Would Nadal be the GOAT if not for injuries?

[Born Again]

This guy has won so much yet it seems like he's been injured half his career.
Just look at this year he's played 9 tournaments and almost finished the year #1.

 

[ADuck]

RIP for what's about to happen

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

 

[Plamen1234]

The fact that he almost finished Year End Number One shows how pathetic the current state of ATP is.I mean Nadal skipped almost all of the HC season,only played 3 HC tournaments and he retired in 2 of them.The reason why he is in Top 2 is because for another title he vultured multiple clay titles

 

[Sport]

Not a relevant question IMO. Injuries are part of sport, and the ability to avoid injuries is a critical factor for GOATNESS. Federer's style is more technical than physical, which allows him to avoid more injuries. Nadal is more physical... and unfortunately more injury-prone.

 

[Standaa]

 

[GabeT]

 

[Boom-Boom]

a moonballing clay specialist?

another Thomas Muster doesn’t look like a GOAT

 

[Born Again]

Not a relevant question IMO. Injuries are part of sport, and the ability to avoid injuries is a critical factor for GOATNESS. Federer's style is more technical than physical, which allows him to avoid more injuries. Nadal is more physical... and unfortunately more injury-prone.

You make a very good point.
Still, i think Nadal was really unlucky.
Look at Djokovic, his style is extremely reliant on his physical capabilities and he remains healthy, much more so than Nadal.

 

[Bartelby]

 

[George Turner]

If Karlovic had Djokovics backhand and could move a bit quicker he'd be the GOAT.

If Schwartzman had a serve he'd be ranked top 5.

If Dimitrov lived up to the baby Fed hype he'd be a Wimbledon, Australian open and US open champion.

If Kyrgios had Ferrers professionalism and work rate he'd be number one.

If Murray had Federers forehand he'd be a 10 time major winner.

If, but's and maybes.

 

[KINGROGER]

So far I’d say no. I don’t think he’s really lost out on lots of slams because of injury.

Wimbledon 2009 I’d say 50/50 with Federer at best. The guy coming off RG win would be confident and wanting revenge.

2012, 2014 USO? Maybe 2014.

2016 RG he was a bit better than 2015 but nowhere near 2017. I give that to Nole again.

Maybe he’s missed out 2-3 at most.

Can say same for Federer. If he plays 2016 W/USO at 2015 level he wins both. If he doesn’t get mono in 2008 he could’ve won AO.

 

[oldmanfan]

This guy has won so much yet it seems like he's been injured half his career.
Just look at this year he's played 9 tournaments and almost finished the year #1.

Wrong assumption.

You're suggesting that Rafa would win more without injuries, but it's closer to the truth that had he been more injury-free, he'd win waaaay less. It's BECAUSE he competes so hard, fought so tough, and was relentless, that brought him so much success. If he was less injured, by default that would mean that he competes less, fought less, and lets up, thus easily winning way less. Set points, match points, and break points don't magically save themselves ya know? Maybe some of them were saved by luck/choking, but not the majority.

Rafa fought hard and very well for his current place in history, at the cost of frequent injuries. If he didn't, he'd be healthier, but much lower on the totem pole of history.

 

[Druss]

If Kuerten wasn’t crippled with injuries he’d have added another 2-4 FOs.

If Haas wasn’t riddled with injuries he most likely would have won 1-2 slams.

If Del Potro didn’t have all those career threatening injuries, those that make Nadal’s injuries look like a cat scratch on the skin, he’d have another 2-4 slams.

If Safin didn’t have those injuries he’d have another 2 slams at least.

If .....

You get my point?

 

[TahoeTennis]

lol Nadal is already the GOAT, tripgoats united Fedalovic, war is over btw.

 

[mike danny]

You make a very good point.
Still, i think Nadal was really unlucky.
Look at Djokovic, his style is extremely reliant on his physical capabilities and he remains healthy, much more so than Nadal.

Djokovic is more flexible.

 

[tennis_pro]

Would he even win half of what he did if he didn't exert himself so much?

