Lidstrom & Hart Trophy Voting

[jawbreaker 0]

I have feeling that we all agree, that Nick has been the best player in the league for some years now. Despite collecting Norris awards and Stanley Cups , he haven't won a Hart. I looked at some voting results, it seems that he hasn't been even close to win MVP. Voters usually give this award to a forward (that is a shame), but still how a Dman, who has a shot to be at least 3rd all-time, haven't got any serious consideration (read: top 3 in voting) to win Hart Trophy.

Sure, we know that he is only that good 'cause he plays with Zetterberg and Datsyuk, and they are so good 'cause they play with Lidstrom. Same old song and dance.

The last defender, who won award was Chris Pronger. Sometimes I wonder, how many more votes would have Nick got every year, if he was a Canadian? Voters were more than happy to give that Hart to Pronger, despite that he wasn't the best player by the wide margin (Jagr probably got robbed). Hell, Pronger wasn't even the best dman by the wide margin (Nick had more points for example). So Pronger has a season which is slightly better than the next dman has, and gets the Hart over Jagr. On the other hand Nick has won some of his Norris Trophy's by the sick margin (he is clearly the best dman that season), and never cracks the top 3. That doesn't make sense at all.

I'm not saying that in all those years Nick clearly deserved Hart more than the winner, but no top3 is just sick in my humble opinion.

1999/2000

HART

1. Chris Pronger 396 (25-9-11-8-4)

2. Jaromir Jagr 395 (18-22-9-4-4)

8. Steve Yzerman 26 (1-0-1-3-2)

9. Nicklas Lidstrom 22 (0-1-0-4-3)

NORRIS

1. Chris Pronger 565 (53-5-0-0-0)

2. Nicklas Lidstom 400 (5-4-5-1-0)

3. Rob Blake 196 (0-3-25-15-5)

2000/2001

HART

1. Joe Sakic, COL 585 (53-6-2-1-0)

10. Nicklas Lidstrom, DET 38 (0-2-1-6-1)

NORRIS

1. Nicklas Lidstrom, DET 600 (56-5-1-0-0)

2. Ray Bourque, COL 251 (4-16-12-10-9)

2001/2002

HART

1. Jose Theodore, Mtl 434 (26-16-9-5-2)

Lidstrom out of top10

NORRIS

1. Nicklas Lidstrom, Det 472 (29-20-7-2-1)

2. Chris Chelios, Det 431 (28-10-13-4-4)

2002/2003

HART

1. Peter Forsberg 508 (38-13-6-2-1)

8. Nicklas Lidstrom 41 (0-0-4-6-3)

NORRIS

1. Nicklas Lidstrom 560 (42-20-0-0-0)

2. Al MacInnis 486 (20-38-4-0-0)

2003/2004

HART

1. Martin St. Louis, TAM 1,016 (97-5-1-2-0)

Lidstrom out of top10

NORRIS

1. Scott Niedermayer, NJD 872 (72-13-10-3-2)

6. Nicklas Lidstrom, DET 165 (1-6-10-19-6)

2005/2006

HART

1. Joe Thornton, SAN 1,058 67 48 9 1 4

7. Nicklas Lidstrom, DET 106 1 2 7 12 11

NORRIS

1. Nicklas Lidstrom, DET 1,152 91 28 8 2 0

2. Scott Niedermayer, ANA 817 29 57 16 15 3

2006/2007

HART

1. Sidney Crosby, PIT 1225 (91-34-14-2-1)

6. Nicklas Lidstrom, DET 53 (1-1-3-4-9)

NORRIS

1. Nicklas Lidstrom, DET 1217 (87-44-5-4-2)

2. Scott Niedermayer, ANA 1024 (46-62-22-6-2)

2007/2008

HART

1. Alex Ovechkin, WSH 1313 (128-4-1-0-0)

4. Nicklas Lidstrom, DET 246 (2-7-17-24-20)

NORRIS

1. Nicklas Lidstrom, DET 1313 (127-5-1-1-0)

2. Dion Phaneuf, CGY 561 (2-38-37-26-12)

P.S Nick's best is 4th place last year as we see. But IMHO he wasn't clearly even the best player on our team. Datsyuk has probably the best season after Fedorov Hart season, that a two-way forward can have, and he is 9th is Hart voting

