Franchise level players

[JD1]

Lots being thrown around on the board about franchise level players. Too much "generational" on the main boards for my liking.

Seems like a lot of kids are getting labeled with these tags of franchise level or generational or something of the like.

I kind of think that it is over hype OR were on the verge of seeing a major upgrade in play.

Curious to see guys thoughts on how many franchise level players are out there. Or what a franchise level player is by definition.

Click to read more...

 

[Tuna99]

Lots being thrown around on the board about franchise level players. Too much "generational" on the main boards for my liking.

Seems like a lot of kids are getting labeled with these tags of franchise level or generational or something of the like.

I kind of think that it is over hype OR were on the verge of seeing a major upgrade in play.

Curious to see guys thoughts on how many franchise level players are out there. Or what a franchise level player is by definition.

To me a franchise player is someone who wins, not a talent but a player who makes everyone around them better and leads your team to the playoffs.

Alfie is a Franchise player because he was the definition of a player who won and set an example of excellence.

Spezza is not a franchise player because he has to many holes in his game. A building block player and a great player for sure, but not a franchise player.

Chara and Karlsson are the only other franchise players in Sens history. Hossa, Redden, Fisher, Heatley are all huge talents, but don’t have that element of winningness and buy-in the other players bring

 

[Micklebot]

Generational to me is reseved for the best of their generation. Crosby was generational, he separated himself from the next closest player in Ovechkin (imo though some might argue he is close enough to fit generational). Currently McDavid. The next grouping is Franchise players. These are the guys who can potentially reverse the fortune of a franchise. Malkin for example, Sakic, Forsberg Yzerman fit the bill in the days of Gretzky and Lemieux. Many 1st OA picks fit here but not all. Then you have superstars. These guys are often the best player on their team or only aren't because of a franchose level guy ahead of them.

That's how i see it anyways.

 

[AchtzehnBaby]

Generational I get.

so, Elite below franchise, I guess.

Alfie for sure is our Franchise guy...

(ib4t-boro talk)

 

[stempniaksen]

Generational seems easy enough to distinguish (Crosby, Ovechkin, McDavid)

Certainly tougher to differentiate between franchise vs superstar vs star player.

 

[Six Assets]

Generational to me is reseved for the best of their generation. Crosby was generational, he separated himself from the next closest player in Ovechkin (imo though some might argue he is close enough to fit generational). Currently McDavid. The next grouping is Franchise players. These are the guys who can potentially reverse the fortune of a franchise. Malkin for example, Sakic, Forsberg Yzerman fit the bill in the days of Gretzky and Lemieux. Many 1st OA picks fit here but not all. Then you have superstars. These guys are often the best player on their team or only aren't because of a franchose level guy ahead of them.

That's how i see it anyways.

Crosby and Ovechkin are both generational, no question. I don't see a problem listing 2 players as generational. Ovechkin actually might be more generational than crosby.

 

[bert]

Sens have had 5 franchise players in their history. Players that are cornerstones you build around that make everyone better around them. Alfie, Hossa, Stone, Chara and Karlsson.

 

[HSF]

Karlsson was the best of the best

Alfie was good but Karlsson carried some weak teams to the playoffs

 

[Do Make Say Think]

The main boards are overrun by children to whom "if you don't have the absolute best, you have the worst".

The main boards should never, ever be used as a barometre for anything.

As far as the generational label goes, Karlsson could have earned it but his rash of injuries make it difficult to still believe he qualifies. Super Mario also had a lot of injuries and a somewhat shortenes career but he was more dominant than Karlsson ever was so he gets the generational label.

Alfie and Spezza were star players. Nothing to scoff at but I wouldn't call them franchise or generational players, the two tiers I'd have above star player. Karlsson is franchise level, easily; he is by far the best player to ever put on an Ottawa jersey.

 

[BondraTime]

Thornton is the upper level of Frabchise player for me.

Spezza circa 06-12 is the lower level of Franchise for me.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Using some previous Sens players for reference, I'd loosely go with something like this, but it's hard to clearly define in neat little boxes.

Generational - Karlsson (at least while he was here)
Franchise/superstar - Alfredsson, Chara, Stone
Star - Yashin, Hossa, Spezza, Duchene, Redden
Support/Niche Star - Havlat, Heatley, Hoffman

 

[danielpalfredsson]

Generational is overused.

