Wimbledon was overrated the last decade. Replace Nadal in Roddick's matches and Federina won't convince himself that he "dominated the tour". The smug Fed said he dominated tennis for 5 months since October 2011. LMAO
you're not really serious here, nor in the majority of your posts related to Federer.
But let's suppose for a moment you are. If we replace Roddick with Nadal at Wimbledon in matches against Federer then he would have contested the 2004 and 2005 Wimbledon final. Based on what we know of Nadal's ability on grass vs Federer's ability on grass in those years, you would struggle to make a case that Nadal would have won these finals.
In 2009, perhaps you could make a case that Nadal might have beaten Federer in the final, although the fact he was injured then might have precluded him playing his best (?). Nadal tends to lose when he's injured, some people say.
Based on the above, not really sure what your point is. Federer would still have dominated Wimbledon in the last decade.