Kakko is a sudden surprise for my sophisticated hockey mind base in the sense that I never expected him to be this high level (call this level whatever you prefer) talent from the limited viewings of his games before the WHC. Either his pace of development has exceeded the speed of light recently or I've been hallucinating when watching his latest performances. Most likely the latter since he is not a physical singularity, just your regular dude from Turku, Finland. Given this, what Kakko should instead very much be - warning sign: "generational" approaching on the other side of this sentence - is generational, in Finnish terms. Kakko is not a singularity, but, at least nationally, generationality.
There is only one caveat, there are many young players coming from Finland who might deserve to be called generational Finnish players, yet only few, if not only one, could be such for a generation. How to solve this puzzle? Either we should throw the term in a trash bin it being unusable in a local context or give it a boarder meaning: generational is just a term for extra-ordinary talents, you cannot limit their exact quantity by a more or less arbitrary restriction "one for a generation, a generation for one". Sometimes they just come in bunches outta the woodwork like a swarm of wasps or a flock of sparrows.