So I have actually written several responses on Zhukov, especially this one which looks at the complications in evaluating his legacy due to the nature of the Soviet system, and specifically his treatment within it.

As for Rommel, I've also touched a little bit on him which you might be interested in, although it mostly focuses on the shaping of his legacy by the British, the "Rommel Myth", and is less focused on his actual military accomplishments, although there are a few more answers in this regard in the FAQ.

As for Patton, well, I have opinions about him, but I'll leave his merits to someone else.

If I may add another military hat into the ring here, is there an assessment of Montgomery's actual prowess?

Everything I have read seems to suggest it was myth and ego before substance when it comes to Montgomery, with other British leaders, such as Slim, being equally apt despite being left out of the light. He seemed like a brash and somewhat unworkable man from my admittedly limited reading, and yet is held in a somewhat revered role. Is it time to take the iconoclasitc position and tearing the image down?