Jasprit Bumrah vs Joel Garner

[PlayerComparisons]

Two bowlers of similar quality

 

[Johan]

Garner is.

 

[Thala_0710]

Again, very tough to do. Don't know who to go with here

 

[kyear2]

Again for now, now it's Garner , but set to shift in the not to distant future

 

[Randomfan]

Two bowlers of similar quality

Are they?

Bumrah 5-fers every 3 tests
Garner 5-fers every 8 tests

I think Bumrah is more devastating than Garner. If they were very close then let's wait and see what posters think when Bumrah gets to 250-260 test wickets( same range as Garner). I will be surprised if too many fans pick Garner at that point.

Question is a better test bowler - I will pick Bumrah even without getting to 250 test wickets.

A better career, then it becomes a debate for me and after another 30 wickets it won't be a debate.

 

[Johan]

Are they?

Bumrah 5-fers every 3 tests
Garner 5-fers every 8 tests

I think Bumrah is more devastating than Garner. If they were very close then let's wait and see what posters think when Bumrah gets to 250-260 test wickets( same range as Garner). I will be surprised if too many fans pick Garner at that point.

Question is a better test bowler - I will pick Bumrah even without getting to 250 test wickets.

A better career, then it becomes a debate for me and after another 30 wickets it won't be a debate.

Garner was sharing his wickets with some immense competition.

 

[Randomfan]

Garner was sharing his wickets with some immense competition.

A likely reason but I am not sure his lack of 5-fers can be explained by competition only. Let's look at WI bowling avg during Garner's career and see it against India during Bumrah.

WI bowling avg during Garner's career:




India bowling avg during after Bumrah's debute:




I know this stats is influenced by Indian spinners at home so let's see only away for India.

India bowling avg away after Bumrah's debute:



Garner may have bowled more 1st change, that can be one explanation. I did not see Garner's bowling so simply trying to go by stats here.

 

[Johan]

A likely reason but I am not sure his lack of 5-fers can be explained by competition only. Let's look at WI bowling avg during Garner's career and see it against India during Bumrah.

WI bowling avg during Garner's career:

View attachment 48597


India bowling avg during after Bumrah's debute:
View attachment 48598



I know this stats is influenced by Indian spinners at home so let's see only away for India.

India bowling avg away after Bumrah's debute:

View attachment 48599

Garner may have bowled more 1st change, that can be one explanation. I did not see Garner's bowling so simply trying to go by stats here.

he did bowl first change a lot too Yeah, when he actually opened the bowling his fifer rate came down to one every 5th game.


These are the guys Garner shared his wickets with

while Bumrah's fellow Pacers are...more modest

 

[Randomfan]

he did bowl first change a lot too Yeah, when he actually opened the bowling his fifer rate came down to one every 5th game.


These are the guys Garner shared his wickets with

while Bumrah's fellow Pacers are...more modest

That's true but aggregage stats shows that WI bowlers were not really picking wickets at lower average than Indian bowlers during Garners career. We can have big names or small names, but when all said and done, if taken together team is picking wickets at same average then not sure how to think about competition in certain period. Intangible taken together should reflect in tangibles. I must be missing something here.

As you pointed out his new ball record,- his new ball record shows that he would have picked 10-12 5-fers if taken a new ball entire career.

 

[kyear2]

Are they?

Bumrah 5-fers every 3 tests
Garner 5-fers every 8 tests

I think Bumrah is more devastating than Garner. If they were very close then let's wait and see what posters think when Bumrah gets to 250-260 test wickets( same range as Garner). I will be surprised if too many fans pick Garner at that point.

Question is a better test bowler - I will pick Bumrah even without getting to 250 test wickets.

A better career, then it becomes a debate for me and after another 30 wickets it won't be a debate.

If you've been watching Bumrah, it's usually that the rest of the bowlers didn't get the job done and he comes back to clean up.

Garner didn't often get that opportunity.

My bigger concern with Garner (from memory) was the higher amount of lower order guys and he benefitted from never having to be the no. 1 guy.

So while it does impact his legacy, it doesn't as much reflect on his quality, if that makes sense.

 

[Randomfan]

If you've been watching Bumrah, it's usually that the rest of the bowlers didn't get the job done and he comes back to clean up.

Garner didn't often get that opportunity.

My bigger concern with Garner (from memory) was the higher amount of lower order guys and he benefitted from never having to be the no. 1 guy.

So while it does impact his legacy, it doesn't as much reflect on his quality, if that makes sense.

Yah, it make sense. I think higher amount of lower order is natural when you are not taking the new ball and new ball bowlers are gun.

 

[smash84]

Bumrah

 

[ma1978]

What’s the argument for Garner? Honestly asking.

 

[Johan]

What’s the argument for Garner? Honestly asking.

longer career as of the moment, less injury prone and about equal stats upon era adjustment.

 

[ankitj]

longer career as of the moment, less injury prone and about equal stats upon era adjustment.

Show your workings for era adjustment

 

[Johan]

Show your workings for era adjustment

 

[ma1978]

longer career as of the moment, less injury prone and about equal stats upon era adjustment.

the about equal stats is where this falls apart

era adjustment won’t make much of an impact

bunrah’s quality of opponents way ahead of garner

 

[Johan]

the about equal stats is where this falls apart

era adjustment won’t make much of an impact

bunrah’s quality of opponents way ahead of garner

and iirc this is the most bowler friendly era since the 50s, so everyone is gonna have lower averages than 80s naturally.

also, How?

 

[ma1978]

and iirc this is the most bowler friendly era since the 50s, so everyone is gonna have lower averages than 80s naturally.

also, How?

difference negligible vs the 1980s

and Bumrah started before the bowling era started

Garner played 50% of his tests at home and half away. bowlers of all varieties do better at home

about a third of his tests played against a very week England batting and about 25% played against India and New Zealand who were not strong

bumrah 25% at home and 75% against Australia, England and New Zealand, the top three batting lineups of his time

 

[Johan]

difference negligible vs the 1980s

and Bumrah started before the bowling era started

Garner played 50% of his tests at home and half away. bowlers of all varieties do better at home

about a third of his tests played against a very week England batting and about 25% played against India and New Zealand who were not strong

bumrah 25% at home and 75% against Australia, England and New Zealand, the top three batting lineups of his time

it's not though, pacer average since 2018 has been 27, in 1980s it was 29 and almost 30.

Bumrah started in 2018 or 17 I think and you can argue bowling era started around 2015-16, and was definitely underway by 2018.

That flip side to that is, Bumrah also gets to rest home games and not play as much that allows his body more aid and rest to stay strong, It is kinda just you admitting Garner can actually play more and playing more = good for the team.

England was very weak in Silverwood/Root era in batting, it really wasn't until Brook and Jamie that England became a strong batting side, I won't call 2018 Australia and especially current particularly amazing either but I'll give it to you on that