So basically Hewitt is a champion and a relentless fighter and Ferrer is a relentless choker? That pretty much sums it up.
Ferrer isn't a choker, he lacks weapons to beat the big guns - just like Hewitt did once Olderer peaked and transitional era ended, so Hewitt faded. Once again the era you play makes a huge difference. I don't see him going through combination of Nadal/Federer/Djokovic in slams during 2005/2012 (hell, even wildly incosistent guys like Safin routined Hewitt if they were hot, he simply had no weapons to compete against them even when Olderer lost (AO 2005)) - just like Ferrer could not. Hewitt took advantage, props to him for winning something with such a limited game, but by no means he would even come close to a slam today.
Hewitt's talent is underrated though, he plays the percentages better than any other player I've seen. He might be lacking as far as big weapons are concerned, but he never beats himself, you beat to beat him (in his prime of course).
That's not talent IMO. Technique-wise, he had an awful forehand and literally WTA serve. That left him with RoS, defense and percentage play....exactly the same thing Ferrer excels at. Running down every ball like a dog which completely ruined his body by early 20's is not a good example of talent.