Pakistani batsmen: Separating minnow bashers from the others - Shocking stats!

[Hawkeye]

For the past several months, I've seen many of our fans lose the sense of reality -- conveniently forgetting how poor we've been against any half decent side and bullying the weaker teams/minnows.

I'd like to clarify what a minnow basher is. It's not someone who averages 100 against the weaker teams.

It's someone who has a very high average against the weaker teams, and is a consistent low performer against any top side, with a huge difference in averages. That's how the separation works.

Let's take a look at the past two years, where some have made "comebacks" and our fans really revere.


Pakistani batsmen against top 5 ODI sides::

Pakistani batsmen against the lowest ranked sides:

Observations:

- Babar Azam is our best bat. Good averages against both top and low ranked sides.

- Sarfraz consistent across the two. Good average against both groups. 40 average.

- Hafeez consistent across the two. Averaging 40.

- Malik: That's where he gets caught! Average against top sides: 35. Average against weaker ones: 76!

Difference between averages: 41.

- Ahmed Shehzad: He's not a batsman to begin with.

- Imad Wasim: 's average is inflated due to 4 not outs, otherwise it's 27. Strike rate is poor for a late order hitter.


Let's keep things real. It appears Pakistan fans and the board has accepted that we're minnows -- losing series after series against any decent side has become the norm. We've become numb against the losses.

We immediately forget the humiliation, then win against a weak side or minnows and start cheering for the same players who fail to perform when we REALLY want them to.

We need a direction and an aim. Where do we want to be in the next 2 years?

 

[Hawkeye]

[MENTION=107807]Pete Rose[/MENTION] this is what you've been saying all along.

About time we invest in players who are useful when the going gets tough. (And yeah, that includes Kami, if he fails in the CT).

 

[JibranAnsari]

Our approach in the first half of the batting innings is pathetic. Players usually looking to cater their own interests take a lot of time getting started and in the end we end up with a meagre total.

We need to change our approach of batting , minnows or no minnkws our batsmen play a truckload of dot deliveries. In every game we need to target at least 150 in the first 25 overs of the innings. There is no room for taking your time in todays one day cricket.

How england changed their approached is examplary , we will lose every match of champions trophy with usual suspects scoring big after taking their time.

 

[MRSN]

Our approach in the first half of the batting innings is pathetic. Players usually looking to cater their own interests take a lot of time getting started and in the end we end up with a meagre total.

We need to change our approach of batting , minnows or no minnkws our batsmen play a truckload of dot deliveries. In every game we need to target at least 150 in the first 25 overs of the innings. There is no room for taking your time in todays one day cricket.

How england changed their approached is examplary , we will lose every match of champions trophy with usual suspects scoring big after taking their time.

well when players with this approach are made to look like legends and youngsters are asked to learn from them then expect this trend to completely vanish from the side is wishful thinking.

 

[JibranAnsari]

Englands runrate since wc 2015 is 6.26 and their runrate from 2013 to 2015 wc was 5.26. A difference of runrate of 1 which means 50 runs per innings.

Their w/l ratio after wc 2015 is 1.7 and it was 0.7 from 2013 to 2015.

 

[Slog]

Bangladesh and Sri Lanka should be in the first list as they are ranked higher than us

 

[shaz619]

Should have included Australia as well hawkie and it can be argued that Lanka should be included in the top teams list but I suppose the conditions tend to be suited to our style of play and it seems the metric being advocated here is runs away from conditions pak find compatible even on paper.

 

[shaz619]

Great job! am enjoying reading the OP with me cup of chai and cake.

 

[New Yorker]

For the past several months, I've seen many of our fans lose the sense of reality -- conveniently forgetting how poor we've been against any half decent side and bullying the weaker teams/minnows.

I'd like to clarify what a minnow basher is. It's not someone who averages 100 against the weaker teams.

It's someone who has a very high average against the weaker teams, and is a consistent low performer against any top side, with a huge difference in averages. That's how the separation works.

Let's take a look at the past two years, where some have made "comebacks" and our fans really revere.


Pakistani batsmen against top 5 ODI sides::

Pakistani batsmen against the lowest ranked sides:

Observations:

- Babar Azam is our best bat. Good averages against both top and low ranked sides.

- Sarfraz consistent across the two. Good average against both groups. 40 average.

- Hafeez consistent across the two. Averaging 40.

- Malik: That's where he gets caught! Average against top sides: 35. Average against weaker ones: 76!

Difference between averages: 41.

