Is Evgeny Malkin a generational talent?

[Zero Requiem]

Because his talent is the best playmaker of his generation, not goal scorer.

2 90 assists seasons. Hasn't been done since Gretzky/Lemieux.

Adam Oates had 97 assists in 84 games and 90 assists in 61 games...

 

[These Are The Days]

Again laughable. If Ovechkin is not a generational talent neither is Crosby.

Ovechkin will go down as the best of his generation 60 years from now when all the Xenophobia has passed.

Ignorance is bliss I guess. Like I said before, "It depends on how you define 'generational talent'." In my definition generational talent = "once in a lifetime"/GOAT. Not the "best of his day" This has nothing to do with Xenophobia merely that Ovechkin will not be mentioned in the same breath as Lemieux, Gretzky, Orr and Howe by me.

 

[livewell68]

Ovechkin has the best career and has the most dominant season since Gretzky. If you can only choose 1 its Ovechkin. Laughable that you say "neither is Ovechkin".

Jagr says hello about 6 times over.

 

[Fantomas]

Ignorance is bliss I guess. Like I said before, "It depends on how you define 'generational talent'." Generational talent = "once in a lifetime"/GOAT. Not the "best of his day" This has nothing to do with Xenophobia merely that Ovechkin will not be mentioned in the same breath as Lemieux, Gretzky, Orr and Howe by me.

Nor in the same breath as Ron Francis, according to you.

 

[Malinator]

In my opinion, being a generational talent, means the best player of your generation. Malkin is close but I don't think he is the best player over the time period he has played. Generational, means once in that generation. How are you a once in a generation talent if people claim 2 others are generational?

 

[Fantomas]

In my opinion, being a generational talent, means the best player of your generation. Malkin is close but I don't think he is the best player over the time period he has played. Generational, means once in that generation. How are you a once in a generation talent if people claim 2 others are generational?

The Lemieux and Gretzky era overlapped somewhat. Does that mean we have to pick one?

 

[livewell68]

Ignorance is bliss I guess. Like I said before, "It depends on how you define 'generational talent'." Generational talent = "once in a lifetime"/GOAT. Not the "best of his day" This has nothing to do with Xenophobia merely that Ovechkin will not be mentioned in the same breath as Lemieux, Gretzky, Orr and Howe by me.

Those are the 4 best players in history. There are more than just 4 generational talents ; Morenz, Richard, Hull, Plante, Lafleur, Bossy, Bourque, Roy, Jagr, Hasek, Lidstrom just to name a few and Ovechkin most definitely belongs on that list.

 

[Fantomas]

Those are the 4 best players in history. There are more than just 4 generational talenrs ; Morenz, Richard, Hull, Plante, Lafleur, Bossy, Bourque, Roy, Jagr, Hasek, Lidstrom just to name a few and Ovechkin most definitely belongs on that list.

Easily. And people can include Crosby as well and everyone will be happy.

 

[livewell68]

Easily. And people can include Crosby as well and everyone will be happy.

And Malkin.

 

[charliolemieux]

I think its time to add a new level.

Is Malkin a generational talent? Well his talent level is only matched by two other superstars in his generation. So perhaps by that definition he is a generational talent.

But still He is not of the Howe, Orr, Gretzky, Lemieux level.

Is Jagr a generational talent? Because that is about where I put Malkin, Ovy and Sid.

We need to redefine what Howe Orr Gretzky and Lemieux are because they are beyond generational talents. Their excellence and level of play transcends the history of the game, not just one generation.

So yes, I will say Malkin is a generational talent. With the caveat that Howe, Orr, Gretzky and Lemieux are no longer considered generational talents but are considered Transcendental Talents.

 

[MontrealCanadiens*]

Gretzky
Lemieux
Orr

Guys that made great players look average in comparison. Tiger Woods and Michael Jordan level talent.

Malkin is awesome but belongs in the Jagr, Selanne, Sakic tier.

 

[livewell68]

Gretzky
Lemieux
Orr

Guys that made great players look average in comparison. Tiger Woods and Michael Jordan level talent.

Malkin is awesome but belongs in the Jagr, Selanne, Sakic tier.

You are misunderstanding the term generational talent.

Just the NBA alone you've got Magic, Bird, Kareem, Wilt, West, Kobe, Lebron.

