Meet the next generation of male tennis players....

pirateofthecarribean

Hall of Fame
Okay, so, let me sum up the next generation of men's tennis:

Andy Murray, Joachim Johansson, Gael Monfils, Richard Gasquet, Rafael Nadal, Marcos Baghedatis. Who did I miss? They are all around 20 years of age. Even in 2 years time they would be as old as me right now (22 years of age). Wow!!! Truly exciting! As Roger Federer and Andy Roddick fade away through age, the next generation of male tennis players will dominate our attention! So, who do you think is the best of the next generation? My favorite is, of course, Gael Monfils from France!!!
 

Jack the Hack

Hall of Fame
Joachim Johansson is 24 years old, so I would consider him part of Federer's generation, not the newcomers that you mentioned.

Rafael Nadal is obviously the best of the new generation right now. His success at this early age is comparable with Hall of Famers Becker, Wilander, and Borg... and if he stays healthy and improves, he will win a lot of Slam titles. (In fact, if his career ended today, he would already be a Hall of Famer based on his two French championships, Wimbledon final, and record tying 16 titles as a teenager.)

IMHO, second to Nadal will be Gasquet. Once he gets a little stronger physically and mentally, I think he will be a multiple Slam winner.

I love Monfils, and I think he will win at least one Slam someday. However, it might take him awhile longer than the others to harness in his potential as he plays a pretty loose game.

Baghdatis is a tough competitor and reminds me in some ways of Agassi with his baseline style. He will have a solid career... but I'm not sure if he will be an Agassi player results-wise, or end up more like a David Nalbandian type (always getting to quarterfinals or semifinals and capable of winning, but not necessarily coming through in the big one).

As far as players you missed, one of the obvious is Tomas Berdych. He has all of the physical tools to be good and has a big game, but has shown himself to be mentally weak so far. Tough to tell if that will change, but given his age and talent level, he seems like a sure bet to contend for Slams in a few years.

Another player is Novak Djokovic, who is already broken into the top 25 at age 19. Djokovic is a good athlete and has polished strokes, but when I saw him at the Open this year, he didn't blow me away. However, I'm not going to write off someone that is so good at such a young age. I just am unsure if his talent is high enough to be a consistant Slam contender... and I'll just need to see more.

Other players that haven't been mentioned would be the current top juniors like Thiemo De Bakker, Dusan Lojda, Nicolas Santos, and yes... Donald Young. I haven't seen most of those guys other than in quick clips here and there. I did watch Young at the Open this year (against Djokovic in the 1st round) and I think he has the talent to be a top 50 pro (maybe better), but he needs to get way, WAY tougher physically and mentally. As far as the juniors go, I am sure that there are other good names that I am missing, so I will let someone else who follows that level more add others from that group.

EDIT: I almost forgot to mention Murray. Good player, but I'm very unsure about his potential for Slams. He's farther along than Monfils and some of the the others, but doesn't seem to have the same raw talent level or athletic ability to be an alltime great. I can see him reaching the top 10 and being steady, but IMHO, I'm not sure about beyond that.
 

shawn1122

Professional
Jack the Hack said:
Baghdatis is a tough competitor and reminds me in some ways of Agassi with his baseline style. He will have a solid career... but I'm not sure if he will be an Agassi player results-wise, or end up more like a David Nalbandian type (always getting to quarterfinals or semifinals and capable of winning, but not necessarily coming through in the big one).
But, you see, Baghdatis has these results as of this year. One can only assume his results will improve as he gets older and reaches his prime.
 

Jack the Hack

Hall of Fame
shawn1122 said:
But, you see, Baghdatis has these results as of this year. One can only assume his results will improve as he gets older and reaches his prime.

Agassi won 8 Slams and is a Hall of Famer. Nalbandian has made the semifinals of every Slam, and one Wimbledon final (at age 20, the same age that Baghdatis was this year when he made the Aussie final). Both are great achievements, but are at obviously different levels. My point is that I can't tell yet whether Baghdatis is going to go on from here and have a career like Agassi, or if he will be like Nalbandian. (One could only assume that Nalbandian would improve from where he was at in 2002, but it hasn't happened yet... and they play a very similar game.)
 
shawn1122 said:
But, you see, Baghdatis has these results as of this year. One can only assume his results will improve as he gets older and reaches his prime.

Baghdatis' fitness level is atrocious. Unless he gets serious in that area, he'll never have a better year then 2006.
 
