On Mike Hussey...

[zaremba]

Hussey's overall stats are awesome and his quality is indeniable, but despite the fact that he seems like he's been on the Test scene for a while now, he only made his debut in late 2005 - less than three years ago.

What's interesting is that while he has very quickly put his stamp on the game as one of the best in the world, others have matches his performances during the timeframe of them.

Since Hussey made his debut in Test cricket, he has amassed a Test average of 70.6. This is obviously phenomenal, but during that time Ponting has recored an average of 70.32, Sangakkara has managed 68.15 and Mohammad Yousuf actual betters the Huss with an amazing 2498 runs at 78.05.

Highest Test Averages Since Hussey's Debut
Yousuf - 2498 runs @ 78.06
Hussey - 2471 runs @ 70.60
Ponting - 2813 runs @ 70.30
Sangakkara - 2658 runs @ 68.15
Jayawardene - 2706 runs @ 64.42
McKenzie - 960 runs @ 64.00
Younis - 2051 runs @ 56.97
Clarke - 1175 runs @ 55.95
Chanderpaul - 1932 runs @ 55.20
Hayden - 2015 runs @ 54.45
Kallis - 2341 runs @ 50.89
Pietersen - 3417 runs @ 50.25

Whilst this still puts Hussey right up near the top, it does show that his figures haven't been quite as hard to achieve during this time frame as they might suggest.

When you consider that the likes of Ponting and Sangakkara have been playing for a lot longer and have a lot more to their resumes than the last three years or so, it more than makes up for the small difference in averages he has maintained ahead of them during this time, IMO.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not trying to take anything away from Hussey and I think he'll go down as a great of the game when he retires, but to call him the best in the world is just a little much at this stage when you look at what those established ahead of him have done since his debut. Granted though, he should probably feature in discussions more often than he does - I imagine that will change fairly soon though.

Thanks for this excellent bit of research. A very interesting list and it puts Hussey's achievements in their (very impressive) context. The top 4 have indeed been the best players in the world in the last 3 or 4 years.

(I'm a little surprised to see some of the others (viz Clarke and McKenzie) in that list, but these stats don't lie.)

 

[GIMH]

Something interesting I've just noticed is that KP tops the actual runs scored chart. Presumably that is because we play more Tests than any other nation.

 

[pup11]

Thanks for this excellent bit of research. A very interesting list and it puts Hussey's achievements in their (very impressive) context. The top 4 have indeed been the best players in the world in the last 3 or 4 years.

(I'm a little surprised to see some of the others (viz Clarke and McKenzie) in that list, but these stats don't lie.)

I think both Clarke and McKenzie have been very good since they have made their comebacks, for Mckenzie to do well as opener in test cricket is a very good effort indeed since considering opening the batting isn't something that he's used to.

I think Clarke's comeback has been even more impressive, after having been chucked out of the Aussie side, he made an unlikely comeback during the last Ashes series, only due to Watson's injury and since then he has been really consistent, he almost scoring a century every second test since then.

 

[Ikki]

Come on, you're better than that.

It's an itch I have to scratch once a month.

 

[Athlai]

Top of the bunch excluding matches vs. Bang, Zim and ICC World XI since Hussey debuted.
(At least 1000 runs, average 60+)

Name,
Runs Scored, Average
Hundreds/ Fifties Matches/Innings NO's
Runs scored per innings

Mohammad Yousuf
2498 @ 78.06
10/6 20/36 4
69.39
MEK Hussey
2229 @ 69.65
8/9 24/40 8
55.73
RT Ponting
2622 @ 69.00
12/10 24/43 5
60.98
DPMD Jayawardene
2263 @ 61.16
8/9 22/39 2
58.03
KC Sangakkara
2115 @ 60.42
7/7 21/37 2
57.19

Hussey's figures are remarkably similiar to Jayawardene's besides the amount of not outs, which have a massive effect on his average. A difference of 14 well trumps, Ponting and Yousufs 9, and the Lankans 3.

While he's not the best batsman in the world, he's certainly top 5-10.

