Sharapova would have beaten anybody? Right, because her level of play was something no woman has ever achieved on a clay court
Erranni is the weakest Slam finalist in the history of tennis. THE HISTORY OF TENNIS.
Also what I said about Davenport is not a contradiction. Her peak was between 1998-2000. Although she played well in late 2004 and early 2005, her power game was not as explosive and her mentality was way weaker than it was a few years prior. I don't care if she was ranked #1, Wozniacki was ranked #1, big deal. Also just because someone isn't at their "peak" doesn't mean they can't still play a great match, such as IW '05. Look at Serena, she is not the Serena of 2002 but she can still kill her opponents 6-1 6-0 in huge finals
Or Hingis, who was retired for years, came back playing like crap, but still managed to beat one of the "best" in under an hour in a T1 final
The list of examples goes on, a player can still summon great tennis even if they're past their peak.
Lindsay was also a HUGE choker by the time she started playing Maria, a problem she didn't have during her best days. That massive choke against Maria would have never happened in 1999 when she beat Steffi fucking Graf in a Wimbledon FINAL. Maria would have been done and dusted. As it stands, she is fortunate to have scraped by Lindsay when she did, because there is no doubt in my mind Lindsay does EVERYTHING better than Maria. Everything -- except for movement, but comparing the two slowest top players in the game is worthless. Sharapova is nothing but a poor man's Davenport. She is more opportunistic certainly, having mastered the art of vulturing.