I think Ćilić will be there also.
he's only 17 years old but he plays great.
I saw him the other day when i was on my tennis lesson, he trained a court next to mine. And I was impressed!
but, on the other hand...I didn't see a lot of pro training:)
 

War Safin!

Professional
pirateofthecarribean said:
Okay, so, let me sum up the next generation of men's tennis:

Andy Murray, Joachim Johansson, Gael Monfils, Richard Gasquet, Rafael Nadal, Marcos Baghedatis. Who did I miss? They are all around 20 years of age. Even in 2 years time they would be as old as me right now (22 years of age). Wow!!! Truly exciting! As Roger Federer and Andy Roddick fade away through age, the next generation of male tennis players will dominate our attention! So, who do you think is the best of the next generation? My favorite is, of course, Gael Monfils from France!!!
Even in 4 years' time I can still only see one or two guys challenging Federer: Nadal, Gasquet, (and possibly Djokovic.)
 

pirateofthecarribean

Hall of Fame
War said:
Even in 4 years' time I can still only see one or two guys challenging Federer: Nadal, Gasquet, (and possibly Djokovic.)

In 4 years time, Federer will be 29 years old and faded away.

PS: I thought Joachim was 20 years old. My bad. My apologies.
 

Docalex007

Hall of Fame
pirateofthecarribean said:
In 4 years time, Federer will be 29 years old and faded away.

Don't count on that to happen, my friend. In four years time, if Fed stays healthy and uninjured, he'll still be top 5 material at age 30 and going for his 15th Grand Slam title.
 

maverick66

Hall of Fame
monfils wont last with the style hes playing. hes gonna get seriously injured the way he slides on the court.
murray needs to stop complaining and add size if he wants to make a serious run at a major.
also i dont see nadal lasting very long with his style every match he plays is so physicall that his game is not built on having a long career.
the guy i like right now is berdych. he hits big moves pretty good and blow someone of the court. he just needs to put it all together for 2 weeks. he actually plays a style that would give federer trouble.
 

Lleytian3

Semi-Pro
I think nadal will be the most dominat of this generation. He just has too much fight and power. But i do think that the person that will take him out of FO, fed mite, but i cant see it happening, but i think monfils or djokiovic might take him out.

of course i always like monfils, n gasquet. always respected djokovic too. baghdatis is one hell of a player, especailly in the big matches. berdych proves he can hang with the big boys too.

so i think monfils, baggy, gasquet, and of course nadal will be the most dominant.

murray, nope, too much of a crybaby, isnt their mentally at all. once he grows up mentally and matures he can be a threat, maybe.

as for the americns only hope is sam querrey and scoville jenkins. sam proved he can hang with the big boys as nadal, and jenkins has some nice doubles results

donald young is a joke and vastly overrated. he lost like 1-6, 0-6 to djokovic in the final sets. are you kidding me, stick with the futres and challenegers kid, save the embrassment of losing in first round of ATP tournaments any ATP tournaments.
 
Gasquet, Murray, Bags. I think all 3 need to get their fitness together, otherwise they all got serious game to challenge Fed/Nadal starting Jan 2007.
 

Jonas78

Legend
When are we going to meet the next generation of male tennis players?
Good question! Looks like the generation between 90 and 95 is missing, probably too much electronics and too little sports:eek:. Wimbledon 2030 will probably be played from a couch with joysticks:confused:.
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Okay, so, let me sum up the next generation of men's tennis:

Andy Murray, Joachim Johansson, Gael Monfils, Richard Gasquet, Rafael Nadal, Marcos Baghedatis. Who did I miss? They are all around 20 years of age. Even in 2 years time they would be as old as me right now (22 years of age). Wow!!! Truly exciting! As Roger Federer and Andy Roddick fade away through age, the next generation of male tennis players will dominate our attention! So, who do you think is the best of the next generation? My favorite is, of course, Gael Monfils from France!!!

How about a certain young Serbian? Seems the OP's crystal ball may have been a little clouded! ;)
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Yeah but still. Where are the Couriers and Agassis and Brugueras and Musters and Beckers and Edbergs and Lendls etc of today's tennis?

Well I guess Nadal is like Bruguera and Muster rolled into one. As for the rest, it's a fact that not as many players are winning Grand Slams these days as back in the 80s and 90s. Today we have just 7 active players who have won Slams. Back then, you had at least a dozen.
 

