Has Connor Bedard quietly became underrated ?

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think HF talent evaluation is quietly underrated. The question is... is it generational?

The same entities that deemed Crosby and McDavid generational, deemed Bedard generational. Hence why he piled up endorsements before he played a game
 
So your argument for him being at Crosby and McDavid's level is that other people said so 2 years ago?

Not very compelling. His body of work in the NHL simply doesn't compare 87 and 97 at the same age.


I said he projects to be better than Patrick Kane, how is that anti-Bedard? In the past I said he had 120+ point potential. How is that anti-Bedard?
Umm no. My argument is that the same people who said McDavid was generational before he was even drafted , said the same about Bedard. And they were right about McDavid.

The same people who said Crosby was generational before he was drafted, said the same about Bedard. And they were right about Crosby.

Were you around in 2004 or 2014 ? I was.

A Patrick Kane with a more elite shot is generational.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voight
Umm no. My argument is that the same people who said McDavid was generational before he was even drafted , said the same about Bedard. And they were right about McDavid.

The same people who said Crosby was generational before he was drafted, said the same about Bedard. And they were right about Crosby.
So like I said, you are basing it on what some people said 2 years ago.

My man you have about a hundred posts getting into semantic debates that you don’t think he’s generational. At best it’s passive aggressive.
The overwhelming majority of which are just me defending myself from the onslaught of posters who disagree with me saying he's not a McDavid / Crosby level talent.

This is a hockey message board - when people challenge my opinions, I will engage with them to explain my position. That doesn't mean I am ant-Bedard. If anything, I was one of his earliest supporters. Go back to his early prospect threads if you don't believe me.
 
The overwhelming majority of which are just me defending myself from the onslaught of posters who disagree with me saying he's not a McDavid / Crosby level talent.

This is a hockey message board - when people challenge my opinions, I will engage with them to explain my position. That doesn't mean I am ant-Bedard. If anything, I was one of his earliest supporters. Go back to his early prospect threads if you don't believe me.
You also pop into Michkov threads and stuff to randomly chime in that Bedard is not generational.





Just own it. Bedard's lack of generational-ness is a topic that interests you greatly.
 
Once again, we are caught up in everyone having different definitions. Personally, I don't consider pre-career hype as criteria to determine if a player is considered a "generational" player (sue me). Maybe there's a conflict between "generational talent" vs "generational player". IMO, to become a "generational player" you need to prove it in the NHL BEFORE I will assign that tag to them.

Yes, Bedard came in with all the hype. But how he plays in the NHL (not Juniors) will determine how history looks at him, IMO.

So, until proven otherwise, I will look at Bedard as being a very good player, possibly an elite player....Could he become generational? Sure, but I don't look at him as one, at least not yet.

I think after this season we should be able to get a better handle on that.
 
Anything less than a top-5 Art Ross finish this year and the generational tag is pretty much gone.

Gretzky year 2 = won MVP, Art Ross (He also won MVP in year 1 lol)
Mario year 2 = 2nd place MVP, 2nd place Art Ross (Wayne Gretzky existed)
Crosby year 2 = won MVP, Art Ross
McDavid year 2 = won MVP, Art Ross

All of those players had a much higher pts/game rookie season relative to the league as well.
 
Last edited:
Once again, we are caught up in everyone having different definitions. Personally, I don't consider pre-career hype as criteria to determine if a player is considered a "generational" player (sue me). Maybe there's a conflict between "generational talent" vs "generational player". IMO, to become a "generational player" you need to prove it in the NHL BEFORE I will assign that tag to them.

Yes, Bedard came in with all the hype. But how he plays in the NHL (not Juniors) will determine how history looks at him, IMO.

So, until proven otherwise, I will look at Bedard as being a very good player, possibly an elite player....Could he become generational? Sure, but I don't look at him as one, at least not yet.

I think after this season we should be able to get a better handle on that.
Can't disagree with this as a Hawks fan. His junior hype and WJC record breaking stats are great and all but that doesn't help my team win a Cup. He's got to show a lot more in the NHL, which I think he's completely capable of it just may take some time like a Jack Hughes or Nathan MacKinnon. Keep in mind he hasn't even played a full 82 games in his career yet.
 
Anything less than a top-5 Art Ross finish this year and the generational tag is pretty much gone.

Gretzky year 2 = won MVP, Art Ross (He also won MVP in year 1 lol)
Mario year 2 = 2nd MVP, 2nd Art Ross (Wanye Gretzky existed)
Crosby year 2 = won MVP, Art Ross
McDavid year 2 = won MVP, Art Ross

All of those players had a much higher pts/game rookie season relative to the league as well.
Some of these players were older in year 2 than Bedard is.
 
Generational goal scorer, and no previous top 10 all-time caliber goal scorer had anywhere close to the two-way game he has. Really in a way he's a very unique player that hasn't come along before, a two-way center who can score 60-70 goals?

He's only a two-way player because of the lobbying of Toronto media. We've seen how soft he actually is on the ice. A lifetime of blown coverage and soft plays.

He's a great regular season scorer, and the NHL has seen a lot of those.
 
