Are ARs just better by default?

[Johan]

All time XI logic says Gilchrist > Muralitharan, like be for ****ing real.

 

[Randomfan]

All time XI logic says Gilchrist > Muralitharan, like be for ****ing real.

Nah, it says Gilly adds most value compared to other keeper batsmen in history and nothing else.
Gilly can's do spin bowling and Murali can't do keeping. They are not fighting for a spot.

Marshall, McGrath, Steyn, IK, Hadlee , Lillee, Donald all fo them are competing for a pacer slot. All of them can bowl pace. If difference is minuscule and their runs make the team stronger due to all round abilities then they will be first to get selected. It's not like Gilly and Murali.

 

[Johan]

Data set is built on tons of judgement calls for specialist vs all rounders.

And yes, we shouldn't use them exclusively. We should try to see stats, achievement and whatever we can use to arrive at a conclusion. We should neither ignore stats nor all time XI data sets just because it goes agaisnt pre determined belief.

And what are these judgement calls made on? with extraordinary teams that will not need extra utility or handy disciplines and can afford to focus purely on primary disciplines, therefore the whole premise is conceptually unrealistic and invalid.

No, we are obligated to ignore all time XIs. It's beyond disgusting that you attempt to put statistics and achievements in the same level as nerd mental masturabation exercise like all time XIs. The statistics are a reflective number of what the cricketers actually did on the Cricket field, so are achievements reflective of what they achieved in the game, All time XIs are not real and the entire point is to make something detached from reality, the entire concept is built on faulty premises. The club team hypothetical was infinitely more valuable than all time XIs, because atleast club teams actually exist

 

[OverratedSanity]

None of these factors hold true nor precludes Hadlee or Imran. There's surely no limit or diminishing returns on batting depth is there?

Everyone knows there are diminishing returns after a point.

 

[Johan]

Nah, it says Gilly adds most value than other keeper batsman and nothing else.
Gilly and Murali are not competing for a spot. They serve two differnet function in team.
Gilly can's do spin bowling and Murlai can't do keeping.

Marshall, McGrth, Steyn, IK, Hadlee , Lillee all fo them are competing for pacerr slot. If difference is miniscule and their runs make team a whole lot better then they will be first to get selected.

Great to see we agree that the value a player brings to world XI isn't just reflective of quality in general, No normal team is going to pick Gilly over Murali, it just won't happen, as one is massively better.

lol what, can you show me one all rounder who bats 10 or 11? if no, then that's the same as Murali and Gilly where these tailender positions are handed out to specialists, why would they try to reinvent the wheel and put all rounders at 10 and 11? on top, they don't need so as they quite literally have Bradman and Gilly so they can afford to go for the best bowlers, in an average team those runs the all rounders make with the bat and the insurance they give are a far, far bigger factor than the one extra run McGrath and Marshall save per wicket, which amounts to 2 runs per innings.

 

[Randomfan]

Great to see we agree that the value a player brings to world XI isn't just reflective of quality in general, No normal team is going to pick Gilly over Murali, it just won't happen, as one is massively better.

Not picking Murali for keeping or not picking Gilly for spin bowling , does not prove one is massively better than other. Not sure how are you making that conclusion. They can't to do each others role.

 

[OverratedSanity]

This has to be an intentionally stupid line of discussion.

 

[Randomfan]

And what are these judgement calls made on? with extraordinary teams that will not need extra utility or handy disciplines and can afford to focus purely on primary disciplines,

Yes, it's a valid point.

Specialists can spent more time focusing on one skill. So all rounders falling behind specialist is an expected outcome. Now if gap is miniscule in primary, as claimed by many, all rounders will be selected by a vast majorities all the time. But that's not the case.

Nothing wrong in selcting all rounders, I have put IK, Kallis, Hadlee and Sobers in one team in past. But gap in primary between SRT and Kallis or Marshall and IK is large enough. If it was not large enough, IK and Kallis will be lock in all tme XIs. That's not the case.

 

[Johan]

Yes, it's a valid point.

Specialists can spent more time focusing on one skill. So all rounders falling behind specialist is an expected outcome. Now if gap is miniscule in primary, as claimed by many, all rounders will be selected by a vast majorities all the time. But that's not the case.

Nothing wrong in selcting all rounders, I have put IK, Kallis, Hadlee and Sobers in one team in past. But gap in primary between SRT and Kallis or Marshall and IK is large enough. If it was not large enough, IK and Kallis will be lock in all tme XIs. That's not the case.

Ofcourse it is.

I don't see how a person can unironically believe there is a big gap between Hadlee and McGrath or Marshall as bowlers without being intentionally obtuse, same with Imran too tbh. The gap being wide is not mathematically sustainable, especially if it is wider than the batting advantage Hadlee and especially Imran bring in.