- Ahmed Shehzad: He's not a batsman to begin with.

- Imad Wasim: 's average is inflated due to 4 not outs, otherwise it's 27. Strike rate is poor for a late order hitter.


Let's keep things real. It appears Pakistan fans and the board has accepted that we're minnows -- losing series after series against any decent side has become the norm. We've become numb against the losses.

We immediately forget the humiliation, then win against a weak side or minnows and start cheering for the same players who fail to perform when we REALLY want them to.

We need a direction and an aim. Where do we want to be in the next 2 years?

Let's bracket for the moment that fact that it is still early days for Babar, that he looks
the part and *has* scored against top sides, albeit not as heavily as against, say Windies.
He averages 76 against minnows and 45 against top sides. That kind of gap seems at
least worth acknowledging in this context. And it might suggest that against top sides he
is not as good as Misbah.

 

[moghul]

Hafeez is the ultimate King against minnows.

 

[Hawkeye]

Bangladesh and Sri Lanka should be in the first list as they are ranked higher than us

It's not 'higher than us'.

It's top 5 sides, who in the real world dominate LOI cricket, vs the lower half, the weakling teams that include Pakistan.

Should have included Australia as well hawkie and it can be argued that Lanka should be included in the top teams list but I suppose the conditions tend to be suited to our style of play and it seems the metric being advocated here is runs away from conditions pak find compatible even on paper.

Australia is included, Shaz!

 

[jusarrived]

Why exclude Aus ?

tbh 75 avg against "minnows" and 36 avg at 86 sr against the Top teams is not bad . His sr of 86 is also pretty good .

 

[JibranAnsari]

Let's bracket for the moment that fact that it is still early days for Babar, that he looks
the part and *has* scored against top sides, albeit not as heavily as against, say Windies.
He averages 76 against minnows and 45 against top sides. That kind of gap seems at
least worth acknowledging in this context. And it might suggest that against top sides he
is not as good as Misbah.

Yah conviniently ignoring misbahs sr , sr is as important as average in odi cricket. Misbah was good in the days when 230 runs were good enough.

 

[Hawkeye]

Hafeez is the ultimate King against minnows.

Your logic: I won't look at facts and logic, just blindly state something without having the least idea.

He averaged very well against England, New Zealand (twice), and has been consistent against both weaker teams as well as the top 5 ones, that's why he averages 40 against both the halfs.

 

[Hawkeye]

Let's bracket for the moment that fact that it is still early days for Babar, that he looks
the part and *has* scored against top sides, albeit not as heavily as against, say Windies.
He averages 76 against minnows and 45 against top sides. That kind of gap seems at
least worth acknowledging in this context. And it might suggest that against top sides he
is not as good as Misbah.

The gap would've been very concerning if the lower average was in the 20s or 30s.

45 average is very good for someone who just started -- it'll go up.

 

[jusarrived]

Hawkeye ,

are you seriously saying that Sarfraz has had more impact than Malik be it against minnows or non minnows ? I honestly dont think thats the case .

 

[Hawkeye]

Yah conviniently ignoring misbahs sr , sr is as important as average in odi cricket. Misbah was good in the days when 230 runs were good enough.

Misbah's SR was obviously not good enough.

But, we have to look at the bigger picture. He held his own against the best sides, our current players can't maintain such average even at 60 strike rate (e.g. Shehzad).

And, he mostly had to come to bat under a collapse. Almost always.

Anyways, he's not an ideal LOI bat.

 

[Pakpak]

A player with a terrible average against top teams would have any sane fan questioning his inclusion. But Hawkeye's logic:

Lets judge a player after he has played against better teams, even though his recent outing against a terrible team was very poor.

#Becausecomebacks invalidate all previous numbers.

 

[Pakpak]

For the past several months, I've seen many of our fans lose the sense of reality -- conveniently forgetting how poor we've been against any half decent side and bullying the weaker teams/minnows.

I'd like to clarify what a minnow basher is. It's not someone who averages 100 against the weaker teams.

It's someone who has a very high average against the weaker teams, and is a consistent low performer against any top side, with a huge difference in averages. That's how the separation works.

Let's take a look at the past two years, where some have made "comebacks" and our fans really revere.


Pakistani batsmen against top 5 ODI sides::

Pakistani batsmen against the lowest ranked sides:

Observations:

- Babar Azam is our best bat. Good averages against both top and low ranked sides.

- Sarfraz consistent across the two. Good average against both groups. 40 average.

