Quinton de Kock vs Babar Azam

[babajee]

Lol what. Speak about bias. QDK is much better than Babar Azam. Agree with [MENTION=139595]Ab Fan[/MENTION] 's post

Babar is the better and more complete batsman by far. If you don't believe it yet you'll see for yourself sooner or later.

 

[Chief Destroyer]

That's crap. de Kock played a pivotal role in winning his team a test series in Australia. What has Babar done in contrast? 38 tests, 4 tests hundred for a no. 7 who is a wicket-keeper batsmen and scores his runs at a quick rate. Babar has what, 1 hundred lol.

In ODIs, de Kock has scored a 111 ball 178 vs Australia which Babar doesn't have the ability to do, no matter who the opposition bowlers are. His record, Strike Rate is all better than Babar in ODIs who has just established himself in tests and ODIs and nowhere near to be seen as one of premier batsmen in the world in either of two formats.

De Kock is well ahead and has achieved more than Babar without any shadow of doubt.

What you're posting is crap because you didn't read what I said. Quinton can't do anything outside his comfort zone. He's a true pitch player and struggles any time there's movement. Cannot play spin to save his life.

It's pretty obvious you haven't followed Quinton if you think he's a premier batsman in the world, lmao.

 

[Chief Destroyer]

Lol what. Speak about bias. QDK is much better than Babar Azam. Agree with [MENTION=139595]Ab Fan[/MENTION] 's post

There is no bias here. Babar is the more complete batsman by far.

 

[Ahson8]

Not even close. Babar way ahead

 

[Hasan123]

I don't think De Kock will come to close Gilchrist which I said earlier in the thread. But he's still better than Babar in LO.

 

[Ab Fan]

<B>What you're posting is crap because you didn't read what I said</B>. Quinton can't do anything outside his comfort zone. He's a true pitch player and struggles any time there's movement. Cannot play spin fro.

It's pretty obvious you haven't followed Quinton if you think he's a premier batsman in the world, lmao.

That's because you didn't read what I said earlier. Read again. I said, Qdk is ahead and has achieved more than Babar and in response, you said lol. Great!

1. Quinton de Kock is a wicket-keeper batsmen who bats at 7, his role is different. There has been several occasions already where he has come to bat with team reeling at 80-5 and shifted the momentum of the game and also scored those runs fast.

Babar, in contrast, has shown some glimpse of his ability but he hasnt shown that he possess the temperament or the ability to turn the game on its head. He is not yet a match-winner like Qdk is.

Babar is just an established name in test as of now, nowhere near world's premier test batsmen with a total of 1 hundred in 26 tests. In contrast, de Kock is a premier wicket keeper batsmen in the world who on his day is threatening and destructive and although he was out of form for a while but now he is back into his grooves.

2. Coming to ODIs, Qdk has got that extra gear and most ODIs are played on true pitches where you need to have that ruthlessness of dominating bowlers which Qdk had done and can do it more often while Babar cant. Babar doesn't have the same ruthlessness either. The inning of 178 which de Kock played against Australia while chasing 300 is an inning Babar can only dream of. Absolutely beyond his capability. He also seems to relish in chasing which is apparent by some of his chases in 2nd inning.

At this point, Quinton de Kock is well ahead and unless Babar learns to score hundreds, he will always remain inferior to the former.

 

[Chief Destroyer]

That's because you didn't read what I said earlier. Read again. I said, Qdk is ahead and has achieved more than Babar and in response, you said lol. Great!

1. Quinton de Kock is a wicket-keeper batsmen who bats at 7, his role is different. There has been several occasions already where he has come to bat with team reeling at 80-5 and shifted the momentum of the game and also scored those runs fast.

Babar, in contrast, has shown some glimpse of his ability but he hasnt shown that he possess the temperament or the ability to turn the game on its head. He is not yet a match-winner like Qdk is.

Babar is just an established name in test as of now, nowhere near world's premier test batsmen with a total of 1 hundred in 26 tests. In contrast, de Kock is a premier wicket keeper batsmen in the world who on his day is threatening and destructive and although he was out of form for a while but now he is back into his grooves.

2. Coming to ODIs, Qdk has got that extra gear and most ODIs are played on true pitches where you need to have that ruthlessness of dominating bowlers which Qdk had done and can do it more often while Babar cant. Babar doesn't have the same ruthlessness either. The inning of 178 which de Kock played against Australia while chasing 300 is an inning Babar can only dream of. Absolutely beyond his capability. He also seems to relish in chasing which is apparent by some of his chases in 2nd inning.

At this point, Quinton de Kock is well ahead and unless Babar learns to score hundreds, he will always remain inferior to the former.

Quinton's team has achieved more, not the player. He does not carry the team like Babar does.

Quinton is only a threat in his comfort zone. To become a premier batsman, you have to be a threat in all conditions.

 

[Hyperion66]

In tests it's QDK hands down, Babar hasn't done much so far bar a flew flashy innings.

ODIs I would pick Babar, although QDK is clearly a more talented strokemaker but also inconsistent AF. I would much rather have a clam and composed Babar bat through the innings laying a solid foundation while everyone batting around him.