The value of all rounders fundamentally lie on their overall utility their secondary and often tertiary disciplines bring in, amplifying the team in all three dimensions, if the team is strong enough to ignore secondary and tertiary disciplines for number ten and number eleven, they will do that, doesn't mean a Cricketer loses value for batting 7 in a real team and working well there just because in a hypothetical team the selectors would've the resources to ignore it in favour of primary discipline.

I shouldn't need to explain this honestly.

 

[Randomfan]

Ofcourse it is.

I don't see how a person can unironically believe there is a big gap between Hadlee and McGrath or Marshall as bowlers without being intentionally obtuse, same with Imran too tbh.

There is not too much gap bttween Hadlee and McGrath or Marshall as bowlers. They are top 3. We can still rank them in order.


There are few more bowlers between IK and top 3. Gap is bigger here, but IK adds more in batting compared to anyone from the list. That's why folks will be making a judgement call about extra runs by IK being worth it or not. Different people will come to different conclusion. Hadlee is number 3 for me and I don't know how others see him, but he adds less value as batsman compared to IK.

As I said earlier, this is not the exlcusive way to judge anyone, but totally ingoring it made no sense to me. Anyway, nothing much I can add here but plenty of strong discussion around it in this thread by various posters. By reading all different views, I do learn new stuff at times and change my opinions.

 

[Johan]

There is not too much gap bwteen Hadlee and McGrath or Marshall as bowlers. They are top 3. We can still rank them in order.


There are few more bowlers between IK and top 3. Gap is bigger here, but IK adds more in batting compared to anyone from the list. That's why folks will be making a judgement call.

McGrath averages 1 less run per wicket than IK at the expense of 25 or so less runs every single innings, not close mathematically and impact wise either.

 

[Randomfan]

McGrath averages 1 less run per wicket than IK at the expense of 25 or so less runs every single innings, not close mathematically and impact wise either.

Quality and volume both, Mcgrath is not one run apart from IK. If you genuinely think that IK and McGrath are so close then picking IK over Mcgrath should be no brainer decision in all time XI. Most don't see it that way. I don't need to point out why.

 

[Johan]

Quality and volume both, Mcgrath is not one run apart from IK. If you genuinely think that IK and McGrath are so close then picking IK over Mcgrath should be no brainer decision in all time XI. Most don't see it that way. I don't need to point out why.

That's the statistical gap, contextually it's probably even smaller. The reason McGrath makes the XI more is because he is a better bowler and nobody generally cares about the batting of a #10 or #11, but yes, they are one run apart, maybe two if you reallllllly push it.

 

[OverratedSanity]

If you genuinely think that IK and McGrath are so close then picking IK over Mcgrath should be no brainer decision in all time XI.

Agreed

 

[DrWolverine]

There is not too much gap bttween Hadlee and McGrath or Marshall as bowlers. They are top 3. We can still rank them in order.

McGrath & Hadlee are similar in terms of their claim to greatness. Maco had the best peak but lacks longevity. All 3 can be ranked in any order in my opinion.

 

[DrWolverine]

There’s a small gap between McGrath and Imran but none between McGrath and Hadlee as bowlers. That’s why Hadlee over McGrath is common while Imran over McGrath is rare.

 

[Johan]

Life would be so easy if people can just come to terms with the basic reality that Imran Khan is the third best Test cricketer of all time.

 

[DrWolverine]

Life would be so easy if people can just come to terms with the basic reality that Imran is the third best Test cricketer of all time.

Imran is the top contender for 3rd best test cricketer

 

[subshakerz]

Rankign of players - A shorter sample
All time Xis - drastically longer sample with 1000s.

Idea that we should totally ignore 1000s does not make any sense. Yes, you can consider individual ranking as well and combine it with all time XI jusdgement calls. Not stop there, use whatever is availble. Don't igore anything totally just because it goes against predermined held belief.

Does individual ranking put all rounders better by default - Answer is No
Does all time XIs picks allrounders over spcialists - Answer is even bigger No
Add more points - some will support one view and some will not support....

What 1000s of ATGXIs are you talking about? Youre just making stuff up.

 

[subshakerz]

Nah, it says Gilly adds most value compared to other keeper batsmen in history and nothing else.
Gilly can's do spin bowling and Murali can't do keeping. They are not fighting for a spot.

Marshall, McGrath, Steyn, IK, Hadlee , Lillee, Donald all fo them are competing for a pacer slot. All of them can bowl pace. If difference is minuscule and their runs make the team stronger due to all round abilities then they will be first to get selected. It's not like Gilly and Murali.

Hadlee and Imran are often competing for a dedicated AR spot.

This is obvious and pretending they aren’t is like pretending Gilly is competing with batsmen.

Quality and volume both, Mcgrath is not one run apart from IK. If you genuinely think that IK and McGrath are so close then picking IK over Mcgrath should be no brainer decision in all time XI. Most don't see it that way. I don't need to point out why.

Because Imran is competing for a no.7/8 spot and McGrath for a no.11 spot.