The Crowe vs Kane debate is often raised by NZ media, more so than is necessary in my opinion. Crowe was the best test batsman in the world between 1985 to 1991*. KW will not likely replicate this feat. But it doesn't mean that he will not have the better career for NZC. The eras have changed. There was no Safrica then, SL's first high quality batsman was de Silva who peaked in the 1990's, and India were not regularly building up batting line ups of sheer class at that stage that they do now. Crowe only had to beat off Border and Miandad as Viv was shrinking in this time from the colossus he was in the 1970's. Outshining Gooch and Gower, is not like attempting to outshine all of Sangakarra, Amla, ABDV, Kohli, Root and Smith for any 5 to 6 years.
In this time, Crowe combined with Hadlee gave NZ more of the stellar test highlights than KW has. But a lot of those were stellar because they were the first time NZ beat an opposition, or beat it away. But there is no Hadlee type for NZ at present, and at times, KW's efforts have been overshadowed by Taylor or BMac, when they were stellar in themselves. Crowe had Wright and later Jones in support.
As a NZC fan, I just hope we get a full career out of KW, not plagued and cut short by injuries like Crowe's last few years were. Crowe's highlights reel is very impressive of wins and elegant stroke making full of extended poses on the shots, but KW's consistency and low profile approach often gets less attention, such as his 4th innings 100 to seal what should have been an easy win against a weak Sri Lanka team, but top order wickets fell far too regularly. That isn't celebrated like Crowe's efforts vs Australia or WI in 1985-87, and nor should it be. But KW sealed off the win, without much fuss or bother. KW scores runs, he doesn't do pomp and fanfare. He may even be doing himself a disservice, if he turned himself into a brand like Crowe did, or Kohli has done now, he may make a bit more coin and gain more international recognition for himself. But that's not Kane's style even if NZC's current biggest self promoter BMac was referring to Kane as "the King".
For me, I hope the debate turns to what does KW have to do to outshine RJ Hadlee as NZ's best test player ever. I don't mind if people prefer Crowe, though, he left an indelible legacy of a lot of success, in a fairly short career, and played with phenomenal style, elegance and tactical intelligence, most known for his countering techniques of top bowlers like playing inside Wasim Akram. But his career is over, and KW should now be entering his own peak batting phase at 27 years of age now, if NZ can get a few more regularly scheduled tests, 4 in 18 months just isn't good enough.
Turner's not even in the debate for me, though. Maybe if he had played for NZ for 5 more seasons he may have been. Especially with RJ Hadlee on the rise then, but despite his 100's in each innings vs Australia, and his wildly impressive WI tour in the 1970's (albeit before the WI four prong pace attack), his career is more full of what ifs as against contributions for NZC. But he was firmly in Gavaskar's shadow, Boycott's too. And possibly not even clear of Greenidge just as contemporary openers. Let alone the Barry Richards conundrum. Before LLoyd, Miandad, or heavyweights like Viv or G Chappel even come into discussion for Turner's era. Turner was a great batsman from NZ, one of few ever ranked #1, and a worthy contender if not member of any ATG NZ XI team, but not our greatest ever batsman.
*
http://www.espncricinfo.com/newzealand/content/story/978067.html
