The best ODI batsmen

Continued from What the best ODI batsmen have…

This post is one in a series called ‘The Sachin Tendulkar Debate’

We started with a set of six batsmen to compare on previously defined parameters. Their career highlights:

Batsman	ODI’s	Runs	Average	Strike Rate
Adam Gilchrist	287	9619	35.89	96.94
Brian Lara	298	10353	40.44	79.58
Hershelle Gibbs	244	8038	36.37	83.32
Kevin Pietersen	90	3109	47.83	87.60
Ricky Ponting	311	11251	42.13	80.14
Virender Sehwag	198	6378	34.47	101.83
Sachin Tendulkar	425	16684	44.37	85.66

Why not Mohammed Yousuf, or Michael Bevan, or Saurav Ganguly, or scores of other very good ODI batsmen? Because, these names came readily to mind, and combined, they should offer a reasonable comparison against the performance of the focus of this debate, Sachin Tendulkar.

Consistency – Removing the effect of Minnow-bashing

The first test was to remove all those runs scored against minnows to see whose averages get impacted the most. For the purpose of this discussion, the term ‘minnows’ includes the teams that suck more consistently, than others. The list includes: Bangladesh, Bermuda, Canada, Hong Kong, Ireland, Kenya, Namibia, Netherlands, Scotland, UAE, USA, Zimbabwe.

Batsman	Adjusted Average	Impact to Career Average
Pietersen	47.72	-0.24%
Tendulkar	42.43	-4.37%
Ponting	41.53	-1.43%
Lara	39.54	-2.23%
Gilchrist	34.99	-2.50%
Sehwag	33.91	-1.63%
Gibbs	33.68	-7.38%

Bad news for Tendulkar fans right off the bat. Barring Gibbs, SRT’s average takes the biggest hit when the free runs against the lesser teams are excluded. Predictably, all the batsmen in this consideration did a little better against the minnows, however, Pietersen’s phenomenal average shows an imperceptible change while Gibbs loses the most. Note that the adjusted average still shows that SRT has scored (over his entire career) nearly 3 runs per game more than Lara, 7 runs a game more than Gilchrist and 8.5 runs per game more than Sehwag.

Performance against the top sides

Against	Australia	England	India	New Zealand	Pakistan	South Africa	Sri Lanka	West Indies	Variation
Ponting		-1.89	-5.84	0.19	-8.28	-1.64	-2.61	6.94	4.82
Tendulkar	3.84	-0.71		3.62	-2.75	-10.60	0.64	11.74	6.85
Gilchrist		-2.05	1.87	-3.04	-1.90	-6.82	15.38	-4.37	7.33
Lara	-0.01	-8.96	-6.91	11.32	3.66	-3.68	9.25		7.80
Gibbs	-3.59	-4.49	13.13	3.53	-5.35		-9.80	9.28	8.44
Sehwag	-11.36	3.52		17.49	2.69	-7.55	-1.21	-6.72	9.63
Pietersen	8.28		2.42	-11.92	-14.72	50.95	-15.34	-8.72	23.53

The table above shows difference between the adjusted career average and average against each team. The negative numbers in red show opposition against whom the batsman scored lower than his career average. The right-most column titled ‘Variation’ is a measure of the volatility in the performance of a batsman against the various teams. Lower the variation, better the batsman. The assumption here is that the best batsmen shouldn’t have glaring weaknesses against any teams.

As expected, all batsmen have their favourites and their bugbears, some of them surprising. For example, Gilchrist seemed to have more trouble against the South Africans while gorging on the Lankans. Pietersen on the other hand has an astronomical average against his countrymen while having significant trouble against Sri Lanka, Pakistan and New Zealand. Pietersen has the best average of the lot but he will need to get more consistent against teams other than South Africa and Australia to be considered a great player. Similarly, Sehwag will not do his talent justice if he keeps under-performing against the Australians.

The table also shows how arguments based on Tendulkar’s lower average against the South Africans are hollow because, apparently, every player has teams they’ve not quite been at their best against.

Going by variation, Ponting and Tendulkar are the most consistent irrespective of opposition.

Percentage of team runs

	Tendulkar	Ponting	Pietersen	Lara	Gibbs	Gilchrist	Sehwag
1990	12%			6%
1991	17%			12%
1992	20%			22%
1993	12%			26%
1994	21%			14%
1995	20%	13%		31%
1996	25%	14%		30%	12%	4%
1997	14%	36%		23%	8%	17%
1998	30%	21%		22%	4%	15%
1999	19%	18%		13%	18%	15%
2000	17%	16%		17%	15%	14%	8%
2001	32%	22%		21%	17%	18%	13%
2002	23%	18%		20%	17%	15%	18%
2003	26%	20%		21%	19%	16%	15%
2004	17%	16%	46%	17%	10%	18%	11%
2005	11%	18%	29%	13%	23%	14%	13%
2006	20%	15%	19%	15%	15%	16%	12%
2007	19%	31%	19%	18%	20%	14%	14%
2008	17%	10%	21%		13%	14%	21%
2009	20%	13%	10%		17%		22%

the cells in bold red italics are the highest for that year amongst the 7 batsmen considered here

the cells in bold black italics show contributions greater than 20%

The table shows the runs scored in each calendar year as a percentage of the average team score. Considering that the typical ODI lineup, there’ are usually 6 specialist batsmen with a couple of handy lower order hitters, anything approaching 20% of team runs would indicate more than a decent contribution. What surprised me was that Gilchrist and Gibbs rarely breached the 20% barrier (Gilchrist never and Gibbs twice) – An indicator of the relative freedom they had to blaze away to wrest the initiative early. After his initial years of carefree stroke-making, Sehwag will see more of the run-scoring load over the remainder of his career.

