Is Adam Gilchrist the most valuable player in world cricket?

[Beny]

I think so! The best WK batsmen in the world. If not ever. He's saved Australia so many times its not funny.

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/NATIONAL/AUS/

[Paoli]

Yes, by quite some margin....Best WK batsman ever??? By a long way...The only one who comes near is Andrew Flower.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Beny

I think so! The best WK batsmen in the world. If not ever. He's saved Australia so many times its not funny.

Fundamental problem with your reasoning here: value is determine by supply and demand.. and right now Australian cricket is supplying the selectors with genuine alternatives as wicket-keepers.. and the team is only demanding that one is selected - Gilchrist's value is therefore determined merely by how much more he's worth than the next (perfectly adequate) wicketkeeper-batsman.

You've got batting coming out of your ears.. so supply is outstripping demand. SAme to a lesser extent in spin bowling. Not sure in seam bowling though: I'd say McGrath's the one who is toughest to replace.. hence greatest value.

[Teatime FatCat]

I'm sorry, but I just feel it's not as simple as 'Most Valuable Player in the World'. As cricket is a such a complex game, with different needs at different times of a 5 day match, I'd suggest that he would only be MVPW if he took his pads of when the wicket had flattened out and bowled left arm wrist-spin to devastating effect.

Some would argue that a player would need to be a genuine batter & bowler to become MVPW

But then again, someone has stolen my Catnip Squeaky Mouse this morning, so I am in a pedantic mood!

[Beny]

Fundamental problem with your reasoning here: value is determine by supply and demand..

Ohh spoil the party why dont you... You're not an economics teacher are you?

I'd say McGrath's the one who is toughest to replace.. hence greatest value.

Ok that'll do, I can live with that!

[cantplaycantalk]

Murali is the MVP, without him Sri Lanka are a shadow of the side.
Kallis is a better batsman, and a decent bowler to boot,

As a WK batsman, he has no equal at present, probably ever, but he isn't the most valuable player in the world.

[Mike]

This is probably the best bowling analysis article I've come across and shows how good Murali is but as good as Murali and McGrath are I think I'd pick Dravid in my side first. He is so consistent. Sehwag also rates highly because he can get a team off to a flyer with his high strike-rate. I read that he has the second-best 1st innings average in history after the Don. Gilchrist, Ponting and Lara are still automatic choices, I think.

1st innings averages:

57.74 Gilchrist
62.39 Dravid
62.62 Lara
63.25 Tendulkar
63.37 Ponting
71.30 Sehwag
97.85 Bradman

[Rachael]

This "most valuable player" thing is a bit odd, really: for the Aussies.. Gilchrist is replaceable, dispensible. He's got no equal elsewhere in the world.. but even so... South Africa are in more desperate need of middle order batsmen (Boucher and DeVilliers both seem oK as glovemen)... Pakistan are in more desperate need of an opening bat... England would much rather sign Warne or Murali... NZ would much rather sign McGrath or Pollock... and so on.

If you considered "who would be the most irreplaceable player for a world XI" then I guess that's a bit different. Consider:

Langer        Smith / Fleming
Sehwag      Hayden / Strauss
Dravid / Ponting
Lara / Tendulkar      
Kallis / Martyn / Inzi
Gilchrist      Sangakkara / Boucher
Pollock        Vaas, Kasprowicz
Warne / Muralitharan
McGrath      ?
Gillespie       Akhtar?  Harmison?

There is no world shortage of middle order batsmen right now.. and picking between Warne and Muralitharan is so tough you might just take both... but worthy replacement opening batsmen are not too easy to identify... but the real shortage in world cricket, right now, is in seam bowling.

Akhtar? Suspect attitude. Harmison? Suspect temperament. Kasprowicz? Maybe. The rest? The promising ones just haven't proven themselves enough yet.. and those that have proven themselves have mostly proven to be limited. It's not like a few years ago when you could have replaced Wasim, Waqar and Curtley with Donald, McGrath and Pollock and still left Walsh, Gough and Srinath in the wings!

[Ernest]

Good read that Mike,wow .

To be honest from your list of , I would just take Gilchrist,(out of current players), and nationalise him, England would then be invincible .

[Mike]

I can't believe you've omitted Flintoff from your list, Rachael, as I think he would leave a huge gap in England's middle-order. I think the most valuable players in the world are (one selection from each major Test country):

Flintoff - ENG
Dravid - IND
McGrath - AUST
Muralitheran - SL
Kallis - SA
Inzamam - PAK
Vettori - NZ
Lara - WI

From that list, Kallis is probably the most difficult to replace because he is also a good change bowler. You can't replace him directly with Martyn or Inzi who are just batsmen without seriously effecting the team balance. Flintoff is another who would be difficult to replace because of his bowling. McGrath could be replaced by Pollock, Murali by Warne. Dravid by Ponting. Inzamam by Tendulkar. Vettori by Warne. Lara by Tendulkar.