Quickfire 20s/30s/40s sounds great in principle, but a guy scoring less than 20 rpi is not making these types of scores with any type of regularity. Basically you are describing Klusenar, who averaged nearly twice as much as Dev.It all boils down to the era right ? In the era Kapil played, India had Gavaskar, Amarnath, Vengsarkar, Shastri, Yashpal etc. None of these players could produce the kind of destructive batting Kapil was capable of. He had a specific role to play i.e make those quickfire 20s,30s and 40s. Would have been gold in the era he played where 230-240 used to be match winning scores. Others around him would do the work of scoring a 100 ball 50 or 120 ball 70. And this strategy worked beautifully for a long time. No wonder India was such a good ODI team from 1983- 1987 or so. So in a nutshell Kapil excelled in his role.
24@95 is very good in his era in which 35@65 or 30@75 was considered a hallmark of a good ODI batsman.
I am not a big fan of splitting a player's career either. In this case though, I was comparing peak decade of Kapil with peak decade of Afridi. You could take their whole careers and a similar gulf exists.
While comparing Kapil with someone like Flintoff or Klusener though, I feel it is fair to compare 80s Kapil with their whole career. Neither of them had anywhere near his longevity. And both dodged their declines by retiring at the same age that Kapil started to decline.
I compared Kapil's ER with Saqlain's, now you proved Kapil's is better.I saw some one comparing Saqlain to Kapil Dev. Here is comparative statistics after adjusting.
View attachment 25791
Between Saqlain and Kapil, there is no contests. They are in different league as bowlers. I added two similar paced bowlers in Vaas and Razzaq. Vaas (and probably Zaheer) has better stats than Kapil. All in all Kapil will be struggling to get in to top 10 pacers from Asia.
Klusner managed 26 runs per innings for an 8.5 year careerQuickfire 20s/30s/40s sounds great in principle, but a guy scoring less than 20 rpi is not making these types of scores with any type of regularity. Basically you are describing Klusenar, who averaged nearly twice as much as Dev.
IDK if the figures you are describing as good bats for the decade. If they are, they probably shouldnt be- the batting average for the decade was 32ish, which includes bowlers. Even if these should be considered good, there is a limit to how much you can extrapolate down from it... keep going down and you get a bat who is striking at 200 or whatever but averaging 5, which is clearly garbage.
Players definitely deserve credit for longevity, but splicing away worst years is too much credit IMO. Would you be willing to chop away Laras mid career slump and only look at the beginning and end for example?
Total number of wickets don't mean much. And where each bowler stands by the rank doesn't mean much too. What means is the raw numbers. Ranks are relative, raw numbers are not.I compared Kapil's ER with Saqlain's, now you proved Kapil's is better.
But if you compare 80s with Klusner era, Kapil occupied 1st position in wickets ( equivalent of Murali ) 17th in avg (equivalent of Warne ) and 13th in ER ( equivalent of Saqlain ).
And I rate Saqlain very highly, 3rd Best bowler from Sub Continent behind 2 Ws and
Just ahead of Murali.
When it comes to Kapil, Most people agree on his stats undersells him, yet he managed to feature among top 10 or top 5 bowling rankings regularly. A definite top 5 asian pacer.