- Hafeez consistent across the two. Averaging 40.

- Malik: That's where he gets caught! Average against top sides: 35. Average against weaker ones: 76!

Difference between averages: 41.

- Ahmed Shehzad: He's not a batsman to begin with.

- Imad Wasim: 's average is inflated due to 4 not outs, otherwise it's 27. Strike rate is poor for a late order hitter.


Let's keep things real. It appears Pakistan fans and the board has accepted that we're minnows -- losing series after series against any decent side has become the norm. We've become numb against the losses.

We immediately forget the humiliation, then win against a weak side or minnows and start cheering for the same players who fail to perform when we REALLY want them to.

We need a direction and an aim. Where do we want to be in the next 2 years?

Imad Wasim is alright, but remains to be seen where he will end up. Shehzad deserves to be shown the door.

Our team is very poor so I wouldn't mind some minnow bashing, we'd even stopped doing that until recently.

 

[waqar goraya]

The stats make one thing clear that both Azhar Ali and Ahmad Shehzad are very mediocre.

 

[Pete Rose]

Hafeez is helped by NZ inclusion. His is a very narrow failure. Can't play SA, oz, England in helpful conditions.

 

[JibranAnsari]

Misbah's SR was obviously not good enough.

But, we have to look at the bigger picture. He held his own against the best sides, our current players can't maintain such average even at 60 strike rate (e.g. Shehzad).

And, he mostly had to come to bat under a collapse. Almost always.

Anyways, he's not an ideal LOI bat.

Teams will be happy even if a batsman scores at 100 average at 70 sr. He was a failure as an odi batsman.

 

[shariqnoor]

Never really understood this logic of separating performances by top 5 sides and bottom 5 sides. If a batsman scores against the minnows, people don't give them credit and if he doesn't then they say "oh he can't even score against the minnows." Typical mentality of not being happy with anything.

To be fair, if Malik didn't bash the minnows, we would've lost those matches as well. And a 36 average against top 5 sides is reasonable enough given that he comes in at 5 and 6.

 

[Pakpak]

Never really understood this logic of separating performances by top 5 sides and bottom 5 sides. If a batsman scores against the minnows, people don't give them credit and if he doesn't then they say "oh he can't even score against the minnows." Typical mentality of not being happy with anything.

To be fair, if Malik didn't bash the minnows, we would've lost those matches as well. And a 36 average against top 5 sides is reasonable enough given that he comes in at 5 and 6.

Good point, but minnow-bashing stat is used to highlight how certain players cash in when the going is easy and cement their place and then inevitably fail against top sides.

 

[Pete Rose]

Never really understood this logic of separating performances by top 5 sides and bottom 5 sides. If a batsman scores against the minnows, people don't give them credit and if he doesn't then they say "oh he can't even score against the minnows." Typical mentality of not being happy with anything.

To be fair, if Malik didn't bash the minnows, we would've lost those matches as well. And a 36 average against top 5 sides is reasonable enough given that he comes in at 5 and 6.

Whats so complicated to understand. We are going to play a tournament in england with 5 of these top side out of a total of 8 teams. And basis these widely performance, why would anyone select minnow bashers?

 

[NauV]

The way I read your analysis is that if anything, our middle order is fine! (provided they play at the right position . .)

Opening is a huge problem! and we have known that . .

Average of over 35, batting at 6 or below in ODI is very very good!

Sarfaraz to bat at 4, Malik at 5 . . Hafeez at 6 . .

What it also tells me is that Imad Wasim is not a slogger . . he is a proper bat! I think he can do a better job at 6 than 7 . . but then the eternal question remains . . what do you do with Mr. Hafeez?!

You can't send him to open because he is a liability there . . you can't send him in the middle order because it messes up with the entire make up of the team . . but I guess because he is Mr. Hafeez, you have to fit him in somewhere . .

 

[Pete Rose]

Good point, but minnow-bashing stat is used to highlight how certain players cash in when the going is easy and cement their place and then inevitably fail against top sides.

Point to me is very clear. We are going to play CT with 5 of these top sides.

 

[Pakpak]

Point to me is very clear. We are going to play CT with 5 of these top sides.

Where they will fail, yes.

 

[shaz619]

The way I read your analysis is that if anything, our middle order is fine! (provided they play at the right position . .)

Opening is a huge problem! and we have known that . .

Average of over 35, batting at 6 or below in ODI is very very good!

