C Connor Bedard (2023, 1st, CHI) Part 6

[Happyhary9]

Don't say that, the mob will come after you. Anything under 82 points will be a disappointment

Haha. You realize you completely didn't understand what he was saying. He means he won't be those guys current level as a rookie.
This is his prediction just like 2 pages back.
"Bedard coming into Chicago will definitely have his work cut out for him when it comes to producing and competing with the other elite talents in the NHL, but predicting he'll score less than a point per game when he'll be getting all the powerplay time and offensive opportunity to succeed in Chicago is grossly underrating the abilities of this player. The only way that happens is if he gets injured, otherwise I think he's getting 40+ and 90+ assuming a similar scoring trend we've seen these past few seasons league wide."

So he is nowhere close to your 50 point prediction. The real reason people are getting on you is your horrible take on Bedard's skating. Which is just awful.

The same people seem to want to knock on the kid. First it was the he is only like 5'8 160. Which was false. Now those people have somehow read scouts saying he doesn't have McDavid level speed to assuming that means he is an average skater.

The Kid probably just had the most dominant draft year season this decade. Only 2 comparable seasons were Crosby and McDavid. The reason people predict around ppg or so is because everyone else that was in his same level as a JR did that as well. He wasn't just a great JR player, he was absolutely dominant. He frigging scored a 143 points (1 other 100 point player in the WHL) on a bad team. Next closest was 86 points. Including Bedard Regina has 3 players drafted by the NHL. Probably the second best player on their team was Howe, who was 16/17 old who is a projected mid 1st next year. Throw in breaking a 30+ year old record as the highest scoring 17/draft year kid at a WJC-20. Then capped it of with 20 points in 7 playoff games. There is a reason he is labeled a "generational prospect" and not a franchise prospect.

 

[bigdog16]

Haha. You realize you completely didn't understand what he was saying. He means he won't be those guys current level as a rookie.
This is his prediction just like 2 pages back.
"Bedard coming into Chicago will definitely have his work cut out for him when it comes to producing and competing with the other elite talents in the NHL, but predicting he'll score less than a point per game when he'll be getting all the powerplay time and offensive opportunity to succeed in Chicago is grossly underrating the abilities of this player. The only way that happens is if he gets injured, otherwise I think he's getting 40+ and 90+ assuming a similar scoring trend we've seen these past few seasons league wide."

So he is nowhere close to your 50 point prediction. The real reason people are getting on you is your horrible take on Bedard's skating. Which is just awful.

The same people seem to want to knock on the kid. First it was the he is only like 5'8 160. Which was false. Now those people have somehow read scouts saying he doesn't have McDavid level speed to assuming that means he is an average skater.

The Kid probably just had the most dominant draft year season this decade. Only 2 comparable seasons were Crosby and McDavid. The reason people predict around ppg or so is because everyone else that was in his same level as a JR did that as well. He wasn't just a great JR player, he was absolutely dominant. He frigging scored a 143 points (1 other 100 point player in the WHL) on a bad team. Next closest was 86 points. Including Bedard Regina has 3 players drafted by the NHL. Probably the second best player on their team was Howe, who was 16/17 old who is a projected mid 1st next year. Throw in breaking a 30+ year old record as the highest scoring 17/draft year kid at a WJC-20. Then capped it of with 20 points in 7 playoff games. There is a reason he is labeled a "generational prospect" and not a franchise prospect.

Whats also going over your head is that I never said he was a bad skater. People claiming he is this elite skater, which he isnt. His skating will not stick out at the NHL level, thats my point.

 

[Happyhary9]

Whats also going over your head is that I never said he was a bad skater. People claiming he is this elite skater, which he isnt. His skating will not stick out at the NHL level, thats my point.

