Would you consider Djokovic to be a greater player than Federer if...

[Obsi]

...Novak ends up with 16 slams but also with more year-end No. 1, more weeks at No. 1, more WTF and more Masters than Roger (17 slams)?

 

[Federberg]

If you add more titles total to that, there'll certainly be a conversation. At this point it's pretty much agreed that number of slams is the be all and end all, but for me there would be a conversation

 

[Obsi]

At this point it's pretty much agreed that number of slams is the be all and end all

That's not true. A panel of more than 40 experts has already put Djokovic above Nadal http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/16371992/tennis-top-20-all

 

[Moxie]

I know everyone is dying to make their player the GOAT, but aren't you really asking the question: which player would have the greater career? The last dozen years have been a marvel in men's tennis, with Roger, Rafa and Novak, especially, (Andy and maybe Stan, I guess, honorable mention,) but I do believe that there are a lot of people who will argue for Federer, (and I don't mean just fans; I would include commentators) until the 'next Roger Federer' comes along. Roger is perfectly shaped to be THE tennis great. (Exquisite, smooth form, 1HBH, excellent bridge between old school and new tennis.) For me, I think you have 3 in this era who are very, very great for different reasons, and you could stop there. I will get flogged for including Rafa, as self-serving, but I don't think a lot of dispassionate people would disagree with me. So, as to your criteria, Obsi, no, I don't think that will end the conversation. I think Novak would have to get to 19+, and be dominant beyond an age when anyone else ever was to stop the argument v. Federer. There is a huge cult of Roger Federer. (Not meant as an insult to his fans. It's Rosetta Stone is David Foster Wallace.)

 

[teddytennisfan]

...Novak ends up with 16 slams but also with more year-end No. 1, more weeks at No. 1, more WTF and more Masters than Roger (17 slams)?

YES.

 

[Federberg]

That's not true. A panel of more than 40 experts has already put Djokovic above Nadal http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/16371992/tennis-top-20-all

I'm not talking about so called experts I'm talking about fans generally. Otherwise players like Lendl would be much higher up in the pecking ordeer

 

[Carol]

That's not true. A panel of more than 40 experts has already put Djokovic above Nadal http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/16371992/tennis-top-20-all

Of course looking the last two years that panel of "experts" has to put Djokovic above Nadal but then they should put above Federer too but we''ll see at the end of their career who will be above whom

 

[DarthFed]

It'd definitely be a big debate. I think the non-calendar year GS would be a bigger thing in his favor than the rest. Roger had the most dominant stretch of 6 years in history but he never held all 4 at a time. I'm a Fed fan of course but I give Nole his due props for that.

 

[Obsi]

aren't you really asking the question: which player would have the greater career?

Yes. The term "greater player" is ambiguous but from the way I asked the question it's clear what I meant.

So, as to your criteria, Obsi, no, I don't think that will end the conversation.

I didn't ask will that end the conversation. Many experts consider Laver to be a greater player than Federer but they don't think Roger is out of the GOAT debate.

I'm not talking about so called experts I'm talking about fans generally. Otherwise players like Lendl would be much higher up in the pecking ordeer

So called experts? Do real experts agree with fans?

Of course looking the last two years that panel of "experts" has to put Djokovic above Nadal but then they should put above Federer too but we''ll see at the end of their career who will be above whom

The fact they didn't put Djokovic above Federer shows they were looking the whole careers not just the last 2 years.

 

[britbox]

Well, let me put it this way... IF Djokovic gets to 16, maybe even 15, 14... he will probably get lauded as the greatest of all time by many experts or fans AT the time, because we live in a kind of "What did you do for me today/yesterday" kind of world... but later down the track when he's gone through his decline and lost to lesser players... his stock will subconsciously drop, and Federer's 17 would again be seen as the benchmark.

Heck, even the last 6 months.... his stock has subconsciously dropped a little... yet his legacy as far as achievements concerned hasn't dropped at all.

 

[Carol]

Yes. The term "greater player" is ambiguous but from the way I asked the question it's clear what I meant.



I didn't ask will that end the conversation. Many experts consider Laver to be a greater player than Federer but they don't think Roger is out of the GOAT debate.



So called experts? Do real experts agree with fans?



The fact they didn't put Djokovic above Federer shows they were looking the whole careers not just the last 2 years.

The only fact I see is that Novak was playing better than the rest of the tour for 2 years (but not his whole carrer) because diferent reasons but it doesn't mean that he would be able to continuos to do it or the rest of the tour are going to be so inconsistent like has been. Let's go to wait to see what is going to happen the next three years to analyze correctly the numbers and facts

 

[DarthFed]

^ He's played better than the rest of the tour for 5 of the past 6 years. That's 2 more years at #1 than your precious has.

 

[Carol]

^ He's played better than the rest of the tour for 5 of the past 6 years. That's 2 more years at #1 than your precious has.

He didn't , just in 2011 when in a couple of months he improved so much that it took to everybody by surprise and later 2015 was almost as good as 2011

 

[DarthFed]

^ He was the best player in 2012, 2014 and this year as well. 2011 and 2015 were just extremely dominant years, but he's still been the best player in the world a few other years as well.

 

[Carol]

^ He was the best player in 2012, 2014 and this year as well. 2011 and 2015 were just extremely dominant years, but he's still been the best player in the world a few other years as well.

Like when?

 

[Moxie]

Carol, Twisted is likely going with ending the year at #1, which you can look up. 2012 was a pretty close one, as the Majors were evenly split between the Big Four. 2013 I think Novak ended at #1, but Rafa won the most Majors of anyone, so that's also a tighter year. Andy had a shot at YE#1 this year, but Novak would have to give him a lot of help.

 

[DarthFed]

Rafa finished #1 in 2013 but it's been Djokovic the other 5 years including this one. 2012 was close but Nole still clearly had the best results.

 

[Carol]

Carol, Twisted is likely going with ending the year at #1, which you can look up. 2012 was a pretty close one, as the Majors were evenly split between the Big Four. 2013 I think Novak ended at #1, but Rafa won the most Majors of anyone, so that's also a tighter year. Andy had a shot at YE#1 this year, but Novak would have to give him a lot of help.

If we are talking about help then we should say that it's not Muzz fault if he would reach at #1 this year same like it wasn't Novak's fault to keep that position because the other players had injuries, bad patches or not playing so well

 

[Moxie]

Rafa finished #1 in 2013 but it's been Djokovic the other 5 years including this one. 2012 was close but Nole still clearly had the best results.

Probably by figures, but narratively 2012 was a toss-up in many ways. Surely it wasn't a year in which Novak dominated, and had some surprising losses. He did rather come back to earth that year. 2013, as you remind me, Rafa did end the year at #1. 2014 was a rough start but good finish for Nole. 2015 was the one. Except for that final against Stan. This year, good start, and a lot of wobbling since FO win/Nole slam. He'll probably finish up fine, but not without hiccups.

 

[DarthFed]

2012 was close but not a tossup. Djokovic won YEC, had the best results at the slams, and probably won the most MS titles. 2014 he was clearly the best player despite only winning 1 slam. There's no way you can say Rafa, Stan, or Cilic were the best players that year.