Your player(s) of the year since 2000! [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Your player(s) of the year since 2000!

Billabong
10-06-2005, 04:48 AM
There's this thread in WTAWorld, so I'd like to see your picks on the men's side:D! Here are my players of the year:

-2000: Kuerten/Safin
-2001: Kuerten/Agassi/Hewitt
-2002: Hewitt
-2003: Federer/Roddick/Ferrero
-2004: Federer
-2005: Federer (so far)

tangerine_dream
10-06-2005, 05:04 AM
:wavey:

2000: Safin
2001: Hewitt
2002: Sampras
2003: Roddick
2004: Federer
2005: Nadal

Fergie
10-06-2005, 05:11 AM
2000: Kuerten
2001: Kuerten/Hewitt
2002: Hewitt
2003: Federer/Roddick
2004: Federer
2005: Federer

deliveryman
10-06-2005, 05:56 AM
2000: Keurten
2001: Keurten
2002: Hewitt
2003: Roddick
2004: Federer
2005: Federer

Rafa = Fed Killa
10-06-2005, 05:56 AM
2000: Kuerten
2001: Agassi
2002: Hewitt
2003: Roddick
2004: Federer
2005: Nadal

Phunkadelicious
10-06-2005, 06:02 AM
00-Kuerten
01-Agassi/Hewitt
02-Hewitt
03-Roddick/Ferrero/Agassi (for much of the year)
04-Federer
05-Federer

K-Dog
10-06-2005, 06:03 AM
2005: Nadal

um, no!! yea he won a bunch this year, but fed is supreme in majors and record. rafa can't even reach year-end no.1 the rest of the year fed is so far out in front.

Colosseo
10-06-2005, 06:07 AM
-2001: Safin
-2002: Hewitt
-2003: Safin
-2004: Federer
-2005: Federer

Rafa = Fed Killa
10-06-2005, 06:10 AM
Posting it depending on expectations to results.
Fed was expected to win 3-4 grandslams. He won 2.
No way Nadal was expected to win 10 tournaments as a teenager.
Also Nadal broke a record this year while Fed has not broken a record this year.
I am not the only one to put Nadal as the player of the year for 2005.

K-Dog
10-06-2005, 06:14 AM
Posting it depending on expectations to results.
Fed was expected to win 3-4 grandslams. He won 2.
No way Nadal was expected to win 10 tournaments as a teenager.
Also Nadal broke a record this year while Fed has not broken a record this year.
I am not the only one to put Nadal as the player of the year for 2005.

Yeah, one other person who put Pete as player of the year in 2002.

savesthedizzle
10-06-2005, 06:24 AM
2000- Kuerten
2001- Kuerten/Hewitt
2002- Hewitt
2003- Ferrero
2004- Federer
2005- Federer/Nadal

naiwen
10-06-2005, 06:28 AM
2000: Kuerten/Norman/Safin
2001: Agassi/Kuerten
2002: Hewitt
2003: Roddick/Federer
2004: Federer
2005: Federer

El Legenda
10-06-2005, 06:31 AM
Posting it depending on expectations to results.
Fed was expected to win 3-4 grandslams. He won 2.
No way Nadal was expected to win 10 tournaments as a teenager.
Also Nadal broke a record this year while Fed has not broken a record this year.
I am not the only one to put Nadal as the player of the year for 2005.

your not bias at all, why not say that Federer was expected every tourny that he plays.

Rafa = Fed Killa
10-06-2005, 06:37 AM
I don't think Fed was expected to win RG by analysts but he was predicted to win the Aussi Open.
I guess I am biased, but Nadal broke the record for most tournaments won by a teenager and won RG on his first try.

ExpectedWinner
10-06-2005, 06:49 AM
Fed was expected to win 3-4 grandslams. He won 2.



Some people have unrealistic expectations. Or may be stupid is the right world. Reasonable people knew it would be very hard to repeat 2004.
Besides, player of the year should be determined by actual results, not expectations. End of the discussion.

mickymouse
10-06-2005, 08:03 AM
-2000: Safin
-2001: Hewitt
-2002: Hewitt
-2003: Roddick
-2004: Federer
-2005: Federer

Ferrero Forever
10-06-2005, 08:08 AM
I'm going to start from 2003, since I only ever started really following tennis since then
2003-Ferrero
2004-Federer
2005-Federer
That was easy

megadeth
10-06-2005, 08:10 AM
Posting it depending on expectations to results.
Fed was expected to win 3-4 grandslams. He won 2.
No way Nadal was expected to win 10 tournaments as a teenager.
Also Nadal broke a record this year while Fed has not broken a record this year.
I am not the only one to put Nadal as the player of the year for 2005.

fed has not broken a record this year? c'mon!

1. what about the 4 masters series eh?
2. beating pete's record on hard court streaks
3. being the only person to win both halle and wimby 3 times straight

also, he's on the verge of beating jmac's 82-3 record. if not 82-3, have the highest winning % in a season.

Castafiore
10-06-2005, 08:30 AM
The question is about 'YOUR' player of the year. Why would you reply with a 'no' to somebody else's choice?

Federer would be a logical choice for player of the year but mentionning Nadal is not such an odd choice either.
- He is the first player to claim the Roland Garros title in his main draw debut since Mats Wilander in 1982 and became just the seventh player to win a Grand Slam in his first appearance at the event, and the first since Andre Agassi at the 1995 Australian Open.
- The Roland Garros title match was Nadalís 24th consecutive match win, setting an ATP record for teenage winning streaks, surpassing Agassiís 1988 streak of 23 straight wins.
- The French Open was his sixth title of 2005, tying him with Agassi (1988) and Becker (1986) for the third-most titles for a teenager in a season. He then trailed only Borgís seven (1974) and Wilanderís nine (1983) titles, a record which he broke with the China Open win.

I mean...just look at this and answer me why you would think that mentionning Nadal as the player of the year is so odd.

deliveryman
10-06-2005, 08:34 AM
Because Federer has clearly had a much better year than Nadal.

Come on, players of the year go by what people accomplish, not by exceding expectations.

So, using that logic, James Blake or Robby Ginepri should also be a reasonable choice for player of the year because they "exceeded expectations"

Aphex
10-06-2005, 08:35 AM
2000: Kuerten/Sampras/Safin
2001: Agassi/Kuerten/Hewitt
2002: Agassi/Hewitt
2003: Agassi/Ferrero/Federer/Roddick
2004: Federer/Federer/Federer/Federer/Federer/Federer...
2005: Federer/Federer/Nadal

Castafiore
10-06-2005, 08:39 AM
It's a personal choice...accept that instead of hammering your own opinion onto everybody else.

Come on, players of the year go by what people accomplish, not by exceding expectations
What about players who accomplish a lot and thereby exceed expectations and set amazing records? :p

NOTE: I did say that Federer is a logical choice (just to make that clear before the blood pressure of some people go up to alarming heigths) but I think that Nadal deserves a spot on that nomination list with all that he has done THIS year, keeping in mind how difficult that is at that age.

Iza
10-06-2005, 08:50 AM
well my players of the years have been
2000-no-one
2001-no-one
2002- JCF
2003- JCF
2004- Verdasco


the players of those years IMO are
2000-Safin
2001-Ivanisevic
2002-Hewitt
2003- Ferrero/Roddick
2004- Federer

deliveryman
10-06-2005, 11:00 AM
It's a personal choice...accept that instead of hammering your own opinion onto everybody else.


What about players who accomplish a lot and thereby exceed expectations and set amazing records? :p

NOTE: I did say that Federer is a logical choice (just to make that clear before the blood pressure of some people go up to alarming heigths) but I think that Nadal deserves a spot on that nomination list with all that he has done THIS year, keeping in mind how difficult that is at that age.

Player of the year is basically the same thing as an MVP in a team sport.

Sure, you would put Nadal on the "nomination" list, just because there has to be one.

But there's no denying Federer has had the best year out of anyone on the ATP tour, and therefore, it would be just flat-out stupid to honestly consider anyone else.

If the question was, "Best up and coming players of the year?" Or, "Excluding Roger, who's the player of the year." Then yes, the obvious choice would be Nadal.

I don't know how people can claim something as simple as this could be subjective to the individual. Because it isn't. Just look at the god damn stat sheet.

Castafiore
10-06-2005, 11:03 AM
Come on, man....read before you type...

