Is Evgeni Malkin a generational talent?

[TomasHertlsRooster]

By your definition of generational, do you consider Evgeni Malkin a generational talent?

Click to read more...

 

[John Johnson]

Oh yeah one of the best Russians ever at the very least.

 

[lawrence]

Is he a mcdavid level player ? Pretty much answered your own question people.

 

[elmaco]

No

 

[TruePowerSlave]

Of course not

 

[Zamuz]

Absolutely

At his best he looked like Lemieux out there, and he has kept his consistency over the years.

However he is not a top 100 player of all time

 

[ijuka]

How could a player who's not in the top 100 be generational? Come on now.

Make a thread "is Jonathan Toews a generational talent?" and it might make for a better discussion.

 

[Claypool]

Imagine how much easier your career is getting to play secondary matchups almost every night while Crosby gets the toughest.

 

[Freudian]

Close but no. He's a franchise player though. Only two players from that era that are generational are Ovechkin and Crosby. Then nothing until McDavid.

 

[bobholly39]

Very close but no

 

[tacogeoff]

I would say he is elite

 

[iginlafan77]

No. He's the third best player of his generation. Very good player, but not generational.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

I think he just falls short to be honest. You can’t be a generational talent while being the 3rd best player of your generation.

 

[Just Linda]

We were never in the Malkin era. Malkin didn't define this or the last generation of players. My kids never grew up wanting to be Malkin like they grew up wanting to be Crosby or Ovi.

For that reason, no.

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

Generational talent yes, but not a generational player.

 

[BonAppleTea]

No, but he is franchise level. Generational would be Crosby, Ovechkin, McDavid these last few years

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Imagine how much easier your career is getting to play secondary matchups almost every night while Crosby gets the toughest.

Then remember that Malkin actually performs better when Crosby's out of the line-up

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I think he just falls short to be honest. You can’t be a generational talent while being the 3rd best player of your generation.

Yes, you can. The year your parents had unprotected sex shouldn't decide whether you're generational or not.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

Elite superstar in his prime. Not Generational. Too many injuries prevented him from being a generational player.

 

[amnesiac]

To me "generational" is a top 10 or 20 player of all-time.

and even then, I mean was Messier generational? Yzerman? Sakic?

 

[OppositeLocK]

Malkin is 14th all time in points per game. The next active player not named Ovechkin is Patrick Kane and he's 41st.

The opinions inside this thread are shameful.

 

[joe dirte]

Im back and forth on this one. Could go either way so i wont vote.

 

[joe dirte]

Malkin is 14th all time in points per game. The next active player not named Ovechkin is Patrick Kane and he's 41st.

The opinions inside this thread are shameful.

Fair enough but when we are talking generational, just how many should there be? It should be pretty exclusive. Have rhere been 14 generations since the NHL began? Surely not....

 

[OppositeLocK]

Fair enough but when we are talking generational, just how many should there be? It should be pretty exclusive. Have rhere been 14 generations since the NHL began? Surely not....

I think a top 100 player of all time in many things is generational in every sense of the word.

 

[ijuka]

Malkin is 14th all time in points per game. The next active player not named Ovechkin is Patrick Kane and he's 41st.

The opinions inside this thread are shameful.

Durability is a factor.

I think a top 100 player of all time in many things is generational in every sense of the word.

This poll's about Malkin, though.