GDT: My second GDT! Winnipeg Jets @ Chicago Blackhawks

[Toews2Bickell]

I don't disagree that Hughes is not generational.

Is it too early to start Lose for Lafreniere??

 

[Kurtosis]

He isn’t generational, he’s epochal.

 

[BK]

Is it too early to start Lose for Lafreniere??

Yes.

 

[Kurtosis]

Is it too early to start Lose for Lafreniere??

Yeah. It doesn’t really roll off the tongue either.

I think it’s going to be a moot point because the team is going to be on its way to Cup #4 of this era.

 

[Toews2Bickell]

Yeah. It doesn’t really roll off the tongue either.

I think it’s going to be a moot point because the team is going to be on its way to Cup #4 of this era.

#HughesyIsGenerational

 

[Kevin Musto]

I'd rather lose for Lundell. That guy is the next Toews.

 

[Pez68]

I hate the term "generational". Only McDavid and Crosby could be considered as such for recent years, at least in terms of forwards.

Kane isn't generational. Toews isn't either. McKinnon, Eichel, Matthews, and Laine aren't either. But these guys are gamebreaking talents. That's what a team needs to compete, individuals who can break a stalemate in a playoff game and then celebrate with an awesome celly.

I'll be happy to welcome Hughes in if he comes here. Same with Kakko too. Both have legit gamebreaking potential. Any pick after that still has a chance, especially the immediate picks after, but the odds start dwindling real fast the later the pick.

Alex Ovechkin says hello.

 

[migi]

Yeah Hughes is not generational. Matthews isn’t. MacKinnon isn’t. Kane isn’t.

Could Hughes play as good as those guys listed?

Definitely.

 

[AmericanDream]

Hughes to be in spotlight at U.S. World Junior select camp

 

[CallMeShaft]

Alex Ovechkin says hello.

Not generational IMO. Sorry Ovi.


In my view of the term "generational", it's the best player for a generation. Crosby was the better player during all of Ovi's career, so Ovi is simply a gamebreaking talent. McDavid, on the other hand, is quite a bit younger than either Crosby or Ovi, and is in a league of his own, so he'd be a generational talent.

 

[ChiHawk21]

Not generational IMO. Sorry Ovi.


In my view of the term "generational", it's the best player for a generation. Crosby was the better player during all of Ovi's career, so Ovi is simply a gamebreaking talent. McDavid, on the other hand, is quite a bit younger than either Crosby or Ovi, and is in a league of his own, so he'd be a generational talent.

ohhhh id say ovi is. just my opinion tho

 

[HawksBeerFan]

Ovechkin has a shot at the all time goals record, and is pretty likely going to finish in the top 3-5, that's generational

 

[AmericanDream]

I think Crosby has always gotten a bit too much love while Ovi has simply never gotten enough...the man has 8 -50 plus goal seasons lol...another at 49 goals and another at 46 goals...many of those years were in the very low scoring era. the guy is physical and plays with passion. he isn't a complete overall player and he is Russian - which is why he doesn't get mentioned as a generational talent as often as he should. I hate the term generational player, but there is no doubt in my mind he is a generational player - the man has done in over a decade what nobody else has been able to come close to...

Ovi is currently 15th ALL-TIME in goals...6th ALL-TIME in goals per game...during a low scoring era...and STILL can be playing for 4-5 more years of elite/near elite level..He is the best goal scorer of his generation - not sure how he wouldn't be a generational talent IMO.

 

[hawksfan50]

Surprising stats in the Time on ice metrics...this shows when goals scored for or goals scored against our team when the player is on the ice adjusted for every 60 minutes played.


Seabrook GA/60 is 3.6 Even Strength

Toews GA/60 is Also 3.6 Even Strength ...

Does this mean both equally inept defensively in ES?

How about on Pk short-handed per 60:

SEABROOK is better than Toews in that stat......10.2 vs. 9.6 goals against per 60 minutes short-handed.

Toews is better in goals for /60 in ES

3.6 /60 vs. 2.4 /60 for Seabrook.


I am just saying the eye test on Seabrook individually looks very bad ...but his net effect on the team's defensive performance is early the same as the vaunted "200ft. TOEWS".

COULD both be defending problems to the same degree ?And Toews worse effect on the team per 60 short-handed?

Who could have guessed it?

We are lauding takes for being back to "normal" offensively individually but perhaps if he is as bad or worse than Seabrook for the goals against effect on our team when they are on the ice ;we should be looking hard at this too when doling not the stink criticisms.

I should also point out that in the "difference-maker" differential stats for effect on ice between GF/60 and GA/60 ...It apoeatsxToewsxisxa big fat Zero
.

You want to pay $10.5 on cap for a big fat zero impact on the team performance in ES like that? Just Even in differential effect in ES...Not really "startibg" effect overall is it?

SEABROOK is of course worse because though he is on for the same number of goals against in ES as Toews per 60 ,he us on less for goals for compared to Toews ...the team scores 3.6 per60 Toews time on ice bit only scores 2.4 goals /60 of Seabrook's time on ice in ES ..

Not saying that Toews is the same level of bad as Seabrook is per 60 via theveyectest because they are plays made offensively that do not result in goals or defensively that prevent goals when thesecplayersxarecon shift.. And by eye test Seabrook appears much guiltily for these "almost "goals against" than it seems Toews is. ..so there us that ...

But still we use these stats to determine the impact a player has...positively or negatively per 60 in ES and short -handed cases /60 ...and while these are affected by everyone else on shift with them in the situations...by comparison g these stats against each other for the effect of shifts of 2 different players we ought to get some idea of their relative impact in comparison to each other as to what happens to a team when they are on per 60 .

Just saying. ..

 

[Hawkaholic]

Both Crosby and OV are generational talents. Not even a debate.

 

[Pez68]

I think Crosby has always gotten a bit too much love while Ovi has simply never gotten enough...the man has 8 -50 plus goal seasons lol...another at 49 goals and another at 46 goals...many of those years were in the very low scoring era. the guy is physical and plays with passion. he isn't a complete overall player and he is Russian - which is why he doesn't get mentioned as a generational talent as often as he should. I hate the term generational player, but there is no doubt in my mind he is a generational player - the man has done in over a decade what nobody else has been able to come close to...

Ovi is currently 15th ALL-TIME in goals...6th ALL-TIME in goals per game...during a low scoring era...and STILL can be playing for 4-5 more years of elite/near elite level..He is the best goal scorer of his generation - not sure how he wouldn't be a generational talent IMO.

Arguably the best goal scorer of all time.....

 

[BobbyJet]

I have to admit that I was part of the crowd who thought Ovi was on the downside a few years ago when his numbers slipped. That has changed and I agree that (in my mind) he is the best scorer of all time.

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

As long as the Hawks pick top 3 and get one of Hughes, Kakko or Dach idgaf really. Lafreniere is the prize next year.
No, it isn't too early to start tanking for him. He's worth it.

 

[AmericanDream]

Arguably the best goal scorer of all time.....

when all is said and done, he likely will be....crazy to think we watched this guy for over a decade and he might become the greatest goal scorer of all-time while remaining in Crosby's shadow...

 

[piteus]

Patrick Kane will arguably be the greatest American born hockey player when it's all said and done. For our exercise, that is definitely generational. Kids in Canada and the US are trying to emulate his play. When was the last time that happened? Is he better than Crosby? NO. However, Patrick Kane impacts how the game of hockey is played for a generation.

Is Stephen Curry the best player in his NBA generation? Absolutely not. However, he's changed the game of basketball. He is a generational talent.

 

[hawksrule]

If we got Hughes, as long as he is a legit high end 1C, I couldn’t care less if he is generational.

 

[Hawkaholic]

Patrick Kane will arguably be the greatest American born hockey player when it's all said and done. For our exercise, that is definitely generational. Kids in Canada and the US are trying to emulate his play. When was the last time that happened. Is he better than Crosby? NO. However, Patrick Kane impacts how the game of hockey is played for a generation.

Is Stephen Curry the best player in his NBA generation? Absolutely not. However, he's changed the game of basketball. He is a generational talent.

My threshold for generational is much higher than that. There are other players in Kanes generation that were better hockey players than him. Not just a couple, but over a handful. You have to be top of your generation consistently year in and year out to be considered generational. Where you are from plays zero part in it. He may be an American generational hockey talent, but not NHL.

 

[piteus]

If we got Hughes, as long as he is a legit high end 1C, I couldn’t care less if he is generational.

Someone compared Hughes to Kane. Is that true?

 

[CallMeShaft]

Again, for me, being 'generational' is being the best player in your generation. Crosby>Ovi. Ovi is a damn good player, will go down in NHL history as one of the best goal scorers of all time, but by how I define the term generational, he isn't one.

Which helps prove my point with Jack Hughes. Hughes won't be a generational talent. He'll never be as good as McDavid. But he doesn't need to be. He could be 98% the player CM is, and he'd be the clear cut second best player in the league. If he's 90% the guy McDavid is throughout both of their careers, he'll be a top 5 center. You can win with a top 5 center.

Pierre is talking a bunch of bullshit if he's calling guys like McKinnon and Eichel generational players.

 

[CallMeShaft]

Someone compared Hughes to Kane. Is that true?

Hughes plays a LOT like you'd expect Kaner to play like if he was a center. And Hughes is roughly the same size as Kane was in his draft year.

Hughes is probably more like Kane than Panarin is.