It's very difficult to choose in T20s as Babar clearly has better stats but not exactly the one who puts fear into opposition, at best he would play second fiddle to a more destructive batsman. While QDK when on song can take the game away in a few overs. I would probably choose QDK solely because on his day he can win matches on his own. Nothing against Babar he has been amazing in t20s for sometime but this is just a matter of personal preference.

 

[Ahson8]

That's because you didn't read what I said earlier. Read again. I said, Qdk is ahead and has achieved more than Babar and in response, you said lol. Great!

1. Quinton de Kock is a wicket-keeper batsmen who bats at 7, his role is different. There has been several occasions already where he has come to bat with team reeling at 80-5 and shifted the momentum of the game and also scored those runs fast.

Babar, in contrast, has shown some glimpse of his ability but he hasnt shown that he possess the temperament or the ability to turn the game on its head. He is not yet a match-winner like Qdk is.

Babar is just an established name in test as of now, nowhere near world's premier test batsmen with a total of 1 hundred in 26 tests. In contrast, de Kock is a premier wicket keeper batsmen in the world who on his day is threatening and destructive and although he was out of form for a while but now he is back into his grooves.

2. Coming to ODIs, Qdk has got that extra gear and most ODIs are played on true pitches where you need to have that ruthlessness of dominating bowlers which Qdk had done and can do it more often while Babar cant. Babar doesn't have the same ruthlessness either. The inning of 178 which de Kock played against Australia while chasing 300 is an inning Babar can only dream of. Absolutely beyond his capability. He also seems to relish in chasing which is apparent by some of his chases in 2nd inning.

At this point, Quinton de Kock is well ahead and unless Babar learns to score hundreds, he will always remain inferior to the former.

Against literally the worst AUS bowling attack of all time lol

And re. 100's Babar has 8 100's in 59 ODIs, QdK 13 in 101

 

[Ab Fan]

Against literally the worst AUS bowling attack of all time lol

And re. 100's Babar has 8 100's in 59 ODIs, QdK 13 in 101

Brother, that 178 came of 111 balls, chasing 299. Can Babar score 175 of 120 balls chasing even against that level of attack??

Qdk has chased 300+ against England as well and you saw today's inning as well.

 

[Ab Fan]

Quinton's team has achieved more, not the player. He does not carry the team like Babar does.

Quinton is only a threat in his comfort zone. To become a premier batsman, you have to be a threat in all conditions.

He is a threat across all conditions and all formats of the game.

Babar is good against pace, yet not someone whom I will perceive as a serious threat yet.

 

[Chief Destroyer]

He is a threat across all conditions and all formats of the game.

Babar is good against pace, yet not someone whom I will perceive as a serious threat yet.

He is not.

The only time we've been in the game or won a game this series is when Babar has stayed on the crease so yes he is Pakistan's prize wicket.

 

[MeanAndGreen]

He is a threat across all conditions and all formats of the game.

Babar is good against pace, yet not someone whom I will perceive as a serious threat yet.

How is he a threat in all conditions and all formats of the game?

What test, ODI credentials does he have outside his comfort zone.

Being a threat and actually delivering are 2 totally separate entities.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

Overrating QdK in this thread and overrating Babar Azam too.

The former, because he is a gun player, but short of potential ATG, is not good against spin and needs certain conditions to fire. But at least he is a wicketkeeper, so he gets some leeway.

The latter, because he is being hyped more on potential than any substantial innings.

I'll wager a 100 dollar bet, that if Babar has to chase 300 plus scores, he will ON CURRENT ABILITY, lead his team to a loss.

 

[Xoib]

That's because you didn't read what I said earlier. Read again. I said, Qdk is ahead and has achieved more than Babar and in response, you said lol. Great!

1. Quinton de Kock is a wicket-keeper batsmen who bats at 7, his role is different. There has been several occasions already where he has come to bat with team reeling at 80-5 and shifted the momentum of the game and also scored those runs fast.

Babar, in contrast, has shown some glimpse of his ability but he hasnt shown that he possess the temperament or the ability to turn the game on its head. He is not yet a match-winner like Qdk is.

Babar is just an established name in test as of now, nowhere near world's premier test batsmen with a total of 1 hundred in 26 tests. In contrast, de Kock is a premier wicket keeper batsmen in the world who on his day is threatening and destructive and although he was out of form for a while but now he is back into his grooves.

2. Coming to ODIs, Qdk has got that extra gear and most ODIs are played on true pitches where you need to have that ruthlessness of dominating bowlers which Qdk had done and can do it more often while Babar cant. Babar doesn't have the same ruthlessness either. The inning of 178 which de Kock played against Australia while chasing 300 is an inning Babar can only dream of. Absolutely beyond his capability. He also seems to relish in chasing which is apparent by some of his chases in 2nd inning.

At this point, Quinton de Kock is well ahead and unless Babar learns to score hundreds, he will always remain inferior to the former.

Babar has played 21 tests not 26 also he is averaging 50+ in his last 10 tests which shows he is on the rise.
In terms of who's better can't compare both have completely different roles for their team in both formats.

 

[Ab Fan]

Qdk with a brilliant 80 of 94 balls under pressure again proving why he is the next big thing as a wkt-keeper batsmen and is already levels ahead of any active Asian batsmen taking all formats into consideration except one.