You are being too narrow on the term.

Btw Jagr is a step above Crosby, Malkin, Ovechkin and Sakic do not lump them with those players.

 

[Fantomas]

Gretzky
Lemieux
Orr

Guys that made great players look average in comparison. Tiger Woods and Michael Jordan level talent.

Malkin is awesome but belongs in the Jagr, Selanne, Sakic tier.

Selanne is not that good.

 

[beaterson]

I think its time to add a new level.

Is Malkin a generational talent? Well his talent level is only matched by two other superstars in his generation. So perhaps by that definition he is a generational talent.

But still He is not of the Howe, Orr, Gretzky, Lemieux level.

Is Jagr a generational talent? Because that is about where I put Malkin, Ovy and Sid.

We need to redefine what Howe Orr Gretzky and Lemieux are because they are beyond generational talents. Their excellence and level of play transcends the history of the game, not just one generation.

So yes, I will say Malkin is a generational talent. With the caveat that Howe, Orr, Gretzky and Lemieux are no longer considered generational talents but are considered Transcendental Talents.

So it's:

Star
Superstar
All-Star
Franchise Player
MVP
Hall of Famer
Generational Talent
Transcedental Talent
Gigatranscedental Talent
Godlike Quantummetaphysical talent

Is this hierarchy sufficient?

 

[Homerhawk]

(1) Art Ross Trophy 2007-2008
(1, obviously) Calder Memorial Trophy 2005-2006
(3) Hart Memorial Trophy 2007-2008 / 2008-2009 / 2012-2013
(3) Ted Lindsay Award 2007-2008 / 2008-2009 / 2009-2010
(4) Maurice Richard Trophy 2007-2008 / 2008-2009 / 2012-2013 / 2013-2014
(12) Total

(2) Art Ross Trophy 2006-2007 / 2013-2014
(2) Hart Memorial Trophy 2006-2007 / 2013-2014
(3) Ted Lindsay Award 2006-2007 / 2012-2013 / 2013-2014
(1) Maurice Richard Trophy 2009-2010
(8) Total

(2) Art Ross Trophy 2008-2009 / 2011-2012
(1) Calder Memorial Trophy 2006-2007
(1) Conn Smythe Trophy 2008-2009
(1) Hart Memorial Trophy 2011-2012
(1) Ted Lindsay Award 2011-2012
(6) Total

Kinda hard to argue players 2 & 3 are generational but not player 1.

 

[MontrealCanadiens*]

You are misunderstanding the term generational talent.

Just the NBA alone you've got Magic, Bird, Kareem, Wilt, West, Kobe, Lebron.

You are being too narrow on the term.

Btw Jagr is a step above Crosby, Malkin, Ovechkin and Sakic do not lump them with those players.

I have to disagree. Generational in this context really implies a rarity. Once you start adding dozens of players it makes it a list of great, not generational.

Jagr is not on the level of Gretzky, Orr, and Lemieux. No one said he isn't it the top of the next level.

 

[AINEC*]

If Crosby is I don't see why not.

 

[MontrealCanadiens*]

Selanne is not that good.

Yeah he sucked. 1450 points. What a bum.

 

[charliolemieux]

So it's:

Star
Superstar
All-Star
Franchise Player
MVP
Hall of Famer
Generational Talent
Transcedental Talent
Gigatranscedental Talent
Godlike Quantummetaphysical talent

Is this hierarchy sufficient?

NO it is not sufficient. IT is totally wrong.

First off you're missing, scrub, role player, solid contributor, 1st line categories.

And the idea of someone being more than transcendental is just foolish.

Like can you not see that we need to redefine exactly what Howe, Orr, Gretzky and Lemieux are?
We have players who are definitely better than just a "franchise player" but they are not close to the level of the big 4. And it has been shown that the big 4 guys were not just the best of their generation but the best the game has ever seen. They transcend generations, franchises, and all-stars.

OR would you rather say that guys like OVy, and Sid and MAlkin and Jagr are Semi-franchise-generational-but not gretzky or lemieux good type talents?????

Like C'mon give your head a shake.

 

[HockeyThoughts]

Yeah he sucked. 1450 points. What a bum.

