Cilic or del Potro?

[BGod]

I know the Hall of Fame is a bit of a joke but Stich, Chang, Orantes being in and Ivanisevic possibly getting in at some point never being world #1 and winning a single Slam, I think it's time to consider the obvious loners of the current generation.

Cilic has 2 additional Finals to his credit, del Potro has 1. Both men achieved career high #3 rankings. Cilic has good consistency in Slams but only two YE #6 finishes for his best seasons, with a #7 and #9.

del Potro has three Top 5 YE finishes with notable gaps/comebacks. From 258 and again from 590. Definitely the better story.

Both men have a single Masters crown.



BONUS
Where does Kandyman fit into all of this being a rare two-time finalist of the era? If he has a magical run is he all of a sudden Hall of Fame worthy?????

 

[HetTheGreaterer]

Cilic is a mental midget
So delpo

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Del Po all the way.

 

[Four-ever]

Despite his injuries, Del Potro has more titles & finals under his belt and is a bigger threat against the top players. Unfortunately, Cilic crumbles way too often. Even though I like Cilic more, Del Potro is clearly the better player. We'll see where both stand when they've retired.

As for Anderson, he's just having a bit of a late spell, mixed with some luck.

 

[RogerFederer007]

In term of achievements I give Cilic a slight edge (mostly due to his extra GS final). Del Potro is a better and far more mentally tougher player though.

 

[ak24alive]

I am absolutely sure that Cilic has a higher peak level which usually lasts for 5 games but when he is on it's impossible to touch him. When he is on he hits Delpo like FHs, Djoker like BHs, moves the best for anyone his height and serves like a 6 and half feet guy should. But as I said it lasts for only 5 games
You need not to look any further than Nadalic in Canada and Ciloker in Cincy. Marin was killing Nads and Djoker in some portions of the matches and those two weren't playing bad. It was just Cilic peaking until he wasn't.
He is as big a mental midget as there is.
Delpo is better in the way that he can last a whole match playing at his peak level and also he is mentally tough.
Delpo has an A game and he plays it quite often unlike Cilic whose A game is non existent.. it's either A+ game for him or its B game.
Both of them have similar achievements but Delpo has better h2h against opponents and has given us more classics than Cilic has. Has the better story too.
Considering all that I will give Delpo a slight edge over Cilic for a Hall of Fame induction.

 

[HetTheGreaterer]

Thor

 

[raulram]

I see Del Potro making the HOH undeservedly just due to his popularity, bad luck, and overall story.

Cilic is tougher to say. If he stays friends with some of tennis's elite circle upon retiring he will get in, also undeservedly. If he becomes a bit recluse there is no way.

That is unless thrust's comment of HOF going to a 3 slam minimum starting next year is true.

 

[Red Rick]

I am absolutely sure that Cilic has a higher peak level which usually lasts for 5 games but when he is on it's impossible to touch him. When he is on he hits Delpo like FHs, Djoker like BHs, moves the best for anyone his height and serves like a 6 and half feet guy should. But as I said it lasts for only 5 games
You need not to look any further than Nadalic in Canada and Ciloker in Cincy. Marin was killing Nads and Djoker in some portions of the matches and those two weren't playing bad. It was just Cilic peaking until he wasn't.
He is as big a mental midget as there is.
Delpo is better in the way that he can last a whole match playing at his peak level and also he is mentally tough.
Delpo has an A game and he plays it quite often unlike Cilic whose A game is non existent.. it's either A+ game for him or its B game.
Both of them have similar achievements but Delpo has better h2h against opponents and has given us more classics than Cilic has. Has the better story too.
Considering all that I will give Delpo a slight edge over Cilic for a Hall of Fame induction.

Are you crazy?

That level usually lasts for less than 3 games.

Accomplishments are about even.

In level it's

Hypothetical Red Hot Cilic Peppers>Hypothetical Healthy Del Potro>actual Del Potro>actual Cilic.