 

[Hyperion66]

Qdk with a brilliant 80 of 94 balls under pressure again proving why he is the next big thing as a wkt-keeper batsmen and is already levels ahead of any active Asian batsmen taking all formats into consideration except one.

True, I have high hopes for Pant though, if he could do justice to his talent would become a better player than QDK all format combined.

 

[The Viper]

Good to see him find form in the test format again. The past year has been tough for him.

 

[QalandarFan]

I'll take Babar.

 

[pratiktc]

In terms of performance till date, both have underachieved greatly in Tests given their talent. QdK for his pressure runs in away series in Australia takes marginal lead.

In ODIs, QdK gets the nod given his higher SR and similar century output. Both players have padded their stats somewhat in this format although there is nothing wrong with it (QdK by bashing weak attacks i.e. India 2013, Aus 2016 at home and Babar by bashing minnows in UAE, Zim, etc)

T20s it is an even clash, Babar slightly ahead. Both play different roles - QdK being a firestarter at the top and Babar being the play through anchor. Currently Babar is doing better in his role than QdK in his.

 

[Sunny_majoka]

Babar is pure batsman.
You can't compare a wicket keeper batsman with a pure batsman

 

[Stalin]

Quinton is better . He plays more ''impactful'' knocks.

 

[big_gamer007]

One is a wicket keeper batsmen who comes at number 7 in tests and opens in ODI and other is an accumulator around whom the team plays..

Do people even think before starting comparison threads? Both have totally different roles and playstyle it's like comparing apples with oranges or comparing a spinner with faster bowler..

 

[saeed5646]

dekock have started his career in 2013 also he have played 100 odis while babar have started his career in 2015 who have played 59 odis.Also dekock is wicketkeeper this comparison makes no sense ,completely different batsmen with different role.

 

[Rathore]

Both are batsman dosnt matter if someone is wk or not hence the comparison is quite fair. Guys no one have specialist wk like us. Imo qdk is better than bobby.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Babar is the better batsman

 

[Muhammad10]

Qdk with a brilliant 80 of 94 balls under pressure again proving why he is the next big thing as a wkt-keeper batsmen and is already levels ahead of any active Asian batsmen taking all formats into consideration except one.

He's better than Kohli?

 

[WengerOut]

He's better than Kohli?

Missed the "except one" part

 

[Muhammad10]

Missed the "except one" part

Oh, I thought that was regarding formats.

 

[Ab Fan]

He's better than Kohli?

Padho, pura padho bhai

 

[big_gamer007]

Both are batsman dosnt matter if someone is wk or not hence the comparison is quite fair. Guys no one have specialist wk like us. Imo qdk is better than bobby.

No comparison makes no sense different batsman have different roles..

You can't compare Dhoni or VVVs the batsmen to sehwag or a number three because their roles are different.

Babar is following the path of kohli
De cock is following this path of Gilchrist.

Totally different types of batsmen with different roles.. You can't compare a spinner to a faster bowler similarly you can't compare an accumulator whose job is to stay till 50th over to an explosive opener whose job is to get team to a flyer and demolish opposition within first 20 overs.

 

[Ab Fan]

I think de Kock is better.

 

[zain7077]

Babar any day of the week.

 

[zain7077]

What is it with Indians undermining Babar Azam. I think it’s to do with history. Since India have had superior batsman in the past they find it very tough to praise our batsman just like we find it hard to praise their pacers in comparison to ours

 

[Chief Destroyer]

Not even a contest. De Kock can't survive against the moving ball at the top.

 

[King_Kohli]

Can someone post their stats here

 

[Mesozoic]

Lol. What is up with these absurd comparisons?

One is a specialist batter who likes to accumulate and the other is a WK bat whose role is to provide brisk starts.

 

[Ab Fan]

Can someone post their stats here

Tests-

de kock
Avg 38, SR 72, 5 100s

Babar
Avg 37,SR 52, 2 100s

ODIs-

de kock
Avg 45, SR 95, 14 100s

Babar
Avg 54, SR 87, 11 100s

 

[zain7077]

De Kock has played twice the number of games in both formats as well

 

[Ab Fan]

De kock is 26 and Babar is 25. The peak of both is yet to be seen and de Kock is a glovesman.

I think Babar will surely become a Pakistani great while de kock may also end up becoming a SA great but neither probably would attain ATG status like Kohli, Smith or de Villiers.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

De Kock is sadly in decline, he's an average batsman nowadays. Even Faf is better who's himself above average.

 

[KingT]

Tests-

de kock
Avg 38, SR 72, 5 100s

Babar
Avg 37,SR 52, 2 100s

ODIs-

de kock
Avg 45, SR 95, 14 100s

Babar
Avg 54, SR 87, 11 100s

Where's the no.of matches played?

 

[KingT]

I think de Kock is better.

In what format?
Tests? He's been averaging 30 since 2018 and averaged 20 in 2018.

ODIs? Babar's no.3 right now and De Kock hasn't done too much in this format in recent times

T20is? De Kock has a strike rate of 128 but still averages only 30. Babar despite having played 2 less matches, has 400 runs more than De Kock. He has a strike rate of 127.5 but averages 50 to compensate for it.

 

[Ab Fan]

In what format?
Tests? He's been averaging 30 since 2018 and averaged 20 in 2018.