He had valleys in his career that the vast majority of the other superstars in this thread have never even come close to. Furthermore, his playoff performances were fairly pedestrian to boot.

I think when the poster said "he's not that good" he means to be lumped in a group with players like Jaromir Jagr, Joe Sakic and Evgeni Malkin, and I agree. Selanne to me is about one tier below that caliber of player.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

(1) Art Ross Trophy 2007-2008
(1, obviously) Calder Memorial Trophy 2005-2006
(3) Hart Memorial Trophy 2007-2008 / 2008-2009 / 2012-2013
(3) Ted Lindsay Award 2007-2008 / 2008-2009 / 2009-2010
(4) Maurice Richard Trophy 2007-2008 / 2008-2009 / 2012-2013 / 2013-2014
(12) Total

(2) Art Ross Trophy 2006-2007 / 2013-2014
(2) Hart Memorial Trophy 2006-2007 / 2013-2014
(3) Ted Lindsay Award 2006-2007 / 2012-2013 / 2013-2014
(1) Maurice Richard Trophy 2009-2010
(8) Total

(2) Art Ross Trophy 2008-2009 / 2011-2012
(1) Calder Memorial Trophy 2006-2007
(1) Conn Smythe Trophy 2008-2009
(1) Hart Memorial Trophy 2011-2012
(1) Ted Lindsay Award 2011-2012
(6) Total

Kinda hard to argue players 2 & 3 are generational but not player 1.

All three have impressive award cases. Besides Richards there's nothing separating ovechkin and crosbys.

 

[Perfect_Drug]

I don't consider Ovechkin or Crosby generational talents, and therefore I don't consider Malkin one.

For me its the guys who transcend the game, and play in another level of talent above the superstars. Gretzky Howe, Orr, and forever change how the game of hockey is played.

(Yes, just those 3).


Then there's 'best player for a time': which would include guys like Jagr, Hasek, Roy, Rocket Richard, Gordie Howe, Jean Beliveau, etc.


Then a tier below, are guys that Can occasionally win hardware from year to year, but don't necessarily have it wrapped up at the first game of the season like the previous group did.

Forsberg, Sakic, Yzerman, Crosby, Ovechkin, Malkin, Ray Bourque, Nick Lidstrom, Brodeur, Messier etc.



And Crosby might theoretically be the best player of this generation, but neither the stats, or the hardware show it. His lead as 'best player of this generation' is so razor-thin at best, it's not what anyone can consider dominant.

 

[beaterson]

NO it is not sufficient. IT is totally wrong.

First off you're missing, scrub, role player, solid contributor, 1st line categories.

And the idea of someone being more than transcendental is just foolish.

Like can you not see that we need to redefine exactly what Howe, Orr, Gretzky and Lemieux are?
We have players who are definitely better than just a "franchise player" but they are not close to the level of the big 4. And it has been shown that the big 4 guys were not just the best of their generation but the best the game has ever seen. They transcend generations, franchises, and all-stars.

OR would you rather say that guys like OVy, and Sid and MAlkin and Jagr are Semi-franchise-generational-but not gretzky or lemieux good type talents?????

Like C'mon give your head a shake.

Oh geez give your lack of sense of humour a shake.

 

[leafsfan5]

I don't consider Ovechkin or Crosby generational talents, and therefore I don't consider Malkin one.

For me its the guys who transcend the game, and play in another level of talent above the superstars. Gretzky Howe, Orr, and forever change how the game of hockey is played.

(Yes, just those 3).


Then there's 'best player for a time': which would include guys like Jagr, Hasek, Roy, Rocket Richard, Gordie Howe, Jean Beliveau, etc.


Then a tier below, are guys that Can occasionally win hardware from year to year, but don't necessarily have it wrapped up at the first game of the season like the previous group did.

Forsberg, Sakic, Yzerman, Crosby, Ovechkin, Malkin, Ray Bourque, Nick Lidstrom, Brodeur, Messier etc.



And Crosby might theoretically be the best player of this generation, but neither the stats, or the hardware show it. His lead as 'best player of this generation' is so razor-thin at best, it's not what anyone can consider dominant.

I think you're forgetting the best goal scorer of all time (Lemieux) on your list of generational talents.

To answer the question yes Malkin is no doubt in my mind

 

[a mangy Meowth]

No way