Sarfaraz to bat at 4, Malik at 5 . . Hafeez at 6 . .

What it also tells me is that Imad Wasim is not a slogger . . he is a proper bat! I think he can do a better job at 6 than 7 . . but then the eternal question remains . . what do you do with Mr. Hafeez?!

You can't send him to open because he is a liability there . . you can't send him in the middle order because it messes up with the entire make up of the team . . but I guess because he is Mr. Hafeez, you have to fit him in somewhere . .

I'd keep Imad where he is for now, Hafeez and Sarfraz should swap positions.

 

[Bilal7]

[MENTION=134608]Hawkeye[/MENTION], Malik won't be getting dropped after that century he scored. Also, a team needs a variety of players and one minnow basher is welcome. An average of 36 isn't poor either, since it's better than Malik's career average.

Shehzad is the one that gets exposed here.

 

[Hawkeye]

Hawkeye ,

are you seriously saying that Sarfraz has had more impact than Malik be it against minnows or non minnows ? I honestly dont think thats the case .

I don't think I've included Australia.

Sarfraz has done way better relatively. He performed decently in 2015 WC too.

 

[Hawkeye]

Never really understood this logic of separating performances by top 5 sides and bottom 5 sides. If a batsman scores against the minnows, people don't give them credit and if he doesn't then they say "oh he can't even score against the minnows." Typical mentality of not being happy with anything.

I explained this in my opening post.

If you bash minnows and are also decent against the top "FIVE" sides or in tournaments, you're great!

The issue arises when you're a failure against all the decent oppositions. You only play the decent sides in ICC tournaments.

[MENTION=134608]Hawkeye[/MENTION], Malik won't be getting dropped after that century he scored. Also, a team needs a variety of players and one minnow basher is welcome. An average of 36 isn't poor either, since it's better than Malik's career average.

Shehzad is the one that gets exposed here.

Bilal, that average wouldn't have been a problem if the strike rate was 130.

It only highlights his lack of ability to accelerate. Afridi with ~30 average at 166 strike rate is A MONSTER AND A BEAST.

I'd take him.

 

[Pete Rose]

I'd keep Imad where he is for now, Hafeez and Sarfraz should swap positions.

This is noir going to work. Both Hafeez and sarfaraz will fail. And imam will get promotion post cp

 

[shaz619]

This is noir going to work. Both Hafeez and sarfaraz will fail. And imam will get promotion post cp

Sarfraz did well in England during the ODI's, he is best utilised at no.4 being an accumulator which keeps the scoreboard ticking; Hafeez is a liability but he will be selected regardless and no.6 or no.7 would be ideal for him.

 

[Executioner]

Tamim in ODIs would literally walk into Pakistan side and score big runs against all minnow sides. Probably would have averaged what 60-70 in ODIs against minnows and end up as the greatest ODI minnow basher ever.

 

[Pete Rose]

Sarfraz did well in England during the ODI's, he is best utilised at no.4 being an accumulator which keeps the scoreboard ticking; Hafeez is a liability but he will be selected regardless and no.6 or no.7 would be ideal for him.

All this is saying is sarfaraz at 4, malik at 5, hafeez at 6. they will be laughed out of the CT

 

[MMHS]

Amazing work by OP, I like this sort of in-depth analysis.

However, OP is running the StatGuru standing on 12th April 2017, for last 2 years data, as of teams stands today. Though, I am not sure, if this is the right way to do such in-depth work, because I am not sure if this ranking positions are fixed or not. It's not universal that those 5 teams were always in top 5 & those 5 teams were always in bottom 5. For example, I am quite sure SRL, at the end of 2015 WC was standing at 5th spot in ICC ranking, which should change the outcome of this research work a bit, considering that it includes a Series between SRL-PAK in July 2015 (Not sure where to search, but I have read it somewhere regarding SRL's ranking).

Unless OP can sort this stats by actual position of teams by series/ODI by ODI, I don't think it has much significant weight, since ODI Ranking between 4 to 6 has changed quite frequently in this period. Indicative indeed, but that's at most I can say.

Anyway, still it's great job to show the wonderful contribution by both MoHa & Malik, who are over their career average & SR against both sides. Besides, Malik's ODI stats are similar to Brdaman's Test stats - average of 90 against ENG & 75 against WI while 170+ against IND & 200+ against the then SAF ...... obviously I am not saying both are similar player, but it actually indicates that you can be still good to great with a bit of minnow bashing, if your base against "elites" are good. For this PAK side, which had been 8th or 9th for that entire period of this research work a batting stats of 36/86 is like gold - icing on the cake is 77/108 stats against minnows (as per OP's criteria).

