Would you call player A more aggressive than B?

[The Outsider]

Player A has an average of roughly 45 with a SR of 65. Player B has an average of roughly 42 with a SR of 63. This is ODIs - primarily in the 80s, so SRs matter, but only in the context of those days so don't expect 90 SRs except from someone like Richards. Both were wonderful ODI batsmen and the only reason I am not revealing their names is to get an idea about how much can be gauged by stats. Player A was considered and still is, as one of the more aggressive openers and Player B was considered as a stonewaller and an innings builder. Is there really much to choose between the 'stats'?

[Jersey #10]

Depends on what number they batted at. current perspectives Playing at 100 SR in the middle order (3-5) in middle overs could be considered aggressive while not so much for someone batting at #7

[SachDan]

Greenidge and Haynes? Greenidge was way overrated as an attacking batsman.

[The Outsider]

Depends on what number they batted at.

Both opened.

[rkt.india]

Nothing much to choose. Both stats look pretty similar.

[The Outsider]

Greenidge was way overrated as an attacking batsman.

Is anyone not overrated except Tendulkar according to you? :hmmm:

[maniac]

Depends on a how many runs they scored and the period of time over which they acheived that stat.Until we have that,the numbers you provided are vague.

[The Outsider]

Depends on a how many runs they scored and the period of time over which they acheived that stat.Until we have that' date='the numbers you provided are vague.[/quote'] They played in the same era, faced similar bowlers, and the sample size is large enough for those days when teams were not playing 30 ODIs a year.

[Jersey #10]

Stats are not enough to tell b/c they are very similar in range Someone with 10,000 runs can average that much and someone else with 2000 runs can also average that much.

[Khalpat]

Well it is many times due to one or two matches or series that a player is rated as aggressive and that is how he is look into in his entire career. If we look into the batting records of two greats of modern day Indian cricket. Saurav Ganguly has Strike Rate of 73 for his 311 ODI and rahul Dravid Strike Rate is 71 there is not much difference but we ask any cricket fan everybody will say Dada was very aggressive batsman compared to Dravid.

[Jersey #10]

I know there is a catch but I will chose player A

[kabira]

Who won more Man of the matches??

[rkt.india]

Well it is many times due to one or two matches or series that a player is rated as aggressive and that is how he is look into in his entire career. If we look into the batting records of two greats of modern day Indian cricket. Saurav Ganguly has Strike Rate of 73 for his 311 ODI and rahul Dravid Strike Rate is 71 there is not much difference but we ask any cricket fan everybody will say Dada was very aggressive batsman compared to Dravid.

Ya I always hear that. The thing with Dada was he occasionally used to play aggressive innings and could hit 6s and was weak in taking single and doubles so it used to even out his strike rate because he was a boundary batsman and used to play lot of dot balls. While Dravid was a single double batsman rather 6s or 4s.

[Jersey #10]

Who won more Man of the matches??

It's not about who won more matches or who was more reliable it's about who was agressive. plain and simple

[The Outsider]

I know there is a catch but I will chose player A

There is no catch and I don't have any intention in getting this into a guessing game or a stats guru contest but as Sach Dan rightly guessed player A is Greenidge and player B is Haynes. Now to expand a bit on why I created this thread is that Greenidge is considered an aggressive player because he used to take on the bowling head on within the first few overs, while Haynes' mode of operation was to play out and hit out towards the end. They complemented each other and formed one of the greatest opening pair of all time. Would Greenidge have been able to carry his initial cavalier stroke play without Haynes? No. Would Haynes have been able to bat out the first 50 deliveries for 20 runs without Greenidge? No. Stats don't reveal all and yes, Greenidge was by far the more aggressive opener between the two (despite the gem above that he is over rated), but stats guru will not reveal that information. /End of anti stats guru rant for the day!

[Sachinism]

Who wore more protective gear on their body, that is another very important factor?

[Khalpat]

Ya I always hear that. The thing with Dada was he occasionally used to play aggressive innings and could hit 6s and was weak in taking single and doubles so it used to even out his strike rate because he was a boundary batsman and used to play lot of dot balls. While Dravid was a single double batsman rather 6s or 4s.

Yes, exactly I was amazed to see the difference in number of boundary between both these players. Dada has hit more than 180 Six and Rahul 42 and also the number of four Dada has hit is more than double the boundaries of Rahul but since the strike rate of both the players are similar its obvious that Ganguly played Dot balls much more than Dravid yet Ganguly is regarded as one of the most aggressive batsman and Dravid very defensive batsman.

[maniac]

Would definetely go with B-Haynes. Keeping in mind that he maintained almost similar stats as Greenidge while playing more number of matches,almost a 100 more. Here is how he performed in the early 90's where WI despite being a very strong side was definetely not a superpower of the game as in 80's and 70's.His average dropped but still was healthy for that time period. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/52047.html?class=2;spanmax1=31+Dec+1994;spanmin1=1+Jan+1990;spanval1=span;template=results;type=allround

[Mariyam]

Who has hit more Maxx Mobile Maximums?

[Ultimate_Game]

Player A has an average of roughly 45 with a SR of 65. Player B has an average of roughly 42 with a SR of 63. This is ODIs - primarily in the 80s, so SRs matter, but only in the context of those days so don't expect 90 SRs except from someone like Richards. Both were wonderful ODI batsmen and the only reason I am not revealing their names is to get an idea about how much can be gauged by stats. Player A was considered and still is, as one of the more aggressive openers and Player B was considered as a stonewaller and an innings builder. Is there really much to choose between the 'stats'?

I wouldn't call either of them aggressive. Consistent yes, aggressive no. SR of 63 or 65 hardly qualifies as aggressive - unless it's Tests.