Anderson can get really just gtfo his stats are absolutely disgracefully bad for a double Slam finalist.

 

[raulram]

Are you crazy?

That level usually lasts for less than 3 games.

At the 2014 U.S Open it lasted into more 5 or 6 game clumps throughout.

 

[TennisaGoGo]

Cilic. Anyone can be mentally strong when the crowd is with him 99% of the time. The crowd is never with Marin - except the Davis Cup which he won.

 

[King No1e]

Cilic. Anyone can be mentally strong when the crowd is with him 99% of the time. The crowd is never with Marin - except the Davis Cup which he won.

That's why I was so impressed with Murray's run as #1. It's great when the crowd is with you, but Andy did not waver an inch against Big 3 opponents (namely Djokodal) despite them rooting hard against him. He consolidated dominance match after match in 2016.
Mury GOAT

 

[Rosstour]

Cilic was banned for doping, no?

His name has come up/been hinted at for PEDs AND the match-fixing crap IIRC.

 

[True Fanerer]

That's why I was so impressed with Murray's run as #1. It's great when the crowd is with you, but Andy did not waver an inch against Big 3 opponents (namely Djokodal) despite them rooting hard against him. He consolidated dominance match after match in 2016.
Mury GOAT

As much as I admire Andy's run and was glad to see it, he had a losing record vs Djokodal in 2016.

 

[True Fanerer]

At the moment it's Delpo for overall career. Cilic imo will have more opportunities from here on out just because he isn't as injury prone. What he does with the opportunities is another story. We'll just have to see.

 

[King No1e]

As much as I admire Andy's run and was glad to see it, he had a losing record vs Djokodal in 2016.

I'm focusing on the 2nd half. As in Rome and after that.
Mainly the WTF match
Winning those matches after being perpetually relegated to 2nd tier for years was a huge achievement in itself

 

[True Fanerer]

I'm focusing on the 2nd half. As in Rome and after that.
Mainly the WTF match

Amazing run no doubt. Shame he had to sacrifice his body in order to do it.

 

[King No1e]

Amazing run no doubt. Shame he had to sacrifice his body in order to do it.

Cemented his GOAT status forever

 

[Fabresque]

Neither lol

If I had to choose between them, Delpo just cuz of his story but honestly Cilic gets a lot of flack on these boards.

Anderson is just..... Anderson. He never did anything special, made a couple deep runs to slam finals, reached a ch of #5... Not really Hall of fame worthy.

 

[clout]

I’d say Delpo since they both have similar career achievements but Delpo did it with far less playing time due to all his unfortunate injuries while Cilic had a relatively healthy career

 

[Sport]

Del Potro's fantastic resume at the Olympics solves this dispute.

He defeated Djokovic at the 2012 Olympics on grass to win the Bronze Medal. He defeated both Djokovic and Nadal at the 2016 Olympics to win the Silver Medal.

Cilic has no Olympic Medals.

 

[Sport]

Also DelThortro has arguably the most powerful forehand ever. Cilic's forehand is also very powerful, but nowhere near on the same level of power or efficacy as Del Potro's one.

 

[True Fanerer]

Del Potro's fantastic resume at the Olympics solves this dispute.

He defeated Djokovic at the 2012 Olympics on grass to win the Bronze Medal. He defeated both Djokovic and Nadal at the 2016 Olympics to win the Silver Medal.

Cilic has no Olympic Medals.

This wouldn't have anything to do with Rafa's gold medal would it

 

[Sport]

This wouldn't have anything to do with Rafa's gold medal would it

No. Not everything is an agenda. I do believe Del Potro's 2 Olympic Medals vs Cilic's 0 Olympics Medals give him a solid edge.

In addition, Del Potro is far more popular and charismatic than Cilic. So maybe that helps him to make the HOF. I know popularity shouldn't be a criterion, but at the end of the day those things helps.

 

[True Fanerer]

No. Not everything is an agenda. I do beleive Del Potro's 2 Olympic Medals vs Cilic's 0 Olympics Medals give him a solid edge.