Jimnik
10-06-2005, 12:00 PM
2000 Safin
2001 Ivanisevic
2002 Hewitt
2003 Ferrero
2004 Federer
2005 Nadal

emile32
10-06-2005, 12:10 PM
Federer is the player of the year not Nadal. Federer won more slams, Master-series and more tour titles this year. There can't be any discussions, he is just the best.

Jimnik
10-06-2005, 12:15 PM
player of the year isn't simply who accumalated more ranking points. I don't care if Fed won more slams this year.
Nadal has impressed me more this year.
But I admit it is very close.

R.Federer
10-06-2005, 12:19 PM
Also Nadal broke a record this year while Fed has not broken a record this year.

He did break a record: earliest to qualify for the T.M.C

And, 5 straight wins from now and he will break another big record which stood for 10 years at least (4 straight he will equalize)
Breaking a record is fantastic, but how about setting records that will be difficult to beat, like 24 finales won

emile32
10-06-2005, 12:27 PM
Jimnik with your reasoning, Sampras isn't the best player of all time, because players like federer,mcenroe,laver,Edberg have impressed me more.

Jimnik
10-06-2005, 12:31 PM
Sampras isn't the best player of all time. He is the best grass/hard court player of all time.
1993, 1994 and 1995 he would have been my player of the year.

It's not necessarily fair because Fed has impressed me a lot this year. It's just that Nadal has even more so. On this form, Fed would have beaten many previous "players of the year" it just so happens that Nadal was awesome this year.

jenanun
10-06-2005, 12:35 PM
well i would say nadal my player of year in 2005...
of course, federer is still the king, but he was sort of expected to win, expected to stay on the top, expected to win 2 or 3 slams.. so no surprise at all really,
but nadal is really the player of the year, surprising everyone to win 10 titles at the age of 19... well done nadal!

anyway here is my list!
2000 KUERTEN
2001 IVANISEVIC
2002 HEWITT
2003 FERRERO
2004 FEDERER
2005 NADAL

TennisGrandSlam
10-06-2005, 01:07 PM
2000 Safin
2001 Hewitt, Ivanisevic
2002 Sampras
2003 Federer
2004 Federer
2005 Federer, Nadal

TennisGrandSlam
10-06-2005, 01:09 PM
2000 Safin
2001 Hewitt, Ivanisevic
2003 Federer
2004 Federer
2005 Federer, Nadal

PaulieM
10-06-2005, 03:16 PM
The question is about 'YOUR' player of the year. Why would you reply with a 'no' to somebody else's choice?

Federer would be a logical choice for player of the year but mentionning Nadal is not such an odd choice either.
- He is the first player to claim the Roland Garros title in his main draw debut since Mats Wilander in 1982 and became just the seventh player to win a Grand Slam in his first appearance at the event, and the first since Andre Agassi at the 1995 Australian Open.
- The Roland Garros title match was Nadalís 24th consecutive match win, setting an ATP record for teenage winning streaks, surpassing Agassiís 1988 streak of 23 straight wins.
- The French Open was his sixth title of 2005, tying him with Agassi (1988) and Becker (1986) for the third-most titles for a teenager in a season. He then trailed only Borgís seven (1974) and Wilanderís nine (1983) titles, a record which he broke with the China Open win.

I mean...just look at this and answer me why you would think that mentionning Nadal as the player of the year is so odd.
i agree that there's nothing wrong with naming nadal as a choice but basing your choice on what their expected results were rather than their actual results is the part that is a bit stupid. if i was basing my choice on expected results i could say goran was the clear cut player of the year for 2001 over someone who was expected to win 3 slams and only won 2 just because nobody expected goran to win, but that wouldn't necessarily be a good justification. maybe federer was expected to win but i don't think most reasonable people expected him have a second really amazing year. the fact that he managed to handle the pressure and actually arguably do better than last year makes him player of the year for 2005 in my mind, with nadal as a very close 2nd. based on results nadal is a perfectly logical nominee, but basing it on expectation is a bit silly and not even a necessary justification.