ODIs? Babar's no.3 right now and De Kock hasn't done too much in this format in recent times

T20is? De Kock has a strike rate of 128 but still averages only 30. Babar despite having played 2 less matches, has 400 runs more than De Kock. He has a strike rate of 127.5 but averages 50 to compensate for it.

De kock is going through a lean patch but he will get back to form and is an all-format batsmen. So, I expect a good fight between the two in future. Either way, de kock will not be averaging 50 because he is a wicket-keeper batsmen but I think he will take that average over 40 and play significant role at 7 for SA.

 

[Waleed93]

In Test matches, it's very close. QdK has 3 more hundreds, but he has also played twice the number of games Babar has played. Both are averaging around 38, but looking at Babar's recent Test form, it looks like he will overtake him very soon.

I would take Babar in LOIs. In ODIs, he is probably the world's 3rd best batsman after Kohli and Rohit. In T20Is, both have a similar strike rate, but Babar averages 20 runs more than QdK.

Overall, Babar is quite ahead at the moment. QdK remains a very good keeper-batsman though. Just behind Buttler in that aspect.

 

[Hyperion66]

I would take Babar in LOIs. In ODIs, he is probably the world's 3rd best batsman after Kohli and Rohit.

You seriously believe Babar is a better odi bat than Dhawan, Williamson, Taylor, Stokes, Roy, Butler, Smith and Warner?

 

[KingT]

You seriously believe Babar is a better odi bat than Dhawan, Williamson, Taylor, Stokes, Roy, Butler, Smith and Warner?

If they were better than Babar they would have been ranked higher wouldn't they??
This isn't T20is where teams play their B teams. Teams play their best XI in ODIs.

Also, how are you comparing openers to a no.3 batsman??
You're really clutching at straws here. If you don't like Babar, fair enough but don' try to undermine him. He's averaged 60 in 2019 after 20 matches at strike rate of 92

 

[BlueBeamer]

You seriously believe Babar is a better odi bat than Dhawan, Williamson, Taylor, Stokes, Roy, Butler, Smith and Warner? &#55357;&#56834;

Warner wipes the floor with Babar in LOIs atm....There is just no comparison after the kind of WC Warner had.

 

[KingT]

Warner wipes the floor with Babar in LOIs atm....There is just no comparison after the kind of WC Warner had.

The Warner comparison can be made for every other batsman as well except Rohit and Shakib.

 

[Waleed93]

You seriously believe Babar is a better odi bat than Dhawan, Williamson, Taylor, Stokes, Roy, Butler, Smith and Warner?

That's what rankings are saying at the moment.
You can feel free to disagree with the rankings though. After all, some people actually rate Rahul as a better Test batsman than Babar despite the latter being ranked almost 40 places below him in the rankings.

 

[BlueBeamer]

The Warner comparison can be made for every other batsman as well except Rohit and Shakib.

Well other batsmen have a lot to show for in their career, Babar not so much.

Leaving the obvious top 2 LOI bats aside, Babar is still behind the likes of Bairstow, Root, Roy, Taylor and Hope. He's on par with Finch and Dhawan.

 

[KingT]

Well other batsmen have a lot to show for in their career, Babar not so much.

Leaving the obvious top 2 LOI bats aside, Babar is still behind the likes of Bairstow, Root, Roy, Taylor and Hope. He's on par with Finch and Dhawan.

Hope??
Hope??? )
Seriously??? )

Just coz he scored some hundreds against India doesn't mean he's better than babar.
Where was Hope in the WC??

This is just hilarious.


Hope?? )

 

[KingT]

Hope, the guy who's only 2 hundreds in his 31 test matches career came in the same match and averages 27 in test cricket. Has a strike rate in the 70s in ODIs and completely flopped in the WC and is no where to be seen in T20is is being compared to Babar Azam.

This thread has become a joke now

 

[BlueBeamer]

Hope??
Hope??? )
Seriously??? )

Just coz he scored some hundreds against India doesn't mean he's better than babar.
Where was Hope in the WC??

This is just hilarious.


Hope?? )

Hope has scored more runs at a better average than Babar in the last two years and is just behind Kohli and Rohit in the runs tally. He's better LOI bat than Babar.

 

[zain7077]

Please ignore these attention seeking posts. I think even 99% of biased Indians will agree that Babar is far superior to Hope. Chalk and Cheese.

 

[KingT]

Hope has scored more runs at a better average than Babar in the last two years and is just behind Kohli and Rohit in the runs tally. He's better LOI bat than Babar.

He must have scored those runs against Aus, NZ, England right?

Oh no.

He's scored them against Afghanistan, Bangladesh.


One more thing, Babar has a strike rate of 88 in the last 2 years.
Shai hope has had a strike rate of 75.

Babar scored TWO HUNDRED (200) more runs than Hope in the same number of innings in the WC.

Babar had a strike rate of 87.77
Shai Hope had a strike rate of 70


Don't embarrass yourself. Just admit you were wrong and we can end this comparison right here.

 

[Hyperion66]

If they were better than Babar they would have been ranked higher wouldn't they??
This isn't T20is where teams play their B teams. Teams play their best XI in ODIs.