 

[pasag]

Top of the bunch excluding matches vs. Bang, Zim and ICC World XI since Hussey debuted.
(At least 1000 runs, average 60+)

Name, Runs Scored, Average
Hundreds/ Fifties Matches/Innings NO's
Runs scored per innings

Mohammad Yousuf 2498 @ 78.06
10/6 20/36 4
69.39
MEK Hussey 2229 @ 69.65
8/9 24/40 8
55.73
RT Ponting 2622 @ 69.00
12/10 24/43 5
60.98
DPMD Jayawardene 2263 @ 61.16
8/9 22/39 2
58.03
KC Sangakkara 2115 @ 60.42
7/7 21/37 2
57.19

Hussey's figures are remarkably similiar to Jayawardene's besides the amount of not outs, which have a massive effect on his average. A difference of 14 well trumps, Ponting and Yousufs 9, and the Lankans 3.

While he's not the best batsman in the world, he's certainly top 5-10.

Basically said what Prince EWS said, just much messier

 

[Athlai]

Basically said what Prince EWS said, just much messier

Messy? Never

I just wanted to look at the extent at which the average was altered by the not outs and opposition really.

 

[Richard]

Come on, you're better than that.

Doubt it TBH.

Hussey is just cashing in on flat-tracks and poor bowlers. Nasser Hussain > Mike Hussey.

That's unlikely, but not OOTQ.

 

[zaremba]

Messy? Never

I just wanted to look at the extent at which the average was altered by the not outs and opposition really.

Averages aren't altered (in the sense of being distorted) by not outs. If you're good enough to avoid being dismissed by the opposition, why should your average be adjusted so as to pretend that you had in fact been dismissed?

Consider the following example. Batsman A scores 40 and 40 not out. Batsman B makes one score of 80. Both have managed to score the same number of runs, both have been dismissed the same number of times, and both therefore have the same average. But A's average hasn't been inflated. On the contrary, his achievement is greater than B's. A has, in scoring the same number of runs, had to play himself in twice whereas B has only had to do so once. And as anyone who's ever batted knows, the hardest bit about batting is playing yourself in. Once you're in, the runs come much more easily.

 

[Athlai]

Averages aren't altered (in the sense of being distorted) by not outs. If you're good enough to avoid being dismissed by the opposition, why should your average be adjusted so as to pretend that you had in fact been dismissed?

Consider the following example. Batsman A scores 40 and 40 not out. Batsman B makes one score of 80. Both have managed to score the same number of runs, both have been dismissed the same number of times, and both therefore have the same average. But A's average hasn't been inflated. On the contrary, his achievement is greater than B's. A has, in scoring the same number of runs, had to play himself in twice whereas B has only had to do so once. And as anyone who's ever batted knows, the hardest bit about batting is playing yourself in. Once you're in, the runs come much more easily.

4 of his 8 not outs come from either declarations or chasing very low totals. Thats my main problem, when his team gets bowled out I have no problem with not outs. But when Aussie needs to get practically no runs or when they're well on top he's in a position that will all most certainly get a NO.

 

[Richard]

Why should he be penalised for coming in with 10 runs needed for victory?

In the analysis you offer, he'd come off better had he got a DNB. I don't see how this makes much sense.

No-one should judge anything by a score of 6*. It's a complete irrelevance.

 

[Athlai]

Why should he be penalised for coming in with 10 runs needed for victory?

In the analysis you offer, he'd come off better had he got a DNB. I don't see how this makes much sense.

No-one should judge anything by a score of 6*. It's a complete irrelevance.

Hussey has substantially more not outs than any of the other players mentioned, solely because of the team he plays in and position he bats. He is benefited by this, and I'd just like us to acknowledge that, because there are a handful of batsman that have performed to a slightly better level than him without the same benefits.

 

[inbox24]

Hussey has substantially more not outs than any of the other players mentioned, solely because of the team he plays in and position he bats. He is benefited by this, and I'd just like us to acknowledge that, because there are a handful of batsman that have performed to a slightly better level than him without the same benefits.

Yeah, but isn't that implying that anyone who bats at Hussey's position would have a similar number of not outs and hence a high average?

 

[Richard]

Hussey has substantially more not outs than any of the other players mentioned, solely because of the team he plays in and position he bats. He is benefited by this, and I'd just like us to acknowledge that, because there are a handful of batsman that have performed to a slightly better level than him without the same benefits.

But he'd benefit the same amount if he got DNBs. Would you say the same thing there?

 

[Athlai]

Yeah, but isn't that implying that anyone who bats at Hussey's position would have a similar number of not outs and hence a high average?

In the Australian team during this period of time. Hussey is one of the top batsman in the world no doubt, yet his sky-high figures are somewhat inflated. Instead of sky-high I think they should just be a nice standard 'awesome'.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Hussey has substantially more not outs than any of the other players mentioned, solely because of the team he plays in and position he bats. He is benefited by this, and I'd just like us to acknowledge that, because there are a handful of batsman that have performed to a slightly better level than him without the same benefits.

There's maybe an element of truth in what you say, inasmuch as he's likely to have more not outs than an opener, say, but any advantage he gains average-wise from playing in the middle order is mitigated by the fact that he's also more likely to have a non-specialist partner at the other end. He'd often has to temper his innings to take account of this.

Actually, as a related aside that I don't think has been mentioned so far in the thread, he must be one of the best players with the tail I've ever seen. His ton in the first innings was a prime example of this and I also think of the century (IIRC) stand he put on with McGrath in the Boxing Day test versus SA a couple of years ago. Turned the game on its head.

 

[Athlai]

There's maybe an element of truth in what you say, inasmuch as he's likely to have more not outs than an opener, say, but any advantage he gains average-wise from playing in the middle order is mitigated by the fact that he's also more likely to have a non-specialist partner at the other end. He'd often has to temper his innings to take account of this.

Actually, as a related aside that I don't think has been mentioned so far in the thread, he must be one of the best players with the tail I've ever seen. His ton in the first innings was a prime example of this and I also think of the century (IIRC) stand he put on with McGrath in the Boxing Day test versus SA a couple of years ago. Turned the game on its head.

I've basically singled out 4 not outs where he played only with the top order. Reckon when your teams bowled out your not out is fully justified.

 

[Top_Cat]

There's maybe an element of truth in what you say, inasmuch as he's likely to have more not outs than an opener, say, but any advantage he gains average-wise from playing in the middle order is mitigated by the fact that he's also more likely to have a non-specialist partner at the other end. He'd often has to temper his innings to take account of this.

Actually, as a related aside that I don't think has been mentioned so far in the thread, he must be one of the best players with the tail I've ever seen. His ton in the first innings was a prime example of this and I also think of the century (IIRC) stand he put on with McGrath in the Boxing Day test versus SA a couple of years ago. Turned the game on its head.

Don't forget the one in Adelaide too.

Seriously, that his average is inflated by not-outs is a charge more accurately levelled at a Bevan. Hussey has remained not-out in situations where others would have lost their heads and, as BB said, batted exceptionally well with the tail and turned 250 scores in 400+. He's done the business for Aus in tough and easier conditions, anyone who's actually watched him do it would know this.

 

[Athlai]

But he'd benefit the same amount if he got DNBs. Would you say the same thing there?

Statistics are by no means perfect and I reckon in Hussey's case 4 or so of these cases would have been more appropriate if he DNB.

 

[Richard]

For sure they would (I'm sure both parties, Hussey and whoever was dismissed with 10 needed for victory, would've been far happier with such a situation) but I don't see that it's fair to essentially penalise a batsman for coming in when there's absolutely nothing to gain.

As I say, if you want to get the best possible picture of Hussey's (or indeed anyone's) career, you'd do best to ignore single-figure not-out scores. As I say, they really don't matter in the slightest. They obviously do the batsman no good at all, but equally it's highly unfair to hold anything, however small, against the batsman because of them.