Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Connor Bedard talks chasing Connor McDavid's NHL stats

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/38289794/connor-bedard-connor-mcdavid-stats-nhl-rookie-records

 

His name is Connor. After a season in which multiple NHL teams tried to maximize their draft lottery odds to select him, Connor was selected first overall. He was cast as a potential franchise savior, with unparalleled offensive skills. He's sold thousands of tickets before playing a minute of pro hockey.

 

That was Connor McDavid with the Edmonton Oilers in 2015, after which he was a point-per-game player as a rookie.

 

This is Connor Bedard with the Chicago Blackhawks in 2023, hoping to make a difference for a franchise in need of a dramatic reversal of fortunes.

 

The two Connors had some shared experiences to discuss when attending the 13th annual BioSteel NHL Camp in Halifax this week, hosted by BioSteel Nutrition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stupid. Kid hasn't even played an NHL game yet and they're already hyping him to break the records of the best player in the game today. Just let him play hockey ffs. 

 

Oooh his name is Connor too! Perfect! Let's run with that! :picard:

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he'll be more of a comparable to Crosby - solid, a bit stockier and not as fast but very strong. Probably won't drop 150pts like McDavid but I can see him develop his two-way game a lot better and at the end of the day...who has more cups?

 

I wouldn't focus on McDavid if I were Bedard, I'd focus on Crosby. That is an elite, generational center you want to emulate. As great as McDavid is, he's just not strong enough defensively or even on the puck and in the playoffs that's where it counts. I could see Bedard leaning more that way which will be better for him in the long run. Score 80-100pts and be a solid physical two-way center instead of 150pts and floppy defensively.

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Roberts said:

He has the chance to be the biggest bust in NHL history. I know he probably won't be, but expectations for him are crazy high. Let's see if he can take a big hit in the NHL.

Maybe he will disappoint, and then the Canucks can get him for a 2nd round pick. And when he comes to Vancouver he takes his game to a new level?

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Roberts said:

He has the chance to be the biggest bust in NHL history. I know he probably won't be, but expectations for him are crazy high. Let's see if he can take a big hit in the NHL.

 

I think Yakupov takes the cake on this one.

 

Some will say Daigle, but at least Daigle had a couple of 50+ point seasons to his resume. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, shiznak said:

 

I think Yakupov takes the cake on this one.

 

Some will say Daigle, but at least Daigle had a couple of 50+ point seasons to his resume. 

Daigle unfortunately couldn't check his ego, talented player. Got in his own way a lot though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/30/2023 at 6:49 PM, shiznak said:

 

I think Yakupov takes the cake on this one.

 

Some will say Daigle, but at least Daigle had a couple of 50+ point seasons to his resume. 

Yakupov wasn't touted as a "once in a generation player".   Some Goofs were actually saying Daigle would be better than Mario.    When Crosby came in, he was heavily hyped at a young age, but no more then Tavares was, another "generational"

talent.     McDavid was also given that handle, so actually was Jack Hughes.   They don't come along that often, and they are more miss than hit too (generational).   Daigle hype was massive.    So was Lindros hype.   Lindros actually lived up to it for awhile, he was a great player.   Today?  He'd absolutely destroy everyone.    Weren't many that could handle Lindros when the league was dialed in to handle anyone.   Tom Wilson?   Ha ha ha.    Patrick Stefan?    Even Dahlin "the next Lidstrom" was hyped as generational.   Unless your breaking records, or approaching them

its a loosely used term,  and Daigle is the original poster boy for that.  

 

Said it at the time, it's Heiskanen who looks and plays the Lidstrom game.    Not sure how Dahlin looks or plays that game.   He's a lot bigger for one.    Time yet ... let's see what he does at 27-40. 

 

Edit: Tavares, Crosby, McDavid and J Hughes were identified very young.   Most recently, J Hughes was considered a first overall pick 3 years before it happened by THN.   That's not the norm really.   

 

Quebec was ok with trading Forsberg, Owen Nolan,  Ron Hextall and draft picks to draft Daigle lol.   Yikes...lucky for them Ottawa also thought that highly of him. 

 

In my life anyways,  Daigle is the guy who didn't come close to the hype.    Stamkos and Mathews a lot less.  Stamkos has had a better career than Tavares.  All 3 likely end up in the HHOF.   None were touted as "generational" except Tavares. 

 

Will also say, both Crosby and McDavid were a tad underwhelming given the hype their WJ's  seasons.   Both absolutely brought it.   Claude  Girouix for a little while .. was pacing Crosby, just a little bit behind him, not much behind him anyways.    

 

Mentorship from Mario for sure helped Crosby.   Jack Hughes is more of the normal arc, same with Joe Thornton and Stamkos.   One year at least.    And Daigle should be used as a case study as to why "once in a generation" should stick to just that.     Heck Chychrun was a front runner for first at one point.   If you're 13-15 and lapping the field right up to the draft, then generational is fair.  

Edited by IBatch
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, IBatch said:

Yakupov wasn't touted as a "once in a generation player".   Some Goofs were actually saying Daigle would be better than Mario.    When Crosby came in, he was heavily hyped at a young age, but no more then Tavares was, another "generational"

talent.     McDavid was also given that handle, so actually was Jack Hughes.   They don't come along that often, and they are more miss than hit too (generational).   Daigle hype was massive.    So was Lindros hype.   Lindros actually lived up to it for awhile, he was a great player.   Today?  He'd absolutely destroy everyone.    Weren't many that could handle Lindros when the league was dialed in to handle anyone.   Tom Wilson?   Ha ha ha.    Patrick Stefan?    Even Dahlin "the next Lidstrom" was hyped as generational.   Unless your breaking records, or approaching them

its a loosely used term,  and Daigle is the original poster boy for that.  

 

Said it at the time, it's Heiskanen who looks and plays the Lidstrom game.    Not sure how Dahlin looks or plays that game.   He's a lot bigger for one.    Time yet ... let's see what he does at 27-40. 

 

Edit: Tavares, Crosby, McDavid and J Hughes were identified very young.   Most recently, J Hughes was considered a first overall pick 3 years before it happened by THN.   That's not the norm really.   

 

Quebec was ok with trading Forsberg, Owen Nolan,  Ron Hextall and draft picks to draft Daigle lol.   Yikes...lucky for them Ottawa also thought that highly of him. 

 

In my life anyways,  Daigle is the guy who didn't come close to the hype.    Stamkos and Mathews a lot less.  Stamkos has had a better career than Tavares.  All 3 likely end up in the HHOF.   None were touted as "generational" except Tavares. 

 

Will also say, both Crosby and McDavid were a tad underwhelming given the hype their WJ's  seasons.   Both absolutely brought it.   Claude  Girouix for a little while .. was pacing Crosby, just a little bit behind him, not much behind him anyways.    

 

Mentorship from Mario for sure helped Crosby.   Jack Hughes is more of the normal arc, same with Joe Thornton and Stamkos.   One year at least.    And Daigle should be used as a case study as to why "once in a generation" should stick to just that.     Heck Chychrun was a front runner for first at one point.   If you're 13-15 and lapping the field right up to the draft, then generational is fair.  

 

Yeah the Daigle hype and crash was something to behold.  He was still a passable NHL scorer though.  One that you can probably get in the middle of the second round though.

 

Yakupov was junk from start to finish as were a couple others.

 

Doug Wickenheiser was considered a pretty high profile bust but he was probably a slightly better NHLer than Daigle.  Canucks had him for a minute there as well.  I think the year where they finished near the bottom and then got the 2nd overall pick that turned into Linden.

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, IBatch said:

Yakupov wasn't touted as a "once in a generation player".   Some Goofs were actually saying Daigle would be better than Mario.    When Crosby came in, he was heavily hyped at a young age, but no more then Tavares was, another "generational"

talent.     McDavid was also given that handle, so actually was Jack Hughes.   They don't come along that often, and they are more miss than hit too (generational).   Daigle hype was massive.    So was Lindros hype.   Lindros actually lived up to it for awhile, he was a great player.   Today?  He'd absolutely destroy everyone.    Weren't many that could handle Lindros when the league was dialed in to handle anyone.   Tom Wilson?   Ha ha ha.    Patrick Stefan?    Even Dahlin "the next Lidstrom" was hyped as generational.   Unless your breaking records, or approaching them

its a loosely used term,  and Daigle is the original poster boy for that.  

 

Said it at the time, it's Heiskanen who looks and plays the Lidstrom game.    Not sure how Dahlin looks or plays that game.   He's a lot bigger for one.    Time yet ... let's see what he does at 27-40. 

 

Edit: Tavares, Crosby, McDavid and J Hughes were identified very young.   Most recently, J Hughes was considered a first overall pick 3 years before it happened by THN.   That's not the norm really.   

 

Quebec was ok with trading Forsberg, Owen Nolan,  Ron Hextall and draft picks to draft Daigle lol.   Yikes...lucky for them Ottawa also thought that highly of him. 

