[Not so] Huge statistical analysis on greatest ODI batsman and bowlers ranked

[ankitj]

Yeah, I don't think Tendulkar would relish getting to play only 15 or so overs most of the times, he always liked to spend most time in the middle. Dhoni not only didn't complain, he evolved a method to suit that role.

 

[Victor Ian]

You can't be sure that Tendulkar or Ponting would've been as good at the finisher role though.

I can be sure they would have a better chance at being as good or better a finisher as Dhoni or Bevan would being a beginner.

I'm going off on a rant now.

 

[honestbharani]

I don't know. If Dhoni was all that good, or Bevan, why not put them up higher and get more of their awesome. I think the team knows they cant handle it up there. They don't have the ability to survive. Down lower, after the ball is older and so on, they are perfect for that role. But if they were better than the top order, they'd switch places. What I'm saying is not ironclad. I just believe that Jones was better than Bevan.

You mean, the Victor"Ian" believes a Victorian batsman is better than a NSW batsman? That is new.

But I get what you mean. What I am trying to point out is as the LO game has evolved, the skillsets needed in the top order (1-3), the middle order (4-5 roughly) and the finisher type roles have become more and more well defined. So to me, I find it intrinsically impossible to say with any authority that Ponting was better than Bevan or vice-versa given they fulfilled very different roles. One way to compare is to compare them with others playing the same role from other sides. And in that respect, I think Bevan was better than Ponting. And same with Dean Jones Although, Deano was a great #3 for his era, there was also Abbas and Viv already before him who had great numbers as well as SR. I also think Bevan was the first person to give some structure to the role of the ODI #6 and a bit of a template.

 

[honestbharani]

I can be sure they would have a better chance at being as good or better a finisher as Dhoni or Bevan would being a beginner.

I'm going off on a rant now.

It is a perfectly plausible opinion. Like I said, I find it hard to make a claim either way. So I just go by the fairest comparison I can. Ponting was not ahead of other top order ODI batters of his time but Bevan was ahead of the other #6 batsmen of his time. And Jones, while did showcase a new style to ODI batting, was also not ahead of other ODI top order batsmen of his time.

I mean, if we are only ranking by how anyone innovated a new style of play, then Srikkanth should be considered better than Sidhu, for example. But I don't think that is the case.

 

[Victor Ian]

Yeah, I don't think Tendulkar would relish getting to play only 15 or so overs most of the times, he always liked to spend most time in the middle. Dhoni not only didn't complain, he evolved a method to suit that role.

Definitely, you want guys who can do the finisher role, and Dhoni is peerless, except for his peers.

If you ask all batsmen. They love spending time in the middle. Tendulkar got to do it because he was more reliable at it. If Dhoni was better than Tendulkar and was the opener, I'm sure Tendulkar, without complaint, would have developed the game to suit the role too and been amazing at it. I guess that is my point. Bevan and Dhoni had to 'develop' a different game to normal, because they weren't good enough for the normal one.

 

[Victor Ian]

...And Jones, while did showcase a new style to ODI batting, was also not ahead of other ODI top order batsmen of his time...

Actually, Jones even reached the lofty heights of being better than Richards for a time there (yeah, I know - waning Richards) but still. Jones was the best batsman in the world. He was the man.

Anyway, people get my point, and I get theirs. I know mine is contentious.

 

[honestbharani]

I really do like Dean Jones. He was part of the 87 winning side, wasn't he?

 

[ankitj]

Yes, Dean Jones was ranked #1 in late 1989, and achieved high of 918 rating points which is beaten by very few.

 

[ankitj]

Can a mod change the title of the thread to indicate it has analysis for both batsmen and bowlers? Thanks.

Can a mod please oblige?

 

[trundler]

With Jones you have to keep in mind average ground size in Australia. His SR looks even more impressive because of that. I looked up Abbas's stats and he struck at over 100(!!!) in Pakistan. SR is 63 in Australia and 78 in England. Fantastic still. Oh and Jones wasn't really a contemporary of his. I wish more had been written about his style of play in ODIs. Jones looks like a proto-Root/Taylor. What is the appropriate comparison for Abbas?

 

[ankitj]

I am inclined to say Abbas was proto-Kohli. Abbas's strike rate is mighty impressive no matter how you look at it. He retired in 1985 and has better strike rate than likes of Ponting, Hayden, Gibbs and even Ross Taylor. 5 out of 7 of his hundreds were scored at 100+ SR and another one at 98.xx.

I have lot of time for Abbas and Jones. They made my all time ODI XI before Kohli and de Villiers nudged them out.

 

[ankitj]

Stumbled on some old time posts while I was looking for evidence that I had Abbas and Jones in my ATG XI.

Absolutely You have probably seen me asserting that before. Greenidge IMO is second best ODI opener after Tendulkar, ahead of not just Haynes but also Anwar, Hyaden, Ganguly, M. Waugh etc.

Agree ftr.

 

[Jack1]

Longevity adjustment is too much for my liking.

 

[honestbharani]

PEWS agreeing with you is really not a point in your favor, ankit..

 

[trundler]

I am inclined to say Abbas was proto-Kohli. Abbas's strike rate is mighty impressive no matter how you look at it. He retired in 1985 and has better strike rates than likes of Ponting, Hayden and Gibbs. 5 out of 7 of his hundreds were scored at 100+ SR and another one at 98.xx.

I have lot of time for Abbas and Jones. They made my all time ODI XI before Kohli and de Villiers nudged them out.

Century ratio is obscenely good too. Only Richard in his pomp was rivaling him in that regard also.

Re Bevan: he batted 4 most of the time and averaged highest there, didn't he?

 

[honestbharani]

I guess he was #6 in the 90s but they moved him up to 4 around the 2001 India series or something I think. Guess he also retired around the time Hussey came along. So it should be closer to 50-50 between his #4 numbers and #6 numbers, I think.

 

[ankitj]

Found what I was looking for. Way back in 2012:

Tendulkar
Watson
Richards
Jones
Abbas
Bevan
Dhoni
Akram
Garner
Muralitharan
McGrath

Tough call between Ambrose and McGrath there. Went for the one who did it for longer.

 

[Victor Ian]

I am inclined to say Abbas was proto-Kohli. Abbas's strike rate is mighty impressive no matter how you look at it. He retired in 1985 and has better strike rates than likes of Ponting, Hayden and Gibbs. 5 out of 7 of his hundreds were scored at 100+ SR and another one at 98.xx.

I have lot of time for Abbas and Jones. They made my all time ODI XI before Kohli and de Villiers nudged them out.

I was going to say how ive only become aware of Abbas in the last week or so. The 85 thing probably has a lot to do with it. Guess im going to have fun learning about another great.

 

[Victor Ian]

Yes, Dean Jones was ranked #1 in late 1989, and achieved high of 918 rating points which is beaten by very few.

Nice to see gower up there. He was my first favourite player before i learnt i wasnt allowed to do that. Also explains why he was even an option for my dip**** mum to purchase that tshirt that made me his fan in the early 80s

 

[trundler]

I obviously went to YouTube for an Abbas binge watching session and in terms of stroke play I see a resemblance with Amla.