Also, how are you comparing openers to a no.3 batsman??
You're really clutching at straws here. If you don't like Babar, fair enough but don' try to undermine him. He's averaged 60 in 2019 after 20 matches at strike rate of 92

What? Are you kidding me? Good Lord, if this is your understanding of cricket I honestly don't know how to explain it to you better!! If X is ranked higher than Y does it prove X is a better bat than Y? That way Kohli Must be a better test bat than Smith? lol. Ranking doesn't always reflect ability or quality, it doesn't take into account opposition attack, match situation, impact of the innings etc, which is why Fakhar zaman was higher in ranking than many established bats after his Zimbabwe D bashing. Countless times in the history of sports, not just cricket, lesser players were ranked higher higher than players better than them. I mean I could literally produce like a million examples lol.

So Babar can't be compared with openers or middle order bats now? Where do I find another good but mostly soft scoring, low impact run machine who bats at 3 to compare? Bar that innings against NZ, which I genuinely rate, I am yet to see a single impact ODI innings from Babar.
[MENTION=145946]Waleed93[/MENTION]

 

[Hyperion66]

That's what rankings are saying at the moment.
You can feel free to disagree with the rankings though. After all, some people actually rate Rahul as a better Test batsman than Babar despite the latter being ranked almost 40 places below him in the rankings.

Read post 137 on ranking.

I never said Rahul is a better test bat than better if that is what you are implying.

 

[Waleed93]

What? Are you kidding me? Good Lord, if this is your understanding of cricket I honestly don't know how to explain it to you better!! If X is ranked higher than Y does it prove X is a better bat than Y? That way Kohli Must be a better test bat than Smith? lol. Ranking doesn't always reflect ability or quality, it doesn't take into account opposition attack, match situation, impact of the innings etc, which is why Fakhar zaman was higher in ranking than many established bats after his Zimbabwe D bashing. Countless times in the history of sports, not just cricket, lesser players were ranked higher higher than players better than them. I mean I could literally produce like a million examples lol.

So Babar can't be compared with openers or middle order bats now? Where do I find another good but mostly soft scoring, low impact run machine who bats at 3 to compare? Bar that innings against NZ, which I genuinely rate, I am yet to see a single impact ODI innings from Babar.

[MENTION=145946]Waleed93[/MENTION]

Yes, rankings do not always show you the entire story, especially when we compare two great players like Kohli and Smith.
Kohli being ranked higher than Smith in Tests doesn't make him a better Test batsman. Similarly, Babar being ranked 1st in T20Is doesn't make him a better T20I batsman than Kohli.
However, when it comes to a comparison between a very good player to an average player, rankings are enough to suggest who is better than who.

Unlike Fakhar, Babar can't be accused of rising to the 3rd spot in ICC rankings only due to excessive minnow bashing. He has been Pakistan's top scorer in every single series we have played this year, including the WC where he scored 450 odd runs.
This year, he is one of the top scorer in the ODI format, scoring almost 1100 runs at an average of 60+.
Only Kohli, Rohit, Finch and Hope have scored more. While Kohli is obviously untouchable, Rohit scored only 100 odd more runs than Babar after playing 3 more innings at an average of 53, compared to Babar's 60.

As you said, rankings don't always prove X to be better than Y. But this is only true when you start comparing legends such as Kohli vs Smith, Ronaldo vs Messi, Nadal vs Federer.
When you want to make a comparison between a very good player like Babar to someone like Rahul, this is when rankings are enough to show who is better than who. On one hand, you have a very good batsman who is on his way to become one of the very best, while on the other hand, you have a player who had potential, but looks in rapid decline due to various reasons.

 

[KingT]

What? Are you kidding me? Good Lord, if this is your understanding of cricket I honestly don't know how to explain it to you better!! If X is ranked higher than Y does it prove X is a better bat than Y? That way Kohli Must be a better test bat than Smith? lol. Ranking doesn't always reflect ability or quality, it doesn't take into account opposition attack, match situation, impact of the innings etc, which is why Fakhar zaman was higher in ranking than many established bats after his Zimbabwe D bashing. Countless times in the history of sports, not just cricket, lesser players were ranked higher higher than players better than them. I mean I could literally produce like a million examples lol.

So Babar can't be compared with openers or middle order bats now? Where do I find another good but mostly soft scoring, low impact run machine who bats at 3 to compare? Bar that innings against NZ, which I genuinely rate, I am yet to see a single impact ODI innings from Babar.

[MENTION=145946]Waleed93[/MENTION]

Your understanding on how rankings are made is pretty basic too.
They DO look at the opposition, match situation and the impact of the innings on the match.
Read the FAQ on the ICC page on this topic and you'll know that you're just lying.

The rankings not being accurate accusation can be made for T20is but not ODIs as in the ODIs most teams play their proper xi.

And how are you going to use the Smith-Kohli comparison they're literally a few point away from each other?
Smith is better but Kohli is not far behind

We have people here comparing Babar with Hope. There's a reason why Hope is not even in the top 10 for ODIs despite averaging over 55 for the last two years and being one of the highest scorers too. It's because he's bashed minnows and that's it.

So don't lie to me that rankings don't take into consideration the strength of the opposition just to prove your point because that'll show YOU as having limited understanding of the game rather than I

 

[Captain caveman]

De kock is naturally more talented, but doesnt put value on his wicket.
Babar is more of a thoroughbred who values his wicket.
A bit like comparing umar akmal(de kock) to kohli(babar).
Only one winner in this battle - arise sir babar azam!

 

[Hyperion66]

Your understanding on how rankings are made is pretty basic too.
They DO look at the opposition, match situation and the impact of the innings on the match.
Read the FAQ on the ICC page on this topic and you'll know that you're just lying.

The rankings not being accurate accusation can be made for T20is but not ODIs as in the ODIs most teams play their proper xi.

And how are you going to use the Smith-Kohli comparison they're literally a few point away from each other?
Smith is better but Kohli is not far behind

We have people here comparing Babar with Hope. There's a reason why Hope is not even in the top 10 for ODIs despite averaging over 55 for the last two years and being one of the highest scorers too. It's because he's bashed minnows and that's it.

So don't lie to me that rankings don't take into consideration the strength of the opposition just to prove your point because that'll show YOU as having limited understanding of the game rather than I

Dude I suggest you reread the FAQ, they run a standard algorithm to determine rating points with no human intervention or subjective analysis. As someone who does programming for a living, let me tell you this with authority that a player's impact in a match can never be truly quantified by some boilerplate algo.

Not saying the ranking is totally flawed, all I am saying is that rankings are a better reflection of a player's current form, not overall quality.

Never said Hope is in the same league as Babar, not sure why you had to say this to me.

Lastly, I know what I am talking about unlike many here, before accusing me of lying you should have done your research instead of parroting stuff based on a Google search. "The higher the combined ratings of the bowling attack, in proportion more value is given to the batsman’s innings." Means scoring runs against Afg on a seaming pitch will award one more rating points than scoring against Windies due to Rashid Khan and Nabi's high rating points, despite WI having an overall better bowling attack for such conditions.

Do you understand now? Or do I water it down even more for you?

 

[KingT]

Dude I suggest you reread the FAQ, they run a standard algorithm to determine rating points with no human intervention or subjective analysis. As someone who does programming for a living, let me tell you this with authority that a player's impact in a match can never be truly quantified by some boilerplate algo.

Not saying the ranking is totally flawed, all I am saying is that rankings are a better reflection of a player's current form, not overall quality.

Never said Hope is in the same league as Babar, not sure why you had to say this to me.

Lastly, I know what I am talking about unlike many here, before accusing me of lying you should have done your research instead of parroting stuff based on a Google search. "The higher the combined ratings of the bowling attack, in proportion more value is given to the batsman’s innings." Means scoring runs against Afg on a seaming pitch will award one more rating points than scoring against Windies due to Rashid Khan and Nabi's high rating points, despite WI having an overall better bowling attack for such conditions.

Do you understand now? Or do I water it down even more for you?

I'll ask you two simple questions:

1) Do you think Babar deserves the no.3 spot in ODIs?
2) If not, then what spot does he deserve?

Also, I never said it shows exactly how good a player is but it's a lot more accurate than you are suggesting it to be

 

[Hyperion66]

I'll ask you two simple questions:

1) Do you think Babar deserves the no.3 spot in ODIs?
2) If not, then what spot does he deserve?

1) On current form yes, but no way does that indicate that he is the third best bat as you so wrongly implied in your previous posts.

2) N/A

Also, I never said it shows exactly how good a player is but it's a lot more accurate than you are suggesting it to be

What did you mean by this then "If they were better than Babar they would have been ranked higher wouldn't they??" Do explain please.

I do not fall back on ranking to form an opinion about a player, I watch and understand my cricket.

 

[KingT]

1) On current form yes, but no way does that indicate that he is the third best bat as you so wrongly implied in your previous posts.

2) N/A



What did you mean by this then "If they were better than Babar they would have been ranked higher wouldn't they??" Do explain please.

I do not fall back on ranking to form an opinion about a player, I watch and understand my cricket.

I've used statistics to back up my claims. What evidence do you have to show that Williamson is a better ODI player despite the fact that he's played 70+ more matches than Babar? Even then, Babar has only two less hundreds than him. He may be a Test great but I would definitely pick Babar over Williamson in ODIs. The fact that Babar averages 60 in 2019 with a strike rate of 90+ shows that he's the obvious choice. He played no easy matches either as 9 of his 20 matches he played this year were in a WC

 

[jnaveen1980]

I'll ask you two simple questions:

1) Do you think Babar deserves the no.3 spot in ODIs?
2) If not, then what spot does he deserve?

Also, I never said it shows exactly how good a player is but it's a lot more accurate than you are suggesting it to be

Definitely one of the most consistent batsman in world cricket. Good world cup followed by a good ODI series vs Srilanka.Deserves ranking 3. If not quiet the same he is a bit like how Amla was at the start of the career. There was a 2 year period Amla was averaging 68 at a strike rate of 87.

 

[Adnanaddi]

When you compare babar with his peer group and players who are same age with him and played same matches such as de kock, hope, kl Rahul, poran, Latham, imam, Jason roy, and then you realize Babar is better then all of them and he is going to be the leader of this generation. In 3-5 years Kohli Rohit Smith they will be in there declining phase and the only man who will be standing tall would be Babar azam.

