Excellent analysis and commentary. I do agree Djokovic is in the conversation. But tennis is such a unique sport in that the way you play affects the spectator’s perception of expertise. Mohammed Ali was not a better boxer than many of his opponents. But he was a beautiful boxer that elevated the sport. No one has ever played tennis like Roger. He’s redefined what a tennis match should look like in an era of baseline bashing. He does things on court that no other players can equal (hello SABR). And he has the X factor that statistics don’t account for.

There is also presence. Djokovic plays with a chip on his shoulder. It’s driving him to pound his opponents into the ground. You can see it when he plays… there is almost no joy in his task. He may like winning, but he LOVES seeing the other guy lose more. He is the only seasoned player who stares down opponents during matches. He is another Connors… unrivalled desire to win at any cost, but no matter how many trophies he has, it’s not enough to fill the emptiness inside him. And it all comes out on the court with his machine like performance. Roger has cried on court after a loss, but there was absolutely NO animosity towards his winning opponent. Yes he wanted to win. But he is genuinely happy for others when they win.

And one last point… do you think a 34 year old Djokovic could beat a 28 year old in form Federer the way Roger took down Djoko at the Cinci Open prior to the U.S. Open?

Like you say, it is more than slam count… it is MUCH more.