Ovechkin has 3 harts, led the league in goals a ridiculous amount of times, has a Conn Smythe, and has more Art Ross's than Thornton. Thornton has finished top 3 in Hart voting once in his career (the year he won), outside of winning it 3 times Ovechkin has finished top 3 another 2 times.
Is Thornton the most underrated generational talent?
- Thread starter illpucks
- Start date
PavelBrendl
Registered User
- Jul 9, 2013
- 2,313
- 4,815
Point is, one or two seasons does not a generational player make.
The term “outlier” would be better applied.
Dexter Colt
Registered User
The misuse of the term generational is ridiculous. If a player is generational, there's no need to ask if they are "underrated generational".
Last edited:
PatrikBerglund
Registered User
- May 29, 2017
- 4,628
- 2,656
Generational means the best during the span of 30 years, which is often the measurement you use for one generation.
Thornton was never the best during a generation, probably never even the best for even 10% of a generation.
Thornton was never the best during a generation, probably never even the best for even 10% of a generation.
PavelBrendl
Registered User
- Jul 9, 2013
- 2,313
- 4,815
Only 2 of those seasons are even in the top 50 all-time single-season assist totals.
Great player. Not generational.
PavelBrendl
Registered User
- Jul 9, 2013
- 2,313
- 4,815
Only 2 of those seasons are even in the top 50 all-time.
Great player. Not generational.
razor8
Registered User
- Nov 28, 2017
- 937
- 712
There's been a handful of generational players in the NHL. Thornton ain't one of them. No matter if he has 2000 assists or cures covid.
ScaredStreit
Registered User
Thornton is a 1st ballot HOFer and I can't recall anyone arguing otherwise. Not sure how he's underrated?
Together they make him the best playmaker from 2005- present above Crosby and Sedin.
CanadienShark
Registered User
- Dec 18, 2012
- 40,073
- 14,771
If you're evaluating players based exclusively on shiny metal things with zero context, you're doing it wrong.
Whether or not it's true, people have said that Thornton was the best playmaker of his generation, yet refuse to acknowledge him as generational because it was in one aspect of play. However, Ovechkin is called unquestionably generational, exclusively because of one aspect of play.
Jumptheshark
Rebooting myself
While he is a Hall of Famer he is not generational
if Joe C is a Generational player than Adam Oates goes on that list as well.
Adam Oates assists 1079/1337
Joe C 1094/1644
Longevity does not equal generational
if Joe C is a Generational player than Adam Oates goes on that list as well.
Adam Oates assists 1079/1337
Joe C 1094/1644
Longevity does not equal generational
Awards are generally given to the most obvious candidate, and when a player is clearly generational they are the most obvious candidate.
Icarium
Registered User
- Feb 16, 2010
- 4,030
- 5,744
He has significantly fewer assists per game than Crosby. Comparing that to Ovechkin's utter dominance in the goalscoring department, as you did earlier in this thread, is laughable.
So again, Ovechkin has led the league in goals nine times. Thornton has led in assists three. Do you not see the discrepancy there?
No, they're not. Trophies tend to be heavily reliant on either biased opinions from a small group of people, or factors that have nothing to do with a player's actual talent/abilities. It's a really lazy way to judge players, and that's not really the point anyway. It's that people have been inconsistent with whether an aspect of play can make somebody generational.
Video Nasty
Registered User
- Mar 12, 2017
- 5,723
- 9,957
Echoing others, Thornton is a first ballot Hall of Famer who has achieved great things. Isn’t that enough?
It’s worth noting that he is the only player in league history, outside Gretzky and Lemieux, to record back to back seasons of 90+ assists.
He was also the owner of the highest scoring season from 1999-2000 until the 2018-2019 season.
These things don’t make him generational, but he’s been a special player and doesn’t need that label or even a Cup to validate a speedy Hall of Fame induction.
It’s worth noting that he is the only player in league history, outside Gretzky and Lemieux, to record back to back seasons of 90+ assists.
He was also the owner of the highest scoring season from 1999-2000 until the 2018-2019 season.
These things don’t make him generational, but he’s been a special player and doesn’t need that label or even a Cup to validate a speedy Hall of Fame induction.
PavelBrendl
Registered User
- Jul 9, 2013
- 2,313
- 4,815
Crosby’s per-game totals are better. And outside of just playmaking, Crosby is in another stratosphere.
Sedin also has no place in a discussion about generational players so...
Sid hasn't played out his 38+ years yet. Posters lament about how amazing Ovi's 65 goal season was but not a peep about Joe's 96 assist season. Laughable? Just proves how underrated he is.
Franchise would be best player on the team year after year.
Generational would be best player in the league year after year.
Steve
Registered User
- Mar 6, 2002
- 3,752
- 404
Agreed, although I don't consider Jagr generational. Outstanding player no question but part of his allure is how he played until he was 85. I would have argued Ovi a couple years ago but I'm coming around now. I don't think the term "generational" should be defined by 1 skillset but rather overall skillset/ability but what he has done is crazy.
I think we should all consider that if we have a player who is in a group of 10 most elite of the most elite (ie Yzerman, Lidstrom, Thornton), they they are not generational. Having 10 players defined as a once in a generation is an oxymoron.
