Yes, if you relate "variety" to "completeness", then it is hard to argue against Federer. He has all the shots and everyone know that. But in general I believe people are thinking more of "less cracks in the armour", and the Djokovic of 2011 and 2014/2015 had virtually zero of those. His game was more "homogeneous" and I am sure people are equating this to completeness.
I agree, and this is what I posted about this when this thread was first created:
"Djokovic is the most complete baseliner ever. Federer is the most complete player. Can't say Novak is flat out more complete when he lacks Fed's variety. And, in order not to state this in vague terms, let me specify what variety is: Fed has a better slice, better touch, better volleys, better forward movement, better overheads, and better drop shots (though Novak's droppers are quite good). Of course, most importantly, and this can't be understated enough, Federer has a much, much better serve. However, if we strictly look at this from a baseline perspective, then I believe Novak at his best is more solid than Roger ever was, even in his prime. His offensive onslaught might not be on par with Roger's 2006 heyday, but it doesn't need to be, because nobody in history is as unshakable as Djokovic is off of both wings, and nobody in history has as good a transition game (defense to offense and vice versa, not even Nadal). The backhand is the biggest difference maker here since Novak's is obviously miles better, and I think Novak's rally forehand is one of the most underrated shots in history so there's that. Add in a Martian return and you've got the perfect baseline game.One thing I will say though, is the OP is right. Federer's biggest weakness is more easily exploitable than Novak, especially with the way the game is played today. If tennis were still played like it was in the 90's or early 00's, then this might not be such an issue. But this IS a baseline game first and foremost, so having an exploitable backhand is a huge deal.
So, I'll put it this way: Novak has more weaknesses, if we're looking at sheer quantity. However, having a shaky overhead, average slice, and an iffy net game, while occasionally costly, aren't as big of a deal as having an exploitable backhand in today's game. In fact, even if you combine Novak's weaknesses into one, and compare it to Federer's, I'd still argue that Roger's would be considered a bigger weakness, or at least, in the context of a tennis match, more likely to lead to a loss over a particular stretch of the match."
