Cook isn't in the same league as Imran, Ganguly, Waugh and Lloyd, as a captain. Who are you kidding? He's a better batsman than he is a captain and the only reason he's winning is because he has a very talented team.
He did not turn an average bunch of cricketers into cornered tigers like Imran did; He was not the Apocalypse who unleashed his four horsemen on the world like Lloyd; He did not change the entire nature of a country from meek brown-nosers to aggressive rockstars like Ganguly; He did not build a decades-long empire like Waugh and he was kicked out of the World Cup squad, instead of winning the trophy.
He has no legacy as captain, he's just doing the job. Great captains enhance their legacy by wearing the armband, not mediocre ones.
What did captaincy do to help Wasim, Waqar, Younis, Malik or Afridi?
As a test batsman, Amla is a couple of levels ahead of Cook. As a player, Amla is much better because he can actually play for his country in all three formats and has been hugely successful.
Yes Cook isn't an all-time great captain but he has certainly elevated himself to the level of someone like Michael Clarke, because like him, he steered his team through tough times. Clarke has never been loved in Australia like some of the other Australian cricketers and he could have shied away from the job when he had a mediocre batting lineup and bowling at his disposal (the thoroughly average Siddle was his main bowler for a while) and had the likes of Peter Forrest batting for him. Yet he took it in his stride, carried the team on his back and left Australian cricket in great hands.
Similarly, Cook's start to captaincy wasn't very difficult because he took on a settled side and won in India, but everything fell apart very quickly - Pietersen, Swann, Prior and Trott - four key players - all left while the likes of Broad and Root were consistently world class at that point. Even Finn had lost his way, while players like Bell lost form as well and Cook and Anderson were pretty much the only reliable performers left and Cook himself had a slump in 2013-2014.
Amidst all of this, you had the Ashes disaster with people in England calling for his head including English PPers. It was a complete mess. You had a captain who wasn't scoring the runs, the team was losing and majority of the country was in Pietersen's camp. A mentally weak captain like Amla would have surrendered at that point but Cook didn't, and here he is 2 years later with his team in ascendency and an excellent core that can play for the next 5-6 years.
Captains like Clarke, Misbah, Cook etc. do not have the legacy of Clive, Imran, Kapil, Waugh, Ganguly etc. but they will be remembered as captains who steered their teams through difficult times and had the stomach for a fight as well as a thick skin to withstand criticism.
Wasim, Waqar, Malik, Afridi? Waqar and Afridi were terrible captains like Amla, hence they have no legacy as captain.
Malik should have never been a Test captain because he didn't merit a place in the Test team. His LOIs captaincy started off well but he got sacked in 2008/2009, so what legacy?
Wasim was a very good tactical captain and he had the team at his disposal, but his ego got into the way and he was involved in shady stuff. All poor examples.
I have already provided examples in my previous posts of the various cricketers who status and legacy was enhanced because of their success as captain.
Amla will be remembered as a great batsman but his weak leadership and lack of cojones to lead an unsettled and imploding South African side will never be forgotten either. South Africa can do with a Misbah, Clarke or Cook here, because Amla does not have the heart for it and neither does de Villiers by the looks of it.
)
