Could Bedard be equal or better than McDavid or Crosby?

[Blue]

I've noticed some skepticism creeping in about Bedard. I personally think it is completely unwarranted. He can equal Mcdavid in impact, just in a different way. Similar to Ovechkin and Crosby. He is generational, he was sold in the mainstream as generational. But there are some hockey fans who don't think he is generational. Some of this is just about McDavid hype. Somehow it is sacrilege to say Bedard could be as good as Mcdavid.

 

Where do you stand on Bedards ceiling  ?

 

 

[Bounce000]

I don't think he'll get to Crosby or McDavid status, but It's hard to say right now since he doesn't have his Draisaitl/Malkin yet.

[4petesake]

5 minutes ago, Blue said:

I've noticed some skepticism creeping in about Bedard. I personally think it is completely unwarranted. He can equal Mcdavid in impact, just in a different way. Similar to Ovechkin and Crosby. He is generational, he was sold in the mainstream as generational. But there are some hockey fans who don't think he is generational. Some of this is just about McDavid hype. Somehow it is sacrilege to say Bedard could be as good as Mcdavid.

 

Where do you stand on Bedards ceiling  ?

 

 

 

 

[Jess]

Sure, I wouldn't rule it out, but honestly, that ceiling is bonkers. IMO Crosby is knocking on the top 5 all-time and I wouldn't be surprised if McDavid passes him by the time his career is done. McDavid could become the first name to be mentioned in the same breath as Gretzky, Orr, and Lemieux, depending on how his career goes for the rest of it.

 

That's a pretty damn high bar to reach. Still, I never like to place hard ceilings on guys who seem this good, so I'll say it's possible at least.

[Warhippy]

Crosby will be mentioned as a top 5 player all time.  Possibly as one fo the greatest captains in history and he played with the same kind of calibre HoF roster that Lemieux and Messier did (barring Gretzky) in Malkin, Letang, Fleury.  Honestly, Crosby has had some insanely amazing players on his team over his time

 

McDavid is arguably one of the best individual players to ever play the game.  Period.  If he was playing in the same era as Gretzky it's possible he was putting up 200 point seasons as well.  Doing so without a Malkin, Letang or Fleury or Kessel el etc etc etc.  He has Draisatl now sure but that's it.  

 

Bedard at this point looks like he MAY be a good player.  Maybe even a great one down the line.  it took Mackinnon 3-4 years to start really showing who he was with the help of Raantanen and then Makar.  But at this point he's just a really good player.

 

So at this point.  No.  not even in the same breath as Crosby or McJesus.

[Blue]

29 minutes ago, Jess said:

Sure, I wouldn't rule it out, but honestly, that ceiling is bonkers. IMO Crosby is knocking on the top 5 all-time and I wouldn't be surprised if McDavid passes him by the time his career is done. McDavid could become the first name to be mentioned in the same breath as Gretzky, Orr, and Lemieux, depending on how his career goes for the rest of it.

 

That's a pretty damn high bar to reach. Still, I never like to place hard ceilings on guys who seem this good, so I'll say it's possible at least.

 

Crosby topped out in his 2nd year with 120 points. He makes it up with consistency and the cups I guess. And being a salt of the earth guy. I am just saying, some could argue that Crosby didn't end up with the peaks expected. 

 

McDavid needs to get some team results to go with his hardware. To me, he is more of a rush player than Crosby or Bedard. (and yes, I believe he's in their league right now. His junior numbers put him there. Higher PPG than McDavid on worse teams, broke some of Lindross's jr records)

Edited 22 hours ago by Blue

[Blue]

4 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Crosby will be mentioned as a top 5 player all time. 

 

Bedard at this point looks like he MAY be a good player.  Maybe even a great one down the line.  it took Mackinnon 3-4 years to start really showing who he was with the help of Raantanen and then Makar.  But at this point he's just a really good player.

 

So at this point.  No.  not even in the same breath as Crosby or McJesus.

