if they stopped playing today, do they deserve to be in the HOF? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

if they stopped playing today, do they deserve to be in the HOF?

megadeth
02-26-2007, 12:41 AM
roddick - will need to pull a "sabatini" most probably. expect a lot of strings to be pulled by the USTA to get the duck mentioned here

ferrero - debateable

nadal - yes despite his current slump

ljubicic - nope

nalbandian - nope

hewitt - yes

davydenko - undeservingly no (too bad). there's just no impact at all

safin - debateable

blake - unsure... unless he gets to be more solid on his slam results


anymore insights?

GlennMirnyi
02-26-2007, 12:44 AM
None of them.

RickDaStick
02-26-2007, 12:46 AM
Surely you arent being serious here? Blake,Roddick,Ferrero should never be mentioned together with the hall of fame especially if their careers ended today.

ChinoRios4Ever
02-26-2007, 12:46 AM
fed yes obvious reasons
rafa yes legend of clay
moya RG winner, AO finalist, No1, DC winner
hewitt 2 time No.1, USO and wimby winner, AO finalist, DC winner
safin No. 1, USO and AO winner, 2 time AO finalist too, 2 time DC winner
guga No. 1., 3 RG, 1 TMC (beating pete and andre to win the title)

and.... maybe roddick and ferrero

megadeth
02-26-2007, 12:47 AM
not sure about roddick... remember, he hasn't beaten a top 10 player since God knows when...

he doesn't deserve to be mentioned in there... unless we have an honesty award...

RickDaStick
02-26-2007, 12:49 AM
not sure about roddick... remember, he hasn't beaten a top 10 player since God knows when...

he doesn't deserve to be mentioned in there... unless we have an honesty award...

So then why did you mention him?

Action Jackson
02-26-2007, 12:49 AM
di Mauro

scarecrows
02-26-2007, 12:53 AM
the usual names deserve it, you now, Burgsmuller, Hernandez, Behrend and Dlouhy

zicofirol
02-26-2007, 12:54 AM
you have some wtf names in that group, blake, lubijic, davydenko and nalbandian. out of all them nalbandian has the best shot of winning a slam and that wouldnt put him in consideration.

Roddick and Safin, no..

Nadal, probably yes, hewitt is a toss up...

Tennis Fool
02-26-2007, 12:56 AM
safin - debateable



:eek:

2 Slams, 2 DC winning teams, #1 rank.

Where have you been been :o

Sunset of Age
02-26-2007, 12:57 AM
Anyone who's managed to win a Grand Slam deserves a spot in the HOF I think. Some more than others, that's true...

megadeth
02-26-2007, 12:57 AM
So then why did you mention him?

to open up the debate. given that there are really no clear quantifiable criteria from the HOF on who deserves to be in the list or not.

take sabatini for example...

megadeth
02-26-2007, 12:58 AM
you have some wtf names in that group, blake, lubijic, davydenko and nalbandian. out of all them nalbandian has the best shot of winning a slam and that wouldnt put him in consideration.

Roddick and Safin, no..

Nadal, probably yes, hewitt is a toss up...

take note that the wtf list consists mostly of today's top ten players...

RickDaStick
02-26-2007, 01:00 AM
to open up the debate. given that there are really no clear quantifiable criteria from the HOF on who deserves to be in the list or not.

take sabatini for example...


Ok but for instance you mentioned Blake. You said it was unsure. If he stopped playing today it would mean he finished his career with no major titles. What will he be remembered for in 50 years? Winning Las Vegas?

megadeth
02-26-2007, 01:00 AM
Anyone who's managed to win a Grand Slam deserves a spot in the HOF I think. Some more than others, that's true...


you gotta take out the one slam wonders first... otherwise, you'd have a list of 1-time french open champions or guys like johansson making the list

GlennMirnyi
02-26-2007, 01:00 AM
Anyone who's managed to win a Grand Slam deserves a spot in the HOF I think. Some more than others, that's true...

I disagree completely.

Tennis Fool
02-26-2007, 01:00 AM
to open up the debate. given that there are really no clear quantifiable criteria from the HOF on who deserves to be in the list or not.

take sabatini for example...

Sabatini had a steller career and the one Slam she claimed she beat Steffi. That would be like Roddick beating Federer at the US Open.