You called him average. Which is way off. He doesn't have elite top speed, but is still in the 75 percentile for NHL in speed. Then he has great burst. Elite quickness and edge work. Then his on puck skating is Elite. His mind/hands can keep up with his feet. Again I showed multiple scouting reports that all said he right there as an elite skater overall. Just because you lack a single elite aspect of skating (top end speed), doesn't mean you are not an outstanding skater. As one scout puts it he may not be a burner but he breaks ankles with his quickness and his ability to maintain high speeds while puck-handling. That is hockey speed. Adreas Athanasiou has wold class elite top end speed with out the puck. Put the puck on his stick, he has to slow down.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

It’s been very hard to find a comparison for Bedard, but I’ve settled on one.

He’s Steven Stamkos. Elite right handed shot from distance. Really does come on heavier than it looks. It’s not Ovechkin or Laine raw power, but it’s heavy and deceptive.

The playmaking, skating, sense is all NHL above average. It’s probably nothing outrageous, but won’t detract from his game.

Neither are really great defensive players or ultra gritty, but I also don’t think they are bad defensively or shy away from contact.

The differences are that he’s 2 1/2 or 3 inches shorter than Stamkos and is a better overall dangler. I expect he’ll have the career Stamkos would’ve had without the injuries. At his best, Stamkos had some dominant goal scoring seasons and was among the top 5-10 players in the world. I think that’s very doable for Bedard, and if he can avoid the injuries Stamkos has had, he can be that consistently during his career. I don’t view him as generational. Stamkos wasn’t either, but a good or even very good 1OA that had a long history of elite goal scoring before being drafted and should do the same within the NHL.

 

[wetcoast]

I meant in a foot race. Not hard to skate thru 5 guys standing still

You dont know if its holding him back or not because he hasnt played a game in the NHL yet

One can take an educated and reasonable guess, my guess is that you probably have zero interest in scouting and it makes me wonder why you even spend time in a prospect thread since nothing can be gained since they haven't played in the NHL?

 

[hamzarocks]

It’s been very hard to find a comparison for Bedard, but I’ve settled on one.

He’s Steven Stamkos. Elite right handed shot from distance. Really does come on heavier than it looks. It’s not Ovechkin or Laine raw power, but it’s heavy and deceptive.

The playmaking, skating, sense is all NHL above average. It’s probably nothing outrageous, but won’t detract from his game.

Neither are really great defensive players or ultra gritty, but I also don’t think they are bad defensively or shy away from contact.

The differences are that he’s 2 1/2 or 3 inches shorter than Stamkos and is a better overall dangler. I expect he’ll have the career Stamkos would’ve had without the injuries. At his best, Stamkos had some dominant goal scoring seasons and was among the top 5-10 players in the world. I think that’s very doable for Bedard, and if he can avoid the injuries Stamkos has had, he can be that consistently during his career. I don’t view him as generational. Stamkos wasn’t either, but a good or even very good 1OA that had a long history of elite goal scoring before being drafted and should do the same within the NHL.

Way way to low of a comparison

Bedard is a generational prospect

He blew out guys like Marner, Laf, Hughes out of the water for production in his draft year.

He was above an eichel, Matthews as well.

His Reg season + WJC + playoffs were mcdavid or better.

Stamkos being the outcome for bedard would be a disapointment. As a prospect he is much more dynamic and overall offensviely capable

 

[EbonyRaptor]

hfboards - a place where a pissing match can break out at any time and last for days.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Way way to low of a comparison

Bedard is a generational prospect

He blew out guys like Marner, Laf, Hughes out of the water for production in his draft year.

He was above an eichel, Matthews as well.

His Reg season + WJC + playoffs were mcdavid or better.

Stamkos being the outcome for bedard would be a disapointment. As a prospect he is much more dynamic and overall offensviely capable

No, he’s not. People say this every year about players. They get excited about the romanticism of the draft. Before Bedard was Lafreniere and Hughes and Matthews and Eichel. All considered borderline generational. None have been. Throw in Dahlin too, if you want to add a defenseman. There were people at times that suggested Wright and Laine could be generational.

It hasn’t even been 10 drafts since McDavid. We’ve started lowering the bar too much. The only guy I remotely consider in that discussion as generational among that group as a prospect was Dahlin, and that’s because we hadn’t seen a better defenseman prospect in a long time. At least 10 drafts, but some also said defenseman aren’t as valuable as forwards on ELC’s and that’s why he couldn’t, which was a legit argument. I’d say he was borderline (based on how to rate defenseman) and the rest were under the borderline bar. It cheapens what players like McDavid are to call the others since them generational.

 

[Mathieukferland]

Way way to low of a comparison

Bedard is a generational prospect

He blew out guys like Marner, Laf, Hughes out of the water for production in his draft year.

He was above an eichel, Matthews as well.

His Reg season + WJC + playoffs were mcdavid or better.

Stamkos being the outcome for bedard would be a disapointment. As a prospect he is much more dynamic and overall offensviely capable

Stamkos I don’t think is good stylistic comparison for Bédard, but production wise I think if Stamkos doesn’t have injury trouble you’re looking at a top 20 player/top 5 goal scorer of all time; scoring 50 in an age 20 season is remarkable, and prior to all his lower body injury his skating was amongst the league’s best.

It’s been very hard to find a comparison for Bedard, but I’ve settled on one.

He’s Steven Stamkos.

Interestingly, Bédard himself compares himself to Kaprizov, which I think is a more apt comparison from a stylistic point of view, apart from Bédard’s shot being perhaps the best ever from a prospect

(at 5:50)

 

[prongertheman9]

No, he’s not. People say this every year about players. They get excited about the romanticism of the draft. Before Bedard was Lafreniere and Hughes and Matthews and Eichel. All considered borderline generational. None have been. Throw in Dahlin too, if you want to add a defenseman. There were people at times that suggested Wright and Laine could be generational.

It hasn’t even been 10 drafts since McDavid. We’ve started lowering the bar too much. The only guy I remotely consider in that discussion as generational among that group as a prospect was Dahlin, and that’s because we hadn’t seen a better defenseman prospect in a long time. At least 10 drafts, but some also said defenseman aren’t as valuable as forwards on ELC’s and that’s why he couldn’t, which was a legit argument. I’d say he was borderline (based on how to rate defenseman) and the rest were under the borderline bar. It cheapens what players like McDavid are to call the others since them generational.

Nobody was talking about the players you mentioned like they are talking about Bedard. Nor did any of them have the same pre-draft body of work. how are you still coming back for more after having embarrassing Bedard takes for the last 2 years. Just take your L already. The only comparisons in the last 20 years are McDavid and Crosby. That’s it.

 

[Happyhary9]

It’s been very hard to find a comparison for Bedard, but I’ve settled on one.

He’s Steven Stamkos. Elite right handed shot from distance. Really does come on heavier than it looks. It’s not Ovechkin or Laine raw power, but it’s heavy and deceptive.

The playmaking, skating, sense is all NHL above average. It’s probably nothing outrageous, but won’t detract from his game.

Neither are really great defensive players or ultra gritty, but I also don’t think they are bad defensively or shy away from contact.

The differences are that he’s 2 1/2 or 3 inches shorter than Stamkos and is a better overall dangler. I expect he’ll have the career Stamkos would’ve had without the injuries. At his best, Stamkos had some dominant goal scoring seasons and was among the top 5-10 players in the world. I think that’s very doable for Bedard, and if he can avoid the injuries Stamkos has had, he can be that consistently during his career. I don’t view him as generational. Stamkos wasn’t either, but a good or even very good 1OA that had a long history of elite goal scoring before being drafted and should do the same within the NHL.

The Hockey IQ and playmaking of Bedard is on a whole different level then Stamkos.

