Hold Those Thoughts

Novak Djokovic had been the 2016 Australian Open champion for approximately 15 minutes before he heard the question: Can you, the ESPN commentators interviewing him at Melbourne Park wanted to know, win all four majors this season? One of those commentators, Brad Gilbert, even had a nickname ready for the accomplishment: The Djoker Slam. The world No. 1 smiled, bumped fists with Gilbert, and said he liked the sound of that.

“I don’t have any limitations in my mind,” Djokovic said, repeating what has long been a mantra of his.

Over the next few days, the speculation surrounding Djokovic’s future began to extend far beyond 2016. Was he now, many in the press and on Twitter wondered, the best ever to pick up a racquet? Was he the proverbial and partly mythical GOAT? According to at least one U.K. media outlet, the verdict is already in. Before the Aussie Open was over, Metro ran a column with this headline: 6 REASONS DJOKOVIC HAS OVERTAKEN FEDERER AS THE GREATEST TENNIS PLAYER OF ALL TIME

I can understand the desire to speculate, eventually, about the Grand Slam; Djokovic came up just one match short last year. But after a season in which he and Serena Williams vied for it at the same time, I had hoped to avoid hearing the peculiar term “calendar-year,” at least for a few months. I know it’s futile for me to ask, but is it possible for us not to wonder whether Djokovic can win all four until after Roland Garros?

Just winning that event is going to be tough enough. Djokovic has never done it, and no man has pulled off the Aussie-French double since Jim Courier all the way back in 1992. Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, Andre Agassi, Ivan Lendl: None of them won the season’t first two majors back to back. If Djokovic ends that long drought in 2016, I’ll be happy to talk “calendar-year." I suspect Djokovic himself is thinking along the same lines. Simply winning the French Open will be his primary focus in the coming months.

More pointless than the “calendar-year” talk, though, is the GOAT talk, at least as it pertains to Djokovic at this moment. Yes, he has now won four of five majors for the second time, and he now owns winning records over Nadal (24-23) and Federer (23-22) for the first time. And no, there’s no one younger on the horizon who appears ready to overtake him. At some point, we may judge Djokovic to be the greatest player of all time, or at least the greatest male player of all time. But there’s no reason to put him there yet.

We can’t begin to make any definitive judgments until Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic are all retired, and their finals numbers have been tallied. In 2013, when Rafa was riding high at No. 1, some experts speculated that he had already passed Federer in the GOAT sweepstakes—few experts are saying the same thing today. Players have ups and downs, and no one dominates forever. At 28, Djokovic appears invincible, but Federer was also at the top of his game at the same age. Just before turning 28, in August 2009, he won the French Open and Wimbledon and reclaimed the No. 1 ranking. Six months later, he began 2010 by beating Andy Murray in straight sets to win the Australian Open, just as Djokovic did this past weekend. It was Federer’s 16th major title; many were predicting that he would reach 20 someday. In the six years since, Federer has won just one more.

This is not to say that Djokovic, who has 11 Slams, is nearing the end of his run at the top. He reached No. 1 two years later than Federer, and he seems primed to stay there for a while. So far, Djokovic shows no sign of physical decline or mental burnout. Most promising off all is the (incredible) fact that he’s still the second-youngest player in the ATP’s Top 10. I could see Djokovic at No. 1 well into his 30s, and I could see him catching up to Federer’s current 17-major total. Seven years ago I predicted that Federer would finish with 19 Slams and Nadal would finish with 16. (So far, at least, I've been consistent in my overestimation, though neither is done yet). When we see a player dominating, we have a tough time imagining him not dominating.

Djokovic, even if he stays where he is, still has work to do to catch Federer and Nadal. Those two have career Grand Slams; Djokovic still needs the French to complete his. And while he may eventually outdistance them in their head-to-head matchups, it will be the Grand Slam totals that people will compare first.

Majors are an imperfect measurement of greatness across eras. For example, Pancho Gonzalez—the best player of the 1950s, and one of the best ever—was banned from playing them for 20 years. They may not even be a definitive way to measure players of the same time period; Federer has three more Slam wins than Nadal, but Nadal has 12 more head-to-head wins over Federer. Still, Djokovic, Federer, and Nadal have all played at a time when it has been understood that the Slams mean the most. All three have geared their seasons and careers to accumulate as many as possible. Like Nadal, even if Djokovic ends up with a winning record against Federer, it will be difficult for him to be recognized as the greatest ever if he finishes behind him on the Slam-title list.

What was I saying at the start of this column? Save the GOAT talk for another day, or another year? I seem to have ignored my own advice. Maybe that’s because it’s an interesting and ultimately endless discussion that has no right answer. If Djokovic keeps winning, or if Federer and Nadal manage to turn the tables back around on him, the question will get more interesting in the future. But let’s wait a while before we try to answer it.