I knew a long time ago that Sabatini would make it to the HOF despite her lack of Slams.

megadeth
02-26-2007, 01:01 AM
Ok but for instance you mentioned Blake. You said it was unsure. If he stopped playing today it would mean he finished his career with no major titles. What will he be remembered for in 50 years? Winning Las Vegas?

noted dude :) thanks for pointing that out

atheneglaukopis
02-26-2007, 01:01 AM
Safin has already been voted into the MTF HOF; surely that's what all players aspire to? :confused:

All_Slam_Andre
02-26-2007, 01:09 AM
No disrespect to Blake, Davydenko, Ljubicic and Nalbandian but they cannot be considered in this discussion as neither of them has won any grand slams.
Federer - Of course. Already one of the 5 greatest players of all time.
Kuerten - Obviously yes. 3 grand slams, won the Masters Cup, 5 TMS titles, number 1 for over 30 weeks.
Nadal - Yes. 2 grand slams, reached another final, ruled the claycourt season in 2005 and 2006 setting a record winning streak, 6 TMS titles, won the Davis Cup
Hewitt - Yes. 2 grand slams, 2 more finals, 2 masters cup titles, 2 TMS titles, over 80 weeks at no.1, won the davis cup
Safin - Yes. 2 grand slams, 2 more finals, got to number 1, 5 TMS titles, won the davis cup
It is harder to say with the one-time grand slam winners.
Roddick - US Open title, reached 3 more finals, 4 TMS titles, got to number 1
Ferrero - French Open title, reached 2 more finals, 4 TMS titles, got to number 1, won the Davis Cup
Moya - French Open title, reached 1 more final, 3 TMS titles, got to number 1, won the Davis Cup
I think all 3 of them would definately have a case based on those achievements. But Thomas Johansson and Gaston Gaudio definately wouldn't be inducted

brent-o
02-26-2007, 01:13 AM
How are you unsure about Blake? He's never won a Grand Slam (or even reached a semifinal, for that matter), hasn't reached number 1, or been on a DC winning team. Meanwhile, you say Safin is also debatable, who has done all of these. If their careers ended today, Blake wouldn't even be in the same league as Safin.

Sunset of Age
02-26-2007, 01:13 AM
I disagree completely.

And you're completely entitled to do so, Glenn! ;) :D

FaceyFacem
02-26-2007, 01:15 AM
hewitt and nadal are guarantees i think, and probably safin also, 2 majors is an almost guarantee...
rafter made it with 2 majors and 1 week at #1, where safin and hewitt both have 2 majors and more than 1 week at #1...
nadal's clay streak gets him in
roddick and ferrero are borderline with one major and time spent at #1
blake, davydenko, nalbandian, ljubicic have NO CHANCE at this point

Bad Religion
02-26-2007, 01:16 AM
Safin , Moya, Ferrero , Roddick and Hewitt considering that Francoise Durr (1 GS and 3 as highest rank) and Yanick Noah (1 GS and 3 as best rank) are in the HOF .

Safin , Ferrero, Hewitt and Moyá have won Grand Slams , Davis Cup . In addition, all of them were number 1

GlennMirnyi
02-26-2007, 01:18 AM
And you're completely entitled to do so, Glenn! ;) :D

Next thing you know Roddick will be in the HOF... ;)

Sunset of Age
02-26-2007, 01:19 AM
Next thing you know Roddick will be in the HOF... ;)

Okay, okay... you got me, here. I might have to rethink my own statement. :lol: :p

Snowwy
02-26-2007, 01:21 AM
Sabatini had a steller career and the one Slam she claimed she beat Steffi. That would be like Roddick beating Federer at the US Open.

I knew a long time ago that Sabatini would make it to the HOF despite her lack of Slams.

Didnt Sabatini have 18 GS semi-finals?

