Is Sean Williams a better LOI player than Grant Flower?

[sloandog]

Discuss this.
His stats suggest so!

[Jemisi]

Williams has been more consistent than Grant. Grant had some good years and he had some really awful years. There were a couple of periods where he was in the Chigs walking wicket territory.

[eugene]

Grant Flower oddly seemed to decline as his career progressed. Early on he and Andy were equally talented seemingly, but while Andy kicked on, Grant fell away.

[jaybro]

This will no doubt bring up two topics that are regularly debated here on the forum

- Golden Generation played harder opponents than post Rebel Gen

- Opening the batting is harder than playing in the middle

Also the fact many people feel Williams never contributes with the bat when Zim win will arise, especially since Grant's best performances came in Zim victories

Personally I'd much rather watch Williams bat

[sloandog]

Williams is better to watch but Flower probably had a much tougher mental attitude.
I think Williams is a better ODI cricketer than Grant Flower

[CrimsonAvenger]

All-rounder vs all-rounder. A comparison that is not a foregone conclusion by any means and jaybro brings in pretty much all the high level points of argument well. I'll indulge as both are my staunch favorites (as I have already declared elsewhere on these forums) and were part of my all time Zim Draft team earlier this year

One thing is common among both, their best format were the ODIs. Comparing them purely on ODIs in this:

For Grant:

1. Opening the batting, and opening against some of the best bowlers of his era. He faced the Akrams, the Ambroses, the Walshes, the McGraths, the Donalds, etc. and did reasonably well. He is possibly Zimbabwe's most successful long term ODI opener.
2. Match winnings knocks. The team did well when he scored runs. He held the anchor too and carried his bat when the team failed miserably, more than once.
3. Exceptionally hard working cricketer as he did not have the natural talent some others possessed. Hence, a good cricketing brain. Was unlucky to not lead Zim on more occasions.
4. Mental toughness. Excellent physical fitness. Typical 90's Zim never-say-die attitude.

Against Grant:

1. Wasn't very fluent against spin. Had his issues with strike rotation when exposed to good quality spin for long periods.
2. Upping the tempo of the innings was probably not his forte. He was good, aggressive, but could not easily change gears, or at least wasn't tested much on this aspect.
3. Not the most elegant player to watch.
4. Haven't calculated the numbers, but I feel his standard deviation from his average would be bigger. He got some big scores, and then got some really cheap scores in between. No the most consistent (true about most Zimbos though)

For Sean:

1. The guy is a million dollars when he is batting at the top of his game. A treat to watch.
2. Possibly one of the most naturally gifted players to have played for Zimbabwe in terms of touch and technique, specially against spin. Almost comparable to the legendary brother of Grant.
3. Still one of the most consistent to give a few runs to the team when he strides out to bat. May not be a big score, but a decent 30+. That is, smaller standard deviation from the average (hunch, to be verified).
4. Fluent Sean can change gears as the match needs it, as seen even in his most recent ODI hundred a Pgainstak in Pak.

Against Sean:

1. Suspect against express pace, or even decent accurate pace. He was penciled in as Zimbabwe no. 3 by many as soon as he came in and showed his class, but could never get better at this and grab that position.
2. Last 2-3 years have brought out Williams from the constant scrutiny of throwing away a good looking knock after reaching 50s. He has done better on this, but has a long history of looking good, getting a milestone and throwing it away.
3. Questionable temperament. Lot of avoidable run-ins with different people of authority, jeopardizing his own and team's interests. Again, has settled down well of late (possibly starting a family helped?) but this is a factor to consider when we think of what could have been.
4. Long history of being injury-prone and not getting a consistent streak of matches for a long part of his career, again on the mends in recent times.

Common pros in both:

1. Lionhearted team-men. Always willing to contribute to the teams cause with bat, ball or brilliance in the field.
2. Excellent fielders. Grant a bit ahead in this contest though. He was a truly world class fielder on par with Jonty Rhodes during his time. Williams was the best fielder Zim had in late 2000s and early 2010s perhaps. Grant was just a class above Sean here.
3. Left arm spin. Both very effective. Sean seems to be more resourceful when on song, with more variety to fall back on and is accurate most of the times. Grant was accurate, but probably lacked too much variation. But he did his job most of the time. For me, Sean edges Grant here despite Grant having a batter record in a less demanding era of ODIs.

