I just don't see it in any of the current D. Look at Orr's numbers in the link below. In a span of 4 seasons he had 61%, 87%, 49%, 78% more production than the second highest scoring D. Nobody is touching that. For example lets say the second highest scoring D in the league has 90 pts. For someone to match one of Orr's relatively least productive seasons the top scoring D would have to score 137 pts and 172 pts to match the most productive season.
Having seen Ray Bourque's entire career yes Quinn Hughes is under whelming in comparison. Compared to anyone else Quinn Hughes is very good. He came into a much worse situation than Makar and at every age has been BETTER than Makar. Hughes is a year younger and in a much worse development...
forums.hfboards.com
I mean I think your'e setting yourself up to say there's no way any current player could ever be generational. I dont' think it's possible tohave that big of a gap anymore because the overall talent has come up and better training, coaching, tactics, etc, all level things out a bit. You still have guys who are clearly stop of the league elite and better than other players (Like McDavid) but the kinds of gaps in talent we saw in the days of Orr, Gretzky, Lemieux, etc, are not possible in the modern game IMO.
So you're left basically saying that no one can ever be generational again which feels more like hero worshiping the past than evaluating the new players fairly
e: regarding Fox it'll be fascinating to watch his career and I wonder how his game will age. His hockey IQ is so stupid good that I could see him having a lidstrom like career and being that good deep into the end of it