Who's career would you choose right now?

[RF-18]

I've made some research between Djokovic and Agassi and we can all agree they are pretty similar. One has something the other has not, etc.

If Djokovic hangs up his racquet today, wich career would you choose?


Update on their respective careers right now:

Novak Djokovic:

9 GS titles (AO open era goat with 5, 0 FO, 3 W and 1 USO including two multi slam years)
4 YECs
24 MS titles
1 DC title
0 Olympic gold
155 weeks at #1
3 YE#1 (maybe we can already count in his 4th here and now)
54 consecutive weeks at #1 (and counting)

* Other Noteable achievements:
17 GS finals
4 consecutive GS finals
GS Semi-finals: 27
14 consecutive GS SFs
33 GS QFs
4 consecutive GS QFs
25 consecutive QFs
4 YECs finals
34 Master finals


Andre Agassi

8 GS titles (4 AOs, 1 FO, 1 W and 2 USO including one multi slam year)
1 YECs
17 MS titles
3 DC titles
Career Slam
1 OG
101 weeks at #1
1 YE#1
52 consecutive weeks at #1

* Other Noteable achievements
15 GS finals
4 consecutive GS finals
GS Semi-finals: 26
4 consecutive GS SFs
36 GS QFs
6 consecutive GS QFs
4 YECs finals
23 Master finals

 

[Noleberic123]

Everyone better say Djokovic....

 

[Cenarius]

Agassi right now for sure.

 

[cc0509]

"Who's career"

First of all OP we need to give you lessons on when to use "who", "who's" and "whose."

Secondly, I would take either career. There are pros and cons to both careers. I would lean towards Agassi though because: A) I like him more and B) he was 100 times more beloved and popular than Djokovic.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Definitely Djokovic's.

 

[RF-18]

"Who's career"

First of all OP we need to give you lessons on when to use "who", "who's" and "whose."

Secondly, I would take either career. There are pros and cons to both careers. I would lean towards Agassi though because: A) I like him more and B) he was 100 times more beloved and popular than Djokovic.

First of all, I'm not native english speaker.

Second of all, it was a mistake but if you correct me in a nice way instead of being insulting, I'd appriciate it.

Third, the OP is about career accomplishments and not based on popularity. But, if you think Agassis career is better, there is no problem.

 

[mattennis]

They played in different eras.

Agassi had to face tremendous differences in court speed, bounce, balls, playing styles. He basically faced all imaginable great playing styles in all kind of different conditions. He was such talented that he was able to defeat (more than not) almost any other player on any condition. He had some terrible bad phases, especially 1997 was an awful year for him (tennis-wise), but the way he could control a tennis ball....it was amazing.

Djokovic can run faster and defend better than Agassi, also Djokovic is dominating tennis (in terms of being nº1 for a long time) in a way Agassi could not do. Djokovic is also extremely good everywhere, on any court, but he is playing in a much more homogenized era and facing basically only baseliners all year long.

Achievements-wise, Djokovic is a bit above Agassi ( 9 GS + 4 WTF vs 8 GS + 1 WTF, and 3 Year-End-Nº1 vs 1 Year-End-Nº1; I can not compare M-1000 because during the 90s they were not mandatory, there were other important tournaments too back then worth almost the same in points).

But I sincerely believe Federer, Nadal and Djokovic would NOT have achieved the same things had they been born 20 years earlier and been raised and played during the 90s in a polarized era (in terms of court speed, balls, playing styles, with only 16 seeds, a very very diverse era) so I can not compare them properly.

 

[mattosgrant]

Djokovic hands down. I would rather be dominant, super consistent, a 3 time Wimbledon winner, the Australian Open GOAT (rather than the disposed Australian Open GOAT), a major winner across many different surfaces rather than a once-in-blue-moon winner on all but rebound ace/certain hard courts. That easily supplants 1 French Open title for me. Also if Djokovic gets a French his record there blows Agassi's away. In some ways it is a close call even today as Djokovic has been light years more consistent and better overall there, apart from the big minus, not actually winning it, but Agassi who was inconsistent and never spectacular at Roland Garros wouldnt sniff a title there in the era of Nadal, Fed, and Djokovic anyway (even to those who point out Wawrinka, Wawrinka at this years event played better than any year I can think of Agassi at RG, certainly way better than Agassi was at RG 99, and it is not like erratic Agassi would likely be lucky enough to have 1 of his peakest years there coincide with this year anyway).

