- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 9,755
- Reactions
- 5,122
- Points
- 113
Hmm...I'm mixed on this. Surely Stan has shown us more so far, but I maintain that they are similar in that they are both able to reach a very high level commensurate with the elites, just not nearly as frequently as the true elites. But their peak form is comparable to the elites - yes, Kyrgios too (imo). Of course I think scoop takes it way too far, but that's his style.
But the question now is around effectiveness vs. talent, and where we seem to differ is the degree of Nick's talent. I think he's more talented than most of the second tier types (Tsonga, Berdych, Ferrer, etc) - and closer to Stan, although far from the complete talents of the Big Four. But I see him as having more upside than, say, Marin Cilic or Milos Raonic.
But to be honest, I'm not attached to my opinion. Kyrgios remains a bit of an enigma. I've seen him do things that only greats can do, but then in the next match he's totally lost. We simply don't know yet what he can be. Maybe he maxes out as another Cilic, or even a Cilic without a Slam. Or maybe he's quite a bit better. I definitely see him as having the potential to have a better career than Stan.
But the question now is around effectiveness vs. talent, and where we seem to differ is the degree of Nick's talent. I think he's more talented than most of the second tier types (Tsonga, Berdych, Ferrer, etc) - and closer to Stan, although far from the complete talents of the Big Four. But I see him as having more upside than, say, Marin Cilic or Milos Raonic.
But to be honest, I'm not attached to my opinion. Kyrgios remains a bit of an enigma. I've seen him do things that only greats can do, but then in the next match he's totally lost. We simply don't know yet what he can be. Maybe he maxes out as another Cilic, or even a Cilic without a Slam. Or maybe he's quite a bit better. I definitely see him as having the potential to have a better career than Stan.
