Jump to content

DLDT: Draft Lottery Discussion Thread, 4-30-2016, 8:00pm est


WildCard

Recommended Posts

Dunno.  I'm asking because Sittler is on the very cusp of my hockey memory, and I remember seeming to think he was a big deal.

 

he played around the same time and for about as along as Gilbert, i believe.

 

without looking, i'd guess they had about the same number of goals and that #11 would've had significantly more assists.

 

gilbert = elite. but not generational. 

 

/ducks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

he played around the same time and for about as along as Gilbert, i believe.

 

without looking, i'd guess they had about the same number of goals and that #11 would've had significantly more assists.

 

gilbert = elite. but not generational. 

 

/ducks

 

I don't even buy into the term "generational" anymore, so no worries.  When three players in two years are described as "generational," just ten years after another two players in two years are described as "generational," when people used the term to describe Lindros, when Gretzky and Lemieux overlapped for so long, the word just loses meaning.

 

What I'm really hoping for from millbank is a description of how Sittler was viewed at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Copy that.

 

Fwiw, I think McDavid is the first generational talent since ... Crosby?

 

I never thought of OV in those terms. Nor Pat Kane. Elite talents. Superstars.

 

Other than McDavid, seems like it's Gretzky, Lemieux, and, um, ... maybe Lindros? I'm not sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't we have a discussion trying to define "generational" before? I believe we ended up concluding it means something better than elite, not literally one player per generation.

 

Seems right. Not every generation gets a generational player. And it's possible that one generation could have two. Which is sorta goofy. 

 

But, anyway. When I think "generational," I think of, like, a very small handful of players. 

 

Say the word "elite" or "superstar," and there are dozens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems right. Not every generation gets a generational player. And it's possible that one generation could have two. Which is sorta goofy. 

 

But, anyway. When I think "generational," I think of, like, a very small handful of players. 

 

Say the word "elite" or "superstar," and there are dozens.

 

Agreed. In any case, I think you have to include Ovechkin. He's led the league in goal scoring 6 of his 11 seasons, including the last 4 in a row. After a cursory glance at hockey reference, it appears the only player to have led the league more frequently is Bobby Hull with 7 times. Hell, only Esposito matches Ovi's 6; even Gretzky only did it 5 times. He's also 5th all-time in goals per game behind Bossy, Denneney, Lemieux, and Dye. Considering the era, that's pretty spectacular.

 

Edit:  I should note, I have no clue how Denneney and Dye are, so as far as my brain is concerned Ovi is 3rd all time in goals per game :lol:

Edited by TrueBlueGED
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe Orr, Howe, Gretzky, Lemieux, and Sid are generational players. McDavid is a generational prospect but needs to string some years together before I call him a generational player. I call Lindros a generational prospect, but only an elite player.

 

Was Hasek generational?

 

 

Hasek was the best goalie ever to play in the NHL and maybe the best goalie ever to play hockey (Tretiak is the only one who comes close), so I don't know, supergenerational? Hypergenerational?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe Orr, Howe, Gretzky, Lemieux, and Sid are generational players. McDavid is a generational prospect but needs to string some years together before I call him a generational player. I call Lindros a generational prospect, but only an elite player.

 

Was Hasek generational?

I would say Hasek was because at his position there was no in the ballpark pretty much his entire career. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe Orr, Howe, Gretzky, Lemieux, and Sid are generational players. McDavid is a generational prospect but needs to string some years together before I call him a generational player. I call Lindros a generational prospect, but only an elite player.

 

Was Hasek generational?

 

Yes. Best goaltender of all time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm. I never got to watch Hasek play for the Sabres myself, so I wasn't sure how he compared to Roy and then (just later) Brodeur. Seems pretty clear-cut.

 

Roy was closer than Brodeur, but still not really close. Frankly, I don't think Brodeur even belongs in the same sentence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do people do this on other boards? See a huge debate about a rival and then go post good news about the rival? I don't really see the point in it other than antagonizing others

This was unecessary and if you knew Millbank you woudnt have stated the above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...