Castafiore
10-06-2005, 03:31 PM
i agree that there's nothing wrong with naming nadal as a choice but basing your choice on what their expected results were rather than their actual results is the part that is a bit stupid.
Well, not to me. You need a reference point to put the actual results into perspective. Besides, the question is not 'who has the best 'palmares' of the year' (number of slams, masters titles,...) but 'who is YOUR player of the year'.

federer was expected to win but i don't think most reasonable people expected him have a second really amazing year. the fact that he managed to handle the pressure and actually arguably do better than last year makes him player of the year for 2005 in my mind,
See? That's your way of judging who YOUR player of the year is and it's a subjective way (people did not expect him to have a second amazing year (see how expectations do matter?) - the standing up to the pressure - ...).

So to me, I would name both Federer and Nadal. When people will look back on this year, both these names will pop up.

PS I agree that Federer handles the pressures of being the number one very well!

ExpectedWinner
10-06-2005, 03:54 PM
I think people who choose Nadal are getting mixed up. Nadal qualifies for " The most improved", or for "The best teenager", or for "The most meteoric rise", or whatever you want to call it. But "Player of the year" with 4th, 3rd, 2nd round exits at GS is a joke. Besides, 2slams + number 1 rankng > 1slam+number2 ranking.

Action Jackson
10-06-2005, 03:56 PM
Nadal is the Most Improved Player of 2005 and wins that in a canter.

uNIVERSE mAN
10-06-2005, 04:02 PM
who gives a shit what everyone thinks, the POTY is the YE #1.

2001 Hewitt
2002 Hewitt
2003 Roddick
2004 Federer
2005 Federer

buzzy
10-06-2005, 04:15 PM
who gives a shit what everyone thinks, the POTY is the YE #1.

2001 Hewitt
2002 Hewitt
2003 Roddick
2004 Federer
2005 Federer

The question asks "Who is your player of the year" not "who ended the year at #1" or "Who won the year-end Master's cup title". No specific criteria is given so it is up to individuals to use what they feel is worth recognizing. And whatever that may be is a perfectly legitimate reason for them. They are entitled to have an opinion.

So for you, universe man- it's the year-end #1. For someone else, it could be anything else. Could you all please respect other peoples' choices? Otherwise, there's not much point to a thread like this. The record books tell us who ended at #1 each year...it doesn't require a lot of discussion.

landoud
10-06-2005, 04:17 PM
2000-safin
2001-sampras
2002-hewitt
2003-federer
2004-federer
2005-federer / nadal

gillian
10-06-2005, 04:18 PM
Going back into the recesses of my memory, here's what I came up with.

2000: Kuerten
2001: Hewitt
2002: Hewitt
2003: Ferrero (included because of his FO title and USO final appearance)/Federer (took Master's Cup w/out losing a set)/Roddick
2004: Federer
2005: Federer/Nadal (had to include him, because he's outperformed everyone, except Fed)

tangerine_dream
10-06-2005, 04:24 PM
who gives a shit what everyone thinks, the POTY is the YE #1.
The question was: who is YOUR player of the year. If we're only going by numbers and figures, then there wouldn't be a need for this thread and we could all go look it up in the record books. Billabong was asking us for our own personal opinion.

For my choices I based my criteria on the players who made the biggest impact on ME for that year in tennis. Therefore, they are MY players of the year. :)

gillian
10-06-2005, 04:50 PM
I think people who choose Nadal are getting mixed up. Nadal qualifies for " The most improved", or for "The best teenager", or for "The most meteoric rise", or whatever you want to call it. But "Player of the year" with 4th, 3rd, 2nd round exits at GS is a joke. Besides, 2slams + number 1 rankng > 1slam+number2 ranking.

I dunno. 10 titles is 10 titles, no matter the surface or tier. What Nadal has done this year is amazing and in any other (read: non-Fed) year, he'd be the unquestioned player of the year based on his results. I can't see not including him in discussions of POY. Besides that, he's been competitive w/Fed in the actual matches they've played against each other (of course winning @ RG). So, in terms of results and actual match play against the world #1, no one is even in the same building w/Rafael this year (and, yeah, that includes Safin, who, despite an amazing AO, has performed inconsistently the rest of '05).

Dirk
10-06-2005, 05:00 PM
Posting it depending on expectations to results.
Fed was expected to win 3-4 grandslams. He won 2.
No way Nadal was expected to win 10 tournaments as a teenager.
Also Nadal broke a record this year while Fed has not broken a record this year.
I am not the only one to put Nadal as the player of the year for 2005.

Roger won 4 masters events and became the first person since Don Budge to win Wimbledon and USO back to back consecutively.

ExpectedWinner
10-06-2005, 05:04 PM
I dunno. 10 titles is 10 titles, no matter the tier. .

NO. Any GS title is a lot more than a title in HC, Brasil, Doha, or Rotterdam

If people are choosing a player of the year based on emotions/biases, then I'm not interested in this topic.
But the good thing is that tennis is an objective sport where numbers are telling the story.

Dirk
10-06-2005, 05:06 PM
I agree with Gillian. Most of Nadal's title are very respectable. I would probably say his Brazil title is his weakest.

Dirk
10-06-2005, 05:07 PM
Sampras isn't the best player of all time. He is the best grass/hard court player of all time.
1993, 1994 and 1995 he would have been my player of the year.

It's not necessarily fair because Fed has impressed me a lot this year. It's just that Nadal has even more so. On this form, Fed would have beaten many previous "players of the year" it just so happens that Nadal was awesome this year.

Don't forget to add 97 to your Pete list.

DayTripperGH
10-06-2005, 05:10 PM
2000- Kuerten/Safin
2001- Hewitt/Agassi
2002- Hewitt
2003- Roddick
2004- Federer
2005- Federer/Nadal

Angle Queen
10-06-2005, 05:15 PM
2000: Safin
2001: Hewitt
2002: Hewitt
2003: Roddick
2004: Federer
2005: ??? (leaning heavily to Federer but withholding judgement til after Nov)

Rafa = Fed Killa
10-06-2005, 05:25 PM
If you go by year end ranking, what is the point of asking this question.
Nadal is 19 and has done amazing.
MVP is not always given to the best player, it is given to the one who makes the biggest impact on the team or sport.

gillian
10-06-2005, 06:58 PM
NO. Any GS title is a lot more than a title in HC, Brasil, Doha, or Rotterdam

If people are choosing a player of the year based on emotions/biases, then I'm not interested in this topic.
But the good thing is that tennis is an objective sport where numbers are telling the story.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree (somewhat). Nadal's not one of my favorites. I like certain aspects of his game, respect what he's done this year and enjoy his personality, but I don't generally root for him. So, I'm basing my assessment of his year on what he's achieved, not my own bias toward him.

While I agree that Brazil isn't Roland Garros (or even Rome), in whatever tournament he's playing, Nadal still has to go out and actually win the matches. Agassi once commented that Masters Series tourneys are more difficult to win than Grand Slams because they

a) contain the top 32 players in the world
b) take place over a one-week period w/no days off between matches

To date, Nadal's won (I believe 4) MS titles this year, and, of course, one slam. He's 74-10 on the year. Those are amazing numbers no matter what his age is, or what surface he's winning on. Give the boy his due. He's second to Federer this year, but no one else.

ExpectedWinner
10-06-2005, 07:05 PM
I think we'll have to agree to disagree (somewhat). Nadal's not one of my favorites. I like certain aspects of his game, respect what he's done this year and enjoy his personality, but I don't generally root for him. So, I'm basing my assessment of his year on what he's achieved, not my own bias toward him.



I wasn't talking about you. I put it in reply to your message, sorry about that.

stebs
10-06-2005, 07:06 PM
2000 - Safin
2001 - Hewitt
2002 - Hewitt
2003 - Roddick
2004 - Federer
2005 - Federer

ExpectedWinner
10-06-2005, 07:13 PM
To date, Nadal's won (I believe 4) MS titles this year, and, of course, one slam. He's 74-10 on the year. Those are amazing numbers no matter what his age is, or what surface he's winning on. Give the boy his due. He's second to Federer this year, but no one else.

LOL. I always give him credit. I had a few quarrels about it in Fed's forum in the past. But he can not be considered "a player of the year" if you go by facts- 1 Slam vs 2, number 2 ranking vs 1, 3TMS vs 4 (so far), W-L ratio, overall performance in slams.

Angle Queen
10-06-2005, 07:16 PM
MVP is not always given to the best player, it is given to the one who makes the biggest impact on the team or sport.How I wish that true more often. I like to think of it as...where would the team be without you? Would the Yankees still be the Yankees without Derek Jeter? Yep. But where would the Braves have been this summer without Andruw Jones (when Chipper went down)? Doesn't mean any players on killer teams shouldn't be considered...I just think players on non-killer teams should get more of a look with these things are decided.

