality spinners that Bradman faced in Tests?
As I pointed out, at a domestic level, he was less impressive when facing the likes if Grimmett.

"In Sheffield Shield cricket, Clarrie Grimmett and Don Bradman were often opponents, with Grimmett taking Bradman's wicket on 10 occasions. While Bradman's overall average against Grimmett was still impressive (63.30), it was significantly lower than his overall average (95.14) and his average without Grimmett (98.35)." (from my earlier post)

Mention is made of 'bogey teams', but shouldn't it be a case of 'bogey bowlers'? I feel he might have struggled on the turners on the SC against some of the modern spinners.

Regarding the 20 year career mentioned by some. 52 Tests over 20 years doesn't amount to many Tests per year - even taking into account the WWII years when no Tests were played. Given Bradman's war record (or lack thereof) because of fitness issues, I wonder how he would have coped with playing the number of Tests per year that modern players encounter.

 

[GotSpin]

.

Regarding the 20 year career mentioned by some. 52 Tests over 20 years doesn't amount to many Tests per year - even taking into account the WWII years when no Tests were played. Given Bradman's war record (or lack thereof) because of fitness issues, I wonder how he would have coped with playing the number of Tests per year that modern players encounter.

If you’re going to transport him into a modern day schedule then he would presumably have access to modern day facilities and medical care. Think it’s a moot point tbh

Plus, he played a ton of FC cricket as well

 

[TheJediBrah]

No one has really addressed the point I made earlier. Who, apart from Verity, were the quality spinners that Bradman faced in Tests?
As I pointed out, at a domestic level, he was less impressive when facing the likes if Grimmett.

"In Sheffield Shield cricket, Clarrie Grimmett and Don Bradman were often opponents, with Grimmett taking Bradman's wicket on 10 occasions. While Bradman's overall average against Grimmett was still impressive (63.30), it was significantly lower than his overall average (95.14) and his average without Grimmett (98.35)." (from my earlier post)

Mention is made of 'bogey teams', but shouldn't it be a case of 'bogey bowlers'? I feel he might have struggled on the turners on the SC against some of the modern spinners.

In a world where a fair proportion of cricket would be played in Asia, against spinners, I don't see any reason he wouldn't have mastered the conditions and opposition as required. A perceived weakness in his record against quality spin, if actually a thing, was likely more a case of not needing to face it often in Tests rather than an inherent fallibility in his being that would translate to any hypothetical time or circumstance

Regarding the 20 year career mentioned by some. 52 Tests over 20 years doesn't amount to many Tests per year - even taking into account the WWII years when no Tests were played. Given Bradman's war record (or lack thereof) because of fitness issues, I wonder how he would have coped with playing the number of Tests per year that modern players encounter.

This is not a good point at all. Modern players play a lot less cricket if anything. An Ashes tour had like a dozen FC games as well as the Tests, not to mention they played more domestic cricket back then than most do now. Then there's that the travel involved in tours back then was a lot more grueling. It wasn't a 24 hour flight there and back.

 

[Line and Length]

In a world where a fair proportion of cricket would be played in Asia, against spinners, I don't see any reason he wouldn't have mastered the conditions and opposition as required. A perceived weakness in his record against quality spin, if actually a thing, was likely more a case of not needing to face it often in Tests rather than an inherent fallibility in his being that would translate to any hypothetical time or circumstance

I don't see his record against quality spin (ie Grimmett and Verity) as an actual weakness. It's just that his performances (ie average) were considerably lower than against other bowling. He had plenty of opportunities to master Grimmett at a domestic level yet history suggests he was more vulnerable against spin (particularly leg spin). Eric Hollies perceived this and, as I wrote earlier, predicted he would dismiss the Don second ball with a wrong-un in Bradman's final Test innings. Having said that, the emotion of the occasion may well have been a factor in that dismissal.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Assuming equal longevity and era difficulty, 99.95

 

[subshakerz]

They weren’t. For example Hobbs was no more an outlier than Sobers or Steve Smith. All were about 20 runs ahead of their era’s batting average. Bradman was around 60-70 runs ahead of his.

You're correct Coronis just showed me.

 

[Coronis]

Eric Hollies perceived this and, as I wrote earlier, predicted he would dismiss the Don second ball with a wrong-un in Bradman's final Test innings.

This sounds like one of the least likely cricket anecdotes I’ve ever heard tbh.

In a world where a fair proportion of cricket would be played in Asia, against spinners, I don't see any reason he wouldn't have mastered the conditions and opposition as required. A perceived weakness in his record against quality spin, if actually a thing, was likely more a case of not needing to face it often in Tests rather than an inherent fallibility in his being that would translate to any hypothetical time or circumstance


This is not a good point at all. Modern players play a lot less cricket if anything. An Ashes tour had like a dozen FC games as well as the Tests, not to mention they played more domestic cricket back then than most do now. Then there's that the travel involved in tours back then was a lot more grueling. It wasn't a 24 hour flight there and back.

A dozen is putting it nicely

non test matches played by Bradman on each of his Ashes tours

1930 - 22
1934 - 17
1938 - 15
1948 - 18

Total non test matches played by varying Australian XIs on those tours

1930 - 29
1934 - 30
1938 - 31
1948 - 29

A tour of Australia was very chill in contrast.

 

[the big bambino]

No one has really addressed the point I made earlier. Who, apart from Verity, were the quality spinners that Bradman faced in Tests?
As I pointed out, at a domestic level, he was less impressive when facing the likes if Grimmett.

You don’t have to be Verity to be quality spin. If you include fc cricket, which was the staple back then and usually included all the test players, unlike today, he faced;

Verity, White, Peebles, Robins, Freeman, Wright, Goddard, Laker, Hollies, Vintcent, Mankad, O’Reilly, Grimmett, Fleetwood-Smith, Blackie, Mailey and Ironmonger.
He went alright.

 

[Johan]

I mean they were all statical outliers. Curiously all in pre war era.

say Interwar era or golden era, not a fan of the wording "pre war" era in regards to a positive thing like sports evolution, feels a little weird.

 

[subshakerz]

say Interwar era or golden era, not a fan of the wording "pre war" era in regards to a positive thing like sports evolution, feels a little weird.

Ok

 

[sayon basak]

Ok

Good boy.

 

[Johan]

1.67x his competition’s average

Damn, almost 95.

 

[Shady Slim]

Smith is 36 in June, and depending on how he's feeling and his form over the next six months, it's conceivable he could call it at the end of the Ashes series next (Australian) summer. That being said, if his resurgence continues, and with an absolutely packed 2026/27 Test schedule for Australia, I could see him pushing on to the 2027 Ashes, or at least the 2027 150th Anniversary Test. I can't see him going longer than that.

Root is 18 months younger than Smith and by the end of the 2027 Ashes series will still only be 36 and likely within 1,000 runs or so of Tendulkar. He'll surely push on.

don't like the idea of root breaking the tendulkar record