Young Guns Watch: 2015 Edition

[El Dude]

The only thing I worry with Kyrgios he tends to pick up injuries,even when he was playing juniors,at present he has a problem with his back and had to withdraw from 2 tournaments.Though I see he has been picked for DC for Australia.

Yeah, I hear that. Kyrgios reminds me of Juan Martin del Potro in a number of ways, and perhaps unfortunately in his propensity for injury. Let's play wait and see.

Ops, I've made a mistake. It's B not C. In tennis history majority of players who at age 18 showed similar potential like Coric, have never become No. 1 and multislam winners, so the odds are that Borna will not have such career.

Let's not get carried away.

I hear you, but here's my reasoning behind saying C. Two things, mainly:

1. Someone from these two younger generations has to be a multi-Slam winner and #1, and right now I think Coric has the best shot of players that are on the radar. As great as the current regime is, at some point it will start to break up and a prime Coric or Kyrgios or even Dimitrov may be good enough to beat an aging Nadal, Djokovic or Murray. In three years Nadal will be turning 32, Novak and Andy 31; I'd bet on a 27 year old Dimitrov or 22 year old Kyrgios, 21 year old Coric. In other words, while there may be a generational gap in terms of multi-Slam winners and #1s, there won't be two.

2. Just a hunch. Coric seems to have the X-Factor - the drive and fearlessness to win.

Berdych is a very good player. If you predict that Coric will have career like Thomas then I agree.

Berdych is a player who very well could have won a Slam or two, if the stars had aligned and if he had a stronger mental game. He is a better player than several one-Slam winners - Cilic, for instance, not to mention Gaudio, Johansson, etc.

So let's say that Coric has similar talent as Berdych. He also has the factors above going for him. Poor Tomas is of the same generation as two all time greats in Nadal and Djokovic, just a year and two older than them. If Tomas was born in the early to mid 90s then I'd like his Slam chances much better.

Again, Rafa turns 29 this year and Novak and Andy 28, not to mention Roger turning 34. Roger's game dropped a notch sometime in his late 20s, and I don't see why Rafa's, Novak's and Andy's won't do the same. As they creep down, the younger players will continue to creep up and at some point in the next few years they're going to be commensurate and we'll see a Wild West ATP for a year or two until a new regime establishes itself.

So I see this:

2015-16 Continued dominance by current elite, with occasional and perhaps increasing upsets
2017-18 Wild West
2019- New regime

Or something like that. By 2019 Roger will be 37-38 and probably retired, Rafa will be 32-33 and possibly retired, and Novak and Andy will be 31-32 and if still playing and good, won't be where they are now. It is inevitable.

 

[El Dude]

A quick follow-up.

Among the 89-93 generation, I think we'll see at least a few Slams. There's never been a generation that didn't win at least a few Slams. Even the very weak 74-78 generation won 8 Slams - 3 from Kuerten, 2 from Kafelnikov, and then four 1-Slam players in Gaudio, Moya, Costa, and Johansson.

The very weakest generation of players that played during the Open Era was the one born in 1939-43, between the great 34-38 generation that included Laver, Rosewall, Hoad, Emerson, not to mention Santana etc, and the good but not great Newcombe-Kodes-Nastase-Smith generation (1944-48). The 39-43 generation won only 5 Slams, 3 from Arthur Ashe and 1 each from William Bowrey and Chuck McKinley.

Now I suppose it is possible that the 89-93 generation becomes the first of the Open Era--perhaps in all tennis history--to go without winning a Slam. But I wouldn't bet on it. In my opinion the most likely candidates are, in no particular order: Dimitrov, Nishikori, Raonic, Thiem, and Vesely. Surely we'll get a Slam or two, maybe even several, from this quintet. There IS some talent there. After that you have real long-shots in Sock, Tomic, Goffin, Klizan, Paire, Janowicz, Kudla, Harrison, etc - but I'd be very, very surprised if any of these guys win a Slam.