 

But the highlighted is the issue. You are basically saying Bedard is not generational. Until he proves it. But generational players don't have to prove it. Eric Lindross was considered generational before he played an NHL game and still is considered that even though his career was actually underwhelming. 

 

McDavid and Crosby were called generational before they played an NHL game. And Bedard also was in a mainstream kind of way. But people like yourself don't think he's even in the same league as Crosby or Mcdavid. I just disagree. And so does the mainstream. 

 

Why have these exceptions crept in for Bedard that didn't exist for Mcdavid or Crosby ? If you said in 2007 or 2016 that McDavid or Crosby might just be really good players, you'd be laughed at. 

[Kevin Biestra]

18 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Crosby will be mentioned as a top 5 player all time.  Possibly as one fo the greatest captains in history and he played with the same kind of calibre HoF roster that Lemieux and Messier did (barring Gretzky) in Malkin, Letang, Fleury.  Honestly, Crosby has had some insanely amazing players on his team over his time

 

McDavid is arguably one of the best individual players to ever play the game.  Period.  If he was playing in the same era as Gretzky it's possible he was putting up 200 point seasons as well.  Doing so without a Malkin, Letang or Fleury or Kessel el etc etc etc.  He has Draisatl now sure but that's it.  

 

Bedard at this point looks like he MAY be a good player.  Maybe even a great one down the line.  it took Mackinnon 3-4 years to start really showing who he was with the help of Raantanen and then Makar.  But at this point he's just a really good player.

 

So at this point.  No.  not even in the same breath as Crosby or McJesus.

 

Top 5 all time?  I don't know.  I would say top 10 probably.  I have him behind Gretzky, Orr and Lemieux for sure and then we have to start talking about Mr. Hockey, the Rocket, Coffey, Bourque, Denis Potvin, Beliveau, Bobby Hull, Lays Chips Bald Dude, Sawchuk, Plante, Roy, etc.

 

Edited 21 hours ago by Kevin Biestra

[King Heffy]

He's almost as good as McDiver but without the character issues.

[-dlc-]

Thing is, it's hard to know if he'll match the consistency and longevity of some of the greats.

 

He's brilliant, I love watching him play and cheer for him (just not against us). Is he as gifted? I think so.

 

But will he stay at a top level over the years? That's what makes the great players "great" - they really maintain a top level of play throughout their careers.

 

McDavid hasn't established that yet either but I don't deny he's one of the best. He also gets a lot of help that "superstars" tend to get and that factors in too. It's easier to be great if you get a lot of leeway. When he's hot he's hot and a total game changer...but he also can run cold at times.

 

I think his (Bedard's) skill level is there. I wouldn't say he's better, but he has the capacity to be up there.

[Jess]

4 hours ago, Blue said:

 

Crosby topped out in his 2nd year with 120 points. He makes it up with consistency and the cups I guess. And being a salt of the earth guy. I am just saying, some could argue that Crosby didn't end up with the peaks expected. 

 

McDavid needs to get some team results to go with his hardware. To me, he is more of a rush player than Crosby or Bedard. (and yes, I believe he's in their league right now. His junior numbers put him there. Higher PPG than McDavid on worse teams, broke some of Lindross's jr records)

 

Crosby was injured during a lot of his insane years, so you have to take that into account too.

 

I'd also argue two other big things in his favour:

 

1. Two Conn Smythe trophies. Most important individual award in hockey and he's won two of them.

 

2. Crosby played a lot of his career in a very low-scoring era so it's not totally fair to compare him to McDavid on that front. 2007-2017ish was super low scoring and people often forget that. It was almost a second dead-puck era.

[Jess]

21 minutes ago, Blue said:

 

But the highlighted is the issue. You are basically saying Bedard is not generational. Until he proves it. But generational players don't have to prove it. Eric Lindross was considered generational before he played an NHL game and still is considered that even though his career was actually underwhelming. 

