Djokovic vs. Connors/Lendl/Agassi/McEnroe

[Kirijax]

Now that Djokovic has graduated from the Wilander/Becker/Edberg group, he has now entered the next tier of Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, and Agassi. Is he already past these guys? Or will he need a couple more Grand Slams to graduate from this group as well and enter the stratosphere of Borg, Sampras and Nadal?

Novak Djokovic
8 Grand Slams
3 WTF
3 Year-End No. 1
139 Weeks at No. 1
50 tournament titles
15 Grand Slam finals
623 Tour Wins

Jimmy Connors
8 Grand Slams
1 Tour Final
5 Year-End No. 1
268 Weeks at No. 1
109 tournament titles
15 Grand Slam finals
1253 Tour Wins

John McEnroe
7 Grand Slams
3 Tour Finals
4 Year-End No. 1
170 Weeks at No. 1
77 tournament titles
11 Grand Slam finals
875 Tour Wins

Ivan Lendl
8 Grand Slams
5 Tour Finals
4 Year-End No. 1
270 Weeks at No. 1
94 tournament titles
19 Grand Slam finals
1071 Tour Wins

Andre Agassi
8 Grand Slams
1 Tour Final
1 Year-End No. 1
101 Weeks at No. 1
60 tournament titles
15 Grand Slam finals
870 Tour Wins

As of now, I would have to rank them as:

Connors
Lendl
Djokovic
Agassi
McEnroe

But it's close. And if Djokovic wins the French Open in a couple of months, then he'll jump over Connors and Lendl.

Note: I didn't add Masters titles because the criteria with those tournaments has changed so much over the years.

 

[Mile]

I remember Djoker was set as 40th player in history by some experts. That was 2011 or 2012. I think he would be in top 5 by now - with RG in pocket.

 

[El Dude]

I agree with what you say, Kirijax - that he's in the middle there but will pass Connors and Lendl with a French Open win.

It seems a foregone conclusion that Djokovic will surpass that group by a good margin. Let's say he finishes his career with at least a dozen Slams, 200+ weeks at #1, 4+ year-end #1s, 70+ titles, etc. That puts him in the inner circle along with Roger, Rafa, Pete and Bjorn for Open Era players.

 

[Federberg]

I'm not sure I agree with that ranking. I think Mac is still above Djokovic given the dominance he had, and certainly above Agassi. For me, Agassi is the least of the guys you've shown there. Can't really say he ever dominated the tour, the others were all proper alpha dogs

 

[nehmeth]

This thread is rather moot as the careers of the other guys are over and Novak is 27 years old. If he does nothing else in his career then it means something. But he has a lot more tennis in him, so I think he moves to the top of the list for these guys and beyond them very quickly.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

I cannot tell you with any certainty where he is now compared to the others in that list, but I can tell you for a fact he will pass all of them when it is all said and done. Maybe he will not win as many tournaments as some, but his game is already ahead of everyone there.

 

[Riotbeard]

I cannot tell you with any certainty where he is now compared to the others in that list, but I can tell you for a fact he will pass all of them when it is all said and done. Maybe he will not win as many tournaments as some, but his game is already ahead of everyone there.

Agreed. One thing not represented in Agassi's tally: Career slam. I put connors at the top of the list, as it stands, but Novak would have to retire soon to not get ahead of those guys.

 

[Kirijax]

I think we can all agree that Djokovic will pass these guys sooner or later. The question is just as it stands now, who has the better career? As it stands now, I have a hard time putting Djokovic over Connors or Lendl, but I shouldn't have any problem doing that by the end of this year.
Agassi may not have been The Man for long and his career was more up and down, but he was around for almost 20 years and won everything there was to win. And this was done at a times when the courts were not so similar as they are now.

 

[Federberg]

^I certainly respect Agassi's longevity, but I find it hard to place him above Mac. Yes I know he won all the grand slams, but for me that's only a tie breaker. And even then we have to question how important participation in some of those slams was to Mac. When Mac was dominant, he was really dominant. In a way that only Roger and Novak have been able to in the open era. And he had super strong rivals to contend with (even though I'm more results oriented than the whole weak/strong era stuff). Agassi got his results by nibbling here and there. I don't recall too many times where I felt Agassi was going to win with a high degree of confidence, but with Mac..it felt inevitable