[Nev 1,085]

You're mistaking the Hart Trophy for the being the "best player" Trophy. It isn't, its the "most valuable player" trophy. And that means that usually (but not always) it goes to a player on an average or above-average team who has had an career year and helped that team to an above-average or great season. It rarely goes to the best player inthe NHL.

And since the Wings have been at the top of the standings every single year for the last 15 years, and have had a loaded roster to boot, its very hard for a Redwing to win it - note that when Sergei Fedorov won it, it was the year that Yzerman was injured. He has exactly the same year and Yzerman is fit all year, I'm certain he wouldn't have won it.

Perhaps a better argument could be made for him not winning the Lester B Pearson trophy since that is meant to go to the best player.

The other thing to note is Nicks lopsided career haul. Has he really been that much better in the 2nd half of his career than the 1st? I think not - certainly not stats wise. He was 2nd in the Calder Trophy his rookie year, was an all-star by '96, yet his first Norris wasn't till 2001.

In fact, I am absolutely certain that his run of Norris's has something of the Return of the King about it. The voters realise he was unfairly ignored for a decade and have been heaping awards on him ever since (not that he hasn't deserved them mind)

[jawbreaker 0]

You're mistaking the Hart Trophy for the being the "best player" Trophy. It isn't, its the "most valuable player" trophy. And that means that usually (but not always) it goes to a player on an average or above-average team who has had an career year and helped that team to an above-average or great season. It rarely goes to the best player inthe NHL.

And since the Wings have been at the top of the standings every single year for the last 15 years, and have had a loaded roster to boot, its very hard for a Redwing to win it - note that when Sergei Fedorov won it, it was the year that Yzerman was injured. He has exactly the same year and Yzerman is fit all year, I'm certain he wouldn't have won it.

Perhaps a better argument could be made for him not winning the Lester B Pearson trophy since that is meant to go to the best player.

The other thing to note is Nicks lopsided career haul. Has he really been that much better in the 2nd half of his career than the 1st? I think not - certainly not stats wise. He was 2nd in the Calder Trophy his rookie year, was an all-star by '96, yet his first Norris wasn't till 2001.

In fact, I am absolutely certain that his run of Norris's has something of the Return of the King about it. The voters realise he was unfairly ignored for a decade and have been heaping awards on him ever since (not that he hasn't deserved them mind)

The difference between the Hart, and the Lester B. Pearson is that the Hart is voted by the journalists, and Pearson by the other players. These "most valuable" and "best player" are very fuzzy terms. So our best dman by the wide margin is not good enough to be at least 3rd as the most valuable in the NHL? I can bet that if Crosby scores about 120 points this season, and Malkin 100 points, then Crosby will be in the top3 in voting.

[Hockeytown0001 7,652]

He's definately deserving of, at least, consideration for the Hart as MVP. Any team that doesn't have Brodeur or Luongo would automatically name Lids their MVP as well.

[Reds4Life 51]

He's definately deserving of, at least, consideration for the Hart as MVP. Any team that doesn't have Brodeur or Luongo would automatically name Lids their MVP as well.

Luongo? Really? He is so over-rated it's not even funny. He was medicore this season. He never made it past 1st round of the playoffs. He is not even close to Martin Brodeur. Or Lidstrom for that matter.

[eva unit zero 271]

You're mistaking the Hart Trophy for the being the "best player" Trophy. It isn't, its the "most valuable player" trophy. And that means that usually (but not always) it goes to a player on an average or above-average team who has had an career year and helped that team to an above-average or great season. It rarely goes to the best player inthe NHL.

