I was going for an overall general point and instead u focused in on two of the few examples I provided. The heart of what I was trying to say was that until someone clearly defines greatest or gives us an agreeable way to measure it, it's all subjective. You didn't even bother commenting on how Serena holds the record for longest gap between first and last slam. Some could argue that longevity is one of the most important attributes when looking for an all time great. And my point is that u can not say it isn't just because that's a fact that u don't give the same weight as someone else does.
I referenced Martina and Chrisies records because most people concede that Graf and Navrat are the greatest. If there can be an argument for Steffi who Is a few slams behind Court- and if there can be an argument for Navrat who is four slams behind Graf, then there could be an argument for Serena who is three behind Navrat.
Again I have made my position clear three times- I don't think Rena is the games greatest, but I still maintain an argument can be made. Ask yourself why John McEnroe, Azarenka, Clijsters (who has actually played both Steffi and Serena)- even Chris Evert herself said that 'Serena is arguably the Greatest player ever'- ask urself why these people would make such claims. Whether u see it or not arguments are ALREADY being made. That's where we are right NOW. I happen to weigh in on the side that says no, as u do- but that doesn't change the fact that the debate has already begun- like it or not my friend.
Navratilova's 18 slam singles title is not only not even close to a record, but not one of the arguments used for her being the GOAT. In fact if anything it is one of the counter arguments used by those who dont feel she is, especialy when Court has 24, Graf has 22, Evert is tied with her despite missed out on alot of additional Australian and French titles by not playing those events in the 70s back when that was the norm and while she was the defacto dominant player, and considering Wills managed 19 despite never playing the Australian Open. The many argument towards her being the GOAT are her record 9 Wimbledon titles, her 6 Wimbledons in a row, her 6 slams in a row, her unmatched doubles record, her record 167 singles titles, her unmatched 2 year dominance of 83-84, her umatched 5 year dominance of 82-86, her record number of WTA Championships, her epic rivalry and 13 match win streak vs fellow GOAT Chris Evert. Her winning 18 slams is never brought up as to why she is the GOAT, if anything one of the few arguments used against her being it by some. Yet you are saying 15 slams is one of Serena's best arguments as far as achievements for arguably being the GOAT, or an example of a record she is close to. Sorry but no.
By your logic we could say if Serena is possibly the GOAT, then King only being 3 slams behind Serena could be argued as the GOAT just because of her 12 slams (despite that we have now reached the point of being only half of the record, this supposably could now be an argument for King being GOAT).
Now your longest time gap between slams is a valid point and a valid record. That is a good start. I admit you reminded me of that one as I had not thought of it previously. The most hard court slams mark which she should reach would be another, although less of one than the former as the # of greats even eligible for it are very limited to date.
So in other words she is planting the seeds, but she has alot of work to do to make them blossom.
As for the people saying she is GOAT you refer to McEnroe is one of the biggest homers, bandwagoners, and hype blowers in the game today. He even was saying Nadal was the GOAT in the middle of last year but since Djokovic began beating Nadal all those times he has dumped Nadal entirely, and is back on the Federer GOAT bandwagon, even though Nadal since that time has added the same # of slams (1) and many more slam finals to his then resume as Federer has. I am not saying I think Nadal ever was the GOAT, just evidence of how he overhypes the current best (which then was perceived to be Nadal) and jumps from one stance to another. He even tried to argue Venus was the best ever in 2001. He insists Djokovic is the best return of server over Connors and Agassi, all because he can return mostly 110-120 mph serves from a slew of baseliners with mediocre serves today. As for Clijsters and Azarenka they make themselves look better by calling Serena GOAT. Azarenka can be like "oh I am so great, I took the greatest ever deep to a 3rd set, I am one of the best ever too and would win 20 slams in another era". Davenport once tried to argue Venus was the GOAT too, and we all can figure out why.