Has Connor Bedard quietly became underrated ?

[Pablo El Perro]

Expectations were probably too much. He'll be a great forward, not sure that will be as a center.

 

[hirawl]

The same way Chris Tanev isn't held accountable for his OUTRAGEOUSLY bad offensive game, different players do different things.

As someone else said, give him time to mature and gain a more mature frame.

Chris Tanev's lack of offense hardly costs any games.

McDavid's defensive game was just plain laughable when he entered the league. It took him 7 years to get it to acceptable level. 7 years.

And Bedard is ten times worse defensively than McDavid at the same point.

What Chicago is doing is not doing any favors to Bedard the hockey player and his development. And I think it just sucks.

 

[CallMeShaft]

It's a good thing he landed on the Hawks. Wouldn't want to subject his poor defensive play onto any other fanbase. His play is our burden to bare.

 

[MuckOG]

Expectations were probably too much. He'll be a great forward, not sure that will be as a center.

Expectations were WAY too high. He's not the next McDavid or Crosby.

 

[NVious]

Chris Tanev's lack of offense hardly costs any games.

McDavid's defensive game was just plain laughable when he entered the league. It took him 7 years to get it to acceptable level. 7 years.

And Bedard is ten times worse defensively than McDavid at the same point.

What Chicago is doing is not doing any favors to Bedard the hockey player and his development. And I think it just sucks.

Of course it does lmao, you just don't think about it because it's not as obviously "seen" like a bad defensive play directly leading to a goal. But him firing muffin shots, him not making passes, his teammates knowing he's a total non threat in the offensive zone obviously costs the team in the same way bad defensive plays cost the team, it's just one is more easily spotted than the other.

Bad defensive=obvious minus
Bad offense=unrealized +

Same thing.

 

[hirawl]

Of course it does lmao, you just don't think about it because it's not as obviously "seen" like a bad defensive play directly leading to a goal. But him firing muffin shots, him not making passes, his teammates knowing he's a total non threat in the offensive zone obviously costs the team in the same way bad defensive plays cost the team, it's just one is more easily spotted than the other.

Bad defensive=obvious minus
Bad offense=unrealized +

Same thing.

I just honestly hope you don't think these things show equally on scoreboard. If you do I suggest you give it some more thought.

 

[NVious]

I just honestly hope you don't think these things show equally on scoreboard. If you do I suggest you give it some more thought.

You just don't understand basic logic, failing to contribute offensively is just as bad as failing defensively, it's just that one gets a massive pass for some reason whereas the other doesn't, forwards are supposed to all be Kopitar/Bergeron/Barkov, but if a defenseman contributes nothing offensively, all of a sudden "it's not his job."