 

[Happyhary9]

No, he’s not. People say this every year about players. They get excited about the romanticism of the draft. Before Bedard was Lafreniere and Hughes and Matthews and Eichel. All considered borderline generational. None have been. Throw in Dahlin too, if you want to add a defenseman. There were people at times that suggested Wright and Laine could be generational.

It hasn’t even been 10 drafts since McDavid. We’ve started lowering the bar too much. The only guy I remotely consider in that discussion as generational among that group as a prospect was Dahlin, and that’s because we hadn’t seen a better defenseman prospect in a long time. At least 10 drafts, but some also said defenseman aren’t as valuable as forwards on ELC’s and that’s why he couldn’t, which was a legit argument. I’d say he was borderline (based on how to rate defenseman) and the rest were under the borderline bar. It cheapens what players like McDavid are to call the others since them generational.

Not a single on of those guys were called generational prospects in there draft year by actual scouts. A few HF posters calling them that doesn't = scouts calling them that.

A crap load of actual NHL scouts call Bedard a generational prospect. He also had generational production to back it up none of those guys did. The actual things that Bedard has accomplished at JR/international level have been done by a handful of people ever.

Here is some actual scouts comments on Bedard.

Dan Marr.
Connor Bedard holds the title as the best draft-eligible prospect that I have scouted, as were other unique, elite talents before him such as Connor McDavid and Sidney Crosby," Marr said

David Gregory
"I saw Sidney Crosby and I didn't think I'd ever see a junior player that would be as dominant as that, and then I saw Connor McDavid and thought I'd never see another player that dominant. But here comes Connor Bedard," Central Scouting director David Gregory said. "It's really amazing what he can do, and those other guys had good players on their teams. I'm not saying Bedard doesn't, but those teams that Sid and McDavid played on had some stacked teams. ... Regina, to me, was not as stacked but were a good team with lots of good players.

"Bedard was bringing them along as this younger player in the league. I hate to be on the fence and not give a definitive answer, but I'd say those are the three that I saw and said, 'I'll never see another one like that again.'"

Pat Sullivan
"Past players that stood out to me were Crosby, McDavid and Nathan MacKinnon, but Bedard did something those guys couldn't do in the World Juniors at the same age," Sullivan said. "Seeing what he did at World Juniors was bigger than huge. But the thing is, everybody's waiting to see how it translates to the NHL. The reality is he's been doing this since he's been 9 years old.

"I know those other players did that too, but Bedard, to me, has taken it to an extra level at the same age and that's been the difference between Bedard and the rest of the players I've seen in the past."

Those are long time NHL scouts, not some HF boards posters hyping up a kid based on some highlights on YouTube.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Nobody was talking about the players you mentioned like they are talking about Bedard. Nor did any of them have the same pre-draft body of work. how are you still coming back for more after having embarrassing Bedard takes for the last 2 years. Just take your L already. The only comparisons in the last 20 years are McDavid and Crosby. That’s it.

There's no L to take. I said a year ago and two years ago the same thing, and nothing has changed. You are just mad, as you've often been, that Bedard is not rationally viewed as generational when you take the fan hat off. Neither were all those other players I mentioned, but I'm sure you were hypnotized by the hype back then for at least one or two of them too. It makes sense for the hockey world to hype up a player as generational player every year, or at least every few years. That's because they know there are people who have no principles and think it makes rational sense that there are going to be 7 generational players in a generation. They'll always justify it as an exception.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Not a single on of those guys were called generational prospects in there draft year by actual scouts. A few HF posters calling them that doesn't = scouts calling them that.

A crap load of actual NHL scouts call Bedard a generational prospect. He also had generational production to back it up none of those guys did. The actual things that Bedard has accomplished at JR/international level have been done by a handful of people ever.

Here is some actual scouts comments on Bedard.

