I would almost always view a 2 slam season over a 1 slam season, but there can be exceptions. The same could be said when comparing a 1 slam season against a season with no slams.
My opinion is that we should increase the weight given to a slam win from 2000 to 3000 (while keeping F at 1200, SF at 720, etc) to more accurately reflect the value most people place on it.
In this scenario with Nadal having won the AO final and major winners getting 3000 points, Nadal would gain 2800 points on top of his 6835 which would give him 9,635. Djokovic would also gain 1000 points from his wimbledon win which would give him 12,360.
So, my answer to the original question is that I would still view Novak as the best player this year even if Nadal won 2 slams and Djokovic won only 1. I even still have Federer very slightly ahead of Nadal in that scenario (Federer finished with 9,775 points which is slightly higher than Nadal's theoretical 9,635).
My opinion is that we should increase the weight given to a slam win from 2000 to 3000 (while keeping F at 1200, SF at 720, etc) to more accurately reflect the value most people place on it.
In this scenario with Nadal having won the AO final and major winners getting 3000 points, Nadal would gain 2800 points on top of his 6835 which would give him 9,635. Djokovic would also gain 1000 points from his wimbledon win which would give him 12,360.
So, my answer to the original question is that I would still view Novak as the best player this year even if Nadal won 2 slams and Djokovic won only 1. I even still have Federer very slightly ahead of Nadal in that scenario (Federer finished with 9,775 points which is slightly higher than Nadal's theoretical 9,635).