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

[blundluntman]

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.

So in what way would you say that you can determine whether a player is generational? Or do you believe it's impossible to do so until they play in the NHL? From what I've seen, I'd say he checks off each potential indicator and imo that should be enough of a reason to consider him generational. It's not like there are any questionable areas of his dominance/play, he's basically proven himself in every way afaict

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

So in what way would you say that you can determine whether a player is generational? Or do you believe it's impossible to do so until they play in the NHL? From what I've seen, I'd say he checks off each potential indicator and imo that should be enough of a reason to consider him generational. It's not like there are any questionable areas of his dominance/play, he's basically proven himself in every way afaict

It's a subjective measure of what you see with the eye-test. I guess it's different from everyone, which is why I'm not trying to infringe on your right to believe Bedard is generational. I'm merely expressing my view that he's not. When some people got mad that I said so, I only then pushed back on their view and said they've watered down the meaning.

How do you arrive at the subjective that one is generational (pre-draft)? I think it's one of those things where you know it when you see it. Sounds vague, but it should be obvious that a player has other-worldly talent in one area that hasn't been matched in the sport in a long time or never. Ovechkin's shot or McDavid's speed are two examples. With Bedard, the shot is his best asset, but is it like Ovechkin-caliber? I'd say no. And there are obvious limiting factors that effect his case. He's 5'10 (rounded up) with adequate skating/compete for his size. If you go the Crosby route of generational without the otherworldly asset in any one area, is Bedard really at that level of complete in every area of the game? Not sure he is. There are some minor limitations to how he plays. So in total, I think you get another player below the generational threshold, yet one that very reasonably could have a HOF career.

Now with the course of a hockey career, I think it's very fair to arrive at the conclusion that you can be generational based on stats and accolades. Thats because we are comparing players in the same arena. They all play in the NHL. They all compete for relatively the same awards. However, a generational career (impossible to discuss for a player who hasn't played an NHL game) and a generational prospect (relevant to a discussion of a just-drafted 1OA) are different discussions.

 

[blundluntman]

It's a subjective measure of what you see with the eye-test. I guess it's different from everyone, which is why I'm not trying to infringe on your right to believe Bedard is generational. I'm merely expressing my view that he's not. When some people got mad that I said so, I only then pushed back on their view and said they've watered down the meaning.

How do you arrive at the subjective that one is generational (pre-draft)? I think it's one of those things where you know it when you see it. Sounds vague, but it should be obvious that a player has other-worldly talent in one area that hasn't been matched in the sport in a long time or never. Ovechkin's shot or McDavid's speed are two examples. With Bedard, the shot is his best asset, but is it like Ovechkin-caliber? I'd say no. And there are obvious limiting factors that effect his case. He's 5'10 (rounded up) with adequate skating/compete for his size. If you go the Crosby route of generational without the otherworldly asset in any one area, is Bedard really at that level of complete in every area of the game? Not sure he is. There are some minor limitations to how he plays. So in total, I think you get another player below the generational threshold, yet one that very reasonably could have a HOF career.

Now with the course of a hockey career, I think it's very fair to arrive at the conclusion that you can be generational based on stats and accolades. Thats because we are comparing players in the same arena. They all play in the NHL. They all compete for relatively the same awards. However, a generational career (impossible to discuss for a player who hasn't played an NHL game) and a generational prospect (relevant to a discussion of a just-drafted 1OA) are different discussions.

I see, that's a fair viewpoint.

I can only speak for myself but when I see Bedard, I see a generational prospect and a generational superstar. I'd argue his shot is on the same level as Ovi's as far as power and accuracy are concerned. Maybe his one timer isn't quite as strong but he gets his shot off very quickly and has a great nose for high-scoring areas. I think his playmaking and vision are also very much exceptional and his hockey IQ/compete level are on the same level as a Crosby/McDavid imo. That's what leads me to believe he will be a generational player. Of course we'll have to see how he does at the NHL level but my gut tells me he's gonna dominate like a generational star.

As you said though, these projections vary depending on the individual's pov.

 

[ello]

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.

Even if it is "watered down", how come Bedard had more than twice the amount of points as the closest teammate of this?

 

[CallMeShaft]

Bedard had 23pts in 7 games at the last World Juniors at the age of 17.

Logan Cooley had the 2nd most in the tourney and, despite being over a year older, only managed 14pts in that span. Stankoven is over 2 years older and managed only 11pts. Wright was over a year older and only went PPG. Fantilli had 5 pts.