But sadly, that kind of thinking isn't really possible in tennis since it's not a team endeavor. In that regard, I think of a POTY as...who do you not want in your quarter or half of the draw. This year...depending on the surface (to some extent) it's been Fed and Rafa. That's why I'm waiting to see what happens in Shanghai. If Rafa can pull it off, I'll match it with his RG to counter Roger's Wimby and USO. As fans, we're winners regardless because we've been treated to some outstanding tennis this year.

Black Adam
10-06-2005, 07:52 PM
2000:Kuerten/Safin
2001:Hewitt
2002:Hewitt/Fererro/Safin
2003:Rodick:yeah:
2004:Federer
2005:Nadal.

Jimnik
10-06-2005, 09:03 PM
Well done to all the people who wrote down the year-end no.1 players for the last 5 years. :rolleyes:
I think there are some here who haven't fully understood the point of this thread.

El Legenda
10-06-2005, 09:07 PM
2000- Kuerten/Safin
2001- Hewitt/Agassi
2002- Hewitt
2003- Roddick
2004- Federer
2005- Federer/Nadal....................long 3rd Croatia Davis Cup Team :lol:

Skyward
10-06-2005, 09:15 PM
Fed was expected to win 3-4 grandslams.


Really? Hitchhiker and history books convinced me that he was supposed to go slamless after winning 3 last year. ;)

ExpectedWinner
10-06-2005, 09:24 PM
I think there are some here who haven't fully understood the point of this thread.

I guess it depends on your interpretation. The title doesn't ask " Which player impressed you the most?" On the other hand, "player of the year" is a totally objective category where cold numbers matter the most.

AgassiDomination
10-06-2005, 09:36 PM
2000: Kuerten
2001: Sampras
2002: Hewitt
2003: Agassi
2004: Federer
2005: Federer

El Legenda
10-06-2005, 09:40 PM
2000: Kuerten
2001: Sampras
2001: Hewitt
2002: Agassi
2003: Agassi
2004: Federer
2004: Federer

There were 2 Federers is 2004?

Jimnik
10-06-2005, 09:40 PM
I guess it depends on your interpretation. The title doesn't ask " Which player impressed you the most?" On the other hand, "player of the year" is a totally objective category where cold numbers matter the most.
The title is "YOUR player of the year". It is the player who YOU think deserves it. Hence, it is based on OPINION not purely on numbers. Off course numbers help but they are not the definative answer.

AgassiDomination
10-06-2005, 09:42 PM
There were 2 Federers is 2004?

Whoops sorry, corrected!

El Legenda
10-06-2005, 09:43 PM
Whoops sorry, corrected!

:yeah:

propi
10-06-2005, 09:57 PM
From last years
2003:Ferrero
2004:Federer
2005:Nadal
:)

ExpectedWinner
10-06-2005, 10:02 PM
The title is "YOUR player of the year". It is the player who YOU think deserves it. Hence, it is based on OPINION not purely on numbers. Off course numbers help but they are not the definative answer.

In this particular topic opinions should be based on facts. In the topic asking who has the best behind on the ATP tour, emotions will prevail. :p

Loremaster
10-06-2005, 10:05 PM
2001:Hewitt
2002:Sampras
2003:Roddick
2004:Federer
2005:Nadal

missbungle
10-07-2005, 01:10 AM
2000: Safin
2001: Hewitt
2002: Hewitt
2003: Ferrero
2004: Federer
2005: Federer

rommel99
10-07-2005, 04:14 AM
puting nadal as the player of the year in 2005 is stupid, federer clearly had a better year. nadal is solid as the second player of the year but cmon, its pretty obvious.

NYCtennisfan
10-07-2005, 04:30 AM
I like the original poster's picks.

Federerhingis
10-07-2005, 05:50 AM
2000: Kuerten
2001: Kuerten/Hewitt
2002: Hewitt
2003: Federer/Roddick
2004: Federer
2005: Federer

me agrees! :wavey:

Too bad the 2001 french was or has been so far Guga's last victory on a slam or big victory for that matter.