Generational Talents

[glenngineer]

I read the last page or two of the, Is Makar a generational talent and thought, what is a generational talent?

The only generational talents were Gretzky, Lemieux and Orr. Anyone can argue for anyone else but this is the bar. These three were head and shoulders above their peers and especially in Orr's case, he altered the way defensemen played the game. Is there anyone else who is this caliber of player? Maybe one or two and I'm not even sure who they might be. Everyone else after these guys were elite players but not generational.

The term generational is thrown around way too much and looking at the term, you'd think each generation that comes through the league will have one or two of these players. I don't think this was the intent of the term. I think the intent was, who were the players that changed the game and/or were head and shoulders above everyone they played against. Orr fits the bill on both accounts and Gretzky and Lemieux were on a completely different level offensively from anyone before, during or after their tenures.

Who else compares to these three?

Click to read more...

 

[CanadienShark]

McDavid.

 

[Arto Kilponen]

I would stamp Eddie Shore as generational talent.

 

[Sasha Orlov]

McDavid pretty easily

 

[Gregor Samsa]

The word should be banned or filtered

 

[authentic]

I read the last page or two of the, Is Makar a generational talent and thought, what is a generational talent?

The only generational talents were Gretzky, Lemieux and Orr. Anyone can argue for anyone else but this is the bar. These three were head and shoulders above their peers and especially in Orr's case, he altered the way defensemen played the game. Is there anyone else who is this caliber of player? Maybe one or two and I'm not even sure who they might be. Everyone else after these guys were elite players but not generational.

The term generational is thrown around way too much and looking at the term, you'd think each generation that comes through the league will have one or two of these players. I don't think this was the intent of the term. I think the intent was, who were the players that changed the game and/or were head and shoulders above everyone they played against. Orr fits the bill on both accounts and Gretzky and Lemieux were on a completely different level offensively from anyone before, during or after their tenures.

Who else compares to these three?

Gordie Howe and McDavid are probably closest. And Hasek for goalies.

 

[GrandmaCookie]

I think it means a player you will see once in a generation. So generally recognized as being dominant over his peer throughout his career. McDavid would be one. A case could definitely be made for Crosby and Ovechkin, both since they shared the same generation it is contradictory.

The big 3 (Orr, Gretzky, Lemieux) are more like Legendary/Historical player.

 

[PenguinSuitedUp]

Crosby, Ovechkin, McDavid.

 

[Mr Kot]

I always assumed that generational referred to players who, by all accounts, were dominant out of the gate and were considered among the best right away and maintain that stature throughout their careers. . Pretty much everyone listed, plus Crosby and McDavid, fill that quota so far. Look at Crosby, still PPG at his age and will probably only fall below once he is ready to retire.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I'm speaking purely of the 1970s and on (simply because I'm not well informed enough before the expansion era), but the only people I'd consider generational are Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr, McDavid, Crosby and Ovi. Jagr is right on the border where I wouldn't argue against you if you wanted to include him.

I think Ovi's overall impact may not be on par with the other guys, but being the best goal scorer of all time holds so much weight that I don't think you can justify not including him.

 

[MessierII]

Sid, Ovy and McDavid are generational.

The only other guy I thought flirted with it was Lindros.

 

[ClydeLee]

Just use a different term or phrase then. Sports terminology is always hilariously dumb.

But if you think the term has nothing to do with what the word is... why use that word?

What's disgusting about saying those 3 alone are generational vs saying they're the best players ever in your opinion. Or just GOATs. They're just greatest of all time... then say that if that's what you think it should be said.

But saying there's no generational talent before Orr... is baffling to understand the history of the sport.

 

[lionsDen]

Baby boomers gen z Melanie’s gen z people still claiming Orr is the only generational talent…

 

[Tralfamadore]

McDavid and Hutson are the current generational players.

 

[Shlep]

McDavid and Hutson are the current generational players.

Don't be ridiculous, McDavid isn't there yet.

 

[Stive Morgan]

Depends on your definition of generational, but yes, technically speaking, a generational talent should only come around every 20-30 years and I agree the term is thrown around like candy these days.

 

[GrandmaCookie]

McDavid and Hutson are the current generational players.

Hit a generational post today.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I read the last page or two of the, Is Makar a generational talent and thought, what is a generational talent?

The only generational talents were Gretzky, Lemieux and Orr. Anyone can argue for anyone else but this is the bar. These three were head and shoulders above their peers and especially in Orr's case, he altered the way defensemen played the game. Is there anyone else who is this caliber of player? Maybe one or two and I'm not even sure who they might be. Everyone else after these guys were elite players but not generational.

The term generational is thrown around way too much and looking at the term, you'd think each generation that comes through the league will have one or two of these players. I don't think this was the intent of the term. I think the intent was, who were the players that changed the game and/or were head and shoulders above everyone they played against. Orr fits the bill on both accounts and Gretzky and Lemieux were on a completely different level offensively from anyone before, during or after their tenures.

Who else compares to these three?

So the only generational talents were born within 17 years of each other?

That sounds like a LOT less than a generational occurrence.

 

[TheDawnOfANewTage]

I read the last page or two of the, Is Makar a generational talent and thought, what is a generational talent?

The only generational talents were Gretzky, Lemieux and Orr. Anyone can argue for anyone else but this is the bar. These three were head and shoulders above their peers and especially in Orr's case, he altered the way defensemen played the game. Is there anyone else who is this caliber of player? Maybe one or two and I'm not even sure who they might be. Everyone else after these guys were elite players but not generational.

The term generational is thrown around way too much and looking at the term, you'd think each generation that comes through the league will have one or two of these players. I don't think this was the intent of the term. I think the intent was, who were the players that changed the game and/or were head and shoulders above everyone they played against. Orr fits the bill on both accounts and Gretzky and Lemieux were on a completely different level offensively from anyone before, during or after their tenures.

Who else compares to these three?

‘My mind is made up. Let’s discuss’. Bro, to live in this dude’s world..

 

[GrandmaCookie]

IMO a generational player is the type to just dominate from junior hockey until retirement in comparaison to its peer of the same age. 1OV concensus picked, hyped up since peewee, multiple cup winners is a plus and multiple accolade is a must. Tangible exploit that places them over their competition through out there career.

 

[norrisnick]

Generational has always been, and will always be, a completely terrible superlative term to use to describe anything. The second that examples to try and define the term name two players from the same generation... it's completely meaningless.

 

[GrandmaCookie]

Generational has always been, and will always be, a completely terrible superlative term to use to describe anything. The second that examples to try and define the term name two players from the same generation... it's completely meaningless.

What constitute same generation tho?

For example, people make the argument Jagr is not generational because he was eclipsed by Lemieux. But Lemieux domination was 84-97, while Jagr was 95-00. When does a generation start vs ends.

 

[Puckstuff]

Crosby was elite and #1 for his generation but McDavid gets me out of my chair with his speed and skills. But he needs to start winning cups.

 

[Three On Zero]

Crosby, Ovechkin and McDavid

 

[Cubs2024wildcard]

The term is too widely used and accepted.

If the bar is Gretzky, Mario, and Orr, three players who were unique in talent that was never seen before, then the only answer is McDavid. You can make a strong case for Lindros.

There's a huge difference between something you have never seen before and a great player.

I've seen great goal scorers like Ovechkin, until McDavid, I never saw a combination of size, skill, and high end speed with hands that could keep up with the wheels.

When you dummy down the term, you get media saying Connor Bedard is generational, which he clearly isn't. Great player, but not somebody once in a generation. And sorry Sid fans, great player, but nowhere near Mario, who was Gretzky super sized.