GlennMirnyi
02-26-2007, 01:25 AM
Okay, okay... you got me, here. I might have to rethink my own statement. :lol: :p

;) :p

All_Slam_Andre
02-26-2007, 01:27 AM
There are 10 grand slam champions currently in the game. They are Federer, Kuerten, Hewitt, Nadal, Safin, Ferrero, Moya, Roddick, Johannson and Gaudio. In my opinion all of them deserve to be inducted apart from the last two players

Johnny Groove
02-26-2007, 01:30 AM
roddick -
ferrero - debateable
nadal - yes despite his current slump
ljubicic - nope
nalbandian - nope
hewitt - yes
davydenko - undeservingly no (too bad). there's just no impact at all
safin - debateable
blake - unsure... unless he gets to be more solid on his slam results

Roddick- prolly yes, 4 slam finals, a slam victory, many TMS titles, GS SF's up the ass, 20some titles, #1 ranking

Ferrero- i dont think so. #1, one slam, another slam final, i dunno

nadal- o yeah, in my unbiased opinion, 2 slams, 1 slam final, buncha TMS', DC victory, #2 in the Federer era, and hes only 20.

Ljubo- :haha:
Nalbandian- as much as id like to think of him in the HOF, i doubt it. unless he wins a slam.
Kolya- no, sorry.
Safin- NO DOUBT
Blake- no, sorry James :hug:

and how is Hewitt debatable? 80 weeks at #1, 2 slams, another final, TMC champ, DC champ in 03, youngest #1 ever, thats gotta be a fast-track

GlennMirnyi
02-26-2007, 01:31 AM
There are 10 grand slam champions currently in the game. They are Federer, Kuerten, Hewitt, Nadal, Safin, Ferrero, Moya, Roddick, Johannson and Gaudio. In my opinion all of them deserve to be inducted apart from the last two players

:lol:

Why Johansson and Gaudio not mentioned and Moya and Roddick mentioned? :lol:

Snowwy
02-26-2007, 01:35 AM
When were Johansson and Gaudio ranked number 1 or when did they lose in the finals of a GS or even the semis of a GS?

GlennMirnyi
02-26-2007, 01:38 AM
When were Johansson and Gaudio ranked number 1 or when did they lose in the finals of a GS or even the semis of a GS?

Big deal, all of them 1 slam wonders.

Havok
02-26-2007, 01:44 AM
Everyone seems to be forgetting that Roddick was #1. Not only that but he ENDED the year #1, was the 2nd youngest #1 ever and youngest American #1. I'd put him as debateable because he has 3 other slam finals, a whole slew of SF and QF as well, 4 TMS shields and other finals, won titles on all surfaces, a mainstay in the top 10 (hasn't ended the year outside the top 10 ever since he got there in 2002).

Even hough he's got one Slam, he has many other things riding for him, but he is still missing one more slam I'd say to get in with more than a 50% chance.

Safin should get in there, as well as Hewitt (even though he's turning himself into a bit of a joke now). Ferrero no was in hell does he get in. He had what 2, big max 3 good years on tour and is already a waste of talent. Feel bad for the guy but HOF shoudln't ever be mentioned with his name.

partygirl
02-26-2007, 01:49 AM
Everyone seems to be forgetting that Roddick was #1. Not only that but he ENDED the year #1, was the 2nd youngest #1 ever and youngest American #1. I'd put him as debateable because he has 3 other slam finals, a whole slew of SF and QF as well, 4 TMS shields and other finals, won titles on all surfaces, a mainstay in the top 10 (hasn't ended the year outside the top 10 ever since he got there in 2002).

...and counting not to mention his youth.
:hatoff: I don't know how so many people can look at those truths and still disrespect his fat ass.:cuckoo:

Havok
02-26-2007, 01:51 AM
hewitt and nadal are guarantees i think, and probably safin also, 2 majors is an almost guarantee...
rafter made it with 2 majors and 1 week at #1, where safin and hewitt both have 2 majors and more than 1 week at #1...
nadal's clay streak gets him in
roddick and ferrero are borderline with one major and time spent at #1
blake, davydenko, nalbandian, ljubicic have NO CHANCE at this point
Asterix next to that one, well at least in Roddick's case. Andy took the #1 spot off of Ferrero, but then the Federer domination started, and not even Nadal with all his glory and talent isn't even coming into striking distance for that #1 spot. Rafa should be counting his lucky stars that clay is his strongest surface and Federer's weakest surface (though he's qucikly becoming more adept on in) is also clay. Roddick's case looks a hell of a lot rosier than Ferrero's, unless JCF miraculosuly wakes up from this ugly ass tennis he's been playing since 2003.

Also why the HELL are people even mentioning Blake, Davydenko and co? Even Nalbandian with the biggest title apart from a Slam (TMC) shoudln't even be mentioned. ONE slam final, still hasn't gotten to another one yet, and when you have titles that people can count on ONE hand doesn't warrant you a HOF consideration.

All_Slam_Andre
02-26-2007, 01:52 AM
Big deal, all of them 1 slam wonders.

Gaudio i'll agree with as he has never reached a grand slam quarter-final apart from during his run to the 2004 French Open. Johansson i'll also give you. He has reached 1 grand slam semi-final and 2 quarter-finals in addition to his Australian Open title, but that is not enough. But Roddick and Moya one slam wonders? What a joke :lol:

All_Slam_Andre
02-26-2007, 01:58 AM
Ferrero isn't that far behind Roddick to be honest. Roddick has lost in 3 grand slam finals, Ferrero 2. Roddick has spent 13 weeks at no.1, Ferrero 8. Both players have won 4 masters series titles. Ferrero has won the Davis Cup twice, Roddick hasn't won it yet. Ferrero has reached the 4th round at all of the grand slams, while Roddick has never reached the 4th round at the French Open.

GlennMirnyi
02-26-2007, 02:06 AM
Gaudio i'll agree with as he has never reached a grand slam quarter-final apart from during his run to the 2004 French Open. Johansson i'll also give you. He has reached 1 grand slam semi-final and 2 quarter-finals in addition to his Australian Open title, but that is not enough. But Roddick and Moya one slam wonders? What a joke :lol:

Then Roddick and Moya won a second GS? When?

All_Slam_Andre
02-26-2007, 02:12 AM
Surely a player who wins 1 grand slam, and comes close to winning others cannot be classed as a one slam wonder. The fact that Roddick and Moya have consistently gone deep in grand slams draws means that they don't deserve this label. It is players like Gaudio and Costa who have come nowhere near to adding to their total who deserve the label.

GlennMirnyi
02-26-2007, 02:14 AM
Surely a player who wins 1 grand slam, and comes close to winning others cannot be classed as a one slam wonder. The fact that Roddick and Moya have consistently gone deep in grand slams draws means that they don't deserve this label. It is players like Gaudio and Costa who have come nowhere near to adding to their total who deserve the label.

Anyway, 1 slam winners should never be in the HOF.

edit: I still don't agree with Roddick and Moya being more than 1-slam wonders.

partygirl
02-26-2007, 02:17 AM
Anyway, 1 slam winners should never be in the HOF.
What if you win everything but?:rolleyes:
surely there is more to tennis, that is why there are only for of them;)

ExcaliburII
02-26-2007, 02:29 AM
Blake, think of it? Are you crazy man, he has only won a couple of IS. I would think about Nalbandian first. Reached Gs semis at the four different grand slams. Won Masters Cup. Reached Semi Finals at least in 5 different Master Series.

Safin, Hewitt, of course.
Roddick, Moya, Ferrero, maybe.

ExcaliburII
02-26-2007, 02:30 AM
ah, and dont even think about bad players such as Kolya or Ljubo.

ChinoRios4Ever
02-26-2007, 02:37 AM
Blake and Davydenko in the HOF??? wait a minute, if you say James and Kolya.. i say Rios, Nalbandian and Gonzalez

Blake: only won titles on hard, never in a GS final four
Rios: No. 1, AO final, 18 singles titles (5 AMS)
Nalbandian: DC final, TMC title, SF or better in all slams
Gonzalez: QF or better in all slams (AO final), olympic gold medal in doubles, titles in 3 different surfaces...

i cant believe why you say Blake...

Mimi
02-26-2007, 03:14 AM
if Sabitini could get there, why Chang did not get there :confused: , in my standard, winning just one slam should not get you to hall of fame:wavey:

megadeth
02-26-2007, 03:29 AM
they should put the HOF into different categories such as:

1. 2 slam winners
2. 3-4 slam winners
3. 5 or more slam winners
4. no or 1 slam winners but total titles won is XX (minimum must be met like 30-40?)
5. year end #1 players
6. #1 players

etc...

that way, it would be clearer for all fans on who gets there and who doesn't

guga2120
02-26-2007, 05:32 AM
Hewitt and Nadal will almost certainly get into the hall, from that original list, Pat Rafter just got in he had 2 slams.

Gustavo will w/out a doubt get in, and very deserving.