 

In my life anyways,  Daigle is the guy who didn't come close to the hype.    Stamkos and Mathews a lot less.  Stamkos has had a better career than Tavares.  All 3 likely end up in the HHOF.   None were touted as "generational" except Tavares. 

 

Will also say, both Crosby and McDavid were a tad underwhelming given the hype their WJ's  seasons.   Both absolutely brought it.   Claude  Girouix for a little while .. was pacing Crosby, just a little bit behind him, not much behind him anyways.    

 

Mentorship from Mario for sure helped Crosby.   Jack Hughes is more of the normal arc, same with Joe Thornton and Stamkos.   One year at least.    And Daigle should be used as a case study as to why "once in a generation" should stick to just that.     Heck Chychrun was a front runner for first at one point.   If you're 13-15 and lapping the field right up to the draft, then generational is fair.  

Yakupov was viewed as the next Bure and was considered a sure-fire superstar in the league. He couldn’t even muster one good season in the NHL and was out of the league by 23.

 

Edited by shiznak
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, shiznak said:

Yakupov was viewed as the next Bure and was considered a sure-fire superstar in the league. He couldn’t even muster one good season in the NHL and was out of the league by 23.

 

Maybe some got overexcited, but then the same could be said of Zadina and Svecknikov a little while later (consensus 2-3 picks)  Svecknikov did pace Yakupov.. For decades now, subscribe to the Hockey News, get a few dedicated prospect mags a year.  Also follow ISS, because well , that's their job.   Makes for some good fantasy teams, and a fun pass-time.    Don't take my record for JB picks though.   Not JV.  Mathew T for sure over OJ, was shocked we didn't take him, especially after what he did on the way to the memorial cup.  Valardi over Glass, Bouchard over Dobson (didn't want QHs or Boqvist too small), and Podz for sure.   Even called it before the draft, that he might slip from a consensus 3-4 all the way to us.     That's a good team I guess.   More hits anyways.   MT = EP maybe.   Valardi is expected to move up eventually, even with PLD, THN has his with over 50 points this year.  JV's pick would also be on the team or playing in the NHL still.    But tough to defend those picks either.    EP and QHs were great picks of course.   So i'm not an expert, despite being informed. 

 

   Yakupov for sure wasn't considered a slam dunk superstar, By definition, there can only by a couple superstars in the league at one time.    Perennial first and second team all-star.     At most a couple centers, wingers (maybe),  D's and maybe a goalie, maybe not because the position is so fickle.    McDavid, McKinnon, maybe Kucherov or before Kane,  Hedman for quite awhile,  Makar now, and before EK and maybe Doughty.    Luongo, Broduer.   Vasilevsky maybe now.   

 

All drafts are not created equal.   EPs for example, was considered underwhelming.   Didn't end up that way at all though.   Yakupov and Patrick are busts considering their draft slot.   So is Stefan (he's close though).   Scouts consider the bust line for first overall - or the bust line, as 700 games.   Yakupov played six seasons, 350 games, 136 points.   Also lost time

to the lockout and was rushed.   Maybe you got caught up in some CDC hype?   Every year, there seems to be a half dozen or so threads to trade the farm to move up and get the first.   Including some for Nolan Patrick who for most of the year, was considered the best prospect.   Dahlin got over the top ridiculous on the CDC and a little in the real world too.

 

   Yakupov and his 2012 draft class was garden variety as far as hype goes, he wasn't a clear cut first overall like some drafts,  but for sure low hanging fruit for that spot (McDavid, Crosby, Mathews, Dahlin) ... Grigerenko was hyped too, Yakupov but wasn't lower than 2 on most lists either.   For sure a consensus first overall, by two to one approx.     For a couple years some folks wanted to add him to our team based on his first overall.   Stamkos was hyped more, same team, and wasn't overly hyped either, no superstar handle, just a very solid blue chip pick who can fill the net.   And it's not like his stats were eye popping his draft year either (Yakupov).  He's still playing in the KHL BTW.    For sure maybe someone said his peak could be Bure.    Whom did though ?  And what is the context.   For example, every year THN does a bio of average of ten scouts, and rank them.  And on the bottom have "best case" whom the player might be able to turn out, best case.   For OJ they had "Vlasic", for sure would have worked out great for us IF that was the case.   Best case doesn't happen often though, it's simply that, best case.     Felt Hall was hyped more.  Which Taylor to pick, of those first overalls with EDM for sure (Seguin or Hall). 

 

You're right, he was a busteroo.   And a valid selection.   Good pick. 

Edited by IBatch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...