mrzz
Hater
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 6,299
- Reactions
- 3,202
- Points
- 113
What annoys me is that a lot of aspects of his game are neglected, while others heavily exaggerated.
The overrate exists, and is continuous IMO. Even reading posts here I see a giant overrate of aspects of his game that are totally denied by statistics. Someone posted his stats while returning serve. He is around top 100 in point winning percentage. So, deprived of his biggest weapon, his numbers go all the way down. Anyone who have watched entire matches of him knows that. He basically only breaks when the server has a very poor service game. That is a reflection of his poor receiving technique and poor overall ground strokes. Considering that he has very good natural reflexes (that's why his net play is decent), he should do way better than that.
Chris mentioned that he needs to learn percentage play, but it is more complicated than that. It is not like he hits 30+ winners a match (not counting serve) and just makes more UFE's than that. Again, the numbers simply tell another story. He hits a low number of winners (discounting serve), because he is only able to attack very specific balls. During rallies, he is basically a pusher, until some odd ball comes high and floating. This is actually smart, but not exactly a sign of "talent".
The other thing I simply think people judge completely wrong is his "head". While I agree that his behavior is out of the curve, and some attitudes are questionable, there is one big difference here. When you call a player a "head case", you do it because countless time he lost winnable or close matches due to mental fragility/lapses. How many of those you can count for Kyrgios? He surely lost lost matches in a worst way due to his head, but close ones? Surely way less than average. On pressure moments, he has nerves of steel most of the times. Tell me one, just one, non big three player who is cooler than him on big moments.
Still on his "head", he is actually very smart on court. He adapts his play (as far as his technique allows him) to his opponent. He plays Nadal and Federer completely differently, for example. So, in the "head" department, he is completely underestimated. He is also underestimated on the serve department, incredibly. In form, he is maybe the most effective server I have ever seen play.
Considering that, I am quite sure he has a lot of upside, because at some point he will get his baseline game and ground strokes to decent levels, improve his net technique to make better use of his quick hands, and get big wins due to his cool head at pressure moments. People will credit the results to his "talent", citing one or another tricky play, and keep ignoring the stats that won 99% of his points. But that's ok, he is a nice guy and will be good for the sport.
The overrate exists, and is continuous IMO. Even reading posts here I see a giant overrate of aspects of his game that are totally denied by statistics. Someone posted his stats while returning serve. He is around top 100 in point winning percentage. So, deprived of his biggest weapon, his numbers go all the way down. Anyone who have watched entire matches of him knows that. He basically only breaks when the server has a very poor service game. That is a reflection of his poor receiving technique and poor overall ground strokes. Considering that he has very good natural reflexes (that's why his net play is decent), he should do way better than that.
Chris mentioned that he needs to learn percentage play, but it is more complicated than that. It is not like he hits 30+ winners a match (not counting serve) and just makes more UFE's than that. Again, the numbers simply tell another story. He hits a low number of winners (discounting serve), because he is only able to attack very specific balls. During rallies, he is basically a pusher, until some odd ball comes high and floating. This is actually smart, but not exactly a sign of "talent".
The other thing I simply think people judge completely wrong is his "head". While I agree that his behavior is out of the curve, and some attitudes are questionable, there is one big difference here. When you call a player a "head case", you do it because countless time he lost winnable or close matches due to mental fragility/lapses. How many of those you can count for Kyrgios? He surely lost lost matches in a worst way due to his head, but close ones? Surely way less than average. On pressure moments, he has nerves of steel most of the times. Tell me one, just one, non big three player who is cooler than him on big moments.
Still on his "head", he is actually very smart on court. He adapts his play (as far as his technique allows him) to his opponent. He plays Nadal and Federer completely differently, for example. So, in the "head" department, he is completely underestimated. He is also underestimated on the serve department, incredibly. In form, he is maybe the most effective server I have ever seen play.
Considering that, I am quite sure he has a lot of upside, because at some point he will get his baseline game and ground strokes to decent levels, improve his net technique to make better use of his quick hands, and get big wins due to his cool head at pressure moments. People will credit the results to his "talent", citing one or another tricky play, and keep ignoring the stats that won 99% of his points. But that's ok, he is a nice guy and will be good for the sport.