IMO

Rocket
Howe
Hull
Orr
Gretz
Lemieux
Lidstrom?
Crosby
Ovi
McDavid

Guys like Morenz, Shore, Beliveau, Harvey, Lafleur, Espo, Bourque, Dionne, Jagr, Trottier, Bossy, Potvin, Yzerman, Sakic, Messier, Coffey, Mackinnon, among many others, have strong cases, but fall just below the line, for me. All the guys above dominated the league for a time, and were acknowleged as the best. Ovi is the one guy you can argue, but he scored so often, for so long, that I think he belongs.

Bedard is still super young, so it's too early to say anything definitive about him(Lafleur was underwhelming in his first three years), but I don't see generational. If he can be mentioned in the same breath as the group in the paragraph, or in the Kane/Mahovlich/Perreault/Mikita tier, it would be a great accomplishment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: x Tame Impala
IMO

Rocket
Howe
Hull
Orr
Gretz
Lemieux
Lidstrom?
Crosby
Ovi
McDavid

Guys like Morenz, Shore, Beliveau, Harvey, Lafleur, Espo, Bourque, Dionne, Jagr, Trottier, Bossy, Potvin, Yzerman, Sakic, Messier, Coffey, Mackinnon, among many others, have strong cases, but fall just below the line, for me. All the guys above dominated the league for a time, and were acknowleged as the best. Ovi is the one guy you can argue, but he scored so often, for so long, that I think he belongs.

Bedard is still super young, so it's too early to say anything definitive about him(Lafleur was underwhelming in his first three years), but I don't see generational. If he can be mentioned in the same breath as the group in the paragraph, or in the Kane/Mahovlich/Perreault/Mikita tier, it would be a great accomplishment.
Good list
 
Generational goal scorer, and no previous top 10 all-time caliber goal scorer had anywhere close to the two-way game he has. Really in a way he's a very unique player that hasn't come along before, a two-way center who can score 60-70 goals?

Until he does something in the post-season he’s shaping up to be Marcel Dionne.

Is he generational?
 
IMO

Rocket
Howe
Hull
Orr
Gretz
Lemieux
Lidstrom?
Crosby
Ovi
McDavid

Guys like Morenz, Shore, Beliveau, Harvey, Lafleur, Espo, Bourque, Dionne, Jagr, Trottier, Bossy, Potvin, Yzerman, Sakic, Messier, Coffey, Mackinnon, among many others, have strong cases, but fall just below the line, for me. All the guys above dominated the league for a time, and were acknowleged as the best. Ovi is the one guy you can argue, but he scored so often, for so long, that I think he belongs.

Bedard is still super young, so it's too early to say anything definitive about him(Lafleur was underwhelming in his first three years), but I don't see generational. If he can be mentioned in the same breath as the group in the paragraph, or in the Kane/Mahovlich/Perreault/Mikita tier, it would be a great accomplishment.

Rocket, Hull nor Lidstrom were generational. Great, all time players but short of generational.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WhiskeyYerTheDevils
Rocket, Hull nor Lidstrom were generational. Great, all time players but short of generational.
Hull wasn’t? He’s always been talked about as THE player of his era from what I’ve heard. He’s got what would be an absurd amount of Rocket trophies.

If generational only means Gretzky, Lemieux, McDavid, Orr, Crosby, and Ovechkin then it’s a stupid term and I can’t believe this site spends so much time debating it.
 
IMO

Rocket
Howe
Hull
Orr
Gretz
Lemieux
Lidstrom?
Crosby
Ovi
McDavid

Guys like Morenz, Shore, Beliveau, Harvey, Lafleur, Espo, Bourque, Dionne, Jagr, Trottier, Bossy, Potvin, Yzerman, Sakic, Messier, Coffey, Mackinnon, among many others, have strong cases, but fall just below the line, for me. All the guys above dominated the league for a time, and were acknowleged as the best. Ovi is the one guy you can argue, but he scored so often, for so long, that I think he belongs.

Bedard is still super young, so it's too early to say anything definitive about him(Lafleur was underwhelming in his first three years), but I don't see generational. If he can be mentioned in the same breath as the group in the paragraph, or in the Kane/Mahovlich/Perreault/Mikita tier, it would be a great accomplishment.
Orr
Gretzky
Lemieux

You can make a case for a couple other guys but if your list is much bigger than that then you don't understand what generational means.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nfumass
Rocket, Hull nor Lidstrom were generational. Great, all time players but short of generational.
I likely have Rocket and Bobby Hull in, as they are all ranked in the top 10 all time, not like some that are putting guys ranked top 50 in.
 
Rocket, Hull nor Lidstrom were generational. Great, all time players but short of generational.
Disagree on the first two, as someone who is old enough to be around for Hull, and know how Richard was regarded in his day. There was always a massive controversy as to whether Howe or Richard was better. Lidstrom I am less sure about ...
 
I will preface by saying Lidstrom was without a doubt one of the most impressive players I ever watched. The biggest argument in favour of Lidstrom's "generational" status would be the absurd number of Norrises, and, IMO, the PWHA got carried away with awarding a few of them.

That people put so much stock in a trophy awarded by professional hockey writers is another conversation altogether...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad