The Froome-Contador comparison has to take into account that Contador is a little older, and peaked mostly before Froome came onto the scene. He didn't get to race Froome (or Wiggins, who of course he consistently beat easily in previous Tours) in 2012 (for other-forum reasons, of course). In 2013, Contador may not have completely recovered from the long layoff, or he just may have had a bad year, for whatever reason. In 2014, they both crashed out of a Tour that either might have won (or not, given Nibs's dominance), but Contador prevailed in the Vuelta. In 2015, Contador won the Giro. Even without that, he might not have been favored to beat Froome in the TDF that year, but surely the Giro severely handicapped his chances. He was probably past his peak in 2015, and certainly was in 2016, even if he hadn't crashed out again.
So most of the Froome-Contador matchups have featured peak Froome vs. past peak Contador. The only year that Froome prevailed when Contador was at his peak age was 2013. Nobody ever talks about all the GTs Contador was winning when Froome was pre-peak. Contador won his first TDF at age 24, and the last year when he might have won it was probably 2014, when he was 31. He was still a strong contender at age 32. In that respect, his career has been similar to that of other multiple Tour winners, reaching the top before age 25, and finished not long after 30. An eight year reign at the top, though he lost two years from the CAS decision (in stripped titles + suspension), so effectively six.
Froome won his first Tour at age 28, and was probably at the top at age 33, when he won the Giro, and likely would have won the Tour if he hadn't raced the Giro. A six year reign, but if you give him 2012, when he probably would have won if he had been the leader, and last year, he's had an eight year reign. They've both won seven GTs, but Froome has won more Tours, and has three other podiums. Most of that difference reflects the full eight years at the top, vs. six for Contador. If you want to argue Froome over Contador, I think those eight vs. six years are the difference, rather than any distinction between what they were at their peak. If you give Contador those two years, he has two more GTs, and his GT palmares are pretty even with Froome's I think.
History says that even without the accident, Froome at 35 would not likely be the strongest rider any more, but if he should confound the skeptics and win or even put up a very strong challenge this year, you could argue that he's had an even longer reign at the top.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram