Sachin Tendulkar vs Steve Smith - Comparative Analysis

[Cricketics]

55 minutes ago, jalebi_bhai said:

 

There is no questioning Sachin's greatness but it doesn't mean that his record can't be scrutinized. 

Exactly, well said.

 

[velu]

sachin never had any series definying performances in his entire 200 match career 

[jalebi_bhai]

1 hour ago, rtmohanlal said:

So what do you expect?. Just unnecessarily dragging Sachin into a debate  when there have been several ATG batsmen to have played the game.And then claiming that 'Sachin is lesser to other batsman in concern' in some 'batting factors'' .Then expecting other members who have different opinions to that of yours to keep mum and blindly accept what you said to be cent percent correct.If that is not related to superiority complex then I don't know the meaning of the term.

 

 

"but it's now turned into a prestige issue for Sachinistas. I'm tired of reading this 13534 runs @59.35 statistic over and over again."

-these are all blind emotional statements with out any logic or reasoning.Point out as to what is wrong with those stats..

You still don't understand the fact that this thread is a phase-by-phase analysis of their careers. After 60 Tests, Smith's average is 63.5 as compared to Sachin's average of around 52-53. There is a double digit difference in Test batting averages...double digit.

 

Of course Sachin had a tremendous peak, no doubt about it, and Smith is having a tremendous peak as well. It will now become very interesting to compare the two, considering how Sachin peaked from his 50-100th Test

 

Following Smith's career graph, for the next three years in particular, will be very interesting. Next year, it will be our boys who will most probably stand in his way towards aggregating 1000+ calendar runs for the 5th consecutive year.

 

Let's stick to the topic of the thread, which I once again repeat, is a phase-by-phase analysis of their careers, not an overall analysis. Don't make this a prestige issue, it's not.

[rtmohanlal]

28 minutes ago, jalebi_bhai said:

You still don't understand the fact that this thread is a phase-by-phase analysis of their careers. After 60 Tests, Smith's average is 63.5 as compared to Sachin's average of around 52-53. There is a double digit difference in Test batting averages...double digit.

 

Of course Sachin had a tremendous peak, no doubt about it, and Smith is having a tremendous peak as well. It will now become very interesting to compare the two, considering how Sachin peaked from his 50-100th Test

 

Following Smith's career graph, for the next three years in particular, will be very interesting. Next year, it will be our boys who will most probably stand in his way towards aggregating 1000+ calendar runs for the 5th consecutive year.

 

Let's stick to the topic of the thread, which I once again repeat, is a phase-by-phase analysis of their careers, not an overall analysis. Don't make this a prestige issue, it's not.

First of all avoid terms like 'prestige', 'sachinista' etc etc just because some body opposes to your opinion.The problem is that you simply don't understand the basic  senselessness  in comparing two batsmen whose flows of careers  are chalk and cheese apart.Sachin started so early as a mere teenager at 16 years & 235 days or so old.That is so extraordinary because no body ever till to date has debuted so early and yet became 'good' right from the start.Yet he averaged a healthy 41 in AUS,SAF,ENG,NZL&PAK combined even before he turned 20 and that too facing much higher quality bowlers.Keep in mind he didn't even turn into a fully grown up adult  by the time he finished his first round of abroad tours.  Naturally you can't expect such a young teenager to keep blazing away right from the start.And his peak started from only 93 ENG tour.On a side note , for me the 2nd  GOAT batsman is Viv Richards who averaged a mere 50.23 after scoring just 8540 runs or so.If i take  phase by phase comparison of Sachin & Viv based on pure stats, that doesn't make any sense.

[Rasgulla]

Sachin can't compete even with Dravid.. forget about competing with Smith who averages over 60

 

 

[Trichromatic]

On 31/12/2017 at 12:45 AM, velu said:

sachin never had any series definying performances in his entire 200 match career 

Aus series 1999

NZ series 1999

Aus series 2010

NZ series 2009

SA series 2010

[Giant Tissue Box]

Steve Smith is better test player at the same time of their careers. It will be interesting to see how far Smith can go. 

 

Both have faced great players on flat and tricky pitches. Both have played solid knocks but Steve just has this thirst for runs that I don't think Tendulkar had at that time. He just wants to keep on going. 

Edited January 2, 2018 by Giant Tissue Box

[Shamim.Miah]

In my personal opinion, I think Smith is better than Tendulkar. 

 

But, can Smith sustain this level of performance until his retirement? 

[Rasgulla]

14 minutes ago, Shamim.Miah said:

In my personal opinion, I think Smith is better than Tendulkar. 

 

But, can Smith sustain this level of performance until his retirement? 

Sadly smith hasn't played much against nambia, zim and BD or imagine where his Average go can 

[Trichromatic]

2 hours ago, Rasgulla said:

Sadly smith hasn't played much against nambia, zim and BD or imagine where his Average go can 

He played against bangladesh and averaged 29

[CG]

Aus series 1999
NZ series 1999
Aus series 2010
NZ series 2009
SA series 2010

I would every series India well.sachin contributed.Even 2003 Ind Aus Sachin Played a Series deciding knock in Final Test And Remember the India tour of aus in 1998 where he destroyed Warne.Westindies were force till 2000.

[Trichromatic]

24 minutes ago, CG said:

6 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

Aus series 1999
NZ series 1999
Aus series 2010
NZ series 2009
SA series 2010

I would every series India well.sachin contributed.Even 2003 Ind Aus Sachin Played a Series deciding knock in Final Test And Remember the India tour of aus in 1998 where he destroyed Warne.Westindies were force till 2000.

I posted this earlier that SRT has been consistent performer in most of our overseas wins. Only matches he missed was Adelaide test, SA test in 2006  (though he did score 44 in first inning) and SA test in 2010. In rest 5 wins, he was either top scorer or 2nd.

 

 

[CG]

I posted this earlier that SRT has been consistent performer in most of our overseas wins. Only matches he missed was Adelaide test, SA test in 2006  (though he did score 44 in first inning) and SA test in 2010. In rest 5 wins, he was either top scorer or 2nd.
 
 

To be fair India never had bowling to win overseas series.If we had won at Sydney it would have huge.

[Trichromatic]

2 hours ago, CG said:

2 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

I posted this earlier that SRT has been consistent performer in most of our overseas wins. Only matches he missed was Adelaide test, SA test in 2006  (though he did score 44 in first inning) and SA test in 2010. In rest 5 wins, he was either top scorer or 2nd.
 
 

To be fair India never had bowling to win overseas series.If we had won at Sydney it would have huge.

Even batting wasn't there for long time to have any favorable result.

[velu]

9 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

Aus series 1999

NZ series 1999

Aus series 2010

NZ series 2009

SA series 2010

aus series 1999 - lost 0-3 , averaged 46

nz series 1999 - won 1 - 0 , scored two centuries , phatta

Aus series 2010 - won 2 - 0 , ok

Nz sries , won 1- 0 , averaged 68 

SA series , won 2 - 0 , averaged 71

 

only time he scored over 100 average is in bold .. and that too in a 2 match series and nowhere close to smithys performance  

[Muloghonto]

On 12/30/2017 at 11:35 AM, jalebi_bhai said:

You still don't understand the fact that this thread is a phase-by-phase analysis of their careers. After 60 Tests, Smith's average is 63.5 as compared to Sachin's average of around 52-53. There is a double digit difference in Test batting averages...double digit.

 

Of course Sachin had a tremendous peak, no doubt about it, and Smith is having a tremendous peak as well. It will now become very interesting to compare the two, considering how Sachin peaked from his 50-100th Test

 

Following Smith's career graph, for the next three years in particular, will be very interesting. Next year, it will be our boys who will most probably stand in his way towards aggregating 1000+ calendar runs for the 5th consecutive year.

 

Let's stick to the topic of the thread, which I once again repeat, is a phase-by-phase analysis of their careers, not an overall analysis. Don't make this a prestige issue, it's not.

If you wish to do a phase-by-phase analysis, it makes far more sense to do age-by-age comparative analysis, not match-by-match.

Because of the wide variety of debut ages and the simple fact that males from species homo sapiens attain their sporting peaks usually in the 25-30 age brackets for most sports, it makes age-by-age analysis far more relevant than 'after X number of matches'.

 

For eg, nobody will argue that Gilchrist, even though a gun batsman, is nowhere close to Alan Border as a batsman. Yet, after 50 tests, Gilchrist was way ahead. So what ? Gilchrist made his debut as a fully seasoned, peak of his prowess, 28 year old. Border made his debut as an unfinished product as a 22 year old. 

 

This becomes especially relevant for players making debut way ahead of the curve (Sachin) or players playing way later than the curve (Gooch), especially if their performances are below their career norm.