And since the Wings have been at the top of the standings every single year for the last 15 years, and have had a loaded roster to boot, its very hard for a Redwing to win it - note that when Sergei Fedorov won it, it was the year that Yzerman was injured. He has exactly the same year and Yzerman is fit all year, I'm certain he wouldn't have won it.

Perhaps a better argument could be made for him not winning the Lester B Pearson trophy since that is meant to go to the best player.

The other thing to note is Nicks lopsided career haul. Has he really been that much better in the 2nd half of his career than the 1st? I think not - certainly not stats wise. He was 2nd in the Calder Trophy his rookie year, was an all-star by '96, yet his first Norris wasn't till 2001.

In fact, I am absolutely certain that his run of Norris's has something of the Return of the King about it. The voters realise he was unfairly ignored for a decade and have been heaping awards on him ever since (not that he hasn't deserved them mind)

IMHO, Lidstrom has deserved to win the Norris every season since 1997-98, with the exception of 2003-04. The first three Norrises he should have won, he lost because he was a European. 1998 was especially obvious as he had outplayed Blake in every respect that season except for the fact that Blake had a nice goal-scoring streak towards the end of the season. As Lidstrom had also outplayed every other defenseman, the voters needed to find someone who had SOMETHING on Lidstrom...so Blake got the Norris.

[egroen 384]

I think Babcock and Holland actively campaigning for him helped him finally get into the top 5 in Hart voting. If Lidstrom has another year where he really dominates the other defensemen, and there is not a spectacular forward netting over 60 goals or over 120 points, Lidstrom just might get it. He finally is getting recognition.

Lidstrom has always had Yzerman and Fedorov and now Datsyuk and Zetterberg. I do strongly feel he would have a Hart if he were playing on other teams, but it is hard to be the "most valuable" when you are consistently on such a good team. I wish the Pearson was not voted on by the players - some of their choices over the years have been head scratching to say the least. Most of them do not even see many players but once or twice a year and I do not think they are the best judge. It would be nice to see an award based on votes from coaches and GMs.... guys that are actively watching and studying tapes of the entire league.

[egroen 384]

IMHO, Lidstrom has deserved to win the Norris every season since 1997-98, with the exception of 2003-04. The first three Norrises he should have won, he lost because he was a European. 1998 was especially obvious as he had outplayed Blake in every respect that season except for the fact that Blake had a nice goal-scoring streak towards the end of the season. As Lidstrom had also outplayed every other defenseman, the voters needed to find someone who had SOMETHING on Lidstrom...so Blake got the Norris.

Do you think Konstantinov deserved to be ahead of Lidstrom in the '97 Norris voting? Lidstrom had a lot more points than him as well.

Blake and Pronger were beating Lidstrom because they were destroying people on the ice and making a much more noticeable impact on games (goals, hits)... I dunno, I am trying not to be homer here, and I think Lidstrom's game really has improved a lot since the 90s. He was not "Mr. Perfect" then.

I do agree it took a lot longer for Lidstrom's play to be really appreciated, but he was the runner-up for the Calder, so it is not like he was an unknown. Babcock saying he never really had an appreciation for Lidstrom until he actually saw him play on a day-to-day basis is pretty telling... I am just trying to look at it from all angles.

[HomeNugget 2]

Luongo? Really? He is so over-rated it's not even funny. He was medicore this season. He never made it past 1st round of the playoffs. He is not even close to Martin Brodeur. Or Lidstrom for that matter.

He put the entire Vancouver team on his back and carried them into the second round in 2007.

[eva unit zero 271]

Do you think Konstantinov deserved to be ahead of Lidstrom in the '97 Norris voting? Lidstrom had a lot more points than him as well.

Blake and Pronger were beating Lidstrom because they were destroying people on the ice and making a much more noticeable impact on games (goals, hits)... I dunno, I am trying not to be homer here, and I think Lidstrom's game really has improved a lot since the 90s. He was not "Mr. Perfect" then.

