SmashDebate: who wins a Grand Slam first, Nick or Sascha?

There isn’t a whole lot of variety when it comes to men’s tennis. Well, the Grand Slams anyway. Five men – Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokovic, Andy Murray and Stan Wawrinka – have won 53 of the past 58 Grand Slams.

But with every one of those men well into their thirties, 2018 could be the year we finally see fresh faces Alexander Zverev and Nick Kyrgios winning a Grand Slam.

Both have been widely touted as the most talented players of the ‘Next Generation’ and many people consider them likely to win a major at some point in their careers.

Who’s going to get there first? Let’s debate…

Related: can Grigor Dimitrov be world No.1 in 2018? 

Briscomb: Zverev

Player A: Guy who vaulted 21 places in the rankings to finish the year at world No.4 and won 54 matches in his third year on tour and claimed five titles including two Masters and has beaten Federer, Djokovic, Wawrinka and also has 40 wins over top-10 opponents and can’t even legally drink a beer yet.

Player B: Guy who dropped eight places in the rankings to finish outside the top twenty and has won two fewer titles in his career than Player A did in one year and whose 2017 Grand Slam performances included two first-round bombs and two second-round bombs.

I’ll take Player A.

Trollope: Kyrgios

Oh hi Bede.
Ah, this is a fun one. Kyrgios and Zverev inspire fan passion and discussion like few other of the rising stars in the men’s game.
But unlike your slightly simplistic Player A / Player B analysis – which takes into account only what’s happened in the past season months and nothing before it – I’m going to opt for a different route and go with Kyrgios.

That’s because we know what he can produce at the Slams. And so far, across several years, it’s better than what Sascha has mustered. Despite his tender years

Kyrgios has already reached two Grand Slam quarterfinals and the second week of another two. Zverev has only ever done that once. Yes, he’s two years younger, but I felt his early-round flops at the French and US Opens – when he came in having won Masters titles in the lead-up – were concerning.

Kyrgios had a worse year at the majors in 2017 compared with Zverev, but he was under an injury cloud at three of them. When he’s healthy, we know the level he can produce. And that’s closer to a Slam trophy, and sooner, than the German.

ICMYI: Sascha’s incredible season ends on a sour note

Briscomb

That’s because Sascha is twenty! He is allowed to crumble under the weight of expectations – now with five years’ experience, Kyrgios is not. And if Nick’s shoulder is sore then he shouldn’t play because he will aggravate it to the point where it will limit him down the track.

I think another important point you are understating is Sascha’s two Masters trophies. To actually get over the hump and win titles of that magnitude reinforces that:

1) He knows how to win

2) He knows how not to lose.

The second point is Kyrgios’ main hurdle and one that I don’t see him clearing before Zverev wins a major.

Trollope

I already acknowledged that Sascha was 20. What I didn’t acknowledge was that at the same age, Kyrgios had already reached two Grand Slam quarterfinals, having advanced to his first at age 19.

History shows that the very best players in the game succeed early on the biggest stages. Zverev’s Masters titles are one thing – and especially impressive given it’s been so rare of late for young players to win at this level. But it’s not the five-set sphere of Grand Slam play.

Look at Djokovic, Nadal, Federer. And although they don’t play five, look at Serena, Maria, Venus, Kvitova and Kuznetsova … all those players rose rapidly and won majors early. Kyrgios was, until this injury-marred season, demonstrating similar trajectory.

He’s proven himself over five sets. Just look at his Davis Cup record. And his 4-2 winning record in five-set matches at the majors. Zverev’s record is 2-3, and he’s lost his last two.

Zverev – yes, although only 20 – is showing incremental improvement at the majors so far, rather than the more rapid route taken by those aforementioned players. It’ll most likely win him a major eventually, but not before Nick.

SmashDebate: who’s better, Maria or Venus?

Briscomb

I feel much more confident in incremental gains than sporadic greatness.

Perhaps Nick will catch fire one fortnight, but you would have a better chance of getting Gilles Muller to smile than predict when and where it will happen.

With Sascha, I know he is trending upwards — and the only obstacle is the maturity of his game, which I’m predicting to settle under a full off-season with Juan Carlos Ferrero.

Trollope

But what we’re debating here is not who’s rising more steadily towards sustained career success. That could very well be Sascha. What we’re discussing is who will win a Grand Slam title first. And all it takes is catching fire in a single fortnight to do it. And I see Kyrgios being the one.

Although Zverev is the more consistent of the pair, I would argue Kyrgios’ highest level is better than the German’s. More raw firepower, perhaps slightly more comfortable on the biggest stages, and a little more shotmaking flair. Kyrgios can, when playing at his best, render opponents completely hapless. I’m not sure Zverev quite has that ability.

Much like Ostapenko caught fire at the French Open this year and hit everybody off the court, Kyrgios could easily do the same. He believes he can beat anybody (provided he avoids facing Andy Murray), and he has the deep Grand Slam runs already on his CV. He knows he’s only been a few matches away from winning the whole damn thing.

If he finds himself in a good physical and mental state during the Slams next year, watch out.