 

[mike danny]

Would he even win half of what he did if he didn't exert himself so much?

And that is the million dollar question.

Nadal lives by the sword and dies by the sword.

 

[Username_]

If nadal didn't time waste as much, he wouldn't have received many time violations.

this 'if' is a fact

 

[Sport]

Djokovic is more flexible.

Yex. And Nadal is faster as well. But it seems like being faster doesn't make you less injury-prone.

 

[-NN-]

Didn't even catch this one. I reckon no, given how much of his greatest success comes after injury breaks. I like to troll and pretend the answer is yes though.

Nadal would have won 25 Slams.

 

[mike danny]

Yex. And Nadal is faster as well. But it seems like being faster doesn't make you less injury-prone.

Maybe Djokovic was blessed with rubber tendons, who knows?

 

[mike danny]

Didn't even catch this one. I reckon no, given how much of his greatest success comes after injury breaks. I like to troll and pretend the answer is yes though.

Nadal would have won 25 Slams.

In other words, the injury breaks have benefited him, not hindered him.

 

[BrokenGears]

Yex. And Nadal is faster as well. But it seems like being faster doesn't make you less injury-prone.

Djokovic simply has less weight on his body and eats freakishly clean

 

[-NN-]

In other words, the injury breaks have benefited him, not hindered him.

I'm not willing to go all the way and say they have benefited him OVERALL. I'm not sure how significant his injuries are overall given the rigours he puts his body through. We'll never know. What I would say is it's ignorant to dismiss the evidence of how he has fared after such breaks and then assume that it must be the case that he was hindered overall throughout his career, indubitably, irrevocably, immutably (especially in relation to the fortunes of others).

 

[Sport]

Didn't even catch this one. I reckon no, given how much of his greatest success comes after injury breaks. I like to troll and pretend the answer is yes though.

Nadal would have won 25 Slams.

Not an objective analysis. You are considering the specific instances where Nadal gets injured outside Grand Slams, and how it gave Nadal time to repose. But you are missing injuries in Grand Slams. That data alone refutes your argument that it has "helped" Nadal. Nadal got injured during RG 2004, RG 2009, RG 2016, AO 2018 or USO 2018, and of course it didn't make him any favor. Nadal had to skip Queens and Wimbledon 2009 due to a knee tendonitis he acquired during RG 2009. Well, after skipping Wimbledon 2009 he did not win the US Open, so skipping Wimbledon due to an injury didn't help him at all.

 

[mike danny]

On a serious note, the slams that he missed due to injuries are RG 2004, AO 2006, Wimb 2009, USO 2012, AO 2013, USO 2014 and Wimb 2016. The slams that he didn't miss but in which he got injured: AO 2010, AO 2011, AO 2014, RG 2016, AO 2018 and USO 2018.

Nadal's chances of winning each of those aforementioned slams:

1. RG 2004 - slim to none. Still too young and inexperienced.
2. AO 2006 - zero chance.
3. Wimb 2009 - slim.
4. USO 2012- moderate chances.
5. AO 2013 - zero chance
6. USO 2014 - good chance. Although hot Cilic might be problematic. Lesser players have pushed Nadal on HC, so Cilic is in with a realistic shot.
7. Wimb 2016 - zero chance
8. AO 2010 - slim. Nadal was getting outplayed by Murray even before the injury occurred.
9. AO 2011 - zero chance.
10. AO 2014 - great chance.
11. RG 2016 - great chance.
12. AO 2018 - slim. Fed simply had his number on HC. And even before the injury, Nadal's form wasn't spectacular.
13. USO 2018 - zero chance.

At best, Nadal would have added just 4 additional slams: USO 2012, AO 2014, USO 2014 and RG 2016, which would put him at 21 slams.

But then, you also have to take into account that Fed too could have won more slams without his own health issues, like Wimb 2013, Wimb 2016 and USO 2016. These 3 slams were very likely to be won by Fed given the opposition in those and if his form was good enough, which would put him at 23 slams. So Fed would still be the GOAT IMO.