Jonas78

Legend
Well I guess Nadal is like Bruguera and Muster rolled into one. As for the rest, it's a fact that not as many players are winning Grand Slams these days as back in the 80s and 90s. Today we have just 7 active players who have won Slams. Back then, you had at least a dozen.
And 3 of the 7 have won 41 of the last 49 slams, thats pretty insaneo_O
 

Adv. Edberg

Legend
Well I guess Nadal is like Bruguera and Muster rolled into one. As for the rest, it's a fact that not as many players are winning Grand Slams these days as back in the 80s and 90s. Today we have just 7 active players who have won Slams. Back then, you had at least a dozen.

Yes. I guess that's what ITF wanted. Same ppl in semi finals over and over again.
 

haqq777

Legend
what.. for necrobumping? anyone can do it. sort posts by oldest and bump at your hearts content. it's mostly done to fan current player flame wars though

Ah I see, I wasnt aware of "necrobumping" - in all honesty I just enjoyed reading an old post, didn't mean to flame any wars. Not that sort of a fan :) - still remember when these guys were up and coming and showed such promise.
 

Bender

G.O.A.T.
Can't wait to see what Bagdhatis can do when he peaks
I'm waiting for Gasquet

readImage
 

haqq777

Legend
I'm waiting for Gasquet

readImage

LOL! I know. I had him pegged as at least winning a couple of Grand Slams. Boy did he disappoint or what. He was a promising junior I heard, just didn't transition well to the big boy play yard it seems. Still partial to his OHBH though. Prettiest looking on the tour.
 

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
How about a certain young Serbian? Seems the OP's crystal ball may have been a little clouded! ;)
The thread dates back to 2006 and Djoko broke through in 2007. The reason why Murray was already on the radar is that he beat Fed in Cincy 2006. That was guaranteed to draw a lot of attention in a season when Fed was virtually unbeatable!!
Novak did win his first title in 2006 though but it was a small one on clay. It would take until IW/Miami 2007 for Novak to make big news
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
The thread dates back to 2006 and Djoko broke through in 2007. The reason why Murray was already on the radar is that he beat Fed in Cincy 2006. That was guaranteed to draw a lot of attention in a season when Fed was virtually unbeatable!!
Novak did win his first title in 2006 though but it was a small one on clay. It would take until IW/Miami 2007 for Novak to make big news

Lol...according to some posters on here, that 2006 victory over Federer doesn't count because Fed was tired. How different things looked from the perspective of the actual time! ;)

Incidentally, Murray also won his first title in 2006 (San Jose) 5 months before Djokovic so maybe that too had helped put him on the radar.
 

Cup8489

G.O.A.T.
Lol...according to some posters on here, that 2006 victory over Federer doesn't count because Fed was tired. How different things looked from the perspective of the actual time! ;)

Incidentally, Murray also won his first title in 2006 (San Jose) 5 months before Djokovic so maybe that too had helped put him on the radar.
... Fed was tired. How many matches has Murray won against 30+ Federer again?

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 

Cup8489

G.O.A.T.
Oh we know. Fed's always tired when he loses to Murray. That's an article of faith for you Fedfans.
Seems like a big assumption that fed is always tired when he loses... Do you have anything to substantiate that statement?

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Seems like a big assumption that fed is always tired when he loses... Do you have anything to substantiate that statement?

I don't assume anything of the sort. I'm referring to the general tendency of some Fed supporters to claim he is tired whenever he loses to Murray.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
I don't assume anything of the sort. I'm referring to the general tendency of some Fed supporters to claim he is tired whenever he loses to Murray.

I've seen you blame tiredness, lack of motivation, the back surgery etc...for Murray's losses? Why is it ok for you to do it?
 

Cup8489

G.O.A.T.
Actually I'll help you out. the Rogers cup and cincinatti were back to back. IIRC there were no byes at the time (those came the next year), and Federer won Canada. so he had no rest for 6+ days going into his match with Murray. How often do we see these guys play that many competitive matches back to back? Oh.. that's right. We don't. Because they changed the rules after that year.

It's telling that once he lost to Murray, he didn't lose the rest of the year.. because he got a chance to catch his breath.
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
I've seen you blame tiredness, lack of motivation, the back surgery etc...for Murray's losses? Why is it ok for you to do it?

The difference is that I don't blame any of those things for ALL of Murray's losses!
 
Top