Not trying to piss anyone off, just think it's ridiculous that everyone acts like Eichel is on a completely different level of existence but according to this objective evidence it shows their rookie seasons would be offensively the same. And I actually prefer Marners defensive game. Not saying Marner will def be better but Marner's junior production is phenomanal and he doesn't get enough credit because he's a leaf prospect.
Not trying to piss anyone off, just think it's ridiculous that everyone acts like Eichel is on a completely different level of existence but according to this objective evidence it shows their rookie seasons would be offensively the same. And I actually prefer Marners defensive game. Not saying Marner will def be better but Marner's junior production is phenomanal and he doesn't get enough credit because he's a leaf prospect.
Jut one person it's looking like. Possibly 2.Wait people think Marner will be better than Eichel?
Outside of size Eichel doesn't have much on McDavid, but my general point was there is a quite clear drop off, not a shot at Eichel and I've already said Eichel is clearly a better prospect than Marner. No reasonable person would take Eichel over McDavid and no reasonable person would take Marner over Eichel at this point in time. McDavid is generational, Eichel isn't (he's a good #1 pick in most years). Guys like Tavares, and Ovechkin would have gone above him. You are not a generational talent when there are 4 prospects in the past 11 years you would be drafted behind.
Actually if you go on the Leafs forums, I'd say nearly 50% of their posters think Marner is the better prospect and will be the better player.
Those guys would of been taken ahead, a generational prospect is usually the best prospect of the last decade. You aren't a generational prospect if you are the considered the consensus 2nd in the draft, and Eichel most likely goes behind Tavares and Ovechkin. The top 5 had 3 clear tiers, tier 1 (McDavid), tier 2 (Eichel), tier 3 (Strome, Marner, and Hannifin). My main point wasn't how close they were to each other, but that no GM takes one over the other in both cases. People act like i'm trying to say Eichel is bad, he's a top pick in most drafts and an elite prospect.
Well that is what a generational prospect is, you don't have to wait 5 years but if someone is clearly better than the other prospect in the draft, the other prospect is not generational. Lindros and Lemieux were only 6 years apart both are clearly generational. If Crosby and McDavid were in the same draft i doubt there would be a consensus, which formed this year. Eichel is an amazing prospect but he was not clearly better than Ovi, and Tavares as prospects. Be happy with McDavid( EDIT:Meant to say Eichel here), he'd 7 or 8 times out of 10 be the number 1 pick, but that doesn't make you a generational prospect which many people are trying to claim he is.
Under that logic though guys like Tavares, Ovi, Stamkos and Mackinnon become generational because they all have that chance. Ekblad looks like a generational prospect then because he looks to be the top defenseman in a few years. If we start labeling every prospect who at their peak could be the best in the league then the term starts to lose significance. There are only 2 other prospects in the last 25 years who potentially go above McDavid (Crosby and Lindros) and that is a debate. Eichel is in that next tier with guys like Stamkos, Kovalchuk, Tavares, Daigle, Ovi, Thornton and Lecavalier. Maybe i'm just stricter in my definition, but I don't see that 2nd tier as generational as prospects (even if amazing players) because one seems to emerge on about a every 3 year avg.
Crosby and maybe Ovi, I'd put down as generational, the others are elite. A generational prospect is on a next level, if there is a prospect clearly better then one in the same draft both can't be generational. I stand by my point and some of the calling Eichel generational was media hype at the draft similar to the Jones over Mackinnon or Hedman over Tavares talk. He's an elite prospect and he's above he Hamrlik, Berrard, Stefan, Hall, Yakupov, Johnson, Kane, Fluery, Dipietro, RNH tier but is much closer to the Stamkos, Lecavalier, Thornton, Tavares, Daigle, Mackinnon, and Ovi tier then the Crosby, Lindros, and McDavid tier. The first grouping isn't generational, its just an above average #1 pick that comes along every 2 or 3 years. Eichel is much closer to Auston Matthews than he is to McDavid, and I'll be ecstatic if Leafs somehow get Matthews.
So you think Eichel is closer to the Lindros, Crosby and McDavid tier than the Stamkos, Tavares, Lecavalier and Mackinnon tier? If so then we just fundamentally disagree on Eichel as a prospect, how we define generational is besides the point.