 

[El Dude]

One more thing, purely speculative (isn't it all?). Given current age (in parentheses), health and level, let's posit the following future Slam counts for the Big Four, with a range of likely probability and an average:

Federer (33 yr, 7mo): 0-1 Slams; average 0.5
Nadal (28 yr, 10 mo): 1-5 Slams; avg 2.5
Djokovic (27 yr, 10 mo): 2-8 Slams; avg 4.5
Murray (27 yr, 10 mo): 0-3 Slams; avg 1.5

Adding the average up, that's 10 more Slams from the Big Four. Could be more, could be less - but I think it is a decent estimate. Now let's say that those 10 Slam titles come in the next five years, with an average of 2 a year. That means there's an average of 2/yr over the next five years that are won by someone else.

Now let's say that the Big Four win the max in the ranges I provided - that's 17 Slams. If we spread that out over, say, 6 years, that's 2 more in 2015 and then 3/year from 2016-2020. That still means that there are six Slams won by other players from 2015-2020. That's the range of years before we will probably see the next generation, players born in 1999-2003, on the radar - so the range of years when current generations will be dominating the field.

Again, this is all purely speculative but it is meant to support a point: The Big Four can't possibly win ALL Slam titles, and in fact going forward it may be more accurate that they'll win roughly HALF of them over the next half decade or so. That means there are a lot of other Slam titles to hoist! Maybe they'll all be one-Slam winners, but chances are that SOMEONE other than the Big Four is going to be #1 within that range--perhaps several players--and someone will win more than one Slam.

Should be interesting!

 

[herios]

At this moment I see Dimitrov winning no slams unless he changes coach and mentality. He goes backward not forward.

 

[herios]

Berdych was top 40 at 19, so Kyrgios is tracing his path at the moment. Considering his injuries, I think Kyrgios will be making it to the top 10 like Tomas did, but I think he will be held back by his fitness. 1-2 slams at the very best for him, but he could end up empty handed.

 

[Billie]

Coric might have the biggest potential of winning majors regularly, other than that I don't see any multiple major winner right now, but players will win them once the top players retire. But the dominance of 1 or 2 players will be over for a while.

 

[El Dude]

OK, one more. Here are the total Slam counts per generation, going back to the great Laver-Rosewall generation:

94-98: 0
89-93: 0
84-88: 27+
79-83: 23+
74-78: 8
69-73: 32
64-68: 23
59-63: 17
54-58: 16
49-53: 15
44-48: 15
39-43: 5
34-38: 51 (or 76 including Pro Slams)

So here's a thought. Even if 89-93 is a weak era and produces few Slams--which seems incontrovertible at this point--it would be a historical precedent for 94-98 to ALSO be a weak era, or low Slam count. Even if both generations are week, one--especially the younger generation--should win quite a few Slams simply because someone has to win Slams. Novak and Rafa and Andy can't win them forever, so even if their dominance is extended into their early 30s, chances are that 4-5 years from now at the very latest, we'll see a regime change.

I don't have as detailed numbers for older generations, but from what I can tell the Ashe generation is easily the weakest in tennis history and you have to go back to the late 1890s to find another really weak generation. From what I can tell, only a few generations have not included one 5+ Slam winner: Kuerten's, Ashe's, and then you have to go back to Borotra's in 1894-98 and possibly the one from 1884-88.

So again, while it seems likely at this point that the 1989-93 generation will not include a 5+ Slam winner, it is highly unlikely in terms of historical precedents that the same will be true of the 1994-98 generation. Two generations in a row of no 5+ Slam winners hasn't happened in the last 150 years!

 

[Great Hands]

Mayb it;s ab ol priiton, but i'll stan bu it; I think ori is going to b an all-tim grat - i.. win at last 5 majors. H's got it, thnially an mntaqlly.

grigor sms to b going bakwars. i rally lik his styl of play, but his porblm, as wll as laking big wapons, is his mntality. i on't s that intsity that's rquir from him, an h has a horribl habit of making ba rros, inluing oubl faults, on big poinjts. not a goo sign.

i think igf grigor is going to win a slam, it will b w. grass plays to his strngths an nullifis his waknsss to som xtnt. it givs him mor pop on his srv, an his wronrful sp an grat hans om into thir own. i was wathing som of him playing at quns an w last yar an h llo so goo at tims, so muh bttr than h os on othr surfas, you l almost srib him as a grass ourt spiolsi. so whilst i an s him having agnuin shot at w in th oming yars, i just an't s hom winning th othr slams.