Dan Marr.
Connor Bedard holds the title as the best draft-eligible prospect that I have scouted, as were other unique, elite talents before him such as Connor McDavid and Sidney Crosby," Marr said

David Gregory
"I saw Sidney Crosby and I didn't think I'd ever see a junior player that would be as dominant as that, and then I saw Connor McDavid and thought I'd never see another player that dominant. But here comes Connor Bedard," Central Scouting director David Gregory said. "It's really amazing what he can do, and those other guys had good players on their teams. I'm not saying Bedard doesn't, but those teams that Sid and McDavid played on had some stacked teams. ... Regina, to me, was not as stacked but were a good team with lots of good players.

"Bedard was bringing them along as this younger player in the league. I hate to be on the fence and not give a definitive answer, but I'd say those are the three that I saw and said, 'I'll never see another one like that again.'"

Pat Sullivan
"Past players that stood out to me were Crosby, McDavid and Nathan MacKinnon, but Bedard did something those guys couldn't do in the World Juniors at the same age," Sullivan said. "Seeing what he did at World Juniors was bigger than huge. But the thing is, everybody's waiting to see how it translates to the NHL. The reality is he's been doing this since he's been 9 years old.

"I know those other players did that too, but Bedard, to me, has taken it to an extra level at the same age and that's been the difference between Bedard and the rest of the players I've seen in the past."

Those are long time NHL scouts, not some HF boards posters hyping up a kid based on some highlights on YouTube.

Were you around for all those players I named? There was a lot of people saying the same things. Same exact arguments that this time it's different. Hint: it wasn't.

Could it be a little more with Bedard? Sure, but being even if so the most hyped up of the players below the generational threshold doesn't make one generational.

And truthfully, I think HF is a good representation of things. We don't need to insult the posters of this website too much. They usually have a good pulse of how the hockey world views things. As for those specific examples, I don't even know who those people are with the exception of Marr.

 

[Offtheboard412]

It hasn’t even been 10 drafts since McDavid. We’ve started lowering the bar too much.

"It's only been 5 years since Gretzky came into the league. No way this Lemieux kid can be generational."

Not saying Bedard is Lemieux level it's possible for 2 all time greats to come in within 10 years of each other. Lindros was drafted 7 years after Lemieux, and Crosby and Ovechkin were just 2 years apart. Not to mention Jagr in 1990.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

"It's only been 5 years since Gretzky came into the league. No way this Lemieux kid can be generational."

Not saying Bedard is Lemieux level it's possible for 2 all time greats to come in within 10 years of each other. Lindros was drafted 7 years after Lemieux, and Crosby and Ovechkin were just 2 years apart. Not to mention Jagr in 1990.

Yes, you can have two generational players in a draft. Distributions in data sets aren't always even.

However, does generational mean generational or not?

Be consistent on this. If you think Bedard is the standard of a generational player and it's been like 8 drafts between him and McDavid, wouldn't it be logical that we'll go about 12 years to the next? You're ready to say Bedard is so good that some 12 year old kid you've never heard of won't be generational 6 years from now?

Because if you're to be logically consistent, that's what it'd mean. It'd mean you think he is so far beyond questioning of his ability when he was drafted that we probably won't see another player at his level for about a generation.

 

[Happyhary9]

Were you around for all those players I named? There was a lot of people saying the same things. Same exact arguments that this time it's different. Hint: it wasn't.

Could it be a little more with Bedard? Sure, but being even if so the most hyped up of the players below the generational threshold doesn't make one generational.

And truthfully, I think HF is a good representation of things. We don't need to insult the posters of this website too much. They usually have a good pulse of how the hockey world views things. As for those specific examples, I don't even know who those people are with the exception of Marr.

Yes I was around for all those and many before. And none of those guys had close to the actual scouts rankings them in the category of Crosby/McDavid/Bedard. HF hype and Twitter hype is not the same at all. And some clickbaiters tying to hype up guys. The top scouts and guys didn't. Also not my fault you don't know those scouts. All those guys have been scouting hockey for 20+ years with teams and scouting services. That was just a few examples.they basically all mention 3 guys as the same type of prospects only Crosby/McDavid/Bedard. All those others were listed as franchise type prospects.

Also the fact that Bedard is the actual one with "Generational production". Far better production they any of those other guys outside Crosby/McDavid. But I guess that is just hype/luck as well.

Yes, you can have two generational players in a draft. Distributions in data sets aren't always even.

However, does generational mean generational or not?

Be consistent on this. If you think Bedard is the standard of a generational player and it's been like 8 drafts between him and McDavid, wouldn't it be logical that we'll go about 12 years to the next? You're ready to say Bedard is so good that some 12 year old kid you've never heard of won't be generational 6 years from now?

Because if you're to be logically consistent, that's what it'd mean. It'd mean you think he is so far beyond questioning of his ability when he was drafted that we probably won't see another player at his level for about a generation.

Full on spin now.

 

[Offtheboard412]

Yes, you can have two generational players in a draft. Distributions in data sets aren't always even.

However, does generational mean generational or not?

Be consistent on this. If you think Bedard is the standard of a generational player and it's been like 8 drafts between him and McDavid, wouldn't it be logical that we'll go about 12 years to the next? You're ready to say Bedard is so good that some 12 year old kid you've never heard of won't be generational 6 years from now?

Because if you're to be logically consistent, that's what it'd mean. It'd mean you think he is so far beyond questioning of his ability when he was drafted that we probably won't see another player at his level for about a generation.

Were Gretzky and Lemieux generational or not in your opinion? Were Crosby and Ovechkin? I'm not strict about there only being 1 generational player at a time. I think there can be 2 at the same time as has happened before.

As for Bedard his numbers speak for themselves. Only 2 other prospects in the last 20 years have produced the numbers he has at his age in junior; Crosby and McDavid. I would be quite surprised to see another prospect with an equally or more impressive pre draft resume come up in less than about 8-10 years.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Yes I was around for all those and many before. And none of those guys had close to the actual scouts rankings them in the category of Crosby/McDavid/Bedard. HF hype and Twitter hype is not the same at all. And some clickbaiters tying to hype up guys. The top scouts and guys didn't. Also not my fault you don't know those scouts. All those guys have been scouting hockey for 20+ years with teams and scouting services. That was just a few examples.they basically all mention 3 guys as the same type of prospects only Crosby/McDavid/Bedard. All those others were listed as franchise type prospects.

Also the fact that Bedard is the actual one with "Generational production". Far better production they any of those other guys outside Crosby/McDavid. But I guess that is just hype/luck as well.


Full on spin now.

Spin? It's reality that there should be about one generational player per ten years.

Here's the thing about the production argument, this is where it really undermines the argument that he is generational. If you want to say subjectively by your eye test and your recollection that Bedard was the most hyped by the hockey world and the most talented of a generation, that's your opinion. You are entitled to it. There's no way for me to refute your eye test.

When you start saying his production is generational, that's when it gets very flimsy. All these players were breaking these records. There's literally a dude in his own draft breaking as many of these records. The best players in an age group in youth hockey break records. By what measure is his production demonstrably better than those players to make him generational?

And I'm not even sure Crosby, Ovechkin, and McDavid were generational due to production. It was based on a subjective view of their skillsets that everyone seemed to agree on.

Were Gretzky and Lemieux generational or not in your opinion? Were Crosby and Ovechkin? I'm not strict about there only being 1 generational player at a time. I think there can be 2 at the same time as has happened before.

As for Bedard his numbers speak for themselves. Only 2 other prospects in the last 20 years have produced the numbers he has at his age in junior; Crosby and McDavid. I would be quite surprised to see another prospect with an equally or more impressive pre draft resume come up in less than about 8-10 years.

Yes, those players were. I never said you can't have more than one generational player in a generation. I'm saying that if you want to be logically consistent, there shouldn't be more than one every ten years. Of course, it's not going to be an even distribution, but when you add it all up, it should come out to about 1 every 10 years.