 

[mike danny]

I'm not willing to go all the way and say they have benefited him OVERALL. I'm not sure how significant his injuries are overall given the rigours he puts his body through. We'll never know. What I would say is it's ignorant to dismiss the evidence of how he has fared after such breaks and then assume that it must be the case that he was hindered overall throughout his career, indubitably, irrevocably, immutably (especially in relation to the fortunes of others).

What I think is that without those lengthy breaks, Nadal would have simply burnt out earlier. Nadal's body is just not made for the constant grind week in and week out for every year.

 

[-NN-]

Not an objective analysis. You are considering the specific instances where Nadal gets injured outside Grand Slams. But you are missing injuries in Grand Slams. That data alone refutes your argument that it has "helped" Nadal. Nadal got injured during RG 2009, RG 2016, AO 2018 or USO 2018, and of course it didn't make him any favor. Nadal had to skip Queens and Wimbledon 2009 due to a knee tendonitis he acquired during RG 2009. Well, after skipping Wimbledon 2009 he did not win the US Open, so skipping Wimbledon due to an injury didn't help him at all.

Not an objective analysis. It only considers short-term ramifications and doesn't account for periods of extremely impressive dominance achieved after the recoveries, which probably often acted for him as offseasons. An objective consideration is to accept that in the lack of knowledge one cannot be certain that he has been hindered to any unusual degree which should appreciably change his standing among his peers. The assumption made is that it must be the case that he has suffered in a manner which cripples him by comparison. When his style of play is brought up the retort is often one of congenital foot condition. It's possible that without it he wouldn't have suffered but it's impossible to know. To me it seems logical that his style of play would lead to regular injuries, yet despite that he's had quite remarkable health throughout his career, almost always being ready to win the one Slam which accounts for most of his Slam tally (opportunity is important in such judgments). Such a blind assumption isn't objective, but, in fact, ignorant.

Djokovic's recent injuries and problems cost him many opportunities, given the balance of his success across 3 of the Slams. It's a lot to miss out on through physical problems when one is such a massive threat at 3 of the 4 Slams in a year. This isn't to say he's been more unfortunate but it's something to think about. Then there are also his allergy "injuries" which may have heavily cost him many further chances at Slams.

Ultimately, the narrative that Nadal suffered unfairly through injuries might be true even in relation to the Big Three overall, but it also might not be. The narrative is pedalled, however, in extreme degrees by some people, and the contour and tempo of his resurgences are brushed under the carpet as nothing significant when weighing up the full puzzle.

 

[-NN-]

What I think is that without those lengthy breaks, Nadal would have simply burnt out earlier. Nadal's body is just not made for the constant grind week in and week out for every year.

Yeah that's one outlook as he'd have put himself on the line more often against his biggest rivals while not being in the sort of shape he might wish for and have ground his body into the ground if his body were even more durable as to avoid some of the injuries which put him out. Again it's funny to me that Federer never met Djokovic during his resurgence but now he's fallen considerably and Djokovic has risen again they've already played twice. 2013 Fed vs Nadal sticks out like a sore thumb. Nadal is probably more strategic than either Djokovic and Federer in picking his fights and making sure he's tiptop when gunning for his glory.

But on the other hand he could have carried on longer periods of dominance and not burnt out at all, leaving him on many more Slams. Impossible to know.

Ultimately it's all a nonsense anyway and so much of tennis is waves of momentum and confidence. What if Federer didn't have mono in 2008 for example... would he see such a mediocre year and a string of results which paved the way for him being usurped as the king of tennis by Nadal? But then if it DIDN'T happen would Federer have EVER won RG. In the end we just have to accept the contours, narratives and journeys that have happened in what have been terrifically fortunate careers for Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. Someone like Del Potro has a real bone to pick.

On a serious note, the slams that he missed due to injuries are RG 2004, AO 2006, Wimb 2009, USO 2012, AO 2013, USO 2014 and Wimb 2016. The slams that he didn't miss but in which he got injured: AO 2010, AO 2011, AO 2014, RG 2016, AO 2018 and USO 2018.

Nadal's chances of winning each of those aforementioned slams:

1. RG 2004 - slim to none. Still too young and inexperienced.
2. AO 2006 - zero chance.
3. Wimb 2009 - slim.
4. USO 2012- moderate chances.
5. AO 2013 - zero chance
6. USO 2014 - good chance. Although hot Cilic might be problematic. Lesser players have pushed Nadal on HC, so Cilic is in with a realistic shot.
7. Wimb 2016 - zero chance
8. AO 2010 - slim. Nadal was getting outplayed by Murray even before the injury occurred.
9. AO 2011 - zero chance.
10. AO 2014 - great chance.
11. RG 2016 - great chance.
12. AO 2018 - slim. Fed simply had his number on HC. And even before the injury, Nadal's form wasn't spectacular.
13. USO 2018 - zero chance.

At best, Nadal would have added just 4 additional slams: USO 2012, AO 2014, USO 2014 and RG 2016, which would put him at 21 slams.

But then, you also have to take into account that Fed too could have won more slams without his own health issues, like Wimb 2013, Wimb 2016 and USO 2016. These 3 slams were very likely to be won by Fed given the opposition in those and if his form was good enough, which would put him at 23 slams. So Fed would still be the GOAT IMO.

Good illustration of how opportunity needs to also be factored in.

How much did Djokovic possibly lose out on through his recent problems which he even had to have surgery for?

 

[FiReFTW]

OP have you ever watch Nadal play?

He runs like a crazy animal alll around the court sprints at 100% full effort to retrieve balls and grinds to no end.

Its one of the key reasons why he is so tough to beat, he gets to all balls and runs like mad, rly hard to hit winners against (specially true for younger Nadal).
Its also why he is so injury prone, because he pushes his body beyond normal human limits day in day out.

If he didnt do that he would not be injured much at all.

He also wouldnt win more than 3 RG's in his lifetime also.

So if he changed his style to be less animalistic he wouldnt even have 10 slams now.

 

[Deon Sanders]

John McEnroe has more of a case than Ned considering he has one more real slam and an all time great doubles career

Johnny Mac has also won the year end title a few times

 

[Subway Tennis]

If Nadal had not had as much interruption through injury he would certainly have won at least 4 more majors, and most likely have a triple career grand slam.

But these juicy "What Ifs" exist for all the ATG contenders.

If Federer had upgraded his equipment earlier, would he have been overpowered as often through the 2009-2010 seasons as he was, or would he have more majors?

If Novak had addressed his dietary and respiratory issues earlier, could we be talking about a guy who is the oldest YE#1 ever with 18-19 majors and no decline in sight?

If Murray had adopted a more aggressive game style and coach sooner, would it have taken him as long as it did to break through?

 

[BeatlesFan]

RIP for what's about to happen

How 'bout recognizing in .91 seconds this is a recently banned Novak account?

Try harder: double account, fake account...

Transparent even with a proxy.

 

[ADuck]

How 'bout recognizing in .91 seconds this is a recently banned Novak account?

Try harder: double account, fake account...

Transparent even with a proxy.

I don't get your response. Even if I presumed to know something which is impossible to know, it doesn't change the inevitable direction this thread was gonna take. How is it you know someone is a double, fake or even using a proxy when you can't see IP adressess?

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

If Karlovic had Djokovics backhand and could move a bit quicker he'd be the GOAT.

If Schwartzman had a serve he'd be ranked top 5.

If Dimitrov lived up to the baby Fed hype he'd be a Wimbledon, Australian open and US open champion.

If Kyrgios had Ferrers professionalism and work rate he'd be number one.

If Murray had Federers forehand he'd be a 10 time major winner.

If, but's and maybes.

If ifs and buts were candies and nuts we'd all have a merry christmas.

 

[Deleted member 763024]

Simple answer: we'll never know. One can make a case both ways for how the injury time off has affected his career.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Rafa will be GOAT despite his injuries