To be fair Lemiuex and Gretzky have a gap on the rest of the Generational talents. They sit at the top on their own.
If Makar doesn’t miss games due to injury, he wins that trophyIsn’t Fox closer to generational than Makar is right now? The only other defenseman to win a Norris in his sophomore season was Bobby Orr. Not saying either of them are generational but Fox won the Norris and Makar has not yet
Fox was better last season defensively, Makar was better offensively. But Makar was on a much better team and didn’t have to deal with his #1C slumping due to Covid with only 11 points in the first 25 games as well as his top winger missing a few weeks due to a political hit pieceIf Makar doesn’t miss games due to injury, he wins that trophy
Yah I’m just saying that makar wins if he stays healthy. I’m kinda glad he didn’t, because he probably would have signed a bigger contractFox was better last season defensively, Makar was better offensively. But Makar was on a much better team and didn’t have to deal with his #1C slumping due to Covid with only 11 points in the first 25 games as well as his top winger missing a few weeks due to a political hit piece
Makar is the only dman with potential to have multiple hundred point seasons. It has been accomplished only 14 times in the history of the NHL and the last time was in 1991/92 by Brian Leetch. 30 freaking years ago!! Team defense and goaltending are much stronger these days. In the past it was obviously much easier to score.Unless he becomes a legit hart contender against McDavid for the foreseeable future, I can't justify labeling him one. I don't see him hitting that level of dominance
This reminds me of the Tyler Myers threads after his first 100 games.
Makar is the only dman with potential to have multiple hundred point seasons. It has been accomplished only 14 times in the history of the NHL and the last time was in 1991/92 by Brian Leetch. 30 freaking years ago!! Team defense and goaltending are much stronger these days. In the past it was obviously much easier to score.
Since year 2000 only 2 dmen have managed just over 80 points (Burns and Karlsson once each).
If Makar can hit 100 point multiple times while playing above average defense and win multiple Norris's than I would say he is generational. If he played a few more games this year he would have won the Norris and will likely win multiple times in his career.
You should be able to have a generational forward, dman and goalie at the same time IF they are deserving. Obviously McDavid is generational, but if Makar can be head and shoulders above all other dman than why not label him generational? What does Hasek's dominance have to do with Lemieux's dominant play?
Hasek, Brodeur and Roy are the GOAT's and none can be called generational?
What are you smoking? Makar is never sniffing 100pts.Makar is the only dman with potential to have multiple hundred point seasons. It has been accomplished only 14 times in the history of the NHL and the last time was in 1991/92 by Brian Leetch. 30 freaking years ago!! Team defense and goaltending are much stronger these days. In the past it was obviously much easier to score.
Since year 2000 only 2 dmen have managed just over 80 points (Burns and Karlsson once each).
If Makar can hit 100 point multiple times while playing above average defense and win multiple Norris's than I would say he is generational. If he played a few more games this year he would have won the Norris and will likely win multiple times in his career.
You should be able to have a generational forward, dman and goalie at the same time IF they are deserving. Obviously McDavid is generational, but if Makar can be head and shoulders above all other dman than why not label him generational? What does Hasek's dominance have to do with Lemieux's dominant play?
Hasek, Brodeur and Roy are the GOAT's and none can be called generational?
If Makar doesn’t miss games due to injury, he wins that trophy
Because he is only 22 years old and only played 1 1/2 seasons and had 44 pts in 44 games last year. The biggest thing is the eye test where you can easily see he is the most dynamic offensively gifted dman perhaps that we have seen in decades. Perhaps Karlsson is close but Makar is still getting better. He creates so many scoring chances every game. Why can't he improve on a point per game pace? The potential is most certainly there. Extremely hard to reach, but it is definitely in the realm of possibility. Even Paul Coffey said so.What are you smoking? Makar is never sniffing 100pts.
>If Makar can rack up multiple 100pts seasons while playing above-average defense
Dude, Makar hasn’t even come remotely close to accomplishing that so why even bring it up?
He’d need to increase his offensive output over a full season by 20%.Because he is only 22 years old and only played 1 1/2 seasons and had 44 pts in 44 games last year. The biggest thing is the eye test where you can easily see he is the most dynamic offensively gifted dman perhaps that we have seen in decades. Perhaps Karlsson is close but Makar is still getting better. He creates so many scoring chances every game. Why can't he improve on a point per game pace? The potential is most certainly there. Extremely hard to reach, but it is definitely in the realm of possibility. Even Paul Coffey said so.
