Re: "Every generation is better than the previous one. The game is always evolving"
For the record, I personally don't see any of the new generation so far as having more potential/talent than Serena, and I would only consider any of them to be greater than her if they exceed her achievements.
My point is (even if it's not the most eloquent point I've ever made) is that, in debates comparing Serena to Graf/Navratilova/Evert, many people (not always Serena fans) are quick to say that, even though Serena has achieved less, her achievements have more weight simply because this era is (so the theory goes) stronger and better due to sport always evolving. And my point is, if you take that argument to its logical conclusion, those same people would have to say that if Azarenka/Kvitova/Stephens/Keys/Vekic/whoever got to 10 Slams or something, they would surely have to be considered better than Serena (again, ONLY going by the logic that they're applying to comparisons between Serena and former generations).
Don't worry, I didn't really think you did think that.
Still, helluva lot of trouble to go to to get up the noses of a few Serena fans. I actually think there is a more eloquent point lurking in here somewhere. Something along the lines that any comparison between players of different generations rests to some extent on assumptions that not everybody is likely to share. Which is why most GOAT discussions soon descend into silly bickering at cross purposes.