 

McDavid and Crosby were called generational before they played an NHL game. And Bedard also was in a mainstream kind of way. But people like yourself don't think he's even in the same league as Crosby or Mcdavid. I just disagree. And so does the mainstream. 

 

Why have these exceptions crept in for Bedard that didn't exist for Mcdavid or Crosby ? If you said in 2007 or 2016 that McDavid or Crosby might just be really good players, you'd be laughed at. 

 

Frankly though, I think quite a few people thought Lafreniere was gonna be generational and it looks like that won't be the case, even though he's now heating up. I think it's never premature to guess that someone will be generational, but to call them that before they've actually achieved and proven that is premature IMO.

[nzan]

16 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Top 5 all time?  I don't know.  I would say top 10 probably.  I have him behind Gretzky, Orr and Lemieux for sure and then we have to start talking about Mr. Hockey, the Rocket, Coffey, Bourque, Denis Potvin, Beliveau, Bobby Hull, Lays Chips Bald Dude, Sawchuk, Plante, Roy, etc.

 

 

 

Exactly - Top 5, I don't know - like maybe. After the absolute highest echelon (usually a group of 4), who is better than Sid? The answer is a whole bunch are maybe in the same category, and maybe Sid is right there with the best of them.

 

I'd sidestep the original question to look at Crosby and McDavid being spoken about in the same breath.

 

Without attempting to downplay how great McDavid is, I don't rank him anywhere near the greatness of Sid.

[Bob Long]

McDoofus yes, Crosby no. Bedard won't be able to play as physical as Sid. 

[Warhippy]

28 minutes ago, Blue said:

But the highlighted is the issue. You are basically saying Bedard is not generational. Until he proves it. But generational players don't have to prove it. Eric Lindross was considered generational before he played an NHL game and still is considered that even though his career was actually underwhelming. 

 

McDavid and Crosby were called generational before they played an NHL game. And Bedard also was in a mainstream kind of way. But people like yourself don't think he's even in the same league as Crosby or Mcdavid. I just disagree. And so does the mainstream. 

 

Why have these exceptions crept in for Bedard that didn't exist for Mcdavid or Crosby ? If you said in 2007 or 2016 that McDavid or Crosby might just be really good players, you'd be laughed at. 

That's just it.

 

On one hand you have your Crosby's and MCDavids

 

On the other you have you Mackinnons and Mathhews'

 

Bedard will fall between the two maybe.

[Toni Zamboni]

he could be equal or better or worse.

[Bob Long]

2 minutes ago, Toni Zamboni said:

he could be equal or better or worse.

 

this makes sense. Probably. 

[Blue]

24 minutes ago, Jess said:

 

Frankly though, I think quite a few people thought Lafreniere was gonna be generational and it looks like that won't be the case, even though he's now heating up. I think it's never premature to guess that someone will be generational, but to call them that before they've actually achieved and proven that is premature IMO.

 

But Lindros, Crosby and McDavid were considered that before they proved it. 

 

Bedard is an exceptional status player. He was selling out NHL arenas as a junior player. He beat some of Mcdavid and Lindross's jr records. The Lafreneir comparison doesn't really track. 

[flat land fish]

People get way too hung up on points.  Crosby is special in that hos two way play was excellent for basically his whole career that along with his humble confidence allowed the cup wins and international success.  Mcdavid is possibly the most exceptional offensive talent ever, despite them getting close to the cup I'd still take Crosby over mcdavid.

 

Bedard I'm less convinced will have  dynamic two way presence we could have more of an ovie or Patrick kane trajectory where could be a major winner but will need a great supporting cast.

[Jess]

7 minutes ago, Blue said:

 

But Lindros, Crosby and McDavid were considered that before they proved it. 

 

Bedard is an exceptional status player. He was selling out NHL arenas as a junior player. He beat some of Mcdavid and Lindross's jr records. The Lafreneir comparison doesn't really track. 

 

Maybe by most, but not by me. I've always felt you need to prove it before you get the label. I've only recently in the past few years conceded to calling McDavid generational.

