I'd take a guy that averages 25 in bowling and 2 with batting over a guy that averages 30-31 with bowling and 30 with batting. Why? Because that average in batting just wont be needed if you have enough good batsmen on the team.
You underestimate the value of having a number 7-8 who can bat and bowl to a reasonably high level in both disciplines. Sure you'd want 2-4 bowlers who can average under 30 with the ball, but that 4th bowler being able to bat gives the side a lot more.
Flintoff averaged 31.78 with bat, 32.79 with ball. He could take a side apart with bat or ball, he didn't often enough, but I'd rather have someone like him in the side than not.
Someone who averages 2 with the bat is a near rabbit, you can't have too many like that in the order or you end up with the innings nearly being over when you're six wickets down. Noone is suggesting you load the tail with batsmen to compensate when the top order fail, but having someone down the order who can help turn 200/6 into maybe 330 all out, or who can add those extra runs that turns 400/7 into 500 or more is invaluable.
Ashwin averages 43.62 with bat, 31.28 with ball. While that average is probably a little artificially high so I might not risk him at say 6-7, it is quite impressive nonetheless. He has also been quite potent with the ball, even if his average is a bit on the low side.
Ashwin (11 Tests)
567 runs @ 43.62 (HS 103, 100 x1, 50 x3, SR 66.08)
60 wkts @ 31.28 (BB 6/31, 10wm x1, 5wi x5, SR 60.22)
Pretty good on face value, decent SRs in both disciplines and enough 50s and 5wis in just 11 Tests that I wouldn't be so hasty to ditch him. In fairness he has played five home Tests against weaker sides in West Indies and New Zealand, against the aussies and England he averages over 50 with the ball although his batting remains useful. That series against the aussies was in Australia, I wouldn't expect off spinners to rip through sides there, Murali didn't.................... (5 Tests, 12 wkts @ 75.42)
I'd give him a bit longer, see if he can turn himself into a decent all-rounder, in India one seamer and three spinners would allow for that and outside of India they could try 2-3 seamers and 1-2 spinners, depending on who they're playing, where etc.
It's not as if all the Indian bowlers are shining this series, in fact I was a bit bemused by the various changes made and thought a few were lucky to escape the axe. Never have been impressed with iss-hit sharma, compare him to Ashwin with his 10.05 with bat and 38.17 with ball and tell me you wouldn't rather have a lot of other players, including Ashwin, instead of him................... Not just 11 Tests, thats FORTY SIX Tests with less 5wis than Ashwin in FOUR TIMES the number of Tests, even taking just his home record of 52 wkts @ 33.06 you have to question how he gets in the side. Must be giving selectors a good BJ or something like that, does look like a big girl so maybe he gives them some kind of sick fantasy fulfilment.
----------
Yeah, read that earlier today in the newspaper. It's funny how we are suddenly so dependent on the pitches. I would rather have India back their abilities and go for the match than expecting a turner. Even if we get one, Swann and Panesar seem more effective than Indian spinners. But, that can also be because our batsmen have been ridiculous.
No point having a traditionally massive home advantage if you aren't going to use it. Back your players to play spin better than the visitors, no point playing more to your weakness (seam) than to their's (spin, even if relative)