Take Stankoven's point totals, Wright's point totals, and Fantilli's point totals and add them all up together; that's what Bedard got, and he did it while being younger than any of them.

 

[prongertheman9]

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.

How do you write these essays and not even make one coherent point. Are you so upset about Lafreniere being a bust that you are unwilling to believe some hype actually might be warranted?

For what it's worth, Laf wasn't even on the same planet as Bedard as a prospect.

17 year old seasons:

Laf
Q 61GP 37-68-105
WJC 5GP 1-0-1

Bedard
WHL 57GP 71-72-143
WJC 7GP 9-14-23

 

[jj cale]

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.

Gotta disagree here, having to not play one game against Russia can't account for a 12 point difference between Mcdavid's 11 in his draft year WJC and Bedards 23 in his draft year WJC.

That's just too gargantuan a gap in production to wave off as a watered down result on one teams absence. I think you have to at least entertain the possibility that this player could just POSSIBLY be a generational player, I mean, the stats and the eye test both lend credibility to that opinion at the present moment.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

How do you write these essays and not even make one coherent point. Are you so upset about Lafreniere being a bust that you are unwilling to believe some hype actually might be warranted?

For what it's worth, Laf wasn't even on the same planet as Bedard as a prospect.

17 year old seasons:

Laf
Q 61GP 37-68-105
WJC 5GP 1-0-1

Bedard
WHL 57GP 71-72-143
WJC 7GP 9-14-23

Comes to a message board and complains about the length of a post. Amusing.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Gotta disagree here, having to not play one game against Russia can't account for a 12 point difference between Mcdavid's 11 in his draft year WJC and Bedards 23 in his draft year WJC.

That's just too gargantuan a gap in production to wave off as a watered down result on one teams absence. I think you have to at least entertain the possibility that this player could just POSSIBLY be a generational player, I mean, the stats and the eye test both lend credibility to that opinion at the present moment.

It’s not just one game against Russia. There’s a snowballing effect to it. It moves everyone up a place that they shouldn’t be in. International hockey has weak depth to begin with. It’s probably two easier games than it should be because it’s one easier group game and then one easier knockout game.

This applies to all players, so it’s not only about this one player, but putting up a ”historical” performance at the World Juniors now isn’t what it once was. We have to admit that, and can’t act like it’s all the same as it’s always been.

 

[hawksrule]

It's a subjective measure of what you see with the eye-test. I guess it's different from everyone, which is why I'm not trying to infringe on your right to believe Bedard is generational. I'm merely expressing my view that he's not. When some people got mad that I said so, I only then pushed back on their view and said they've watered down the meaning.

How do you arrive at the subjective that one is generational (pre-draft)? I think it's one of those things where you know it when you see it. Sounds vague, but it should be obvious that a player has other-worldly talent in one area that hasn't been matched in the sport in a long time or never. Ovechkin's shot or McDavid's speed are two examples. With Bedard, the shot is his best asset, but is it like Ovechkin-caliber? I'd say no. And there are obvious limiting factors that effect his case. He's 5'10 (rounded up) with adequate skating/compete for his size. If you go the Crosby route of generational without the otherworldly asset in any one area, is Bedard really at that level of complete in every area of the game? Not sure he is. There are some minor limitations to how he plays. So in total, I think you get another player below the generational threshold, yet one that very reasonably could have a HOF career.

Now with the course of a hockey career, I think it's very fair to arrive at the conclusion that you can be generational based on stats and accolades. Thats because we are comparing players in the same arena. They all play in the NHL. They all compete for relatively the same awards. However, a generational career (impossible to discuss for a player who hasn't played an NHL game) and a generational prospect (relevant to a discussion of a just-drafted 1OA) are different discussions.

According to scouts there is universal consensus that he’s the best prospect since McDavid, and Crosby/Ovechkin before that. Time will tell if he lives up to the hype, but yes, that’s the very definition of a generational prospect.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

According to scouts there is universal consensus that he’s the best prospect since McDavid, and Crosby/Ovechkin before that. Time will tell if he lives up to the hype, but yes, that’s the very definition of a generational prospect.

Source?

 

[jj cale]

It’s not just one game against Russia. There’s a snowballing effect to it. It moves everyone up a place that they shouldn’t be in. International hockey has weak depth to begin with. It’s probably two easier games than it should be because it’s one easier group game and then one easier knockout game.