 

[Trichromatic]

21 minutes ago, velu said:

aus series 1999 - lost 0-3 , averaged 46

nz series 1999 - won 1 - 0 , scored two centuries , phatta

Aus series 2010 - won 2 - 0 , ok

Nz sries , won 1- 0 , averaged 68 

SA series , won 2 - 0 , averaged 71

 

only time he scored over 100 average is in bold .. and that too in a 2 match series and nowhere close to smithys performance  

I meant Aus series at home. Was it 1998?

[putrevus]

On 12/30/2017 at 3:26 PM, rtmohanlal said:

First of all avoid terms like 'prestige', 'sachinista' etc etc just because some body opposes to your opinion.The problem is that you simply don't understand the basic  senselessness  in comparing two batsmen whose flows of careers  are chalk and cheese apart.Sachin started so early as a mere teenager at 16 years & 235 days or so old.That is so extraordinary because no body ever till to date has debuted so early and yet became 'good' right from the start.Yet he averaged a healthy 41 in AUS,SAF,ENG,NZL&PAK combined even before he turned 20 and that too facing much higher quality bowlers.Keep in mind he didn't even turn into a fully grown up adult  by the time he finished his first round of abroad tours.  Naturally you can't expect such a young teenager to keep blazing away right from the start.And his peak started from only 93 ENG tour.On a side note , for me the 2nd  GOAT batsman is Viv Richards who averaged a mere 50.23 after scoring just 8540 runs or so.If i take  phase by phase comparison of Sachin & Viv based on pure stats, that doesn't make any sense.

What you have said is spot on for teenager and as I said in my earlier posts Sachin was very good for a teenager but that does not mean he was the best.Even His well well acclaimed Perth knock was good for teenager and may be for an Indian but that does not mean it was a legendary innings.It was neither match winning nor series changing knock.

 

People are comparing Smith with Sachin because they are leaders of two different eras.Sachin never had this kind of dominating run in tests in his 20 years plus career. Sachin is legend but it is not a knock on Sachin when people say he never had this dominating run.

 

You second point about Viv, he was very good but I don't think he was even half the batsman once his reflexes slowed down a little bit.Viv lost 2 plus seasons due Packer world series.

[rtmohanlal]

4 hours ago, putrevus said:

What you have said is spot on for teenager and as I said in my earlier posts Sachin was very good for a teenager but that does not mean he was the best.Even His well well acclaimed Perth knock was good for teenager and may be for an Indian but that does not mean it was a legendary innings.It was neither match winning nor series changing knock.

 

People are comparing Smith with Sachin because they are leaders of two different eras.Sachin never had this kind of dominating run in tests in his 20 years plus career. Sachin is legend but it is not a knock on Sachin when people say he never had this dominating run.

 

You second point about Viv, he was very good but I don't think he was even half the batsman once his reflexes slowed down a little bit.Viv lost 2 plus seasons due Packer world series.

Mate ... i am fed up with your logic to be frank.This because, even after pointing the reasons with crystal clear statistical evidence as to why Sachin couldn't  pile up mammoth numbers in the same manner as Smith , you are again into this.Once more and for the last time for you.

1. from 93 ENG series( before that and after 2011 world cup  data neglected  due to teenager & terminal decline reasons) till 2011 world cup, Sachin racked up 13534 runs @ 59.35 avg:. Keep in mind 59.35 not far behind 63.5 despite Smith scoring only <6000 runs as of now. This Sachin achieved against 15 or 16 <25 avg:ing bowlers that include 11 ATG bowlers.Hence for me  this 59.35 is much superior than Smith's 63.5.On

a side note, Saeed Anwar and Charles coventry both have highest score of 194(same numerical value) in one dayers, but  they definitely are not the same as far as 'greatness' value is concerned.

2. Sachin played only 6  >=4 test series during the above said phase.This, along with the vast number of one dayers/year India was playing  had a telling effect on Sachin never crossing 500 runs in a series  &  never crossing 900 rating points.For instance, in his peak period of a 41 tests stretch where he averaged 69.92,he played  only 11 tests in 2 years,that is in 1998 & 2000.

 

Now even after specifying these,if you don't accept with me, then that's ok.Let me stick on with my verdicts.

Edited January 2, 2018 by rtmohanlal

[Deleted_User_1]

SRT is not fit to wipe Smith's auss!