JennyS
Hall of Fame
Even though Nadal is 3-4 Slams ahead of these players, there are legitimate reasons to rank these players ahead of Nadal (for now). Back when Connors, McEnroe, and Lendl played, the Australian Open wasn't even treated like a major while the Masters (now WTF) was. Here are several reasons why these players could be considered more accomplished than Nadal:
Reason #1: They have spent more weeks ranked #1 in the world.
Lendl 270
Connors: 268
McEnroe: 168
Nadal: 102
Reason #2: More tournament titles won
Connors: 109
Lendl: 94
McEnroe: 77
Nadal: 50
Reason #3: All 3 players won the WTF (or Masters/ATP Championships, etc)
Lendl: 5 titles
McEnroe: 3 titles
Connors: 1 title
Nadal: 0 so far
Reason #4: Each player won at least 3 Slams on two surfaces
Connors: won 4 Slams on grass (2 Wimbledon, 1 USO, 1 AO), and 3 on hardcourt
McEnroe: won 4 Slams on hardcourt, 3 on grass
Lendl: won 5 Slams on Harcourt and 3 on clay.
Reason #5: Ability to play well indoors.
Has "indoors" ever been a players' weakest surface before Nadal? Connors, McEnroe, and Lendl won dozens of indoor titles (hardcourt and carpet). Heck, Courier and Wilander won 5 and 3 indoor titles respectively.
Reason #1: They have spent more weeks ranked #1 in the world.
Lendl 270
Connors: 268
McEnroe: 168
Nadal: 102
Reason #2: More tournament titles won
Connors: 109
Lendl: 94
McEnroe: 77
Nadal: 50
Reason #3: All 3 players won the WTF (or Masters/ATP Championships, etc)
Lendl: 5 titles
McEnroe: 3 titles
Connors: 1 title
Nadal: 0 so far
Reason #4: Each player won at least 3 Slams on two surfaces
Connors: won 4 Slams on grass (2 Wimbledon, 1 USO, 1 AO), and 3 on hardcourt
McEnroe: won 4 Slams on hardcourt, 3 on grass
Lendl: won 5 Slams on Harcourt and 3 on clay.
Reason #5: Ability to play well indoors.
Has "indoors" ever been a players' weakest surface before Nadal? Connors, McEnroe, and Lendl won dozens of indoor titles (hardcourt and carpet). Heck, Courier and Wilander won 5 and 3 indoor titles respectively.