This applies to all players, so it’s not only about this one player, but putting up a ”historical” performance at the World Juniors now isn’t what it once was. We have to admit that, and can’t act like it’s all the same as it’s always been.

fair point, 12 points though, geez.......that's a massive difference really even at a difference of two games. And it's not like his producion in junior is any less impressive, it stacks up well with guys like Crosby and Mcdavid. He's done it everywhere and he's done it at that age you expect generational guys to do it. And it's also how he's doing it when you watch him play................you can;t take your eyes off the kid when he's playing, he just pops off the screen whenever you watch games he's involved in he's so clearly the best player, as an experienced hockey fan like we all are you know exactly what I mean by that. At some point it just has to be acknowledged that he indeed does have the credentials to possibly be a generational player, he has simply met and passed all the tests thus far.

I'm not giving him anything until he earns it, like any other player he has to prove he is worthy of that label by his play in the NHL. But he has certainly earned the right to legitimately be looked upon as a prospect who possibly can be, there are very few who faithfully can be looked upon that way coming out of heir junior college career.........................Bedard can, he's truly got the resume. I mean what else would he have to do at this point that he hasn't already done to be seen that way?

 

[Panthaz89]

Source?

You get out of the cave yet? Seriously Carlsson and Fantilli are seen as franchise level prospects themselves and Bedard was indisputably a clear level above them as a prospect.

 

[CallMeShaft]

All the hockey pundits and scouts in the world really should've gotten the blessings of these two Ranger fans on HFboards before they anointed Bedard as the next generational player.

 

[Kurtosis]

All the hockey pundits and scouts in the world really should've gotten the blessings of these two Ranger fans on HFboards before they anointed Bedard as the next generational player.

Well he’s no Kakko or Laf to be sure.

 

[Mathieukferland]

All the hockey pundits and scouts in the world really should've gotten the blessings of these two Ranger fans on HFboards before they anointed Bedard as the next generational player.

Oh if you’re new here since the draft they aren’t even the worst ones, a certain Devils fan questions whether he can even reach Eichel’s level, let alone Hughes

 

[CallMeShaft]

Oh if you’re new here since the draft they aren’t even the worst ones, a certain Devils fan questions whether he can even reach Eichel’s level, let alone Hughes

Yeah I saw that, but New Jersey is so close to New York that we can always just bundle them all together in their hatred of Bedard.

 

[wetcoast]

I don't know if struggle is the right word but he won't be MacKinnon/McDavid/Karlsson/Matthews in his first season

Do you mean peaks for these guys as Karlsson stands out on this list by

1) not playing in the NHL in his d+1 year and

2)In his D+2 year he played in the AHL and wasn't exactly anything special in the NHL.

 

[wetcoast]

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.

I dislike the term generational for any player because it becomes a side show but in reality as a prospect Bedard is closer to Crosby/McDavid than Stamkos and I don't think that many scouts would disagree on that.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Prospect of Interest: Connor Bedard's generational talent

The 2023 NHL Draft class is regarded for how deeply talented it is, but there is one clear player ranked at the top. Connor Bedard should have great impact at the NHL level immediately.

www.sportsnet.ca

Stu Cowan: Here's why experts consider Connor Bedard a generational talent

While he already has an elite-level shot, player agent Don Meehan says his vision and hockey sense set him apart from others at NHL Draft.

montrealgazette.com

Connor Bedard could be a generational NHL talent — here’s why

How does a 5-10 forward who doesn’t blow by defenders with McDavid- or MacKinnon-type speed become a nightmare to defend against?

theathletic.com

Craig’s List: Connor Bedard rises to generational status in NHL Draft ranking | TSN

If there was any doubt about Connor Bedard as the consensus No. 1 in the 2023 NHL Draft, those concerns were shattered after a legendary performance at the World Juniors. Check out the new Top 64 from Craig Button.

www.tsn.ca

B/R's Initial 2023 NHL Draft Rankings: Connor Bedard and the Rest of the Top 5

The 2023 NHL draft is expected to be one of the best classes in recent memory.The grand prize? Connor Bedard, a 17-year-old phenom considered to be a…

bleacherreport.com

Connor Bedard: A Generational Talent - The Hockey Writers NHL Prospects Latest News, Analysis & More

A better scorer at the same age than Connor McDavid, John Tavares and Shane Wright: who is Connor Bedard, and how good is he going to become?

thehockeywriters.com

Where top pick Connor Bedard ranks among best all-time NHL Draft prospects including Crosby, McDavid & more | Sporting News Canada

Bedard is considered to be the next generational talent in the NHL, but is he the most-hyped NHL prospect ever?

www.sportingnews.com

Do you want more? There are plenty.

You can post as many opinions as you want. You don't seem to get it. Your opinion or some random pundit's opinion isn't dispositive of the issue.

If there's something that is dispositive, let's see it. If not, I'm not sure why there's such a policing of views in telling others what to think about Bedard being generational or not. Not everyone is going to agree, and not everyone does agree because this is not a clear-cut case like Ovechkin, Crosby, and McDavid. He's a borderline case like Matthews, Lafreniere, Hughes, Dahlin, Eichel before him, and some are going to say yes and others will say no.

 

[EddieTheEagle]

You can post as many opinions as you want. You don't seem to get it. Your opinion or some random pundit's opinion isn't dispositive of the issue.

If there's something that is dispositive, let's see it. If not, I'm not sure why there's such a policing of views in telling others what to think about Bedard being generational or not. Not everyone is going to agree, and not everyone does agree because this is not a clear-cut case like Ovechkin, Crosby, and McDavid. He's a borderline case like Matthews, Lafreniere, Hughes, Dahlin, Eichel before him, and some are going to say yes and others will say no.

Fair enough and you’re welcome to your opinion but I think you primarily enjoy playing contrarian and enjoy that a majority of the rest of the world disagrees with it, random pundits and hockey professionals alike.

 

[Happyhary9]

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.

CHL player of the year doesn't equal dominant, it simply means the best that year. Many guys in the NHL have won MVP awards without dominanting their peers.

Plus the most important year is your draft year. Scouts but way more weight on this year then any other. Because these are 15-17 yo kids who all grow mature at different rates. So look at the players draft year. For example John Tavares was considered a possible *generational talent" at 15. But he was a kid that was very mature at a younger age then most kids. He didn't really make those steps forward. His actual draft year he was worse then his previous seasons. Teams fond ways to limit him and he hadn't really progressed at all.

So let's break down Laf vs Bedard during their DY.
Bedard 57gp 71g 72a 143p
Laf- 52gp 35g 77a 112
Laf was 13 points ahead of 2nd, with 1 more game played.
Bedard was 36 points ahead of 2nd, while playing in 11 less games. If you projected those 11 games Bedard would have a 60+ point difference to the next guy.

This just straight math. Bedard dominanted over his completion. Laf was not close to Bedard level domination.

 

[Happyhary9]

It’s not just one game against Russia. There’s a snowballing effect to it. It moves everyone up a place that they shouldn’t be in. International hockey has weak depth to begin with. It’s probably two easier games than it should be because it’s one easier group game and then one easier knockout game.

This applies to all players, so it’s not only about this one player, but putting up a ”historical” performance at the World Juniors now isn’t what it once was. We have to admit that, and can’t act like it’s all the same as it’s always been.

Haha. You are just being straight up stupid now. Sorry no other way to put it.

You have some litte excuse for everything Bedard accomplished, it is WJC-20 watered down, WHL is watered down, the sky is now green , yada yada.

Here is a statistic fact. Bedard is the only 17 year old to lead the WJC-20 in points this century. But let me guess it was a conspiracy, all teams got together and just allowed him to score right?

Just stick to your eye test and stop debating actual numbers cause your math sucks.

 

[Chelios]

Ah yes, because you have objective measures related to Bedard being generational that apparently are so objective that they aren't even widely agreed on.

If so, why don't you give us the proof that is without dispute? How many people have to be asked to produce this before it can be produced? Shut everyone up, if it's so obvious.

And there's nothing meaningless about debating the meaning of generational and whether that applies to Bedard. If you come to a message board and you feel this is too intellectual of a discussion for you, maybe this isn't the place for you.

I never said anything about objective measures, I was merely pointing out your hypocrisy in criticizing others for throwing out "meaningless stuff" to support their "weak argument" when quite literally your argument centres on your subjective "I know it when I see it" analysis.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

I never said anything about objective measures, I was merely pointing out your hypocrisy in criticizing others for throwing out "meaningless stuff" to support their "weak argument" when quite literally your argument centres on your subjective "I know it when I see it" analysis.

This whole discussion is subjective. There's nothing objective about it. You saying Bedard is generational is a "you know it when you see it" type of argument.

It's not like there's some mathematical generational numerical value you can plug into a computer to see if a player has hit it.

How is it meaningless to discuss how to define generational and how to arrive at conclusions about what constitutes it? A subjective opinion is the only way for anyone to possibly hold an opinion that someone is (or isn't).