JJ One Year On...

[Kieran]

He made his big breakthrough last year in Paris-Bercy, and now he's out of that same tournament in the third round. He reached the semi in Wimbledon and stood his ground well against Murray, played two great matches with Rafa, but hasn't done anything special anywhere else.

Does anyone think he's progressed?

And does anyone think he will progress?

And if so, to what extent?

Perhaps this season was a necessary one of consolidation, but I think the lad is seriously lacking in tennis intelligence, and I'm not sure he's learning quickly enough...

 

[Denis]

Don't forget the HOW MANY TIMES outburst! That was special! :laydownlaughing

 

[tented]

He made his big breakthrough last year in Paris-Bercy, and now he's out of that same tournament in the third round. He reached the semi in Wimbledon and stood his ground well against Murray, played two great matches with Rafa, but hasn't done anything special anywhere else.

Correct.

Does anyone think he's progressed?

No.

And does anyone think he will progress?

No.

Perhaps this season was a necessary one of consolidation, but I think the lad is seriously lacking in tennis intelligence, and I'm not sure he's learning quickly enough...

Correct.

 

[brokenshoelace]

I don't think he's progressed significantly since his breakthrough last year, at least not in the areas in which he needed to (shot selection, body language, defending, movement...).

Though in fairness, it seems a bit harsh to say when he made a Grand Slam semi. Still, the man turns 23 in about a couple of weeks, and needs to start making improvements in some critical areas.

 

[DarthFed]

Right now his hype is kind of centered around 2 good results, last year Paris and this year Wimbledon. And not to take anything away from this year's Wimbledon but somebody had to come out of that section...Needless to say consistency is a problem. The talent is there but the shot selection and all around erratic play keeps him from becoming a true contender as of now.

 

[El Dude]

Depends what your expectations are. He's holding steady in the top 20 (although I think he's going to drop out of the top 20 with this loss), which is pretty good considering that before last year's Paris Masters he was #69.

In 2013 he established himself as a legit top 20 player. I think that's a nice accomplishment for the year. I think 2014 will be more telling as to what his ultimate upside is.

EDIT: Jerzy dropped 7 spots to #21, which is likely his year-end ranking. Last year he ended at #26 so, at worst, he held steady.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

I liked Pim Pim more.

 

[tented]

Right now his hype is kind of centered around 2 good results, last year Paris and this year Wimbledon. And not to take anything away from this year's Wimbledon but somebody had to come out of that section...Needless to say consistency is a problem. The talent is there but the shot selection and all around erratic play keeps him from becoming a true contender as of now.

Exactly. Just two results. He'll drop down to No. 21 after today's loss. If you took away his Wimbledon points, he would drop to 53. So, yeah, two good results, but take them away and he's rubbing shoulders with guys like Montanes, Mahut, and Davydenko.

 

[El Dude]

We could say that about a lot of players, though (take two good results away and they look much worse in the rankings).

That's the nice thing about the rankings - they represent the performance of a player over the last calendar year. What they tell us is that Jerzy Janowicz has been the 21st best player (in terms of results) over the last year. Take his two best results away and he's not #21, but that's true of every player.

 

[calitennis127]

Janowicz is the best of the young crop, along with Pospisil. Dimitrov is talented, but Janowicz has a better mentality and mindset for winning big matches. Raonic is not someone who I look at seriously. He can win Queen's at some point, and maybe some really fast 500 hardcourt events. But I don't see him being a really good player at the MS or GS level at any point.

Janowicz will have a breathrough in 2014. These two Nadal losses have been good for him. And the Wimbledon run gave him a good taste of the big scene.

He'll be around and at the top soon.

 

[calitennis127]

Right now his hype is kind of centered around 2 good results, last year Paris and this year Wimbledon.

That is largely true, but when you just watch him play, you see major ability there. Janowicz passes the proverbial "eye test". His game is elite level, even if he doesn't have the consistent results to have earned that distinction quite yet.

His great results are just a matter of time in my view.

 

[Riotbeard]

We could say that about a lot of players, though (take two good results away and they look much worse in the rankings).

That's the nice thing about the rankings - they represent the performance of a player over the last calendar year. What they tell us is that Jerzy Janowicz has been the 21st best player (in terms of results) over the last year. Take his two best results away and he's not #21, but that's true of every player.

I agree with the Dude and Cali. This is the one year anniversary of Jerzy being relevant, and if you look at any other young guns, he has had a great first year of relevance, but not the breakthrough that some (not me) have expected. I think following up a masters final with a slam semi is pretty good. No he has not been consistent against mediocre players like Raonic, but he held his ground and had a year of competition at the highest level. He definitely has shot selection issues, but he has proven to be the best on the big stage of the youngins. He also has a lot of upside in terms of growth of his skill (which I wouldn't say for raonic). Dimitrov has a lot of tactical and physical upside, but I am not sure he has the psychology of a winner at the big stage.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

don't forget he was injured at the uso :huh:..

he couldnt serve anything like he can in that 1sr rd loss, he missed the asian swing too.

 

[Fastgrass]

young talent ? Missing

 

[NADAL2005RG]

That is largely true, but when you just watch him play, you see major ability there. Janowicz passes the proverbial "eye test". His game is elite level, even if he doesn't have the consistent results to have earned that distinction quite yet.

His great results are just a matter of time in my view.

His game is at an elite level? Or his talent is at an elite level? We see plenty of guys with elite level talent. But possessing a game at the elite level is more about discipline and court smarts. JJ has zero discipline. He might never get it. We'll wait and see, while the years go by. All these young stars are way behind schedule. And Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Berdych, Ferrer most likely all have several years left at the top. By the time the current elite are gone, the new balls will no longer be spring chickens and may be passed their prime. Maybe the generation after JJ (the current juniors) will be the new elite. Or maybe one or two of the current elite will refuse to budge.

 

[brokenshoelace]

I don't know about JJ's being at the "elite" level. Being elite in this era means being a great mover (even someone like Del Potro moves well for his size), having great point construction, defending well, turning defense into attack (this one is MAJOR these days, and JJ is pretty poor in that regard), etc...

I'd say JJ has very good potential and it shows, but his game is nowhere near elite at the moment, since he lacks many of the elements mentioned above.

 

[El Dude]

We all know Cali cannot, or chooses not to, differentiate between actuality and potentiality (no offense, Cali!), but what I think he means--and I agree with--is that Jerzy's game points to elite potential - or at least close to it.

Another way to look at it is that I wouldn't be surprised if Jerzy wins a Masters or even a Slam at some point, while I would be if Raonic did. Jerzy has weapons and a relatively balanced game and is a good bet to be in the mix for a spot in the top 10 next year, when he could surpass players like Gasquet and Wawrinka.

Raonic is another in the line of Isner and Karlovic - maybe better than those two, but without the overall game to be more than a spoiler at big tournaments. He MIGHT end up as another Berdych type and winning a single ATP 1000, but even that might be a bit beyond his reach.

As for Dimitrov, I've actually been somewhat heartened by his recent results. I'm sensing a big breakthrough next year. He halved his ranking from #48 in 2012 to #23 in 2013; I could see him halving it again in 2014 and ending up in the #10-15 range. People complain about him being a disappointment, but look at his year-end rankings since entering the tour:

493, 288, 106, 76, 48, 23

That's steady progress each year. Most elite players jump to the top 10 by the time they're 21, but Grigor at least seems on pace to be a near-elite player and should soon be a fixture in the top 10.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

I agree, I think Dimitrov is in the best position. If he can improve his fitness, he will fade less often. His execution is generally impressive. He isn't horrible mentally, but can improve there, and is improving it lately.

Feels so strange to see Raonic ranked so high. Certain players (Nadal annihilates Raonic, but has closer matches with Isner and Berdych) make Raonic look absolutely AWFUL, while certain others (Murray lost their last meeting, and Raonic leads 2-1) are troubled by him. Raonic is odd to me. Whenever I see him play, I think he's just a Karlovic/Isner-type. But his results are more impressive than there's. Maybe he has the same talent level of Karlovic/Isner but he is better at competing. Better mentally.

 

[Riotbeard]

I agree, I think Dimitrov is in the best position. If he can improve his fitness, he will fade less often. His execution is generally impressive. He isn't horrible mentally, but can improve there, and is improving it lately.

Feels so strange to see Raonic ranked so high. Certain players (Nadal annihilates Raonic, but has closer matches with Isner and Berdych) make Raonic look absolutely AWFUL, while certain others (Murray lost their last meeting, and Raonic leads 2-1) are troubled by him. Raonic is odd to me. Whenever I see him play, I think he's just a Karlovic/Isner-type. But his results are more impressive than there's. Maybe he has the same talent level of Karlovic/Isner but he is better at competing. Better mentally.

Raonic is also very good at beating player ranked below him, which explains his ranking.

 

[DarthFed]

Raonic has more to his game than Isner and Karlovic though I don't think his serve is as good as those players. And that means he is currently less likely to cause trouble to the top players than someone like Isner.