I guess might as well ask this question now though as once Djokovic wins Roland Garros, and he will, it would be too laughable to even discuss. That is the only reason you can even attempt to discuss it now.

 

[cc0509]

RF-18, post: 9494061, member: 564648"]First of all, I'm not native english speaker.

Second of all, it was a mistake but if you correct me in a nice way instead of being insulting, I'd appriciate it.

Ok. I could have been nicer.

Third, the OP is about career accomplishments and not based on popularity. But, if you think Agassis career is better, there is no problem.

I would choose either career at this point for different reasons. There are pros and cons of both careers.

 

[Djokovic2011]

First of all, I'm not native english speaker.

Second of all, it was a mistake but if you correct me in a nice way instead of being insulting, I'd appriciate it.

Third, the OP is about career accomplishments and not based on popularity. But, if you think Agassis career is better, there is no problem.

Yeah, ccO really seems to have it in for you. Don't know why he's always so abrasive with you, although I suspect it's simply because you're a huge Nole fan and he doesn't like people who are fans of him.

 

[mattosgrant]

They played in different eras.

Agassi had to face tremendous differences in court speed, bounce, balls, playing styles. He basically faced all imaginable great playing styles in all kind of different conditions. He was such talented that he was able to defeat (more than not) almost any other player on any condition. He had some terrible bad phases, especially 1997 was an awful year for him (tennis-wise), but the way he could control a tennis ball....it was amazing.

Djokovic can run faster and defend better than Agassi, also Djokovic is dominating tennis (in terms of being nº1 for a long time) in a way Agassi could not do. Djokovic is also extremely good everywhere, on any court, but he is playing in a much more homogenized era and facing basically only baseliners all year long.

Achievements-wise, Djokovic is a bit above Agassi ( 9 GS + 4 WTF vs 8 GS + 1 WTF, and 3 Year-End-Nº1 vs 1 Year-End-Nº1; I can not compare M-1000 because during the 90s they were not mandatory, there were other important tournaments too back then worth almost the same in points).

But I sincerely believe Federer, Nadal and Djokovic would NOT have achieved the same things had they been born 20 years earlier and been raised and played during the 90s in a polarized era (in terms of court speed, balls, playing styles, with only 16 seeds, a very very diverse era) so I can not compare them properly.

I agree with some of what you say for sure. Djokovic, Nadal, and Federer have been super lucky with homogenized playing conditions and the baseline friendly courts, equipments, styles on tour, coaching.

However Djokovic also had to deal with prime-ish Federer and peak Nadal for the longest time. Agassi mostly vultured the post Sampras era (post 98) and won most of his slams there against really weak competition overall, that any of Djokovic, Nadal, and Federer would have loved to have. During the true Sampras era, and the Courier/Edberg/Becker era before that, and the Lendl era before that, all which he was a contender at times in, he continually fell short, and even got discouraged and gave up for periods after repeated losses to whoever was the more dominant player at the time (was always someone other than himself).

 

[Gazelle]

Agassi and it's not even close. CAREER grand slam.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Ok. I could have been nicer.

You also could have apologised ccO. Just sayin'.

 

[Gazelle]

You also could have apologised ccO. Just sayin'.

He just did no? An apology doesn't have to contain the word 'sorry'.

 

[mattosgrant]

Agassi and it's not even close. CAREER grand slam.

If you think the Career grand slam is that big a deal, then you must agree Laver is the hands down GOAT over Federer with 2 Grand Slams. After all the actual Grand Slam >>>>>>>> measley career grand slam. Just saying.