 

[Offtheboard412]

Yes, those players were. I never said you can't have more than one generational player in a generation. I'm saying that if you want to be logically consistent, there shouldn't be more than one every ten years. Of course, it's not going to be an even distribution, but when add it all up, it should come out to about 1 every 10 years.

Ok. It's been 8 years since McDavid was drafted. If you think there should be one about every 10 years then who is the prospect coming up in the next 2 years who will be generational?

 

[Happyhary9]

Spin? It's reality that there should be about one generational player per ten years.

Here's the thing about the production argument, this is where it really undermines the argument that he is generational. If you want to say subjectively by your eye test and your recollection that Bedard was the most hyped by the hockey world and the most talented of a generation, that's your opinion. You are entitled to it. There's no way for me to refute your eye test.

When you start saying his production is generational, that's when it gets very flimsy. All these players were breaking these records. There's literally a dude in his own draft breaking as many of these records. The best players in an age group in youth hockey break records. By what measure is his production demonstrably better than those players to make him generational?

And I'm not even sure Crosby, Ovechkin, and McDavid were generational due to production. It was based on a subjective view of their skillsets that everyone seemed to agree on.


Yes, those players were. I never said you can't have more than one generational player in a generation. I'm saying that if you want to be logically consistent, there shouldn't be more than one every ten years. Of course, it's not going to be an even distribution, but when you add it all up, it should come out to about 1 every 10 years.

On a long term average yes 1 in 10 for average. But in real life it could be 3 in 10 years then followed up by 1 in 30.

No generational production is more then just records. It is also dominating your peers. Crosby/McDavid/Bedard were well above anyone else in their respective leagues. Bedard just broke a 30+ year old record at WJC-20. He broke a WHL draft year PPG record set in the 1980s (much higher scoring then). He lead the WHL in points by 36 points, while playing in 11 less games. If he would have played the same amount of games it would been a 60+ point gap. Let that sink in. He also lead by 21 goals in also 11 less gp. If he played those extra games that's over a 30 goal difference between 1st and second. In the history of the CHL there has been only a handful of playes ever dominant their league like that at 17. Hence generational production and why scouts say he had one of the best 17 year old draft years in the history of the CHL.

Now go pull up guys like Lafreniere or McKinnon. Compare them to Bedard or Crosby or McDavid. You will find a massive difference.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

On a long term average yes 1 in 10 for average. But in real life it could be 3 in 10 years then followed up by 1 in 30.

No generational production is more then just records. It is also dominating your peers. Crosby/McDavid/Bedard were well above anyone else in their respective leagues. Bedard just broke a 30+ year old record at WJC-20. He broke a WHL draft year PPG record set in the 1980s (much higher scoring then). He lead the WHL in points by 36 points, while playing in 11 less games. If he would have played the same amount of games it would been a 60+ point gap. Let that sink in. He also lead by 21 goals in also 11 less gp. If he played those extra games that's over a 30 goal difference between 1st and second. In the history of the CHL there has been only a handful of playes ever dominant their league like that at 17. Hence generational production and why scouts say he had one of the best 17 year old draft years in the history of the CHL.

Now go pull up guys like Lafreniere or McKinnon. Compare them to Bedard or Crosby or McDavid. You will find a massive difference.

Okay, here's an easy hole to pick. You could say Lafreniere dominated his peers more in the CHL than Bedard did. Only other two-time CHL player of the year was Crosby.

Before you react with outrage, I don't think Lafreniere was a level beyond Bedard, but these production arguments for generational don't suffice. They are completely meaningless because we are comparing across leagues. If people can't even agree how to order the three CHL leagues, let alone the ones in other countries, how are we supposed to come up with a good way of measuring production?