[Jess]

35 minutes ago, nzan said:

 

 

Exactly - Top 5, I don't know - like maybe. After the absolute highest echelon (usually a group of 4), who is better than Sid? The answer is a whole bunch are maybe in the same category, and maybe Sid is right there with the best of them.

 

I'd sidestep the original question to look at Crosby and McDavid being spoken about in the same breath.

 

Without attempting to downplay how great McDavid is, I don't rank him anywhere near the greatness of Sid.

 

It's a longevity issue mostly I think. Crosby has over 1600 points, McDavid is just shy of 1000. Crosby will probably retire around 1800-2000 points but once that happens, McDavid will be coming for those totals. That said, Crosby's defensive game has been better than McDavid's and I'd argue he's also a better leader too, so McDavid either needs to be much better offensively to overcome those deficits or shore up his defensive and leadership game to catch Crosby.

[Nucker67]

Early to tell after only 74 games, but Bedard is only around a point-a-game player so far (68 pts in 74 games).

 

I don't think he's a Crosby comparable and certainly not McDavid.

 

More like a Pettersson comparable. (414 pts in 412 games)

[Diamonds]

1 hour ago, Jess said:

 

Crosby was injured during a lot of his insane years, so you have to take that into account too.

 

I'd also argue two other big things in his favour:

 

1. Two Conn Smythe trophies. Most important individual award in hockey and he's won two of them./

 

2. Crosby played a lot of his career in a very low-scoring era so it's not totally fair to compare him to McDavid on that front. 2007-2017ish was super low scoring and people often forget that. It was almost a second dead-puck era.

Point 1. I disagree with in this case. Yes, in the history books Crosby has won two Conn Smythe trophies. However, I don't think he deserved either one of them so I don't think it should impact where he sits amongst the greats.

 

I was living in Pittsburgh both years and watched every playoff game. Kessel should have won in 2016 and Malkin should have won his second in 2017. Crosby was good in both playoffs, but not the best. Crosby won because his name is Crosby.

 

That said, Crosby is a generational player and not just his longevity and consistency but his ability to adapt his game over time is one of the main things that has set him apart. Wasn't he just voted "most complete player in the game" by the other players last year? He certainly wasn't great defensively when he came into the league but he evolved his game, particularly after his concussion/neck issues, to make the team better. The other thing impressive about Crosby has been his ability to elevate his linemates. Even though he has played his whole career with Malkin, they are very rarely used on the same line. There are a number of player like Kunitz, Sheary, and Rust that started to look like different players when they played with Crosby.

[GrammaInTheTub]

Crosby is a Stevie Y/Sakic level legend to me. It’s no slag on Crosby - he’s the most complete player of his generation. It’s just that Gretzky, Lemieux and Orr are in another tier.
 

I understand the longstanding respect for Howe - but he doesn’t crack my top 5. Had Jagr not left for four years he’d be even higher up in points totals too - so it’s not all about points.

 

McDavid is likely to go down as a top five, but in that same echelon as Crosby, Yzerman, Sakic. I think the Ovi and Kane comparisons are apt. It will be pretty amazing to see what he can do once he has some actual support. 

[Kevin Biestra]

1 hour ago, nzan said:

Exactly - Top 5, I don't know - like maybe. After the absolute highest echelon (usually a group of 4), who is better than Sid? The answer is a whole bunch are maybe in the same category, and maybe Sid is right there with the best of them.

 

I'd sidestep the original question to look at Crosby and McDavid being spoken about in the same breath.

 

Without attempting to downplay how great McDavid is, I don't rank him anywhere near the greatness of Sid.

 

McDavid is achieving scoring feats Sid never did but Sid achieved winning feats that most likely McDavid never will.  Sid is kind of like Yzerman if you erase Yzerman's one or two biggest scoring years that were all time greats (155 points).  McDavid thus far is kind of like Marcel Dionne if you ramp up his scoring a little bit.