Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post - Edmonton is No Good XII: "I Dunno.. it's Just Not Good."

Calgary4LIfe · 12-04-2025, 01:01 PM

Generational - by definition - is once every 20 years. Is McDavid this? Nope - I think MacKinnon or Makar should be considered the 'best of the last 20 years".

However, that's also kind of a stupid rule too. Gretzky + Lemieux + Jagr (yes, don't bother arguing with me and wasting both our times, I will die 1000 deaths on this hill) all entered the league relatively close together. They are all unquestionably in the highest echelon of tiers.

That's how I think of 'generational' now. It is such an overused word in hockey. Now I just think "Oh, this kid is supposed to be generational - does that mean tier 1 or tier 2?

McDavid could still end up as a tier 1 player. I think MacKinnon is closer to that than McDavid is, however. Crosby to me is Tier one for sure, and I think he is the only active player that I would consider a Tier 1 talent.

Tier 2 for me are players like Iginla, Sakic, Yzerman - players that were consistently among the best of their generation, but who simply are a tier below players like Howe, and Orr, and so on. So when a kid is touted as being generational, I simply assume he is 'tier 2', as it is highly unlikely he will be tier 1. I think McDavid is a solid Tier 2 player.

I think he is one of the best players in the game - definitely top 5. If I could pick any current player in the game today to start my franchise with, and have that player starting off as an 18 year old, McDavid is probably in my top 5, but he is certainly not in my top 3. Crosby, MacKinnon and Makar are definitely in my top 3. I can argue that Kucherov is a proven winner too and has amazing post-season success, but hey, that's arguable for many. Crosby, MacKinnon and Makar are definitely ahead of McDavid for me.

Doesn't mean McDavid is not 'generational' - I just think that definition just doesn't mean what it really should mean, which is the 'best player of his generation". It is even arguable in most 20 year spans who the best player was. Lemieux vs Gretzky, for instance.

McDavid is solidly as tier 2 player for me, but I wouldn't rule him out from ending up in the top tier. I just think it is doubtful, but he is unquestionably one of the best players in the world right now.

12-04-2025, 01:01 PM	#4317
Calgary4LIfe Franchise Player Join Date: Jun 2010 Exp:	Generational - by definition - is once every 20 years. Is McDavid this? Nope - I think MacKinnon or Makar should be considered the 'best of the last 20 years". However, that's also kind of a stupid rule too. Gretzky + Lemieux + Jagr (yes, don't bother arguing with me and wasting both our times, I will die 1000 deaths on this hill) all entered the league relatively close together. They are all unquestionably in the highest echelon of tiers. That's how I think of 'generational' now. It is such an overused word in hockey. Now I just think "Oh, this kid is supposed to be generational - does that mean tier 1 or tier 2? McDavid could still end up as a tier 1 player. I think MacKinnon is closer to that than McDavid is, however. Crosby to me is Tier one for sure, and I think he is the only active player that I would consider a Tier 1 talent. Tier 2 for me are players like Iginla, Sakic, Yzerman - players that were consistently among the best of their generation, but who simply are a tier below players like Howe, and Orr, and so on. So when a kid is touted as being generational, I simply assume he is 'tier 2', as it is highly unlikely he will be tier 1. I think McDavid is a solid Tier 2 player. I think he is one of the best players in the game - definitely top 5. If I could pick any current player in the game today to start my franchise with, and have that player starting off as an 18 year old, McDavid is probably in my top 5, but he is certainly not in my top 3. Crosby, MacKinnon and Makar are definitely in my top 3. I can argue that Kucherov is a proven winner too and has amazing post-season success, but hey, that's arguable for many. Crosby, MacKinnon and Makar are definitely ahead of McDavid for me. Doesn't mean McDavid is not 'generational' - I just think that definition just doesn't mean what it really should mean, which is the 'best player of his generation". It is even arguable in most 20 year spans who the best player was. Lemieux vs Gretzky, for instance. McDavid is solidly as tier 2 player for me, but I wouldn't rule him out from ending up in the top tier. I just think it is doubtful, but he is unquestionably one of the best players in the world right now.