Greatest Player Ever ... vs. the Greatest Talent

[byealmeens]

Is Novak Djokovic the most talented player of all time? In other words, does he possess the best skill set? I am a Federer fan and feel he is the greatest “player” ever, due to his success in slams, time spent at #1, and amazing consistency and longevity. I also feel Federer is a better tactician, and structures points a bit better. However, I’m starting to believe Novak may be a bit more “skilled”, overall. In my opinion, he has the best return of serve ever, is the best athlete (some of the most incredible movement I’ve ever seen), best combination of defense and offense (better than Nadal), and quite possibly the best ground game overall (combining forehand and backhand). His serve may not be the best, but is certainly one of best and though his volleys may not compare to Rafter or Edberg, they are some of the best of his generation (as good Federer). I do think Roger has the greatest forehand of all time, maybe a little better serve when he’s on, but with everything else it seems Novak has the edge.

Now I realize Roger can still beat Novak, and certainly has achieved a lot more. I also agree that Roger has improved … his backhand is quite possibly better than ever. I’m sure one could also argue that everything is relative … that he was as good as he needed to be in his prime but could have been even better. But based on what we’ve seen, and what we know today, does Novak possess slightly better tennis skill? Just curious ... would love to hear from other Federer fans in particular.

[TheFifthSet]

I always felt Federer is the most naturally talented player of my lifetime. Mecir, Stich, Agassi, Edberg (sans the forehand ), Djokovic, and especially McEnroe and a couple others are comparable but I think Fed takes the cake there (just for me, of the players I've seen).

[BrooklynNY]

Skill vs Talent

Skill is not the same as Talent.

Skill is Talent that has been honed by repetition

People try to say Nadal doesn't have any talent, but he sure has a hell of a lot of skill in putting the ball wherever he wants it to be.

[_craze]

People try to say Nadal doesn't have any talent

Who says Nadal doesn't have any talent?

[NadalDramaQueen]

Originally Posted by _craze

People try to say Nadal doesn't have any talent

Who says Nadal doesn't have any talent?

Clarky.

I've always thought Federer and perhaps even Murray were more talented than Djoker.

[90's Clay]

Greatest Ever: Laver or Pancho

Greatest talent: McEnroe


Who else could be all drugged up, go through multiple divorces, and have all those personal problem yet have as much success as Mac did

[Cesc Fabregas]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

Greatest Ever: Laver or Pancho

Greatest talent: McEnroe


Who else could be all drugged up, go through multiple divorces, and have all those personal problem yet have as much success as Mac did

He didn't win any slams after those problems.

[forzamilan90]

To me both of the criteria are satisfied by Federer. McEnroe, very talented but why so many rate him as having so much talent? Divine volleys and touch, but that's only one aspect of the game. He lacked power and groundstrokes.

[ultradr]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

Greatest Ever: Laver or Pancho

Greatest talent: McEnroe


Who else could be all drugged up, go through multiple divorces, and have all those personal problem yet have as much success as Mac did

Hmm, +1.

It's possible that Pancho was better than Laver.

McEnroe at the age of 50+, makes me wonder how he does what he does....

[tennisaddict]

I suggest OP watch some Fed matches from 2004-07. Fed did not have the backhand he has today, but his movement, forehand, serve , mental strength were lethal and THE best of all time. That is the sole reason he has 17 slams. It doesnt come by just being a good player. He did not need the defense of Nadal or Djokovic , as his game is built on offense.

[above bored]

Originally Posted by byealmeens

Is Novak Djokovic the most talented player of all time? In other words, does he possess the best skill set? I am a Federer fan and feel he is the greatest “player” ever, due to his success in slams, time spent at #1, and amazing consistency and longevity. I also feel Federer is a better tactician, and structures points a bit better. However, I’m starting to believe Novak may be a bit more “skilled”, overall. In my opinion, he has the best return of serve ever, is the best athlete (some of the most incredible movement I’ve ever seen), best combination of defense and offense (better than Nadal), and quite possibly the best ground game overall (combining forehand and backhand). His serve may not be the best, but is certainly one of best and though his volleys may not compare to Rafter or Edberg, they are some of the best of his generation (as good Federer). I do think Roger has the greatest forehand of all time, maybe a little better serve when he’s on, but with everything else it seems Novak has the edge.

Now I realize Roger can still beat Novak, and certainly has achieved a lot more. I also agree that Roger has improved … his backhand is quite possibly better than ever. I’m sure one could also argue that everything is relative … that he was as good as he needed to be in his prime but could have been even better. But based on what we’ve seen, and what we know today, does Novak possess slightly better tennis skill? Just curious ... would love to hear from other Federer fans in particular.