Crosby, Ovechkin, and McDavid are the only current generational players. Some people might dispute Ovechkin, but when a player in the kind of scoring environment Ovechkin has played his career through has even a slim chance of being the most productive goal scorer of all time, that's a generational player. It's something we might not see again for decades. McDavid has already won two Art Ross trophies, he won the Hart trophy in his second year. It took Kucherov having a remarkable season on a stacked Tampa team for McDavid to lose out on a third straight Art Ross trophy. It also might be arguable that where he was trending as an 18 year old prior to getting hurt, that he could have overtaken Jamie Benn to win the Art Ross that year. I'd say he's generational because there are so few examples in the entire modern history of the league of players coming into the league at 18 and dominating production wise like McDavid has.

Previous to that, guys like Orr, Lemieux, Gretzky, and Hasek probably take the mantle. I'm missing a bunch because I am the farthest thing from a hockey historian, but those are the obvious guys where their performance was so far above everybody else at the time.

A franchise player is a player who drives things and wins games at a top level. Someone that can be built around as the central piece on a team. Typically, they make guys they play with much better. The big distinction between franchise and generational is that generational players are accomplishing things individually that haven't and won't be seen in decades. Nathan MacKinnon is a top level franchise player. The problem with franchise vs elite is that defensive ability is much more difficult to quantify. There are players like Bergeron, O'Reilly, and Stone that most people would only call "elite" players because in their average seasons they are never going to touch the most productive guys in the league. Their hockey sense and defensive abilities are so off the charts, and with a guy like Mark Stone he clearly drives his line and makes guys around him better. So it makes me wonder if he's a "franchise" winger.

 

[Sens With Benefits]

I had an argument with some one on Reddit. He was saying Rinne, Thomas, Price and Bobrovsky were generational. Anyways...

Karlsson was approaching generational but his injuries de railed that. After the run in 17 it was between him Crosby and McDavid for best player in the NHL.

Do Chabot or Tkachuk have the ability to be franchise players?

 

[Shruggs Peterson]

The main boards are overrun by children to whom "if you don't have the absolute best, you have the worst".

The main boards should never, ever be used as a barometre for anything.

As far as the generational label goes, Karlsson could have earned it but his rash of injuries make it difficult to still believe he qualifies. Super Mario also had a lot of injuries and a somewhat shortenes career but he was more dominant than Karlsson ever was so he gets the generational label.

Alfie and Spezza were star players. Nothing to scoff at but I wouldn't call them franchise or generational players, the two tiers I'd have above star player. Karlsson is franchise level, easily; he is by far the best player to ever put on an Ottawa jersey.

I've seen the term "generational #3D" on the main boards.

 

[BankStreetParade]

Generational to me is reseved for the best of their generation. Crosby was generational, he separated himself from the next closest player in Ovechkin (imo though some might argue he is close enough to fit generational). Currently McDavid. The next grouping is Franchise players. These are the guys who can potentially reverse the fortune of a franchise. Malkin for example, Sakic, Forsberg Yzerman fit the bill in the days of Gretzky and Lemieux. Many 1st OA picks fit here but not all. Then you have superstars. These guys are often the best player on their team or only aren't because of a franchose level guy ahead of them.

That's how i see it anyways.

If anything, I'd say Ovechkin is closer to the definition of generational. Yes, it's a team sport and Crosby has achieved a tremendous amount of team success. But Ovechkin will probably go down as the greatest goal scorer in the history of the NHL. It's hard to imagine something that could give more definition to the ideal of a "once in a generation" accomplishment.

 

[FolignoQuantumLeap]

Can we quarantine the semantical debates about what a "superstar" etc is to here? That was one of the most ridiculous things to read in the trade thread.

 

[FolignoQuantumLeap]

Generational to me is reseved for the best of their generation. Crosby was generational, he separated himself from the next closest player in Ovechkin (imo though some might argue he is close enough to fit generational). Currently McDavid. The next grouping is Franchise players. These are the guys who can potentially reverse the fortune of a franchise. Malkin for example, Sakic, Forsberg Yzerman fit the bill in the days of Gretzky and Lemieux. Many 1st OA picks fit here but not all. Then you have superstars. These guys are often the best player on their team or only aren't because of a franchose level guy ahead of them.