This is a comparison of them as prospects. If you want to compare production in the NHL, sure. If a guy is the leading scorer year after year in the NHL and is winning the biggest trophies in the game, you can argue that they were generational players in the NHL. It's a lot easier to make those arguments when all the players are in the same league. But in this section of the website it's about pre-draft, and this discussion about Bedard potentially being generational is a subjective one. There's no way to make the generational pre-draft argument an objective one. It's just too hard to accomplish, given the many dynamics to it.

 

[blundluntman]

Okay, here's an easy hole to pick. You could say Lafreniere dominated his peers more in the CHL than Bedard did. Only other two-time CHL player of the year was Crosby.

Before you react with outrage, I don't think Lafreniere was a level beyond Bedard, but these production arguments for generational don't suffice. They are completely meaningless because we are comparing across leagues. If people can't even agree how to order the three CHL leagues, let alone the ones in other countries, how are we supposed to come up with a good way of measuring production?

This is a comparison of them as prospects. If you want to compare production in the NHL, sure. If a guy is the leading scorer year after year in the NHL and is winning the biggest trophies in the game, you can argue that they were generational players in the NHL. It's a lot easier to make those arguments when all the players are in the same league. But in this section of the website it's about pre-draft, and this discussion about Bedard potentially being generational is a subjective one. There's no way to make the generational pre-draft argument an objective one. It's just too hard to accomplish, given the many dynamics to it.

The problem with this is that there's a very significant level of separation between the gap Lafreniere had between 2nd compared to Bedard. Lafreniere outscored the next closest player by 13 points, Bedard was 36 points ahead. Bedard's ppg was also significantly higher.

Even if you say it's hard to judge the level of dominance across CHL leagues, what about the WJC? That's a stage where all of the best prospects compete against one another. Bedard outperformed nearly every prospect in WJC history. He's consistently taken his play to a level higher than any prospect outside of McDavid and Crosby when you compare him to his peers in the CHL and prospects all across the globe.

Outside of stats, there is also the eye test and the overall report of scouts. Lafreniere didn't have any particular skillsets that were significantly exceptional according to scouts. That's not the case with Bedard. When you watch his games, there are overwhelmingly obvious displays of extremely elite skills such as his shot, hands, hockey iq and playmaking. There are definitely ways to measure prospects against one another. All the scouts have reported Bedard as being on the level of Crosby and McDavid as a prospect. Lafreniere was never considered to be on that level by the majority of scouts.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

The problem with this is that there's a very significant level of separation between the gap Lafreniere had between 2nd compared to Bedard. Lafreniere outscored the next closest player by 13 points, Bedard was 36 points ahead. Bedard's ppg was also significantly higher.

Even if you say it's hard to judge the level of dominance across CHL leagues, what about the WJC? That's a stage where all of the best prospects compete against one another. Bedard outperformed nearly every prospect in WJC history. He's consistently taken his play to a level higher than any prospect outside of McDavid and Crosby when you compare him to his peers in the CHL and prospects all across the globe.

Outside of stats, there is also the eye test and the overall report of scouts. Lafreniere didn't have any particular skillsets that were significantly exceptional according to scouts. That's not the case with Bedard. When you watch his games, there are overwhelmingly obvious displays of extremely elite skills such as his shot, hands, hockey iq and playmaking. There are definitely ways to measure prospects against one another. All the scouts have reported Bedard as being on the level of Crosby and McDavid as a prospect. Lafreniere was never considered to be on that level by the majority of scouts.

Well, Bedard is playing in a watered-down WJC field. International hockey hasn't been the same since the war. You can't remove a top 5 nation in a sport that has very limited depth to begin with, and expect it to not significantly impact the overall field, so I think and have said this in many places that we can't look at international hockey as what we once did to measure player performance.

And that's inherently the problem. There are so many of these challenges that exist when you start to try to make this about production. There are so many variables in play that people are going to attach different meanings to. You or someone else will now argue back how it doesn't take away from his performance. Cool, and that's your opinion. We just can't all agree on production.

 

[Mrfenn92]

It’s just getting sadder here I see.