Is Thornton the most underrated generational talent?

93LEAFS

Registered User
Nov 7, 2009
34,176
21,372
Toronto
Not saying he is or isn't generational (that term essentially has no meaning anymore), but it's interesting that people are willing to recognize Ovechkin as a "generational player" due to his level of goal-scoring, yet are unwilling to recognize a player as generational due to their level of playmaking.
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.
 

PavelBrendl

Registered User
Jul 9, 2013
2,311
4,806
He did that once. Actually my post is incorrect. 96 assists is post lockout record. So Joe has 96 and 92 assist season. If that's not a generational performance I dunno what is.
Point is, one or two seasons does not a generational player make.

The term “outlier” would be better applied.
 

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.
 

CanadienShark

Registered User
Dec 18, 2012
40,034
14,721
His passing abilities are still there. It's the rest of his game that's fallen off. He was the best pure passer at his best and is still among the best.
 
  • Like
Reactions: authentic

Dekes For Days

Registered User
Sep 24, 2018
21,313
16,006
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.
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
Oct 12, 2003
100,921
14,806
Somewhere on Uranus
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
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Electrician

93LEAFS

Registered User
Nov 7, 2009
34,176
21,372
Toronto
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, yet Ovechkin is called unquestionably generational, exclusively because of one aspect of play.
Awards are generally given to the most obvious candidate, and when a player is clearly generational they are the most obvious candidate.
 

Jwads

Registered User
May 24, 2010
62
57
Detroit
How can you be "generational" when you were never, at any point in your career, considered a top-3 player in the league? Even in 06-07 (92 assists with Heater on the wing), no one thought he was better or more valuable than Crosby, Ovechkin, Lidstrom or Hasek. I mean, even in at his peak, most people would still take Datsyuk over him.
Heatley wasn't a shark until 09. Why just make things up.
 

Icarium

Registered User
Feb 16, 2010
4,024
5,728
Together they make him the best playmaker from 2005- present above Crosby and Sedin.

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.
 

DropTheGloves

Registered User
Sep 18, 2020
2,807
4,635
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, yet Ovechkin is called unquestionably generational, exclusively because of one aspect of play.

So again, Ovechkin has led the league in goals nine times. Thornton has led in assists three. Do you not see the discrepancy there?
 

Dekes For Days

Registered User
Sep 24, 2018
21,313
16,006
Awards are generally given to the most obvious candidate
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
5,648
9,851
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.
 

PavelBrendl

Registered User
Jul 9, 2013
2,311
4,806
Together they make him the best playmaker from 2005- present above Crosby and Sedin.
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...
 

illpucks

Registered User
May 26, 2011
20,525
4,974
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.
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.
 

jfhabs

Registered User
May 21, 2015
5,142
2,610
What does generational even mean anymore? Seems like it’s thrown around way too often. “Franchise” and “generational” aren’t the same thing IMO.
Franchise would be best player on the team year after year.
Generational would be best player in the league year after year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: snowkiddin

Steve

Registered User
Mar 6, 2002
3,752
404
Elite franchise player for many many years. Not quite generational, just a tier below. Still going to be a 1st ballot HOFer, but no you can't put his name next to Gretzky/Lemieux/Jagr/Orr/Ovi/Sid. McDavid has been fantastic so far, if he keeps it up, he'll be the next guy on that list. Love Jumbo Joe, but he's not generational and there's really no shame in that.

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.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad