Next new Major winner

[El Dude]

Not suspicious, Dude, just digging into your stereotypes. Dimitrov is the forever "next-best-thing." We've been waiting for him to up-and-come for about 7-8 years now. If the post Big 4 Era is like the late 90s, sure, he'll probably have his moment in the sun. As will a lot of people. But I have no faith in his heart for the kill, I guess is where I land. There are a few obvious examples when he should have stepped on Federer's and Nadal's necks and couldn't do it. If you can't kill them elders, you'll wait for them to die off and hope to pick up the crumbs. That's how I see Dimitrov.

The style comment re: Kyrgios...that's the point. He's a lot different from Fed, and not to your liking, I take it. But he's not nearly as one-dimensional as Philippousis. He's way more than a big serve. He's got a wicked live arm, off both wings. Safin and Wawrinka are better comparisons.

I think you are reading too much into what I said. I don't see Dimitrov as the next best thing, and I recognize his shortcomings. By saying he has the "full package" I was merely pointing out that he is a well-rounded player who should be winning big titles, based upon his skill-set. Of course winning is more than just talent, otherwise David Nalbandian would have won 6+ Slams and Jim Courier none. But yes, I like Grigor's game because I like his (and Roger's) style of graceful play.

As for Kyrgios, I agree that he isn't as one-dimensional as Philippoussis as far as skills go, but with his attitude I could see a career trajectory that sees him not tapping into his array of talents - not "deploying" them, to use a term you used, and thus in effect being more one-dimensional than he should be. Perhaps his worst-case scenario is a poor man's Safin, that is, Safin without the Slam titles. But his best-case scenario? As I said, Stan Wawrinka but at a younger age, and thus perhaps a longer prime and more Slams. But it also remains to be seen when (and if) he can get his head on straight. Someone over at TF, I can't remember who, actually thinks he has a mental disorder.

 

[Federberg]

^Wouldn't surprise me if he isn't quite right in the head to be honest.

I think you're a bit hard on Courier. The guy had a brute of a forehand. Sporting history has shown that if an individual has an extreme enough weapon it can override other shortcomings. And frankly his weaknesses weren't that bad. Let's not forget that a winning mentality is a key part of the tool set

 

[Moxie]

When I said I was glad to see that Kyrgios was getting a coach, I almost added that he needed a sports therapist, or even just a proper one. I don't know if I'd go as far to say that Nick has a "mental disorder," but he surely has "issues." He seems to have a chip on his shoulder as big as Australia. He resents the sport that has made him $3.5M US, and he often can't get out of his own way. He seems to be missing some happiness or gratitude towards life. I hope he can work that out.

@ElDude, I agree with @Federberg that you're a bit harsh on Courier. Winning 4 Majors puts him in some rare company. And saying that Nalbandian would otherwise have had 6 is hyperbole. I know you were addressing the notion of "talent," but that goes a bit far.

 

[shawnbm]

I agree with bb that Zverev is most likely to win a major eventually, the question is who if them is most likely to win one and I voted for Dominic. I could see him winning Paris with that clay court game of his.

 

[Moxie]

I agree with bb that Zverev is most likely to win a major eventually, the question is who if them is most likely to win one and I voted for Dominic. I could see him winning Paris with that clay court game of his.

But hopefully not for a year or two.

 

[El Dude]

Moxie, you really take what I say too literally. When I said that about Nalbandian and Courier, I wasn't speaking as if it were literally true, but more illustratively or figuratively. Nalbandian is the quintessential talented player who underachieved, and Courier is a bit of an overachiever (although still quite talented). That is all I'm saying. And the point is simply, Slam titles don't definitively determine how good a player was. Look at Andy Murray: he has "only" won three Slams, but his overall career accomplishments are much better than that. Or look at Johan Kriek - he won two Slams, but never made the top 10!

 

[masterclass]

Perhaps we should also consider in which tournament will it happen?
I see the chances of a first timer doing it in this order:

US Open (Dimitrov, Raonic, Nishikori, Zverev)
Wimbledon (Kyrgios, Zverev, Raonic, Dimitrov)
Roland Garros [French Open] (Thiem, Goffin, Monfils, Nishikori)
Australian Open (Dimitrov, Zverev, Goffin, Thiem)

Respectfully,
masterclass

 

[Federberg]

Perhaps we should also consider in which tournament will it happen?
I see the chances of a first timer doing it in this order:

US Open (Dimitrov, Raonic, Nishikori, Zverev)
Wimbledon (Kyrgios, Zverev, Raonic, Dimitrov)
Roland Garros [French Open] (Thiem, Goffin, Monfils, Nishikori)
Australian Open (Dimitrov, Zverev, Goffin, Thiem)

Respectfully,
masterclass

That's interesting. Here's mine...

