I think taking simple average is not a good method. A weighting scheme has to be developed for each of the six categories in each case. This is the only problem I have with this analysis. I'm sure that even with a new weighting scheme, Novak will be the most complete player.
I wasn't going to go deeper than simple average in numbers. It seems enough to get the picture in general. Sure, you can add different wages to each the categorie, but it will become subjective.
Well, these numbers don't tell something for sure, but you can see the tendency. And you're already see it properly.
An analysis based on ranks fails to take into account the amount of variability within each category.
A simple way to deal with this problem is to subtract each player's score from the group mean and divide this difference by the group standard deviations, i.e. compute a Z score.
This will tell you by how many standard deviations a player's score in a given category deviates from the group mean. I did this for the percentages in each category, and for the ace count I looked at aces/match. I did not take into account number of matches for any category other than Aces.
For service games, the sum of Z-scores across the 6 categories for the top 4 are as follows (higher z-score = better performance):
For return of serve, the sum of Z-scores across the 4 categories for the top 4 are as follows:
For service games, Federer performed the best, followed by Nadal, Djokovic and Murray.
For return of serve, Nadal was the best, followed by Djokovic, Murray and Federer.
If you add the Z-scores from Service games and Return of serve, performance is ranked with Nadal as number 1, followed by Federer, Djokovic, and Murray, which surprisingly, is exactly how these players are ranked.
It's pretty interesting, but I'm not going to analyze the stats seriously coz they can't include very very many things to be fairly representable. I mean there is no column 'Talent: 0-100%', 'GS tourn-s determination percentage', 'everything-killing-topspin-FH quality' etc.
Just a quick look on stats proves that Djokovic has no visible weakness, simultaneously being on top means he is the most complete relative the others tops. Nothing more, nothing less. I actually find him plaing an academy tennis(tennis how it must to be played in theory), along with Federer and Nadal playing different.. umm.. crazy, not normal, not ordinary tennis.