View Single Post
03-14-2013, 02:37 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: bc
Country: Canada
Posts: 399
vCash: 500
he will likely be among the top dmen at a very young age and continue to be a perennial all-star throughout his entire career.

i dont consider that alone to be enough for generational consideration. like someone else said, stamkos is a very special player at such a young age but i wouldnt call that generational either. crosby is still a step ahead and i would consider crosby generational.

comparing jones' future to one of todays top forwards i would say guys like stamkos/malkin as opposed to crosby. as for ovechkin... he couldve been a step ahead of stamkos/malkin and considered generational but look at whats happened there... so its easy to say someone is generational talent when really they are not. you wouldnt think that would happen to a generational talent and you wouldnt think it would happen to crosby either... so only time can truly tell if a player is generational talent by the end of his career.

c4rdsh4rk is offline   Reply With Quote