Also considering Djokovic would blow Agassi to pieces by completing his career grand slam next year (I cant imagine how you would deny that), and you saying he is way behind now, you are really awarding the career grand slam a monstrous value.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Agassi and it's not even close. CAREER grand slam.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. And huge LOL@ "not even close". You're so butthurt from Sunday's result it's actually quite comical.

 

[Djokovic2011]

He just did no? An apology doesn't have to contain the word 'sorry'.

No he didn't. And yes, an apology generally does contain the word "sorry" in it.

 

[cc0509]

Yeah, ccO really seems to have it in for you. Don't know why he's always so abrasive with you, although I suspect it's simply because you're a huge Nole fan and he doesn't like people who are fans of him.

It has nothing to do with that. It is that ND-09 has proven many times that he is FOS. His posts are full of contradictions and when he gets caught in a lie by more astute posters he tries to make it worse. He should admit that some posters have his number rather than try and lie and wiggle his way out of things. All his posts are there in black and white for all to see.

There are a couple of posters who are Djokovic fans and are reasonable, he isn't one of them generally speaking. He has this whole passive aggressive approach. He'll often say something which has a clear intention but when he is called out on it, he denies it. This happens over and over again. That is not a poster you can respect. Zagor for example is a Djokovic fan but he is a good objective poster.

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

I said Djokovic for the simple fact that he has 1 more slam title. The lack of FO is a problem, but then again, Agassi didn't have to play in the Nadal era.

All in all, it's a very close race. Personally, I'd take Djokovic's career.

 

[cc0509]

You also could have apologised ccO. Just sayin'.

Read my post #18.

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

Also, I believe Djokovic is bound to win at least 1 RG in the next couple of years unless Nadal makes a huge comeback.

 

[Djokovic2011]

It has nothing to do with that. It is that ND-09 has proven many times that he is FOS. His posts are full of contradictions and when he gets caught in a lie by more astute posters he tries to make it worse. He should admit that some posters have his number rather than try and lie and wiggle his way out of things. All his posts are there in black and white for all to see.

There are a couple of posters who are Djokovic fans and are reasonable, he isn't one of them generally speaking. He has this whole passive aggressive approach. He'll often say something which has a clear intention but when he is called out on it, he denies it. This happens over and over again. That is not a poster you can respect. Zagor for example is a Djokovic fan but he is a good objective poster.

Well you can't think he's that bad a poster otherwise you'd surely have him on ignore.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Read my post #18.

I did but that still doesn't justify being rude.

 

[cc0509]

Well you can't think he's that bad a poster otherwise you'd surely have him on ignore.

I don't have anybody on ignore. I am not 12 years old. I am perfectly capable of skipping posts I don't wish to read.

 

[mattosgrant]

I said Djokovic for the simple fact that he has 1 more slam title. The lack of FO is a problem, but then again, Agassi didn't have to play in the Nadal era.

All in all, it's a very close race. Personally, I'd take Djokovic's career.

What about all of Djokovic's extra time at #1, his many WTF titles, and his huge consistency edge?

 

[Djokovic2011]

I don't have anybody on ignore. I am not 12 years old. I am perfectly capable of skipping posts I don't wish to read.

So no excuse to moan about any of his future posts. If you don't like him(which is pretty clear) then don't read what he has to say.

 

[Gazelle]

Agassi managed to win career grand slam in era with truly different surfaces. His career grand slam is one of the biggest achievements ever in tennis, but it's hugely underrated by the possum brigade here. He also has Olympic Gold, he has won every big title there is to win.

Djokovic can't even complete his career grand slam in this homogenized era, and I dare to bet he never will because of his inner Chokovic.

 

[cc0509]

I did but that still doesn't justify being rude.

I said I could have been nicer the way I worded my post. I explained why that poster tends to be annoying. He is full of contradictions and denials. He will say something which everybody knows what he is intending to say and then when he is called out on it, he denies his intentions. This happens all of the time. Posting history does not lie. If you can respect a poster like that, good for you. I'll throw you a party. I am pretty sure most objective posters on this forum would agree with me on this one.