Winston's Human
02-26-2007, 05:40 AM
if Sabitini could get there, why Chang did not get there :confused: , in my standard, winning just one slam should not get you to hall of fame:wavey:

I do not think that Michael Chang is eligible yet because he has not been retired for five years. He played his last match at the 2003 US Open.

Winston's Human
02-26-2007, 05:43 AM
not sure about roddick... remember, he hasn't beaten a top 10 player since God knows when...



In the past four months, Roddick has beaten top-10ers Ancic (Australian Open) and Ljubicic (TMC).

2moretogo
02-26-2007, 06:59 AM
Safin, Hewitt, and Guga definately for all the reasons given.

Roddick, I think will get the nod because of his record both in and out of slams. Especially given that he played during the Federer Era (who I think will go down as the 'greatest of all time'.)

Ferrero, close call even though I wuv him.

All the other no, especially if Moya doesn't get in.

Edit: Nadal was on the list? Why? Way too young, but if retired tomorrow, yes he would get in. 2 GS, clay record, and some results on all surfaces (especially grass) would tip the hat.

senorgato
02-26-2007, 08:58 AM
roddick - No. At least Sabatini won a GS doubles title, got to the final of 2 other GS's singles and 3 doubles finals, and 2x's won the YEC. The only other achievement Roddick can hang his hat on is 2 Wimb finals

ferrero - tough one. I'd vote no.

nadal - Definitely. Longest clay match winning streak and 2 FO titles

ljubicic - Not even close

nalbandian - NOwhere close

hewitt - Definitely.

davydenko - Not even close

safin - Yes. 2 GS titles is strong

blake - Not even close

Grenouille
02-26-2007, 09:00 AM
Nadal Hewitt Safin YES

senorgato
02-26-2007, 09:05 AM
if Sabitini could get there, why Chang did not get there :confused: , in my standard, winning just one slam should not get you to hall of fame:wavey:

Sabatini also got to 2 GS finals (Wimbledon 1991 and USO 1988) and won the YEC's twice. She also got to the FO doubles finals 3x's with Steffi and won the Wimbledon doubles title with Steffi.

oz_boz
02-26-2007, 09:19 AM
if Sabitini could get there, why Chang did not get there :confused: , in my standard, winning just one slam should not get you to hall of fame:wavey:

I actually thought Chang was in there, and in that case Safin, Hewitt, Nadal and Roddick would definitely qualify. Ferrero and Moya questionable, Johansson and Gaudio - no way.

A very minimum would be one slam and some other fat comparable to reaching #1 - say getting to three more slam finals or so.

But IMO no one time Slam champs belong in HOF. Of the current players apart from Federer I would put Guga, Nadal and Hewitt in there, Safin too even if that is more arguable.

CmonAussie
02-26-2007, 10:43 AM
#
*
#
Should be restricted to multiple Slam winners [except for exceptional cases]..
...
Kuerten ~ definitely!

Hewitt ~ absolutely!

Safin ~ just scrapes in!

Nadal ~ surely no! [i mean yes!]


...
Ferrero ~ no way Jose!!

Moya ~ close but no cigar!!

Roddick ~ for pro poker maybe!!

Gaudio, Johansson... NO!

BTW, ~ Michael Chang is an exceptional case & deserves to be in there [the way he won 89 FO, plus his many other close calls [3-Slam finals & many SFs] & for his positive influence on Asian tennis]///

t0x
02-26-2007, 10:56 AM
Nadal - He's young, but 2 RG titles, clay record and a final at Wimby. Pretty darn successful.

Hewitt & Safin too

Roddick is iffy... only the one GS, but he has a fair few TMSs, and lets not forget, he's been to another 3 GS finals - which he may well of won if he didn't meet the Fed.

oz_boz
02-26-2007, 11:25 AM
BTW, ~ Michael Chang is an exceptional case & deserves to be in there [the way he won 89 FO, plus his many other close calls [3-Slam finals & many SFs] & for his positive influence on Asian tennis]

If you put Chang in there, Roddick will have to follow - one slam, three finals, #1 spot at young age, TMS titles. Personally I wouldn't let any of those two into HOF.

Winston's Human
02-26-2007, 12:38 PM
If the HOF can induct Yannick Noah -- a one-time slam winner with only one other slam SF and a career-high ranking of #3 -- then almost any other one-time slam winner is worthy of consideration.