That's how i see it anyways.

Alex Ovechkin is likely going to end his career as the NHL's 2nd all time goal scorer. He most certainly fits the generational bill.

He is arguably the greatest goal scorer to ever live.

 

[SAK11]

Using some previous Sens players for reference, I'd loosely go with something like this, but it's hard to clearly define in neat little boxes.

Generational - Karlsson (at least while he was here)
Franchise/superstar - Alfredsson, Chara, Stone
Star - Yashin, Hossa, Spezza, Duchene, Redden
Support/Niche Star - Havlat, Heatley, Hoffman

I disagree with Stone being above the likes of Yashin, Hossa, Spezza and Heatley. At their peaks, Yashin finished 2nd in Hart voting, Hossa and Heatley finished 4th and 2nd in the league in goals, and Spezza finished 4th points. They all led us in points at some point and finished at least top 10 in Hart voting. I'd be inclined to move Stone down a notch. He had flashes of superstar play but battled some injuries and inconsistencies in scoring points. It seems like he's now ready to be a superstar but he's gone.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

I disagree with Stone being above the likes of Yashin, Hossa, Spezza and Heatley. At their peaks, Yashin finished 2nd in Hart voting, Hossa and Heatley finished 4th and 2nd in the league in goals, and Spezza finished 4th points. They all led us in points at some point and finished at least top 10 in Hart voting. I'd be inclined to move Stone down a notch. He had flashes of superstar play but battled some injuries and inconsistencies in scoring points. It seems like he's now ready to be a superstar but he's gone.

That's fair, like I said, I find it difficult to put them in a box.

I put Stone there because of how well rounded his game is over a sniper only like Heatley, or an offense only guy like Spezza, or a guy that couldn't get it done in the clutch like Yashin. Hossa should probably be up there, but he had that weird persona of never being the guy, and was part of some great teams that likely took away from his perceived impact at times.

 

[Upgrayedd]

Sens have had 5 franchise players in their history. Players that are cornerstones you build around that make everyone better around them. Alfie, Hossa, Stone, Chara and Karlsson.

Good times!

 

[Stylizer1]

Generational is a player whose skill sets a new bar a select few in the history of the sport have. Franchise player is one of the best players in league for the duration of his career.

Crosby, Ovechkin, Hasek, Lemieux, Gretzky, Orr, Roy = Generational

Thornton, Sakic, Iginla, Forsberg, Lindros, Brodeur, = Franchise

 

[Shruggs Peterson]

Generational is a player whose skill sets a new bar a select few in the history of the sport have. Franchise player is one of the best players in league for the duration of his career.

Crosby, Ovechkin, Hasek, Lemieux, Gretzky, Orr, Roy = Generational

Thornton, Sakic, Iginla, Forsberg, Lindros, Brodeur, = Franchise

Bold choice not to put him in the Generational category.

All time leader in wins, shutouts, games played, goals by a goalie, assists by a goalie, and had a direct impact on the modern NHL with the trapezoid

 

[Stylizer1]

Bold choice not to put him in the Generational category.

All time leader in wins, shutouts, games played, goals by a goalie, assists by a goalie, and had a direct impact on the modern NHL with the trapezoid

He was a great goalie on a defensive team. His longevity added to his allure. ovechkin won't go down as the greatest goal scorer but he will be viewed as the best.

 

[coladin]

Karlsson was the best of the best

Alfie was good but Karlsson carried some weak teams to the playoffs

A franchise player can’t take nights off and, frankly, Karlsson took quite a few off.

Alfie didn’t. Chara didn’t. Stone didn’t . I consider these three franchise players.

I think Karlsson was elite. Like Spezza. But just a notch below franchise player.

 

[Stylizer1]

A franchise player can’t take nights off and, frankly, Karlsson took quite a few off.

Alfie didn’t. Chara didn’t. Stone didn’t . I consider these three franchise players.

I think Karlsson was elite. Like Spezza. But just a notch below franchise player.

Karlsson was a franchise defenseman but I am not sure he alone could have carried a team.

As for Spezza I think being drafted by an elite team stunted his growth. His prime years where wasted by Murnyk and hurt his legacy as on of the best centers of his generation.