re: Novak Djokovic and Appropriate GOAT Criteria

quote:

---

His best is still the best I've ever seen

---

I agree that the 2011 run he had is arguably the best ever.

But you can't judge any players in any sport only when they are at their best. It's about the total body of work and career. Not just when they are at their best. I remember when Derek Anderson had that amazing year in 2007 for the Browns. But that's it. Jeremy Lin was a bonafide star for the Knicks with all the Linsanity stuff going on and he was hitting game winners and all that. Now he's a below average PG.

It's about the longevity of greatness that truly makes 1 great. A player that can come back from injuries, a player that can alter his game and still win when they get older, etc.

When he's all there and on his game, he's as good as you can be. But, I find that Novak checks in and out of games way too much. The mental part of it is his biggest issue IMO. He let's stuff get to him and it eats away at him. You can't let that happen. The true GOATs can overcome mistakes, missed / bad calls, injuries, etc. And there are sometimes when Novak overcomes those things. And then there are other times where he doesn't. He's mentally inconsistent. If he wasnt, he would have had a great chance at becoming the GOAT.

quote:

---

how so? Please elaborate.

---

People assume Nadal will win three more French Opens. I don't think it's gonna happen. He just looked weary to me during RG this year, and especially in the final. I don't know that we can pencil him in for three more titles at RG.

Also, I'm just not certain Nadal is going to regain the hard court form he had last year. Maybe I'm being pessimistic because I'm a fan of the guy, but I get the feeling his body is a ticking time bomb. To be fair, he's lasted at a high level longer than many expected. i can literally remember where I was the first time I saw Nadal play tennis, and I at once thought he was the best player I'd ever seen (and had no idea how anyone was gonna beat the guy) but certainly not built for longevity.

We'll see. Maybe his body will hold up just peachy (hs Uncle played professional soccer at a high level into his mid 30s), but I have my doubts.

quote:

---

In the category of "being the best on his best days" I challenge anyone to come up with a reason why it isn't Marat Safin. When his head wasn't all the way up his arse like it normally was he would crack winners from literally anywhere on the court off both wings with no warning off of pretty much any kind of ball. He just obliterated people. No one stood a chance against him on his best days.




I realize that was a bit hyperbolic but Safin sticks in my mind as the best example in modern tennis of "if only he hadn't been such a loon"

---

I like this as a thought experiment. How long does one have to sustain a certain level before it counts? Djokovic clearly passes the threshold because he did it for a whole season.

And then there's Safin. I've heard more than one person claim that Safin's match against Federer in the Aussie Open in 2005 was the highest quality match they've ever seen. What if tennis has never been played at a higher level than it was by Marat Safin for two weeks in 2005?

It's not an outlandish claim -- I mean, Safin was absurdly good -- but I just don't quite think it passes the sustainability threshold. He probably lost to a guy ranked 120 in his next tournament.

Marat Safin: The Man, The Myth, The Legend.

Well you pretty much just completely blew your cover, bobby.

I'd put Nadal up against any alien. And, no, he's not done yet.

quote:

---

laver or borg ... laver knew how important the grand slam was, and he did it ... twice, tho one occurred before the open era ... but he knew he needed to complete it again during the open era ... and borg was great on two completely opposite surfaces, despite not winning the hardcourt slams ...

---

I think Borg is the guy who would get the most benefit from modern equipment. I'm not sure Mcenroe fares so well against Borg if you give the Swede the poly strings.

The question I always come to with Borg though, is this: isnt' he pretty much the exact same player as Nadal but with worse groundstrokes?

quote:

---

One of my most enjoyable matches was Emilio Sanchez-Mac at the US Open the first time Sampras won it. Five setter. It was like Mac turned back the clock and in the fifth set took Sanchez to school.

---

That's the great thing about a purely attacking player like Mac. When things are going well, they're just gonna obliterate guys. What Mac did to Connors in the (I think) '83 US Open bordered on evil. Just complete mastery of the guy.


ETA: '84 Wimbledon. 6-1, 6-1, 6-2.

He also beat Mac quite a few times. He beat Mac the year before at Wimbledon in a great five set match.

Jimbo had one thing most of these guys didn't have. A second act.

Kid Bob loves him some sports-playin aliens