 

[jnaveen1980]

When you compare babar with his peer group and players who are same age with him and played same matches such as de kock, hope, kl Rahul, poran, Latham, imam, Jason roy, and then you realize Babar is better then all of them and he is going to be the leader of this generation. In 3-5 years Kohli Rohit Smith they will be in there declining phase and the only man who will be standing tall would be Babar azam.

Hetmyer is 3 years younger than Babar. Hope is probably an year older. Shreyas Iyer is younger as well. There are so many youngsters waiting in the wings. Babar will be one of the best batsman. But definitely saying that he will bet he ONLY ONE is far fetched.

 

[KingT]

Hetmyer is 3 years younger than Babar. Hope is probably an year older. Shreyas Iyer is younger as well. There are so many youngsters waiting in the wings. Babar will be one of the best batsman. But definitely saying that he will bet he ONLY ONE is far fetched.

I'm sure it's more of an educated guess rather than a proper prediction.

 

[Hyperion66]

I've used statistics to back up my claims. What evidence do you have to show that Williamson is a better ODI player despite the fact that he's played 70+ more matches than Babar? Even then, Babar has only two less hundreds than him. He may be a Test great but I would definitely pick Babar over Williamson in ODIs. The fact that Babar averages 60 in 2019 with a strike rate of 90+ shows that he's the obvious choice. He played no easy matches either as 9 of his 20 matches he played this year were in a WC

You chose the wrong guy to play your little stat game against. Out of 11 hundreds of Babar's career only 3 were against top teams and only one of them resulted in a win, the one against NZ at the world cup. Overall his top 20 innings including half tons 9 came against top teams and Pak won 2 of them.

Out of 20 best scores by Williamson 8 were against top teams and NZ won 5 of them.

As I said, Babar's problem isn't scoring runs , it is not having proper impact and domination over a game even when he is scoring runs. He is a consistent run machine and somewhat deserves the number 3 spot, but in terms of pure batsmanship and match winning ability Kane is well ahead. Babar scored runs against top ranked teams and he is definitely not a minnow basher just that most of those runs were too soft to make an impact on the game and the results show that as well.

 

[OmarKhan99]

Hetmyer is 3 years younger than Babar.

2 years* (Oct 1994 v Dec 1996).

Shreyas Iyer is younger as well. .

A month younger* than Babar.

There are so many youngsters waiting in the wings. Babar will be one of the best batsman. But definitely saying that he will bet he ONLY ONE is far fetched.

On topic, although we can never be certain in our future predictions, but it's very likely by the time the great players of today lose their touch and Babar reaches his peak, the likes of Gills, Shaws, and Bantons will have already established themselves and may even overtake Babar.

But there is no denying that in the 20-28 age bracket, Babar is easily the best overall batsman.

 

[NoBallZombie]

So after some posters did not find success in the Babar VS Rahul thread, they decided to bump another one

For god's sake guys, we have only ONE world class batsman (only ONE!!). While is may not be the best, he is definitely world class. Try to appreciate the talent here instead of trying to bring the guy down (and us fans with it)

 

[jnaveen1980]

2 years* (Oct 1994 v Dec 1996).



A month younger* than Babar.



On topic, although we can never be certain in our future predictions, but it's very likely by the time the great players of today lose their touch and Babar reaches his peak, the likes of Gills, Shaws, and Bantons will have already established themselves and may even overtake Babar.

But there is no denying that in the 20-28 age bracket, Babar is easily the best overall batsman.

In this very series Labuschane outclassed every Pakistan batsman. He probably could do well in one dayers. You never know. Same way Iyer could do well in Tests. Shaw can do well in one dayers. It is hard to break down the door and enter in all formats in a country like India. It is practically next to impossible. In Pakistan's case they have absolutely nobody other than Babar. Even if he fails for 10 tests, 10 ODIs you have no choice but to persist with him as there is virtually nobody as good as him. They come up with 100 ball format you will pick him. 5 over cricket you will pick him as you have no choice. In the case of other countries there will always be a good bench strength. Different formats will have different players.

 

[jnaveen1980]

So after some posters did not find success in the Babar VS Rahul thread, they decided to bump another one

For god's sake guys, we have only ONE world class batsman (only ONE!!). While is may not be the best, he is definitely world class. Try to appreciate the talent here instead of trying to bring the guy down (and us fans with it)

Both sides are at mistakes. Many have identified his potential and appreciated him. But talking like he is numero uno and someone who will rule the planet in all formats is hyperbolic. He has his limitations. But he is very consistent. I understand where you are coming from. He is not like the first consistent batsman. But by Pakistan standard he is out of the world consistent as they have been struggling to produce one. So obviously it is understandable to get excited.

 

[NoBallZombie]

In this very series Labuschane outclassed every Pakistan batsman. He probably could do well in one dayers. You never know. Same way Iyer could do well in Tests. Shaw can do well in one dayers. It is hard to break down the door and enter in all formats in a country like India. It is practically next to impossible. In Pakistan's case they have absolutely nobody other than Babar. Even if he fails for 10 tests, 10 ODIs you have no choice but to persist with him as there is virtually nobody as good as him. They come up with 100 ball format you will pick him. 5 over cricket you will pick him as you have no choice. In the case of other countries there will always be a good bench strength. Different formats will have different players.