Definitely not. Djokovic is an exceptional grinder. He probably has the best defence ever, along with Nadal, and is a very solid player, but he is not a wizard with the racket. His game is more meat and potatoes than haute cuisine, but he is very good at what he does.

[DropShotArtist]

Anyone with half a brain knows Federer is both the greatest player and greatest talent ever. Only a Fed hater would think or say otherwise.

That being said the only talent that would come close is McEnroe, but he still lags quite a bit behind what Fed is capable of doing.

Djokovic is not in the same plane as Roger with respect to talent. Even as an older player now with much slower movement and terrible consistency he can beat the best Djokovic has to offer.

[NEW_BORN]

Djokovic is definitely not the most talented player, but what he's done is combine the strengths of both Fed and Nadal whilst eliminating any of their faults / weaknesses.
For example just look closely at his forehand, it's semi whippy like Nadal which gives him bounce off the court but combined with the aggressiveness of a Fed forehand it also gives him penetration thru the court.

[byealmeens]

Originally Posted by NEW_BORN

Djokovic is definitely not the most talented player, but what he's done is combine the strengths of both Fed and Nadal whilst eliminating any of their faults / weaknesses.
For example just look closely at his forehand, it's semi whippy like Nadal which gives him bounce off the court but combined with the aggressiveness of a Fed forehand it also gives him penetration thru the court.

Perhaps “talent” isn’t the right word … I meant skill, of course. Groundstrokes, serve, return, etc. I agree that when at his best, Roger has the most “up-side” or potential, and assuming that is the definition of talent, then I am referring to skill. That being said, how is Djokovic less skilled? If he has the strengths of Nadal and Fed without the weaknesses that would seem to indicate he is more skilled.

And McEnroe … seriously? He’s more talented/skilled than Novak Djokovic? I think John himself would disagree with this statement.

[byealmeens]

Originally Posted by tennisaddict

I suggest OP watch some Fed matches from 2004-07. Fed did not have the backhand he has today, but his movement, forehand, serve , mental strength were lethal and THE best of all time. That is the sole reason he has 17 slams. It doesnt come by just being a good player. He did not need the defense of Nadal or Djokovic , as his game is built on offense.

I have watched these matches ... I've watched almost every televised Federer match. And I agree that his movement and serve WERE the best. My point is ... I don't think they are any longer. And not because of age necessarily, but because Novak is simply better. Certainly a better mover, and as good a serve if not better. Also, Fed may still have the best forehand, but overall, FH & BH combined I don't think Roger is as strong as Novak. I think Novak has simply taken the "modern game" to another level.

[Warmaster]

Originally Posted by byealmeens

I have watched these matches ... I've watched almost every televised Federer match. And I agree that his movement and serve WERE the best. My point is ... I don't think they are any longer. And not because of age necessarily, but because Novak is simply better. Certainly a better mover, and as good a serve if not better. Also, Fed may still have the best forehand, but overall, FH & BH combined I don't think Roger is as strong as Novak. I think Novak has simply taken the "modern game" to another level.

If Djokovic his movement is better, his groundstrokes are better and his serve is better, then why does Federer at 31 win more service games than prime Djokovic?

[Flash O'Groove]

Originally Posted by byealmeens

I have watched these matches ... I've watched almost every televised Federer match. And I agree that his movement and serve WERE the best. My point is ... I don't think they are any longer. And not because of age necessarily, but because Novak is simply better. Certainly a better mover, and as good a serve if not better. Also, Fed may still have the best forehand, but overall, FH & BH combined I don't think Roger is as strong as Novak. I think Novak has simply taken the "modern game" to another level.

Novak has won 1 of the last 4 majors, and 3 of the last 9 masters 1000. It is a great resume, but does it really deserve so much hype?

[heninfan99]

Talent is wonderful but without the focus, mentality and shaping your entire lifestyle in order to win you can't be truly the best in this game. Fed & Novak have done this. Talent alone won't get it done, obviously.

They are both amazing talents but, like Sampras, Fed made the game look easy and fluid. You can call him Mr. Perfect on technique and movement.

Let me be first to sound the Nalbandian alarm. I always was wowed by his talent though it doesn't always translate to wins.

[pvaudio]

Djokovic has six slams. Once he's up there past Agassi and is nudging Nadal, then let's reconsider this topic. Until then, Djokovic is simply the player whose talent finally came to fruition through training and hard work. Look at Nadal on grass and HC, same thing there. But then look at Federer on EVERYTHING: he only needed half a year to start dominating once he won at Wimbledon.

[slowfox]

Talent: Marcelos Rios.