Have a good day - we can discuss further in the long week end.

 

[super hitter]

And who won us the most matches? This guy is just...

Instead olooking at the situations of the match, he takes out minnows to prove something but fortunately, its another wrong claim

 

[shaz619]

All this is saying is sarfaraz at 4, malik at 5, hafeez at 6. they will be laughed out of the CT

That is their best combination given the circumstances what else do you want?

 

[Hawkeye]

Tamim in ODIs would literally walk into Pakistan side and score big runs against all minnow sides. Probably would have averaged what 60-70 in ODIs against minnows and end up as the greatest ODI minnow basher ever.

Any team's openers WALK into Pak's ODI sides right now.

Afghanistan's are better.

 

[Ami]

Keep saying this...
Pakistan needs to change, they're afraid of the change.
Pakistan will not win a single match in champs trophy.

 

[Executioner]

Any team's openers WALK into Pak's ODI sides right now.

Afghanistan's are better.

Shehzad is a hack. Useful in t20s but not so much against quality bowling in ODIs

 

[SarfiBabarHaris]

All this is saying is sarfaraz at 4, malik at 5, hafeez at 6. they will be laughed out of the CT

Why do you have high expectations from us when we are no 8?
We are 8 for a reason and wont be surprise if we finish as no 8.
Thanks to Waqar, Misbah, Azhar and selectors mostly for their lack of vison. The loss of Sharjeel cost us badly too.

Even if we change the combination right now for CT youngsters wont set the world on fire immediately. I would say its better for youngsters' future that ttfs are exposed in CT and booted out forever.

 

[Moid]

Kindly post stats based on the location of performance too(as the CT is in England).

 

[Pete Rose]

Why do you have high expectations from us when we are no 8?
We are 8 for a reason and wont be surprise if we finish as no 8.
Thanks to Waqar, Misbah, Azhar and selectors mostly for their lack of vison. The loss of Sharjeel cost us badly too.

Even if we change the combination right now for CT youngsters wont set the world on fire immediately. I would say its better for youngsters' future that ttfs are exposed in CT and booted out forever.

first paragraph: how we got here
second paragraph: double down the on the same

 

[Pete Rose]

That is their best combination given the circumstances what else do you want?

Are you telling me what will happen or what should happen? what will happen is pretty clear.
What should happen is not a question to be answered by "best combination under the circumstances"

 

[SarfiBabarHaris]

first paragraph: how we go here
second paragraph: double down the on the same

I also wanted youngsters like Talat to play (havent seen Saad Ali much) in WI series. But it is unrealistic that they will be part of CT now that Inzi selected Kami, Shezi and Hafeez for WI series.

 

[geraltofrivia]

Our approach in the first half of the batting innings is pathetic. Players usually looking to cater their own interests take a lot of time getting started and in the end we end up with a meagre total.

We need to change our approach of batting , minnows or no minnkws our batsmen play a truckload of dot deliveries. In every game we need to target at least 150 in the first 25 overs of the innings. There is no room for taking your time in todays one day cricket.

How england changed their approached is examplary , we will lose every match of champions trophy with usual suspects scoring big after taking their time.

Should win against SL.

 

[shaz619]

Are you telling me what will happen or what should happen? what will happen is pretty clear.
What should happen is not a question to be answered by "best combination under the circumstances"

If you disagree with something, instead of spewing nonsensical psychobabble; please offer some practical solutions or alternatives instead.

 

[Speedster777]

In CT2017 better teams would be aiming for 300 plus. Aus, sa, india have even scored 400. PCB is adamant to ruin our team with hacks who can't go past 200.

 

[JibranAnsari]

Should win against SL.

I doubt it

As an odi unit they are still better.

 

[Stallion__]

This explains why Malik, despite having great numbers since his return is still at 45 in ICC rankings (rankings take into account the quality of opposition).

 

[New Yorker]

Hawkeye ,

are you seriously saying that Sarfraz has had more impact than Malik be it against minnows or non minnows ? I honestly dont think thats the case .

Against England last year absolutely!

 

[Square Drive]

OP's purpose is simply to degrade Malik's performances.

An average of 36 (which the OP claims as 35 ) with a SR of 86 against the top 5 sides, considering our alternatives, is not half-bad, especially when this player can also bowl a few handy overs and is a brilliant fielder, not to mention he's almost equivalent to Bradman against lower-ranked nations (which, by the way, are also ranked higher than us at the moment and we do need someone who can bash them as well!).

According to these stats Sharjeel would also be a minnow basher?

Hafeez based on these stats is doing a very good job, too.

What these stats do confirm, though, is that Shehzad & Azhar have no business in this side.

 

[thenawabjunior]

This thread seems like " bad-dianti per Mabni" . So what you want from a good player? He should not score against weak teams? It's a universal rule a good player dominate against the weak competitor and it's natural.I can understand for some people It's hard to digest that Malik is your best Limited overs game player at the moment . He is scoring runs. No need to play with figures when your performance is speaking itself

 

[cricketInsight]

When you consider matches played out of Asia - Sir Hafeez Bradman does what he does best.

Query
Shouldnt that be a factor?

 

[cricketInsight]

I guess the larger point is that opening is our problem. We are missing 2 openers without which our batting will always suffer due to hit it takes upfront.

 

[aloo paratha]

36 isn't even bad lol, I think all the sane people on PP should just leave Haweye's threads alone as they give me and potentially others cancer. All the haters can stay here.

 

[srh]

Why exclude Aus ?

tbh 75 avg against "minnows" and 36 avg at 86 sr against the Top teams is not bad . His sr of 86 is also pretty good .

aankhain hain ya button? Australia is right there in the first group.

agree with your post about India's son-in-law

 

[dildildalwalla]

For the past several months, I've seen many of our fans lose the sense of reality -- conveniently forgetting how poor we've been against any half decent side and bullying the weaker teams/minnows.

I'd like to clarify what a minnow basher is. It's not someone who averages 100 against the weaker teams.

It's someone who has a very high average against the weaker teams, and is a consistent low performer against any top side, with a huge difference in averages. That's how the separation works.

Let's take a look at the past two years, where some have made "comebacks" and our fans really revere.


Pakistani batsmen against top 5 ODI sides::

Pakistani batsmen against the lowest ranked sides:

Observations:

- Babar Azam is our best bat. Good averages against both top and low ranked sides.

- Sarfraz consistent across the two. Good average against both groups. 40 average.

- Hafeez consistent across the two. Averaging 40.

- Malik: That's where he gets caught! Average against top sides: 35. Average against weaker ones: 76!

Difference between averages: 41.

- Ahmed Shehzad: He's not a batsman to begin with.

- Imad Wasim: 's average is inflated due to 4 not outs, otherwise it's 27. Strike rate is poor for a late order hitter.


Let's keep things real. It appears Pakistan fans and the board has accepted that we're minnows -- losing series after series against any decent side has become the norm. We've become numb against the losses.

We immediately forget the humiliation, then win against a weak side or minnows and start cheering for the same players who fail to perform when we REALLY want them to.

We need a direction and an aim. Where do we want to be in the next 2 years?

Those are good batting figures. Imad is averaging over 50? 5 players in ODIs with a batting avg of 40 or more against the best sides.

That is very impressive and I came in here thinking teh averages would be 20-30.

This is particularly good considering the team seems to be in constant flux.

 

[cricketInsight]

Those are good batting figures. Imad is averaging over 50? 5 players in ODIs with a batting avg of 40 or more against the best sides.

That is very impressive and I came in here thinking teh averages would be 20-30.

This is particularly good considering the team seems to be in constant flux.

Imad has 4 out 8 innings as not outs which is inflating his avg. He has been OK considering that his run rate is poor for someone batting at 6 or 7.

 

[cricketInsight]

OP's purpose is simply to degrade Malik's performances.

An average of 36 (which the OP claims as 35 ) with a SR of 86 against the top 5 sides, considering our alternatives, is not half-bad, especially when this player can also bowl a few handy overs and is a brilliant fielder, not to mention he's almost equivalent to Bradman against lower-ranked nations (which, by the way, are also ranked higher than us at the moment and we do need someone who can bash them as well!).

According to these stats Sharjeel would also be a minnow basher?

Hafeez based on these stats is doing a very good job, too.

What these stats do confirm, though, is that Shehzad & Azhar have no business in this side.

Also if the criteria is tough conditions then Malik has averged 42 comapred to Hafeez 34 in Matches played outside of Asia and Americas over the same time period.

Malik would score a lot more runs if he bats 4 which Hafeez is getting to do these days.

 

[Pete Rose]

An average of 36 does not win to matches. Which is what the job of a finisher is - ppl can slice it dice whichever they want, but these are supposedly the battle hardened senior guys who are are supposed to see us over the line. Which is why we lost badly in England and Australia. Because an average of 36 is respectable

 

[USHK]

Average is not everything. Inzimam has lower average than Mohammad Yousuf overall but Inzimam is match winner. Win matters not average. Besides average in win suggest otherwise.

 

[USHK]

Otherwise good thread for debate.

 

[USHK]

We need to follow 90 formula of Pakistan not India formula where average should be given priority at the expense of team interest. After 2015 Pakistan started winning some matches if not series. This is team i believe can chase 200 runs above. Lets not forget from 2011 to 2015 where we were not capable to chase even 200 runs in target.

 

[Square Drive]

An average of 36 does not win to matches. Which is what the job of a finisher is - ppl can slice it dice whichever they want, but these are supposedly the battle hardened senior guys who are are supposed to see us over the line. Which is why we lost badly in England and Australia. Because an average of 36 is respectable

Malik is not a finisher; he is a top 5 bat.

Neither is Sarfraz.

Imad/Shadab/Yamin (the former two for now) can and should play that role.

 

[Hawkeye]

This explains why Malik, despite having great numbers since his return is still at 45 in ICC rankings (rankings take into account the quality of opposition).

An average of 36 does not win to matches. Which is what the job of a finisher is - ppl can slice it dice whichever they want, but these are supposedly the battle hardened senior guys who are are supposed to see us over the line. Which is why we lost badly in England and Australia. Because an average of 36 is respectable

Agree -- an average of 30-35 for a number 5/6 batsman, at a good strike rate, is great. But, that's not a good strike rate even to begin with.

Averaging 30-35 at 80s strike rate in the late order is poor in this era, it becomes really bad when you have NO hitters in the team. The reason why we cannot win against any decent opposition.

This is NOT the 80s or the 90s era, as you're claiming it to be great [MENTION=100918]Square Drive[/MENTION] .

This just shows what we know about him -- he cannot play against decent bowlers and cannot accelerate against them. You'll play only such teams when it comes to ICC tournaments.

 

[Square Drive]

Agree -- an average of 30-35 for a number 5/6 batsman, at a good strike rate, is great. But, that's not a good strike rate even to begin with.

Averaging 30-35 at 80s strike rate in the late order is poor in this era, it becomes really bad when you have NO hitters in the team. The reason why we cannot win against any decent opposition.

This is NOT the 80s or the 90s era, as you're claiming it to be great [MENTION=100918]Square Drive[/MENTION] .

This just shows what we know about him -- he cannot play against decent bowlers and cannot accelerate against them. You'll play only such teams when it comes to ICC tournaments.

Who's saying it's the 80s/90s?

Also, tell me anyone else in Pakistan who can even bat at a SR of 86, let alone at an average of 36.

Beggars can't be choosers.

I also find it funny how you're fine with a complete disgrace of a cricketer being in the team just for his SR, despite the fact that he averages 26 in ODIs overall, but on the other hand, you're trying your best to downplay a man who even despite your nitpicking and playing with stats averages 36 in unfavourable conditions, that too at a SR of 86 for a country that is struggling to find decent batsmen. Not to mention, Malik can bowl and field while your hero Kamran can do neither of those.

And oh, let's not forget Malik averages 76 against the "lower ranked signs" as you yourself pointed out. Your horrible favourite can't even do that.

 

[Hawkeye]

[MENTION=100918]Square Drive[/MENTION] -- all the other batsmen I mentioned play at average of 40 or above at 80+ strike rate. Their average is healthy and they don't even bat at 5 or 6, where you need to have a high strike rate.

His alternative is Hussain Talat, and others who need to be scouted. Can't continue with mediocrity and lose against all top sides.

Also, he's not my favorite. He's in the team because he can whack pacers as an opener. Let his test come after the comeback, in the Champions Trophy, then we can criticize him if he consistently fails.

 

[Pakpak]

[MENTION=100918]Square Drive[/MENTION] -- all the other batsmen I mentioned play at average of 40 or above at 80+ strike rate. Their average is healthy and they don't even bat at 5 or 6, where you need to have a high strike rate.

His alternative is Hussain Talat, and others who need to be scouted. Can't continue with mediocrity and lose against all top sides.

Also, he's not my favorite. He's in the team because he can whack pacers as an opener. Let his test come after the comeback, in the Champions Trophy, then we can criticize him if he consistently fails.

-Whacking pacers at a SR of 83 and at bog standard average of 22 against top sides is useless.
-We wait to see a person's comeback stats before criticising him only after its his first or second return. A person who's got the experience of a decade of First Class and over 200 LOI should not and does not deserve such luxury.
[MENTION=100918]Square Drive[/MENTION], your post, nail on head.

 

[super hitter]

Agree -- an average of 30-35 for a number 5/6 batsman, at a good strike rate, is great. But, that's not a good strike rate even to begin with.

Averaging 30-35 at 80s strike rate in the late order is poor in this era, it becomes really bad when you have NO hitters in the team. The reason why we cannot win against any decent opposition.

This is NOT the 80s or the 90s era, as you're claiming it to be great [MENTION=100918]Square Drive[/MENTION] .

This just shows what we know about him -- he cannot play against decent bowlers and cannot accelerate against them. You'll play only such teams when it comes to ICC tournaments.

AT least don't try to belittle his stats if you're already belittling him.

And again, Why don't you talk about the post comeback> made this thread or ab khud samaj nahi aarahi k logon ko kese jawaab dun

 

[Messiah]

Agree -- an average of 30-35 for a number 5/6 batsman, at a good strike rate, is great. But, that's not a good strike rate even to begin with.

Averaging 30-35 at 80s strike rate in the late order is poor in this era, it becomes really bad when you have NO hitters in the team. The reason why we cannot win against any decent opposition.

This is NOT the 80s or the 90s era, as you're claiming it to be great [MENTION=100918]Square Drive[/MENTION] .

This just shows what we know about him -- he cannot play against decent bowlers and cannot accelerate against them. You'll play only such teams when it comes to ICC tournaments.

I love how you are defending Hafeez and bashing malik, when Hafeez averages less then 4 more than malik batting at 5 lower strike rate. Malik also averages 36 more against bottom sides at 21 more strike rate. Please tell me how that makes Hafeez better. I can't comprehend it

 

[Hasan123]

Malik merits his place in the team. Hafeez, Kami,and Shehzad places in the team are the ones under threat. Introducing Hafeez back into the team messed up the Malik /Sarfraz at 4/5.

 

[Square Drive]

[MENTION=100918]Square Drive[/MENTION] -- all the other batsmen I mentioned play at average of 40 or above at 80+ strike rate. Their average is healthy and they don't even bat at 5 or 6, where you need to have a high strike rate.

His alternative is Hussain Talat, and others who need to be scouted. Can't continue with mediocrity and lose against all top sides.

Also, he's not my favorite. He's in the team because he can whack pacers as an opener. Let his test come after the comeback, in the Champions Trophy, then we can criticize him if he consistently fails.

Which "all the other batsmen"? If you're talking about Babar, Hafeez, Imad, Sarfraz, then yes they should also be in the side because every side has 11 players and 5-6 batsmen.

Talat is indeed a great prospect but IMO for now he should open, because the mediocrity that is Kamran Akmal and Ahmed Shehzad is doing a far worse job than Malik.

Yes let's test a certified TTF in an ICC tournament.

 

[aloo paratha]

An average of 36 does not win to matches. Which is what the job of a finisher is - ppl can slice it dice whichever they want, but these are supposedly the battle hardened senior guys who are are supposed to see us over the line. Which is why we lost badly in England and Australia. Because an average of 36 is respectable

Malik comes in at 5 which is not a finisher in any international team, especially Pakistan as coming in at 5 is like coming in at 3 so many times because of our non existent openers.

 

[aloo paratha]

The biggest reason we should've ignored this thread to begin with is when OP criticizes Malik an doesn't say more than a sentence about Shehzad.

 

[The_Odd_One]

An average of 36 is not bad for someone who bats at #5 for a team like Pakistan. He is clearly an upgrade over the hacks like Akmal and Maqsood.

 

[BD-fan]

Grain of salt:

Miandad 42 against those top 5 teams
Salman Butt, INZI, Mesbah, Yousuf, S Anwar ALL averaged 37.

That 36 of S Malik don't look that bad now, does it?

++++
Minnow bashing:

Yousuf 50
Misbah 49
Anwar 45
Inzi 42
Miandad 40.

 

[Pete Rose]

Malik comes in at 5 which is not a finisher in any international team, especially Pakistan as coming in at 5 is like coming in at 3 so many times because of our non existent openers.

The notion that there are batting positions in the team whose job is not to win a match is ludicrous