How do you exactly calculate that based on bench strength is what I am curious about. Fair point about LAbu but I am pretty sure he is going to struggle in the subcontinent just like every other batsman from australia barring smith has. The condition you have mentioned can very well be applied to Tendulkar given that no other batsman in the team was close to his class at that time and that contributed to his longevity in the game as well as various records. At any point in time, a life of a cricketer is a combination of skill and good luck and good for Babar that is the case for him now at least.

 

[NoBallZombie]

Both sides are at mistakes. Many have identified his potential and appreciated him. But talking like he is numero uno and someone who will rule the planet in all formats is hyperbolic. He has his limitations. But he is very consistent. I understand where you are coming from. He is not like the first consistent batsman. But by Pakistan standard he is out of the world consistent as they have been struggling to produce one. So obviously it is understandable to get excited.

I am not sure if any one has said he is the number 1 batsman (yet). People are making an assumption that if he has any longevity in the game, it is inevitable that the current fab 4 will have a decline and he would be the sole crown holder. All these statements are ifs and buts, for now lets just enjoy his batting and savor a potential champion the making, shall we.

 

[jnaveen1980]

How do you exactly calculate that based on bench strength is what I am curious about. Fair point about LAbu but I am pretty sure he is going to struggle in the subcontinent just like every other batsman from australia barring smith has. The condition you have mentioned can very well be applied to Tendulkar given that no other batsman in the team was close to his class at that time and that contributed to his longevity in the game as well as various records. At any point in time, a life of a cricketer is a combination of skill and good luck and good for Babar that is the case for him now at least.

Not entirely true. Tendulkar's progress was unmatched. Till mid 2000 there was no cry for his exclusion at any point of his career. Tendulkar made debut in 1989/91. IN his debut series Manjrekar made 500 plus runs. Granted that was his last good series. Then Kambli joined him in 1993. For a brief period Kambli outperformed Tendulkar. After he left in 1996 we had Dravid and Ganguly. Not to forget India had Azharuddin. I know he was a corrupt man. Produced some breath taking knocks when Tendulkar was in his early 20s. Who can forget the capetown assault by TEndulkar/Azharuddin. Indian second best players were not nearly as bad as second string players Pakistan has now. Tendulkar finished with an average of 58 in the 90s. Nobody in the world was close to him.

 

[jnaveen1980]

I am not sure if any one has said he is the number 1 batsman (yet). People are making an assumption that if he has any longevity in the game, it is inevitable that the current fab 4 will have a decline and he would be the sole crown holder. All these statements are ifs and buts, for now lets just enjoy his batting and savor a potential champion the making, shall we.

Fair enough. Amla at one point was mind-bogglingly consistent in Tests and the one-dayers. He scored 254*, 114, 123* in three consecutive innings against us. Amla was around 26 then. Couple of years later made 313 at the Oval, 121 at Lords, 110 at the gabba, 196 at perth. Around the same time he was like in top 3 ranking in both formats. Infact no.1 in Tests. Inspite of all that he didn't have this much hype. Babar is not even close to that peak yet. But his career could be similar to Amla if he continues gaining improvement. May not be the most dangerous batsman. But a highly consistent batsman.

 

[OmarKhan99]

In this very series Labuschane outclassed every Pakistan batsman. He probably could do well in one dayers. You never know. Same way Iyer could do well in Tests. Shaw can do well in one dayers. It is hard to break down the door and enter in all formats in a country like India. It is practically next to impossible. In Pakistan's case they have absolutely nobody other than Babar. Even if he fails for 10 tests, 10 ODIs you have no choice but to persist with him as there is virtually nobody as good as him. They come up with 100 ball format you will pick him. 5 over cricket you will pick him as you have no choice. In the case of other countries there will always be a good bench strength. Different formats will have different players.

I clearly said, that based on actual performances, I believe Babar is easily the best overall in that age bracket (Root's practically 29).

Just like "you never know" if those players could translate those performances into different formats, you also can never predict with certainty, that they would prove to be excellent players in all formats without at least seeing consistent promises in each format. Based on the "could" argument you used, it is also certainly plausible, that I "could" suddenly become a better batsman than Kohli and Smith combined. It's not a valid argument, unless there is some sort of evidence to back it.

On Labuschagne, he was playing on his home grounds and earlier, performed in English grounds which is not as disimilar to Australia, as Asia would have been. I really like his grit and determination, but has a small sample size of 11 tests and only two tests in Asia (not overtly impressive). He could turn out to be a very good test player, but can't be called a better all-format batsman, when he hasn't played an LOI.

Regarding your 'it's hard for a batsman getting into all three formats in top tier teams' argument, I can't say much to that. It's just too subjective.

 

[Hyperion66]

In this very series Labuschane outclassed every Pakistan batsman. He probably could do well in one dayers. You never know. Same way Iyer could do well in Tests. Shaw can do well in one dayers. It is hard to break down the door and enter in all formats in a country like India. It is practically next to impossible. In Pakistan's case they have absolutely nobody other than Babar. Even if he fails for 10 tests, 10 ODIs you have no choice but to persist with him as there is virtually nobody as good as him. They come up with 100 ball format you will pick him. 5 over cricket you will pick him as you have no choice. In the case of other countries there will always be a good bench strength. Different formats will have different players.

Very well put.