Final Call:
Grant slightly edges Sean overall for me, but Sean is not finished yet. I'm more a fan of Sean than of Grant, but still...

[Googly]

Pretty decent review. You left out the fielding. Gobs was well ahead. He was a gun.
My 10c worth was that GF played much better opposition, and don't forget he had a decent County career.
I rate Sean but I'd put Gobs ahead in all departments except batting against spin. Did he ever face Warne, Murali and Harbijan?

[CrimsonAvenger]

Pretty decent review. You left out the fielding. Gobs was well ahead. He was a gun.

I did mention that, Googly, under common for both:

Excellent fielders. Grant a bit ahead in this contest though. He was a truly world class fielder on par with Jonty Rhodes during his time. Williams was the best fielder Zim had in late 2000s and early 2010s perhaps. Grant was just a class above Sean here.

[jaybro]

All-rounder vs all-rounder. A comparison that is not a foregone conclusion by any means and jaybro brings in pretty much all the high level points of argument well. I'll indulge as both are my staunch favorites (as I have already declared elsewhere on these forums) and were part of my all time Zim Draft team earlier this year

One thing is common among both, their best format were the ODIs. Comparing them purely on ODIs in this:

For Grant:

1. Opening the batting, and opening against some of the best bowlers of his era. He faced the Akrams, the Ambroses, the Walshes, the McGraths, the Donalds, etc. and did reasonably well. He is possibly Zimbabwe's most successful long term ODI opener.
2. Match winnings knocks. The team did well when he scored runs. He held the anchor too and carried his bat when the team failed miserably, more than once.
3. Exceptionally hard working cricketer as he did not have the natural talent some others possessed. Hence, a good cricketing brain. Was unlucky to not lead Zim on more occasions.
4. Mental toughness. Excellent physical fitness. Typical 90's Zim never-say-die attitude.

Against Grant:

1. Wasn't very fluent against spin. Had his issues with strike rotation when exposed to good quality spin for long periods.
2. Upping the tempo of the innings was probably not his forte. He was good, aggressive, but could not easily change gears, or at least wasn't tested much on this aspect.
3. Not the most elegant player to watch.
4. Haven't calculated the numbers, but I feel his standard deviation from his average would be bigger. He got some big scores, and then got some really cheap scores in between. No the most consistent (true about most Zimbos though)

For Sean:

1. The guy is a million dollars when he is batting at the top of his game. A treat to watch.
2. Possibly one of the most naturally gifted players to have played for Zimbabwe in terms of touch and technique, specially against spin. Almost comparable to the legendary brother of Grant.
3. Still one of the most consistent to give a few runs to the team when he strides out to bat. May not be a big score, but a decent 30+. That is, smaller standard deviation from the average (hunch, to be verified).
4. Fluent Sean can change gears as the match needs it, as seen even in his most recent ODI hundred a Pgainstak in Pak.

Against Sean:

1. Suspect against express pace, or even decent accurate pace. He was penciled in as Zimbabwe no. 3 by many as soon as he came in and showed his class, but could never get better at this and grab that position.
2. Last 2-3 years have brought out Williams from the constant scrutiny of throwing away a good looking knock after reaching 50s. He has done better on this, but has a long history of looking good, getting a milestone and throwing it away.
3. Questionable temperament. Lot of avoidable run-ins with different people of authority, jeopardizing his own and team's interests. Again, has settled down well of late (possibly starting a family helped?) but this is a factor to consider when we think of what could have been.
4. Long history of being injury-prone and not getting a consistent streak of matches for a long part of his career, again on the mends in recent times.

Common pros in both:

1. Lionhearted team-men. Always willing to contribute to the teams cause with bat, ball or brilliance in the field.
2. Excellent fielders. Grant a bit ahead in this contest though. He was a truly world class fielder on par with Jonty Rhodes during his time. Williams was the best fielder Zim had in late 2000s and early 2010s perhaps. Grant was just a class above Sean here.
3. Left arm spin. Both very effective. Sean seems to be more resourceful when on song, with more variety to fall back on and is accurate most of the times. Grant was accurate, but probably lacked too much variation. But he did his job most of the time. For me, Sean edges Grant here despite Grant having a batter record in a less demanding era of ODIs.

Final Call:
Grant slightly edges Sean overall for me, but Sean is not finished yet. I'm more a fan of Sean than of Grant, but still...

Nice summary CA, hit all the major points on the head.