HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

What is "generational"?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-11-2012, 05:37 PM
  #1
Machinehead
Moderator
Hank, pls
 
Machinehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New York New York
Country: United States
Posts: 36,824
vCash: 500
What is "generational"?

The word elite gets thrown around alot here and the problem we always run into is what exactly defines "elite".

Now that's a can of worms I don't care to open as reaching a clear scope on that is nearly impossible.

Another word that has a similar problem attached to it is "generational" which I figured would be relatively easier to define as it tends to connote a more exclusive group.

So I ask you HFers: what for you makes a player a "generational" talent? Don't define the word so much as the on-ice requisites of meeting that definition. Also, give examples if you can.

Machinehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 05:41 PM
  #2
Turrican*
Not a homer
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Stabmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,960
vCash: 500
A player like this only comes once a generation.

Its pretty cut and dry.

Orr/Gretzky/Lemieux/Crosby/Schultz are some examples

Turrican* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 05:43 PM
  #3
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 34,240
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leman Russ View Post
A player like this only comes once a generation.

Its pretty cut and dry.

Orr/Gretzky/Lemieux/Crosby/Shultz are some examples
Basically this, though I'm not sure who Shultz is. Shore maybe?

Generational players are a clear-cut notch above the rest of their generation... hence the name.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 05:43 PM
  #4
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 15,060
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinehead View Post
The word elite gets thrown around alot here and the problem we always run into is what exactly defines "elite".

Now that's a can of worms I don't care to open as reaching a clear scope on that is nearly impossible.

Another word that has a similar problem attached to it is "generational" which I figured would be relatively easier to define as it tends to connote a more exclusive group.

So I ask you HFers: what for you makes a player a "generational" talent? Don't define the word so much as the on-ice requisites of meeting that definition. Also, give examples if you can.
In the words of the late Potter Stewart:

"I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description ; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it."

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 05:45 PM
  #5
Sureves
Registered User
 
Sureves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 7,132
vCash: 500
You're putting the cart before the horse with your OP.

First of all, what is a generation for hockey purposes?

Why don't we start there. For me, if we can get a reasonably tangible definition of the length of years that relates to, I'd say 1 forward, 1 defenseman, 1 goalie for each "generation".

Sureves is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 05:47 PM
  #6
Turrican*
Not a homer
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Stabmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,960
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Basically this, though I'm not sure who Shultz is. Shore maybe?

Generational players are a clear-cut notch above the rest of their generation... hence the name.
It was Schultz! Typo.

Turrican* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 05:50 PM
  #7
jumptheshark
the burn out
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 54,809
vCash: 132
for me generational are the guys you see coming from a mile away

Mario. Gretz and Sid the kid jump to mind, with both Mario and Sid, the hype starter three years before their draft and there was no debate about them being first overall

jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 05:53 PM
  #8
Machinehead
Moderator
Hank, pls
 
Machinehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New York New York
Country: United States
Posts: 36,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sureves View Post
You're putting the cart before the horse with your OP.

First of all, what is a generation for hockey purposes?

Why don't we start there. For me, if we can get a reasonably tangible definition of the length of years that relates to, I'd say 1 forward, 1 defenseman, 1 goalie for each "generation".
You're getting like my professors now. "Motive before thesis."

I tend to think of hockey generations as decades because the 80's are so different from the 90's and the 90's were so different from the lockout era.

Machinehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 05:57 PM
  #9
Turrican*
Not a homer
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Stabmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,960
vCash: 500
I tend to think as hockey generations as 20 years, since thats how long most players can usually play till.

Turrican* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 06:00 PM
  #10
Roo Mad Bro
U havin a giggle m8?
 
Roo Mad Bro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,083
vCash: 500
Connor McDavid will be the next.

Roo Mad Bro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 06:08 PM
  #11
Orange Thunder
Registered User
 
Orange Thunder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,721
vCash: 500
Mark Jankowski

Orange Thunder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 06:09 PM
  #12
DKQ
Generic User Title
 
DKQ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Press Box
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,129
vCash: 500
A player who is considered to be definitive of the era they played in. This doesn't necessarily mean they put up the greatest stats, or won the most trophies, but the ones who when a period is examined in the future will be remembered first. This means players like

Shore
Beliveau
Richard
Plante
Hull
Howe
Orr
Lafleur
Dryden
Robinson
Gretzky
Potvin
Bossy
Lemieux
Bourque
Hull
Roy
Yzerman
Hasek
Sakic
Lidstrom
Brodeur
Ovechkin
Crosby

DKQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 06:13 PM
  #13
King Forsberg
21 68 88 16 44 28
 
King Forsberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 5,380
vCash: 500
No Jagr on that list?

King Forsberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 06:17 PM
  #14
GrandChelems
Registered User
 
GrandChelems's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,808
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leman Russ View Post
It was Schultz! Typo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roo Mad Bro View Post
Connor McDavid will be the next.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Jacob View Post
Mark Jankowski
Alexandre Daigle

GrandChelems is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 06:34 PM
  #15
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 15,060
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DropkickQuinn View Post
A player who is considered to be definitive of the era they played in. This doesn't necessarily mean they put up the greatest stats, or won the most trophies, but the ones who when a period is examined in the future will be remembered first. This means players like
I disagree, because this starts getting into issues of media attention and other things that lead a player to be overrated.

