The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[Jack1]

This is high degree generalizing. You would not see many indians considering Kumble as an ATG.

Take my post with a pinch of salt.

 

[TheJediBrah]

James Anderson is certainly not an ATG. Those numbers mentioned by Logan confirms that he was extremely ordinary in most countries.His longevity takes him to a "good to very good bowler" bracket though.

If only we had a specific term describe players just below the level of ATG . . .

 

[Jack1]

If only we had a specific term describe players just below the level of ATG . . .

ATG
Great
Good
Okay
Average
Poor
Bad
Gash

 

[h_hurricane]

If only we had a specific term describe players just below the level of ATG . . .

I think there is a little more than that separating ATGs and Anderson. Some one like Willis, Snow or Gillespie perfectly fit the level which you described.

 

[Jack1]

I think there is a little more than that separating ATGs and Anderson. Some one like Willis, Snow or Gillespie perfectly fit the level which you described.

Willis is on the cusp of heaven and hell. Maybe the closest? Inclined to give Willis the benefit of the doubt due to his legendary analysis skills and give him ATG status (token ATG status)

 

[h_hurricane]

Willis is on the cusp of heaven and hell. Maybe the closest? Inclined to give Willis the benefit of the doubt due to his legendary analysis skills and give him ATG status (token ATG status)

One thing I noticed about Willis is, he was pretty good everywhere(except 3 tests against WI which can be ignored). Averaged sub 30 everywhere else. I feel only a bad knee was between him and bonafide ATG status.

Snow, if not for his run-ins with the administrators, should have played a lot more away tests. He relished playing abroad, averaged sub 21 !

Gillespie, again, has a balanced home and away record.

 

[Bolo]

I think that the <25 bowling average is practically hardwired into people's assessment of quicks as atgs. Even people who claim not to care about stats- it's just been accepted for so long that people who don't intend using the distinction do it anyway. No bowler from recent times who averages above 25 is considered an atg (although the odd person does make exception for Anderson), and no bowler averaging below 25 with a sizable career typically misses the cut (with the exception of philander).

 

[Jack1]

I think that the <25 bowling average is practically hardwired into people's assessment of quicks as atgs. Even people who claim not to care about stats- it's just been accepted for so long that people who don't intend using the distinction do it anyway. No bowler from recent times who averages above 25 is considered an atg (although the odd person does make exception for Anderson), and no bowler averaging below 25 with a sizable career typically misses the cut (with the exception of philander).

I consider Philander ATG bowler due to his batting average. Shame he’s so injury prone. I don’t care that he lacks pace personally. Obviously the injury prone part doesn’t help his cause but a fully did Philander is ATG in my book.

 

[stephen]

Anderson's career stats are around about McDermott's (with a lot better longevity) and that's generally about how good he was. Great on his day, ordinary at other times. ATVG level player. Fans of the side will love them for their servanthood to their country and will remember the highlights while non fans won't think too much about them when they're gone.

Other ATVG players:

Gillespie
Kumble
Vaas
Zaheer
Walsh (though many people would consider him an ATG, he was certainly a step down from Ambrose)
Benaud
Inzimam

 

[stephen]

I think that the <25 bowling average is practically hardwired into people's assessment of quicks as atgs. Even people who claim not to care about stats- it's just been accepted for so long that people who don't intend using the distinction do it anyway. No bowler from recent times who averages above 25 is considered an atg (although the odd person does make exception for Anderson), and no bowler averaging below 25 with a sizable career typically misses the cut (with the exception of philander).

Philander's fitness has counted against him, a lot like it did with Ryan Harris. Thing is, you'd put him behind quite a few other South African bowlers (Steyn, Donald, Pollock, Rabada) but he's statistically as good as any of them. Underrated player and I like the way he just comes out and gets things done despite the criticisms people have of him.

 

[h_hurricane]

Anderson's career stats are around about McDermott's (with a lot better longevity) and that's generally about how good he was. Great on his day, ordinary at other times. ATVG level player. Fans of the side will love them for their servanthood to their country and will remember the highlights while non fans won't think too much about them when they're gone.

Other ATVG players:

Gillespie
Kumble
Vaas
Zaheer
Walsh (though many people would consider him an ATG, he was certainly a step down from Ambrose)
Benaud
Inzimam

Zaheer certainly was not ATVG, and it is criminal to bucket him in the same class as Walsh. The gulf between them was more than that between Mcgrath and McDermott.

 

[Bolo]

I consider Philander ATG bowler due to his batting average. Shame he’s so injury prone. I don’t care that he lacks pace personally. Obviously the injury prone part doesn’t help his cause but a fully did Philander is ATG in my book.

Bowling alone I mean. You can upgrade him to atg player on the basis of his batting if you want, but exclusively as a bowler, he doesn't crack a nod from most pundits.

Too few career wickets, too high a home/away discrepancy, and too few wpm for me. If any one of these issues weren't present I'd probably call him an atg, considering his average and SR.

Anderson's career stats are around about McDermott's (with a lot better longevity) and that's generally about how good he was. Great on his day, ordinary at other times. ATVG level player. Fans of the side will love them for their servanthood to their country and will remember the highlights while non fans won't think too much about them when they're gone.

Other ATVG players:

Gillespie
Kumble
Vaas
Zaheer
Walsh (though many people would consider him an ATG, he was certainly a step down from Ambrose)
Benaud
Inzimam

Did you just stick zaheer and walsh in the same category? No. No, no, no.

 

[stephen]

Zaheer certainly was not ATVG, and it is criminal to bucket him in the same class as Walsh. The gulf between them was more than that between Mcgrath and McDermott.

Yeah Walsh was a better bowler and maybe I'm giving too much credit to Zaheer, but how many other Indian pacers have done what he did? Kapil Dev is an ATVG in my eyes and the only one that has been clearly better than Zaheer (though Bumrah probably has already become the first picked Indian quick in an AT team). Shami is the only Indian quick other than Kapil to have taken over 100 wickets at an average of less than 30.

Maybe I'm being too generous.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Yeah Walsh was a better bowler and maybe I'm giving too much credit to Zaheer, but how many other Indian pacers have done what he did? Kapil Dev is an ATVG in my eyes and the only one that has been clearly better than Zaheer (though Bumrah probably has already become the first picked Indian quick in an AT team). Shami is the only Indian quick other than Kapil to have taken over 100 wickets at an average of less than 30.

Maybe I'm being too generous.

He shouldn't get credit for other Indian fast bowlers being crap

 

[OverratedSanity]

Walsh is definitely kind of underrated on here. I've seen people lump him in with Gillespie and anderson and just going by the records, it isn't particularly close.

 

[Jack1]

Yeah Walsh was a better bowler and maybe I'm giving too much credit to Zaheer, but how many other Indian pacers have done what he did? Kapil Dev is an ATVG in my eyes and the only one that has been clearly better than Zaheer (though Bumrah probably has already become the first picked Indian quick in an AT team). Shami is the only Indian quick other than Kapil to have taken over 100 wickets at an average of less than 30.

Maybe I'm being too generous.

I had a read on you long ago Stephen. If you are including a player (or excluding) them because of ethnicity or nationality that's nonsense Stephen. Something really weird about that post putting Walsh in there. I'm not going to say it bluntly, but it's blindingly obvious what it's about. Walsh is an ATG great bowler whether you like it or not. I frankly don't give a **** if Ambrose was better, that's irrelevant.

Walsh is definitely kind of underrated on here. I've seen people lump him in with Gillespie and anderson and just going by the records, it isn't particularly close.

Yeah and it's obvious why. He's on another level to Gillespie and Anderson.

 

[h_hurricane]

Walsh and Pollock are ATGs. You don't have to be at Ambrose or Mcgrath level as a bowler to be ATG. Walsh and Pollock ticked so many boxes in their career, the kind of fair weather anomalies which exist in some one like Anderson didn't exist in them. Certainly 2 under-rated cricketers. Think about it, the two had a freaking 900 plus wickets between them at around 24.

 

[Logan]

Shaun Pollock is one of the all time greats. When he was playing his 75th Test match, he took 300 wickets at an average of 20.87. That is extraordinary.

Shaun Pollock played in the same time as Akram, Waqar, Ambrose, Donald and McGrath. He still managed to be ranked as the number one bowler for many months.

 

[Bolo]

Walsh and Pollock are ATGs. You don't have to be at Ambrose or Mcgrath level as a bowler to be ATG. Walsh and Pollock ticked so many boxes in their career, the kind of fair weather anomalies which exist in some one like Anderson didn't exist in them. Certainly 2 under-rated cricketers. Think about it, the two had a freaking 900 plus wickets between them at around 24.

Pretty much nobody on this site disagrees that they are atgs. They do tend to get lumped in the lowest tier of atgs though, which is where they belong. Where they get underestimated is the distance between them and the other atgs- there really isn't that much separating pollock from the statistically identical Akram for example.

 

[Jack1]

Shaun Pollock is one of the all time greats. When he was playing his 75th Test match, he took 300 wickets at an average of 20.87. That is extraordinary.

Shaun Pollock played in the same time as Akram, Waqar, Ambrose, Donald and McGrath. He still managed to be ranked as the number one bowler for many months.

Pollock could bat too. 32.31 average with the bat. Pollock was a better all-rounder than Botham and it's not even close that's how good Pollock was.