Originally Posted by BauerAlmeida
Chang's ranked fine there. But he is not Hall of Fame material imo.
And of course Murray is TOP 100, what I said is he doesn't come close to the TOP 20. I never said he shouldn't be included, he is probably around 50 or so. But people saying he is TOP 10 is laughable.
Kafelnikov maybe the worst 2 slam winner but neither Chang, Roddick and Murray have 2 slams. Besides that he was #1 and an olympic gold winner. He is ahead of the other 3 in terms of achievements. If Murray wins another slam and has at least a week at number 1 his career will be far superior to the other 3. He is already ahead of Chang and would be ahead of Roddick if it wasn't for Roddick being 1 in 2003.
At the moment is probably something like this imo:
2-Roddick/Murray (Is till give Roddick the edge because of being #1)
At the end of his career Murray will be the better player of those 4.
Chang or Roddick probably isn't HOF material if they were strict on who they induct but since they aren't. Chang deserves to be in there. Youngest Slam champion ever, spent quite a long time at the top, and won quite a few titles winning 34 in all. . He had fantastic results all around the world tour during his career.