Ponting has had one of the most consistent careers with substantial contribution to the team cause almost all through except in the last 2 years.

The frequency of numbers in bold in the Tendulkar column underlines that he has been the bedrock of the Indian ODI innings for most of his career. His worst year without a doubt was 2005 but the last four suggest that there’s some gas left in the tank.

Appetite for the big runs

	Scores over 50 (excluding minnows)	Frequency of big scores
Pietersen	25	2.88
Tendulkar	113	3.17
Ponting	79	3.39
Lara	65	3.89
Gilchrist	61	4.02
Sehwag	37	4.51
Gibbs	43	4.58

Frequency of big scores = Number of games between big scores

The longevity of Tendulkar’s career has been used as an excuse by many an expert as the sole explanation for the mountains of runs scored. The table shows scores over 50 against quality opposition. Only Pietersen, who has played all of 90 ODIs scores big more often than Tendulkar.

As an aside, a look at the results of their big scores show that Pietersen’s efforts have been in vain 73% of the time while Lara ended up on the losing side after scoring over 50 nearly half the time.

This stat doesn’t show much except the mediocre ODI sides that Pietersen and Lara play in. The difference in Tendulkar and Sehwag’s ratio suggests an improvement in Indian sides over the last few years. For those who use difference in “average in games won” versus “average in games lost” as arguments are just plain silly.

Ability to dominate

	Strike Rate	Innings*
Sehwag	99.91%	167
Gilchrist	95.66%	241
Pietersen	87.34%	66
Tendulkar	84.39%	358
Ponting	80.40%	268
Gibbs	80.15%	197
Lara	77.46%	253

* innings exclude matches against Bangladesh, Bermuda, Canada, Hong Kong, Ireland, Kenya, Namibia, Netherlands, Scotland, UAE, USA, Zimbabwe

Table shows comparison of strike rates (runs scored per 100 balls faced) and Sehwag and Gilchrist underline the sheer destructive capability they bring to their sides. Among the others there is not much to choose and considering the people Tendulkar scores faster than, there is not a lot anyone can detract from it all.

Big match temperament

The biggest drum his detractors like to bang on is that “Tendulkar is not a big-match player”. If only world cup finals count, then our sample set is all of 8 games amongst the seven batsmen here. So, looking at Finals, Semi-Finals & Quarter Finals together and then the big tournaments together, the numbers surprised even me:

Finals, Semi-Finals, Quarter Finals

	Innings	Runs	Average
Tendulkar	47	2137	50.88
Gibbs	12	465	42.27
Lara	25	861	37.43
Ponting	49	1613	36.66
Gilchrist	39	1277	34.51
Sehwag	18	515	32.19
Pietersen	1	6	6.00

I expected a marginally lower average in ‘big games’ for Tendulkar when I set out to do this exercise. What turned up however indicates even less substance to the argument about Tendulkar not performing in important games.

World Cups, ICC Champions Trophy, Australian Tri-Series

	Innings	Runs	Average
Pietersen	13	644	58.55
Tendulkar	101	4262	46.84
Ponting	170	6378	41.69
Gibbs	55	2050	41.00
Lara	93	3303	40.28
Sehwag	46	1616	36.73
Gilchrist	146	5032	35.69

Tendulkar’s world cup performance are legendary and so it’s no surprise to see him up there with over 5 runs a game over Ponting and over 10 runs a game over Gilchrist. What a lot of us do tend to remember are the blistering centuries Gilchrist scored in the world cup finals, what we don’t is that its the other batsmen that took Australia to those finals.

Summary

	Ponting	Gibbs	Lara	Sehwag	Gilchrist	Pietersen	Tendulkar
Consistency	3	7	4	6	5	1	2
Performance against top sides	1	5	4	6	3	7	2
Percentage of team runs	2	5	4	7	6	3	1
Appetite for big runs	3	7	4	6	5	1	2
Ability to dominate	5	6	7	1	2	3	4
Big Match Temperament (Deciders)	4	2	3	6	5	7	1
Big Tournament Temperament	3	4	5	6	7	1	2
TOTAL	21	36	31	38	33	23	14

numbers indicate relative ranking on that parameter. Top 3 have been highlighted

Top seven ODI batsmen:

1. Sachin Tendulkar
2. Ricky Ponting
3. Kevin Pietersen
4. Brian Lara
5. Adam Gilchrist
6. Hershelle Gibbs
7. Virender Sehwag

This is not a ranking system. Pietersen and Sehwag are only half-way into their careers and their numbers could move either way. The idea is that we should be able to swap the 6 names in this comparison and we can be fairly certain that the numbers in the table here wouldn’t change significantly (although I believe the numbers would tilt further in favour of Tendulkar).

Bottomline: Few batsmen even come close to Tendulkar’s performance in One Day Internationals