In addition, Del Potro is far more popular and charismatic than Cilic. So maybe that helps him to make the HOF. I know popularity shouldn't be a criterion, but at the end of the days those things helps.

Yeah he's more popular and infamous as well. He brings out the worst in Fed. Cilic in the end I believe will have the better slam results. Delpo the better career. Cilic seems more capable of winning 7 Bo5 matches to me than Delpo despite mental struggles.

 

[lewisgibson]

Cilic wont ever make the HOF. His achievements aren't quite good enough, although they are good enough for him to have been gifted in if he were a sentimental favorite or popular player, or had a compelling backstory. Since none of that is even slightly true of him, he wont get in barring probably a 2nd slam win. And even then he might wait awhile.

Del Potro I could see getting in, even if he might not deserve it. Unlike Cilic he is a sentimental favorite after all his bad luck, one of the most popular and best liked players of his era, and has a compelling backstory with his history of injuries and impressive comebacks.

 

[Pheasant]

Delpo has finished the year in the top 5 3 times and Cilic has yet to do it. This clinched it for me.

 

[lewisgibson]

Cilic missed his chance to make the HOF when he imploded in the 5th set of the Australian Open final vs Federer this year and lost what was a winnable match as Roger was definitely beatable that day. Given his massive decline since then and age (although age is less a factor today, but moreso for non true elite talents) there is a good chance he wont ever get another real shot of a 2nd slam. And like I said the only way for an unpopular, kind of bring, and fairly unlikeable player without an interesting game or story like Cilic to get in would be a 2nd slam. And even that might not have been enough, Kafelnikov accomplished more than Cilic, arguably would still have accomplished more even if Cilic had a 2nd slam at some point, and still hasn't gotten in, and still might never. Cilic isn't as unlikeable a personality as Kafelnikov, but he is nearly as boring, unpopular, and generally forgettable.

 

[lewisgibson]

Without all his injuries I see Del Potro winning atleast 3 slams. He would probably be like Wawrinka, same # of slams as Murray but far less consistent and strong than Murray in terms of overall results/day in and day out performance.

Cilic has no such what if. He pretty much maxed out his potential. Maybe if he were a bit stronger mentally he could have won 1 more slam like the Australian Open this year or somewhere else, but more or less what he had is what you got. Del Potro is one of the unluckiest players ever, and still arguably has a slightly better career than Cilic, with his Olympic medals he probably does.

 

[Sudacafan]

See man..
Don't get too offended.
All I was trying to say that cillic is not a champion hearted. mentally, he collapses almost all the times in big matches, goes with wrong strategies against big 3 (tries to grind out with djokodal, blowing off fed)...
He had a lot of potential and still didn't achieve a lot/choked a lot because of his weak mental fortress...
I didn't imply that he's a mental psycho or senseless person...

And by the way, I wasn't the one to report your post.. I don't know who did...

Well, I didn’t react for Cilic, but for Delpo really. Sorry for accusing you without proof. I should be reported for that. Merry Xmas.

 

[HetTheGreaterer]

Well, I didn’t react for Cilic, but for Delpo really. Sorry for accusing you without proof. Merry Xmas.

Lol what???
You thought I was saying delpo's a mental mug??!!!! He's a champion by heart..
Hell of a misunderstanding man...

And Merry Christmas to you too (in advance)
May lord krishna and jesus bless you

 

[Terenigma]

Del Potro is overrated because he usually plays his best against the "popular" players and thus gets remembered more for big wins. He's kind of like Wawrinka in that respect, if you ever watch his early round matches, he's actually kinda garbage a lot of the time. Cilic on the other hand is kind of a mix of both, he's got way more consistency and i would rate his peak level MUCH higher but his title haul isn't as impressive. So you really have to dig into what you would consider makes a better player, titles, performances, consistency between the two.

However despite the fact i'm not overly fond of him, Delpo's H2H is a huge deciding factor when i think about it and he's got bigger titles. So yeah.

 

[Sudacafan]

Del Potro is overrated because he usually plays his best against the "popular" players and thus gets remembered more for big wins. He's kind of like Wawrinka in that respect, if you ever watch his early round matches, he's actually kinda garbage a lot of the time. Cilic on the other hand is kind of a mix of both, he's got way more consistency and i would rate his peak level MUCH higher but his title haul isn't as impressive. So you really have to dig into what you would consider makes a better player, titles, performances, consistency between the two.

However despite the fact i'm not overly fond of him, Delpo's H2H is a huge deciding factor when i think about it and he's got bigger titles. So yeah.

Cilic is the youngest Slam winner as of today (A 30 year old). Should we rejoice or regret?
... And he accomplished that four years ago.

 

[Luka888]

DP all the way. Cilic is a boring smug. The hall of fame is called the hall of fame for a reason. FAME. Personality wise, Cilic has nothing to offer. DP has too much. Great human being. Great player.

They both will get there at some point.

 

[BHBeguile]

As a fan of DelPo it pains me to say it, but neither one is worthy. If I had to choose, DelPo due to Olympics and personal setbacks.

 

[lewisgibson]

Del Potro is overrated because he usually plays his best against the "popular" players and thus gets remembered more for big wins. He's kind of like Wawrinka in that respect, if you ever watch his early round matches, he's actually kinda garbage a lot of the time. Cilic on the other hand is kind of a mix of both, he's got way more consistency and i would rate his peak level MUCH higher but his title haul isn't as impressive. So you really have to dig into what you would consider makes a better player, titles, performances, consistency between the two.

However despite the fact i'm not overly fond of him, Delpo's H2H is a huge deciding factor when i think about it and he's got bigger titles. So yeah.

I agree with a lot of what you say, especialy that Del Potro is overrated since he is a sympathetic figure and he tends to shine most against the most popular star players who are of course Fed and Nadal (he shines far less against Djokovic, who isn't as popular as Fedal). But isn't saying Cilic's peak level is MUCH Higher than Del Potro kind of overstating his peak level? Or underselling Del Potro's?

 

[duaneeo]

Delpo became his slam win is more impressive. He blew Nadal off the court in the semi, and then backed up the win by beating defending/5-time consecutive champion Federer in the final after being down 2-1 sets. Cilic would never win a slam in such fashion. He needed a slamidous Federer and a totally winded finalist to win his lone slam.

 

[lewisgibson]

Delpo became his slam win is more impressive. He blew Nadal off the court in the semi, and then backed up the win by beating defending/5-time consecutive champion Federer in the final after being down 2-1 sets. Cilic would never win a slam in such fashion. He needed a slamidous Federer and a totally winded finalist to win his lone slam.

If you are going to diminish Cilic since Federer wasn't great by his standards in the semis, you cant then build up Del Potro by virtue of destroying Nadal, when Nadal was in godawful form that entire summer and in that match. Far worse than Federer in the 2014 U.S Open semis. Del Potro did beat a far tougher final opponent than Cilic did, but he also had a much harder time winning.

 

[Towny]

I think they're close in terms of achievements though I'd give Del Potro the edge. 22 titles to Cilic's 18 (including 9 500s to Cilic's 2). Both have a slam each. Cilic has two additional finals to Del Potro's one. Both have a similar number of SF and QF appearances. Both have a masters, though Delpo has 3 additional finals to Cilic's 0. Delpo also has two Olympic medals and a final at YEC. Delpo has two top 5 finishes. Cilic best YE ranking is 6.

Delpo has also been more successful against the top guys. He is a combined 17-44 against the Big 3 with his worst record being against Djokovic, 4-15. Cilic is a combined 5-32 against them, with his worst record being against Federer, 1-9.

Combine this with Delpo being plagued by injuries throughout his career and I think it becomes fairly clear who is greater.

 

[lewisgibson]

I think they're close in terms of achievements though I'd give Del Potro the edge. 22 titles to Cilic's 18 (including 9 500s to Cilic's 2). Both have a slam each. Cilic has two additional finals to Del Potro's one. Both have a similar number of SF and QF appearances. Both have a masters, though Delpo has 3 additional finals to Cilic's 0. Delpo also has two Olympic medals and a final at YEC. Delpo has two top 5 finishes. Cilic best YE ranking is 6.

Delpo has also been more successful against the top guys. He is a combined 17-44 against the Big 3 with his worst record being against Djokovic, 4-15. Cilic is a combined 5-32 against them, with his worst record being against Federer, 1-9.

Combine this with Delpo being plagued by injuries throughout his career and I think it becomes fairly clear who is greater.

Agree on all of that and I think DelPo's 2 Olympic medals made a big difference, and serve as an additional tiebreaker between them. I know some mock the Olympics but to the players it is a big deal, certainly a bigger event than anything outside the Slams and maybe the YEC. Now that both have a Masters and both have multiple slam finals it has to be Del Potro.

After the Australian Open this year I probably would have had to say Cilic, Del Potro winning Indian Wells and making the U.S Open final this year are huge.

 

[Towny]

Agree on all of that and I think DelPo's 2 Olympic medals made a big difference, and serve as an additional tiebreaker between them. I know some mock the Olympics but to the players it is a big deal, certainly a bigger event than anything outside the Slams and maybe the YEC. Now that both have a Masters and both have multiple slam finals it has to be Del Potro.

After the Australian Open this year I probably would have had to say Cilic, Del Potro winning Indian Wells and making the U.S Open final this year are huge.

Yeah I was verging on saying Cilic after AO this year too. But it's been a big year for Del Potro and I think he's clearly ahead now.

For what it's worth, although the Olympics hasn't always been that important in tennis, I'd personally put it just above YEC, so Delpo getting second and third place is a big deal.

 

[duaneeo]

If you are going to diminish Cilic since Federer wasn't great by his standards in the semis, you cant then build up Del Potro by virtue of destroying Nadal...

Oh yes I can. Delpo beat 23 year old peak/prime Nadal in the semis, and 29 year old prime/defending 5-time champion Federer in the final. He beat the two players who had won 17 of the last 18 slams. Cilic beat past-prime/mentally blocked Federer in the semis, and tired LostGen Nishikori in the final.

 

[lewisgibson]

Oh yes I can. Delpo beat 23 year old peak/prime Nadal in the semis, and 29 year old prime/defending 5-time champion Federer in the final. He beat the two players who had won 17 of the last 18 slams. Cilic beat past-prime/mentally blocked Federer in the semis, and tired LostGen Nishikori in the final.

If you don't recognize Nadal was badly below par that whole summer, and in addition to some injury issues was still reeling with major self confidence loss from his RG defeat then you are utterly delusional. It is comical you play him up as this super tough opponent at that time, or even a tougher opponent than a non peak Federer at the 2014 U.S Open, or a red hot Nishikori coming off 3 huge wins (including just beating peak/prime Djokovic in the semis) at the 2014 U.S Open. Beating Federer in the final was super impressive, but Federer was on the verge of a 2nd break so many times in the 2nd set, so Del Potro was a bit lucky to not wind up losing in straight sets.

 

[DerekNoleFam1]

Delpo overall, was a solid Top 4 player for longer, and always more dangerous to the Big 3.

 

[DerekNoleFam1]

Yeah I was verging on saying Cilic after AO this year too. But it's been a big year for Del Potro and I think he's clearly ahead now.

For what it's worth, although the Olympics hasn't always been that important in tennis, I'd personally put it just above YEC, so Delpo getting second and third place is a big deal.

Olympics only became important very recently, but agree it is a big thing now. Delpo would still be just ahead without it, but gives him a clear edge now.
Cilic gets some flack for perceived choking against the Big 3, and his last 2 final losses to Fed were poor, whereas Delpo is always a threat.