Isn’t Fox closer to generational than Makar is right now? The only other defenseman to win a Norris in his sophomore season was Bobby Orr. Not saying either of them are generational but Fox won the Norris and Makar has not yet
967-68 | NHL | Bobby Orr | 19 | BOS | D | 11 | 20 | 31 | 28 | 3.3 | 3.5 | 0.0 | 6.7 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1968-69 | NHL | Bobby Orr | 20 | BOS | D | 21 | 43 | 64 | 55 | 6.5 | 5.9 | 0.0 | 12.4 |
1969-70 | NHL | Bobby Orr | 21 | BOS | D | 33 | 87 | 120 | 54 | 12.8 | 6.7 | 0.0 | 19.5 |
2011-12 | NHL | Erik Karlsson | 21 | OTT | D | 19 | 59 | 78 | 16 | 8.6 | 4.5 | 0.0 | 13.1 |
1970-71 | NHL | Bobby Orr | 22 | BOS | D | 37 | 102 | 139 | 124 | 13.5 | 9.3 | 0.0 | 22.8 |
1975-76 | NHL | Denis Potvin | 22 | NYI | D | 31 | 67 | 98 | 12 | 8.7 | 5.6 | 0.0 | 14.3 |
2020-21 | NHL | Adam Fox | 22 | NYR | D | 5 | 42 | 47 | 19 | 3.7 | 4.1 | 0.0 | 7.8 |
1971-72 | NHL | Bobby Orr | 23 | BOS | D | 37 | 80 | 117 | 83 | 12.0 | 8.1 | 0.0 | 20.1 |
1984-85 | NHL | Paul Coffey | 23 | EDM | D | 37 | 84 | 121 | 57 | 9.5 | 5.3 | 0.0 | 14.8 |
1991-92 | NHL | Brian Leetch | 23 | NYR | D | 22 | 80 | 102 | 25 | 8.1 | 5.1 | 0.0 | 13.2 |
2012-13 | NHL | P.K. Subban | 23 | MTL | D | 11 | 27 | 38 | 12 | 4.3 | 2.9 | 0.0 | 7.1 |
The word “generational” should only be used once per generation. If you think Makar is the best player of the last 20-30 years, go ahead and call him generational.
That’s one hell of a definition you’re relying on. Makar is a fine defenseman. He’s accomplished nothing to make him generational. Nor is he even the best defenseman in the league at this time. If your interpretation of “generational” is a top notch defenseman with no individual or team achievements, sure he’s “generational”. But so are about a dozen others this year.I doubt many would agree that Mario Lemieux was not a once in a generation rarity level of talent just because he was not the best player in the last 5 year of is draft year.
If you extend a generation of hockey player to be 30 year's sure that would make that bar quite high.
But that:
Definition of GENERATION.
Is only one of the many definition of generation, it depend of the context.
If you look at cellphone, high school students or game console generations it could be much shorter because of the pace of change and shorts windows, same could be argued about hockey players, a group of hockey players will never be relevant for 30 year's and it is rare for a player to be relevant at the top for 20 season, one could argue a generation is more 12 year's or so for hockey player. A single player in the top 25 of scoring in the 79-80 season played games in the 69-70 season, one could say it was a different generation of players playing.
That’s one hell of a definition you’re relying on. Makar is a fine defenseman. He’s accomplished nothing to make him generational. Nor is he even the best defenseman in the league at this time. If your interpretation of “generational” is a top notch defenseman with no individual or team achievements, sure he’s “generational”. But so are about a dozen others this year.
Ok. Even with that loose definition, you think Makar has achieved that?Where are you reading this from what you quote ?
Translating my, a talent level that we see once every 10-12 year's (that would make for 10-12 hockey player with generation talent to have existed) to a top notch defenseman with no individual or team achievements ?
The only difference is you define generational talent has someone that is the best player in the last 20-30 year's (something that exclude Mario Lemieux and depending how you view Orr, could exclude Gretzky).
A say that it would be possible for someone to define it has a talent that is an average appear once in a hockey generation and that person could define an hockey generation to be a little bit over a decade. Making it possible to have 2 generational talent not only not far apart but playing on Team Canada 1987 on the same line.
Ok. Even with that loose definition, you think Makar has achieved that?
Edit: we are now including people who have died or may not have died. The definition of “generational” is immense.Well, we’ve narrowed the definition of “generational” to be top young defenseman for one year. He hasn’t achieved that. Could we close this nonsense?
Fox was better last season defensively, Makar was better offensively. But Makar was on a much better team and didn’t have to deal with his #1C slumping due to Covid with only 11 points in the first 25 games as well as his top winger missing a few weeks due to a political hit piece