Strange case: Joe Theismann and Jim McMahon. For those who don't remember, they were NFL quarterbacks in the 1980s. Theismann had one great year, a couple of good ones, and a lot of mediocre ones. McMahon had one good year, one above-average one, and a few mediocre ones.

But when QBs of the 1980s are remembered, they're always on the list. Why? Because everyone remembers Theismann's leg snapping like a wishbone on Monday Night Football, and because McMahon was the ultimate loudmouth who drew media attention. Neither one of them would be in the top-10 at their position just for the decade, but most people tend to put them a lot higher simply because the better ones (who don't reach the Montana/Marino level) let their play do the talking, and they didn't have that one defining moment on the field.

To compare to a more modern time, it would be like 20 years from now being in a conversation involving defensemen of 2000-10. Everyone mentions Lidstrom, and Pronger, and Chara, and Niedermayer. Then someone pipes in with Bryan McCabe. The difference in level of play is that drastic.

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 06:39 PM
  #16
Sureves
Registered User
 
Sureves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 7,132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinehead View Post
You're getting like my professors now. "Motive before thesis."

I tend to think of hockey generations as decades because the 80's are so different from the 90's and the 90's were so different from the lockout era.
Yeah that's not a bad way of looking at it. In that case for the last 30 years it'd be something like:

Crosby
Lemieux
Gretzky

Lidstrom
Bourque
Potvin

Brodeur
Roy
Hasek

I don't know nearly enough about the old time hockey, but I think most would agree these guys are generational talents. It gets shady once you start picking more than 1 per generation and you'll see a lot of debate.

But I don't think many would challenge these.

Sureves is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 06:40 PM
  #17
MrFunnyWobbl
Why?
 
MrFunnyWobbl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Unlocated
Country: Umm al-Qaiwan
Posts: 19,772
vCash: 100
Send a message via AIM to MrFunnyWobbl
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leman Russ View Post
A player like this only comes once a generation.

Its pretty cut and dry.

Orr/Gretzky/Lemieux/Crosby/Schultz are some examples
One of these is not like the others.

MrFunnyWobbl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 06:51 PM
  #18
Burritscold
it sure is!
 
Burritscold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFunnyWobbl View Post
One of these is not like the others.
Gretzky?

Burritscold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 06:54 PM
  #19
Sloth Slothersons*
They cut my beard
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Planet Earth
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leman Russ View Post
A player like this only comes once a generation.

Its pretty cut and dry.

Orr/Gretzky/Lemieux/Crosby/Schultz are some examples
Agree with this

Sloth Slothersons* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 07:16 PM
  #20
Vankiller Whale
Propaganda Minister
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,196
vCash: 938
Gretzky/Orr/Lemieux - True generational talent.

Crosby/Jagr/Howe/Lidstrom/Hasek - Borderline generational.


Last edited by Vankiller Whale: 12-11-2012 at 07:42 PM.
Vankiller Whale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 07:40 PM
  #21
Rorschach
Fearful Symmetry
 
Rorschach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 6,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Gretzky/Orr/Lemieux - True generational talent.

Crosby/Jagr/Howe/Lidstrom - Borderline generational.
I like this...throw in a best of the best goalie or two and call it a day.

Rorschach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 07:43 PM
  #22
Vankiller Whale
Propaganda Minister
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,196
vCash: 938
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rorschach View Post
I like this...throw in a best of the best goalie or two and call it a day.
Done. Although imo we've never seen a truly generational goalie. I think in order to stand head and shoulder over the rest like Gretzky/Lemieux/Orr a goalie would have to put up multiple .950sv% seasons, or something like that.

Vankiller Whale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 07:44 PM
  #23
maroon 6
Live and let live
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: British Columbia
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,905
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFunnyWobbl View Post
One of these is not like the others.
Sarcasm. Learn it.

maroon 6 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 07:49 PM
  #24
Kris Chreider
Pass Off The Pads
 
Kris Chreider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: NYC/Minneapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 7,452
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Done. Although imo we've never seen a truly generational goalie. I think in order to stand head and shoulder over the rest like Gretzky/Lemieux/Orr a goalie would have to put up multiple .950sv% seasons, or something like that.
Roy wasn't one?

I think Jagr deserves to be on the list. People seem to forget that he was one of the three players who cycled the Art Ross for a couple years in the 90s.

Kris Chreider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 08:05 PM
  #25
ck20
Registered User
 
ck20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 1,231
vCash: 500
I feel like the players that get called "a prototypical X" are usually good candidates for these generational talks. Players like Pronger/Lindros come to mind: a perfect storm of size, snarl, and skill. Obviously not every player is like either of those guys and they're just examples of monstrously-sized and skilled players (just one "type" of player). Then there's guys that fit in the category of Gretzky: smaller stature, perceived as more "fragile" and usually coming with protection, pure offensive-minded. I think players like Crosby/Stamkos/Kane would fit in here. Not that I'm saying Stamkos or Kane are really generational talents, but in the same vein. I don't know where I'd put guys like Kovalchuk/Ovechkin (not that I think either are really generational, but they have the potential to pull off some really incredible stuff); guys with decent size that know how to use it, can score exceptionally well, and just have a very noticeable presence to them. I guess something like a very lite version of Howe?

As far as goalies, Roy/Hasek are the only two that jump out at me from recent years as generational. I'd even include Brodeur, honestly.

Basically, a player that can (nearly at will) have a massive impact on the flow of the game whenever they're on the ice is who I would consider bringing up.

ck20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:42 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.