The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[OverratedSanity]

Like are you saying if Smith retired averaging 60 after 150 tests hed only be equal to Sachin averaging 53 after 200 because Sachin had a period in the middle of 150 tests averaging 60?

Uh, yes. Of course. How is this remotely controversial.

 

[smash84]

I don't think Smith has to play 200 tests to be considered better than Sachin.

But of course it has to be a number that accounts for longevity. What that number is will vary from person to person. What do you guys think? Around 120-130 test should be a good enough number. Lara has 130 tests and he is in the same league as Sachin isn't he?

 

[Teja.]

I don't think Smith has to play 200 tests to be considered better than Sachin.

I don't think anyone is saying he should play 200 tests. The argument is that if he plays 150 tests, it should be as good or close to Tendulkar 92-10 where he averaged 59 over 150+ tests.

 

[honestbharani]

I don't think Smith has to play 200 tests to be considered better than Sachin.

But of course it has to be a number that accounts for longevity. What that number is will vary from person to person. What do you guys think? Around 120-130 test should be a good enough number. Lara has 130 tests and he is in the same league as Sachin isn't he?

Its not just number of tests, its the number of years too. Coz that will show the challenges you faced over time.

 

[Daemon]

Uh, yes. Of course. How is this remotely controversial.

Really? What if Smith declined at the end but had 125 Tests averaging 63 or something?

 

[honestbharani]

Really? What if Smith declined at the end but had 125 Tests averaging 63 or something?

He can call himself Ponting.

 

[Teja.]

Really? What if Smith declined at the end but had 125 Tests averaging 63 or something?

Even a serious decline would get him to average around 57-58 over 150 tests though and that is comparable to Sachin.

If he does average 63+ over 125 tests though, I think he's in the same league regardless of whether he plays to 150 or not.

 

[smash84]

I don't think anyone is saying he should play 200 tests. The argument is that if he plays 150 tests, it should be as good or close to Tendulkar 92-10 where he averaged 59 over 150+ tests.

I can see merit in this argument but this takes away some of his worst years doesn't it?

Why not chop off the number 8 years of Smith in the beginning then?

 

[honestbharani]

I can see merit in this argument but this takes away some of his worst years doesn't it?

Why not chop off the number 8 years of Smith in the beginning then?

Coz its literally 5 tests.

 

[Daemon]

Even a decline would get him to average around 57-58 over 150 tests though and that is comparable to Sachin.

No I mean if he averaged say 63 up to his 125th Test, then had a bit of a decline like Tendulkars post WC run and ended up with 60, is it fair to compare Tendulkar’s 150 peak with Smith’s full career? I would think you should snip out the last few of Smith’s as well to be fair.

 

[Teja.]

I can see merit in this argument but this takes away some of his worst years doesn't it?

Why not chop off the number 8 years of Smith in the beginning then?

Yeah, sure. Let's chop them off. I don't care how many tests he plays as long as he a stretch of 140 or so tests averaging 60. Chop off Smith decline and early years.

 

[OverratedSanity]

No I mean if he averaged say 63 up to his 125th Test, then had a bit of a decline like Tendulkars post WC run and ended up with 60, is it fair to compare Tendulkar’s 150 peak with Smith’s full career? I would think you should snip out the last few of Smith’s as well to be fair.

Absolutely its fair because tendulkar's sample is even larger

 

[Teja.]

No I mean if he averaged say 63 up to his 125th Test, then had a bit of a decline like Tendulkars post WC run and ended up with 60, is it fair to compare Tendulkar’s 150 peak with Smith’s full career? I would think you should snip out the last few of Smith’s as well to be fair.

Tendulkar's 150 peak would be over 19 years which would be more than Smith's career even with 150 tests though. It's entirely fair.

 

[mr_mister]

Lol. In this hypothetical scenario Smith would probably be only 1500 or so runs short of Sachin's run scoring record in 50 less tests. The century record would be either broken or very close to it.

There wouldn't be a non-Indian on the planet who have any hesitation declaring him the number 2 after BRadman

 

[Daemon]

Absolutely its fair because tendulkar's sample is even larger

Then it becomes advantageous to continue playing even if you average 0 for like another 100 tests so no one can match your 200 test peak.

 

[Teja.]

Lol. In this hypothetical scenario Smith would probably be only 1500 or so runs short of Sachin's run scoring record in 50 less tests. The century record would be either broken or very close to it.

There wouldn't be a non-Indian on the planet who have any hesitation declaring him the number 2 after BRadman

I mean 150 tests averaging 59 has been done before.

If Indians bias is your argument, good luck, haha.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Lol. In this hypothetical scenario Smith would probably be only 1500 or so runs short of Sachin's run scoring record in 50 less tests. The century record would be either broken or very close to it.

Actually in this hypothetical, tendulkar would have the literally the same numbers over the same 150 test stretch. And a few meh tests on top.

Playing meh for 30-40 tests (Sachin) > not playing cricket (hypothetical Smith)

 

[mr_mister]

@teja Yeah maybe I shouldn't have said that part. I take it back. But still the 150 tests averaging 59 has been done as a peak not as a career.

 

[Teja.]

Then it becomes advantageous to continue playing even if you average 0 for like another 100 tests so no one can match your 200 test peak.

We're comparing a hypothetical bloke averaging 60 over 125 tests with a bloke averaging 60 over 150 tests. I don't see why you should punish Sachin for averaging late 30s as a 16 yo.

 

[mr_mister]

Actually in this hypothetical, tendulkar would have the literally the same numbers over the same 150 test stretch. And a few meh tests on top.

Playing meh for 30-40 tests (Sachin) > not playing cricket (hypothetical Smith)

reply to Daemon his arguments are smarter than mine