US Open ( Zverev, Dimitrov, Raonic, Nishikori)
Wimbledon (Zverev, Raonic, Dimitrov, Kyrgios)
Roland Garros [French Open] (Nishikori, Thiem, Goffin, Monfils)
Australian Open (Zverev, Dimitrov, Raonic, Kyrgios)

 

[Federberg]

For me, only two things holding back Zverev right now. More in game maturity, he needs to mix it up a bit. I think he could have beaten Rafa if he's given him more looks. You don't allow Rafa to get into a rhythm if you can help it. And more physical strength and stamina. Both come with age and experience. I would be very surprised if by this time next year he isn't close to 5 in the world barring injury. I've seen enough

 

[Ricardo]

Zverev, hands down the best chance. He's got the game, the mental and with more experience he'll play smarter. Maybe he just needs a bit more variety, as he'll find out that there are guys who you can't always hit off the court. But i am really impressed with his attitude, something one cannot say with Kyrgios.

 

[Moxie]

Moxie, you really take what I say too literally. When I said that about Nalbandian and Courier, I wasn't speaking as if it were literally true, but more illustratively or figuratively. Nalbandian is the quintessential talented player who underachieved, and Courier is a bit of an overachiever (although still quite talented). That is all I'm saying. And the point is simply, Slam titles don't definitively determine how good a player was. Look at Andy Murray: he has "only" won three Slams, but his overall career accomplishments are much better than that. Or look at Johan Kriek - he won two Slams, but never made the top 10!

I was following on Federberg's comment, and you were being very hyperbolic, which isn't really your style, as a poster. But I did get your point, and I agree that Slam titles don't "definitively determine how good a player is." That's why we talk so much about the x-factors in discussions like this.

 

[Moxie]

Zverev, hands down the best chance. He's got the game, the mental and with more experience he'll play smarter. Maybe he just needs a bit more variety, as he'll find out that there are guys who you can't always hit off the court. But i am really impressed with his attitude, something one cannot say with Kyrgios.

I think his composure and commitment are two of his greatest selling points. At the USO 2015, it's worth remembering, when Sasha was 17, he went 5 sets with Kohlscreiber on a brutally hot day, and lost by 1 break in the 5th. I agree that he is pretty much all upside.

 

[El Dude]

Perhaps we should also consider in which tournament will it happen?
I see the chances of a first timer doing it in this order:

US Open (Dimitrov, Raonic, Nishikori, Zverev)
Wimbledon (Kyrgios, Zverev, Raonic, Dimitrov)
Roland Garros [French Open] (Thiem, Goffin, Monfils, Nishikori)
Australian Open (Dimitrov, Zverev, Goffin, Thiem)

Respectfully,
masterclass

I'll bite, in chronological order and likelihood (in my opinion) of winning the Slam:

Roland Garros: Thiem, Nishikori, Dimitrov....not sure who next. Goffin and Monfils seem so unlikely to win a Slam, but I see why you picked them.
Wimbledon: Dimitrov, Raonic, Kyrgios, Zverev...that's as of now. If Dimi gets a new celebrity girlfriend, he might drop to the bottom of the queue.
US Open: Dimitrov, Zverev, Kyrgios, Raonic...ditto above. I rank Zverev higher because I think it won't be until the USO that he becomes a real Slam threat.
Australian Open 2018...who knows?

 

[Carol]

Monfils RG? not even in his dreams!

 

[Moxie]

Monfils RG? not even in his dreams!

May as well be Monfils as Dimitrov. I looked up his RG results and they're not so good. Highest he ever got was R32 in '09. Is he really a contender on clay, or are we just out of 3rd options? Legitimate question.

 

[Carol]

May as well be Monfils as Dimitrov. I looked up his RG results and they're not so good. Highest he ever got was R32 in '09. Is he really a contender on clay, or are we just out of 3rd options? Legitimate question.

Anyone but not Monfils or the rest of the Tour would be in very bad conditions

 

[Moxie]

Anyone but not Monfils or the rest of the Tour would be in very bad conditions

If Wawrinka could make a late run from "talented-but-flakey," why not Gael?

 

[Carol]

Because even that I like a lot Monfils's game you can tell that Wawrinka is more determinated while Monfils even playing seriously (not too often) I don't see him capable to win, he doesn't have the necessary patience neither any determination

 

[Moxie]

Because even that I like a lot Monfils's game you can tell that Wawrinka is more determinated while Monfils even playing seriously (not too often) I don't see him capable to win, he doesn't have the necessary patience neither any determination

I think you could have said the same of Wawrinka, prior to 2014. And Gael is demonstrating a like-wise renewed determination and focus. I'm not saying I think it will happen, but if I'd told you in 2013 that Wawrinka would win 3 Slams, I think everyone would have referred me to my shrink.

 

[Carol]

I think you could have said the same of Wawrinka, prior to 2014. And Gael is demonstrating a like-wise renewed determination and focus. I'm not saying I think it will happen, but if I'd told you in 2013 that Wawrinka would win 3 Slams, I think everyone would have referred me to my shrink.

Well, anything can happen, I got enough surprises already :whistle: