Originally Posted by NadalAgassi
With Federer past his prime and except for this past Wimbledon generally sucking on grass since 2009 (and even at this past Wimbledon he was lucky for it not to turn into another disaester with a loss to Benneteau had Benneteau not choked) prime Agassi would have real chances at Wimbledon each year. He would be just as strong as Nadal had he ever gotten to play on todays slowed grass, and in his prime he is definitely a better grass courter than Djokovic or Murray.
I highly doubt Agassi would be as good as Nadal on grass. Nadal made five straight Wimbledon finals (of the ones he played). I would say Murray's a better grass court player as well. He's won three grass court titles already compared to Andre's one, and I'm sure he'll win at least one Wimbledon in the future. Djokovic might be a bit weaker than Agassi on the surface, but he'd still have a shot at taking him out. In any case, Agassi would certainly have his chances against Murray and Djokovic but he would be lucky to beat Nadal or Federer at Wimbledon, and most likely he would have to beat at least two of the four to do it, which is an even bigger ask. I think if Agassi was the same age as Djokovic and Murray, he'd win maybe one Wimbledon in his career, like his actual career.
That said, he'd definitely get his time at number one. I think NLBwell put it best. He'd be up there with Djokovic, Nadal, Federer, and Murray trading the top rankings back and forth.