Kapil Dev vs Sunil Gavaskar

[ma1978]

Feel CWs consensus is strongly Gavaskar, but if you asked fans and experts when they played, Kapil might win it and he was Wisden’s Jnfua cricketer of the century. I’ll take the controversial view here.

Test cricket obviously

 

[Majestic]

Red ball - Gavaskar
White ball - Kapil

 

[subshakerz]

Gavaskar is an ATG, Kapil is a national great.

 

[Prince EWS]

I usually vote for the allrounder in these but this is a closer one for me. Leaning Gavaskar I think.

 

[subshakerz]

I usually vote for the allrounder in these but this is a closer one for me. Leaning Gavaskar I think.

Not close at all. Gavaskar is a serious contender for an ATG XI. Kapil would struggle to make an Asian XI.

 

[Prince EWS]

Not close at all. Gavaskar is a serious contender for an ATG XI. Kapil would struggle to make an Asian XI.

Yeah but that doesn't necessarily translate to the median or mean Test team. I'm not picking Keith Miller for an ATG XI but ATG XIs aren't real and he'd have been a better addition, era-adjusted, to actual teams than someone like Tendulkar to Hammond IMO (who are both in my ATG XI).

So I just don't think it's a good metric.

Still picking Gavaskar I think, but it's not that clear cut. I reckon Bangladesh at literally any point of their history would have got more use of Kapil. Suspect the same is true of Sri Lanka. It's closer than it seems from looking at ATG XIs.

 

[ma1978]

When they were playing together Kapil was seen not just inside of India but globally as the more important / valuable of the two. It’s easy to look back at stats and draw the conclusion that Subz did, but that wasn’t the perception back then.

I could make the argument that Gavaskar was better but Kapil more important

Case in point

Cricket: When Kapil was king

Cricket: India's greatest all-rounder, Kapil Dev, reflects on how his country lost the fear of winning as they prepare for Lord's.

amp.theguardian.com

 

[ma1978]

Yeah but that doesn't necessarily translate to the median or mean Test team. I'm not picking Keith Miller for an ATG XI but ATG XIs aren't real and he'd have been a better addition, era-adjusted, to actual teams than someone like Tendulkar to Hammond IMO (who are both in my ATG XI).

So I just don't think it's a good metric.

Still picking Gavaskar I think, but it's not that clear cut. I reckon Bangladesh at literally any point of their history would have got more use of Kapil. Suspect the same is true of Sri Lanka. It's closer than it seems from looking at ATG XIs.

India wasn’t far from minnow status when Kapil started playing for India and he was more valuable / impactful it can be argued

 

[subshakerz]

Yeah but that doesn't necessarily translate to the median or mean Test team. I'm not picking Keith Miller for an ATG XI but ATG XIs aren't real and he'd have been a better addition, era-adjusted, to actual teams than someone like Tendulkar to Hammond IMO (who are both in my ATG XI).

So I just don't think it's a good metric.

Still picking Gavaskar I think, but it's not that clear cut. I reckon Bangladesh at literally any point of their history would have got more use of Kapil. Suspect the same is true of Sri Lanka. It's closer than it seems from looking at ATG XIs.

That's an even worse metric to use frankly.

And contrary to thinking on CW, weak teams need better specialists more. Bangladesh could build their entire batting lineup around Gavaskar's excellence.

Gavaskar is one of the top ten best bats of all-time. Simply a better cricketer.

 

[subshakerz]

When they were playing together Kapil was seen not just inside of India but globally as the more important / valuable of the two. It’s easy to look back at stats and draw the conclusion that Subz did, but that wasn’t the perception back then.

I could make the argument that Gavaskar was better but Kapil more important

Case in point

Cricket: When Kapil was king

Cricket: India's greatest all-rounder, Kapil Dev, reflects on how his country lost the fear of winning as they prepare for Lord's.

amp.theguardian.com

How sure are you of that? Because I recall several peers of that time extolling Gavaskar as the best bat of the era after Viv and India's first true worldclass player.

The perception of Gavaskar was similar to Tendulkar in the 90s relative to the rest of the batting lineup.

 

[ma1978]

How sure are you of that? Because I recall several peers of that time extolling Gavaskar as the best bat of the era after Viv and India's first true worldclass player.

The perception of Gavaskar was similar to Tendulkar in the 90s relative to the rest of the batting lineup.

I was too young to really follow the press (until after the fact), but Kapil did win India’s wisden cricketer of the century and the English press loved him (because of 83 and some really swashbuckling performances). I’d say the West Indians rated Gavaskar.

 

[subshakerz]

I was too young to really follow the press (until after the fact), but Kapil did win India’s wisdom cricketer of the century and the English press loved him (because of 83 and some really swashbuckling performances). I’d say the West Indians rated Gavaskar.

English press loved Gavaskar too because he spoke better English.

Benaud put him in his all-time XI.

 

[Prince EWS]

English press loved Gavaskar too because he spoke better English.

Benaud put him in his all-time XI.

This doesn't really help your case.

 

[subshakerz]

This doesn't really help your case.

I know it was just an add-on.

 

[ataraxia]

That's an even worse metric to use frankly.

And contrary to thinking on CW, weak teams need better specialists more. Bangladesh could build their entire batting lineup around Gavaskar's excellence.

Gavaskar is one of the top ten best bats of all-time. Simply a better cricketer.

With Kapil, they could do the same with their bowling (obviously to a lesser degree, but think: Rubel) and also get an above average bat though.

 

[Prince EWS]

With Kapil, they could do the same with their bowling (obviously to a lesser degree, but think: Rubel) and also get an above average bat though.

Yeah Kapil is IMO a much bigger upgrade on their worst seamer than Gavaskar would be on their worst batsman, even before we get into Kapil's batting.

Although I'm pretty sure Sunny would bowl for them as well

The Sun doesn't revolve around Bangladesh obviously but it means more to me than how close they'd be to be an AT World XI.

 

[subshakerz]

Yeah Kapil is IMO a much bigger upgrade on their worst seamer than Gavaskar would be on their worst batsman, even before we get into Kapil's batting.

Although I'm pretty sure Sunny would bowl for them as well

The Sun doesn't revolve around Bangladesh obviously but it means more to me than how close they'd be to be an AT World XI.

Based on that logic you could select Gillespie over Tendulkar as a better cricketer for Bangladesh.

 

[Prince EWS]

Based on that logic you could select Gillespie over Tendulkar for Bangladesh.

If we took longevity out of it then I probably would, yeah.

Gillespie wasn't actually good for long though and he was injury prone during that period.

 

[subshakerz]

If we took longevity out of it then I probably would, yeah.

Gillespie wasn't actually good for long though and he was injury prone during that period.

I mean that just shows how silly a method this is to select a better cricketer.