 

[JerseyDevil]

I am extremely biased so my answer should be irrelevant. That being said, just looking at numbers alone, it would be Nole hands down.

 

[cc0509]

So no excuse to moan about any of his future posts. If you don't like him(which is pretty clear) then don't read what he has to say.

I can read and comment on whatever I like. If you don't like it ignore me.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Agassi managed to win career grand slam in era with truly different surfaces. His career grand slam is one of the biggest achievements ever in tennis, but it's hugely underrated by the possum brigade here. He also has Olympic Gold, he has won every big title there is to win.

Djokovic can't even complete his career grand slam in this homogenized era, and I dare to bet he never will because of his inner Chokovic.

Didn't you read post #8?

 

[Gazelle]

Didn't you read post #8?

Ye, but that post made less sense than you'd want to believe.

 

[Djokovic2011]

I can read and comment on whatever I like. If you don't like it ignore me.

Yeah, which is why there's no excuse to bemoan any of his future posts. It's not like the option to ignore him isn't open to you. If you can't take the heat, get out the kitchen.

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

What about all of Djokovic's extra time at #1, his many WTF titles, and his huge consistency edge?

Those are secondary considerations, but still worth considering. I think Djokovic's consistency is nice, but not a deal breaker. The extra time at #1 also is just a "nice thing". The most impressive of those are the extra WTF titles. You could also add the extra Masters titles there as well.

For me, slams are the biggest prize by far, and the measuring stick. Djokovic has 9, so he wins there. The lack of a French Open can be excused because he has a couple spectacular #2 finishes there to Nadal, and also because I think he will win the FO some day.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Ye, but that post made less sense than you'd want to believe.

Made perfect sense to me. Just wondering, if Djokovic doesn't win RG, how many more slams do you think he needs to win to go above Agassi? This should be good.

 

[RF-18]

It has nothing to do with that. It is that ND-09 has proven many times that he is FOS. His posts are full of contradictions and when he gets caught in a lie by more astute posters he tries to make it worse. He should admit that some posters have his number rather than try and lie and wiggle his way out of things. All his posts are there in black and white for all to see.

There are a couple of posters who are Djokovic fans and are reasonable, he isn't one of them generally speaking. He has this whole passive aggressive approach. He'll often say something which has a clear intention but when he is called out on it, he denies it. This happens over and over again. That is not a poster you can respect. Zagor for example is a Djokovic fan but he is a good objective poster.

Damn, even in this thread were I ask a simple question you cannot get enough of me. Where did all that stuff come from.

If you want to participate here, stop with your BS and start getting OT. Nobody wants to hear you moaning about the past in an Agassi vs Djokovic thread.

 

[mattosgrant]

Agassi managed to win career grand slam in era with truly different surfaces. His career grand slam is one of the biggest achievements ever in tennis, but it's hugely underrated by the possum brigade here. He also has Olympic Gold, he has won every big title there is to win.

Djokovic can't even complete his career grand slam in this homogenized era, and I dare to bet he never will because of his inner Chokovic.

Your summary it is harder is a blanket statement. Yes in general that would seem to make sense, but there is no way in hell it is harder to beat Medvedev (or Gomez, although Agassi couldnt even do that) in a French Open final than Nadal, even the 2011-2014 version. Djokovic's only possible obstacle to a career slam in the 90s would be Wimbledon, and how he would adapt to the new grass vs what the plays on now. It is a no brainer he would win the Australian, French, U.S Open at some point in the 90s, and likely all multiple times.

 

[RF-18]

@Djokovic2011

I appriciate it, but don't answer him/her anymore cause he/she will just ruin what the actual thread is about with the moaning.

 

[Noleberic123]

Also, I believe Djokovic is bound to win at least 1 RG in the next couple of years unless Nadal makes a huge comeback.

God isn't letting him win the FO

 

[cc0509]

Yeah, which is why there's no excuse to bemoan any of his future posts. It's not like the option to ignore him isn't open to you. If you can't take the heat, get out the kitchen.

As I said, I will comment on his posts if I wish to. If you have a problem with it, that's too bad. He told me he would appreciate it if I could tell him about his poor grammar in a nicer way and I agreed I could have stated it in a nicer way. He is fine with it and it is between us. Stay out of it and don't be such a busybody.

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

God isn't letting him win the FO

Nah, nonsense. If there were a God, Djokovic wouldn't have won a single slam.

Just kidding, of course.

 

[Djokovic2011]

As I said, I will comment on his posts if I wish to. If you have a problem with it, that's too bad. He told me he would appreciate it if I could tell him about his poor grammar in a nicer way and I agreed I could have stated it in a nicer way. He is fine with it and it is between us. Stay out of it and don't be such a busybody.

And all I'm saying is speak to him in a more respectful manner in future. You should know by now that English isn't the first language of everyone on here.

 

[Gazelle]

Made perfect sense to me. Just wondering, if Djokovic doesn't win RG, how many more slams do you think he needs to win to go above Agassi? This should be good.

3 slams for the lack of career grand slam
1 slam for lack of olympic gold
1 more slam to be above Agassi

8+5 = 13 slams Djokovic needs to beat Agassi. He already has 9, that's 4 more to go.

Btw, I know you guys value Djok's consistency so much, but that's easier to do in homogonized era so I didn't factor that in as something Djok might have over Agassi. Certainly because it mostly has to do with majoring in minors so not important.

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

3 slams for the lack of career grand slam
1 slam for lack of olympic gold
1 more slam to be above Agassi

8+5 = 13 slams Djokovic needs to beat Agassi

Btw, I know you guys value Djok's consistency so much, but that's easier to do in homogonized era so I didn't factor that in as something Djok might have over Agassi. Certainly because it mostly has to do with majoring in minors so not important.

I thought Djokovic had 9 slams already?

Did the ballgirl sue for his last Wimbledon?

 

[Noleberic123]

Nah, nonsense. If there were a God, Djokovic wouldn't have won a single slam.

Just kidding, of course.

Nah I'm being serious. As we saw this year whether there's Nadal or not, Djokovic can't win the FO. It's not his not meant to. It must be Gods doing (I'm kidding about the God stuff)

 

[Djokovic2011]

3 slams for the lack of career grand slam
1 slam for lack of olympic gold
1 more slam to be above Agassi

8+5 = 13 slams Djokovic needs to beat Agassi

Btw, I know you guys value Djok's consistency so much, but that's easier to do in homogonized era so I didn't factor that in as something Djok might have over Agassi.

I'm not kidding, you just gave me the biggest laugh I've had in ages. You're dynamite Gazelle!

 

[cc0509]

Damn, even in this thread were I ask a simple question you cannot get enough of me. Where did all that stuff come from.

If you want to participate here, stop with your BS and start getting OT. Nobody wants to hear you moaning about the past in an Agassi vs Djokovic thread.

There you go, you are doing it again. Acting all innocent.

Don't tell me when I can participate in a thread or not. You are not a moderator. I have given you my answer that I would choose either career.

 

[Gazelle]

I thought Djokovic had 9 slams already?

Did the ballgirl sue for his last Wimbledon?

Yu clearly didn't udnerstand.

 

[RF-18]

I said Djokovic for the simple fact that he has 1 more slam title. The lack of FO is a problem, but then again, Agassi didn't have to play in the Nadal era.

All in all, it's a very close race. Personally, I'd take Djokovic's career.

In my personal view, lack of FO/career slam can be weighed up with all the other stuff he has achieved, not only the one extra slam he has now, but 4 Rome titles (incredible history in this tournament and much prestige, was considered as the 4th ''slam'' back in the day). Multiple MC titles, Madrid title aswell, and 3 FO runner ups. Of course, this does not replicate a FO title. But what I want to say is, Djokovic's already great resume on clay, along with that extra slam, kicks Agassis career slam to the curb and then when you look at his #1 stats, masters, YECs, GS finals, etc, he has an obvious case against Agassi.

But that is my two cents on it.

 

[Gazelle]

Ready my updated post again, maybe Shackles and Djok2011 will understand better now.