I do agree it took a lot longer for Lidstrom's play to be really appreciated, but he was the runner-up for the Calder, so it is not like he was an unknown. Babcock saying he never really had an appreciation for Lidstrom until he actually saw him play on a day-to-day basis is pretty telling... I am just trying to look at it from all angles.

I feel Konstantinov should have won the Norris in 1995-96 and 1996-97. I know that makes me sound like a homer...but Konstantinov was by far the best defensive player in the league at the time, and could play well offensively and was dominant physically.

Lidstrom was not Mr. Perfect in the mid 90s...but he was still the best defenseman in the NHL in 1998, 1999, and 2000. He outscored Rob Blake in 1998 and was better defensively. MacInnis beat Lidstrom by a couple points, but Lidstrom was still considerably better defensively. Pronger outplayed Lidstrom defensively by a small margin in 2000, but Lidstrom outscored him by a considerable margin. Obviously, Blake is the most glaring error, with Pronger seeming to be a 'good 'ol Canadian' sort of feel to it as was mentioned earlier in the thread; Pronger was a defenseman who was playing alongside the previous year's Norris winner and in front of a Vezina finalist, yet received the Hart trophy as league MVP, something Lidstrom has rarely been considered for even when he has clearly been far more valuable to the Wings than Pronger could ever have hoped to have been to the Blues that season.

I am not claiming Lidstrom should have won three or four Harts...there are many players who are more valuable to their teams; this is due largely to the fact that Lidstrom has played on a team that is much more capable of playing through his absence due to depth and good management. I am merely backing up the idea that Lidstrom has received less consideration than some others have in part due to his nationality. Pronger's Blues team was quite talented, and in fact won the President's trophy.

[seeinred 1,488]

You're mistaking the Hart Trophy for the being the "best player" Trophy. It isn't, its the "most valuable player" trophy.

The Hart Trophy is supposed to be awared to the "player adjudged most valuable to his team." I may be the minority here, but to me the the player that is most valuable to his team is the best player in the NHL. None of this "great player on an average team" BS, the Hart Trophy should go to the best hockey player. And that's Nick Lidstrom.

[eva unit zero 271]

The Hart Trophy is supposed to be awared to the "player adjudged most valuable to his team." I may be the minority here, but to me the the player that is most valuable to his team is the best player in the NHL. None of this "great player on an average team" BS, the Hart Trophy should go to the best hockey player. And that's Nick Lidstrom.

The Hart trophy is award to the MVP. In other words, it's awarded to the player whose team needed him the most.

This is not the same as the best player; If one team has three of the league's ten best players, the chances that any of them are the league's most valuable player greatly diminishes compared to the rest of the top ten if the remainder are all by themselves on teams. Lidstrom is the league's best player, but Ovechkin is pretty clearly the most valuable. Ovechkin could be argued as anywhere from the best player to the 4th or 5th best player...but he is pretty clearly the most valuable player because the other players in the argument are all teammates with another player either in the argument or not far from it. Ovechkin is not.

Ovechkin is the only guy in the discussion for best player where his team could lose him for the season, and the team's season would simply be over, no hope for recovery, while other teams with players in that discussion have other guys who could step up and take some of the load.

[jawbreaker 0]

The Hart trophy is award to the MVP. In other words, it's awarded to the player whose team needed him the most.

This is not the same as the best player; If one team has three of the league's ten best players, the chances that any of them are the league's most valuable player greatly diminishes compared to the rest of the top ten if the remainder are all by themselves on teams. Lidstrom is the league's best player, but Ovechkin is pretty clearly the most valuable. Ovechkin could be argued as anywhere from the best player to the 4th or 5th best player...but he is pretty clearly the most valuable player because the other players in the argument are all teammates with another player either in the argument or not far from it. Ovechkin is not.

Ovechkin is the only guy in the discussion for best player where his team could lose him for the season, and the team's season would simply be over, no hope for recovery, while other teams with players in that discussion have other guys who could step up and take some of the load.

Same could be said about some other players also. First name that pops-up is Kovalchuk. Without him Atlanta would be dead last. If we send Ovechkin to Atlanta (and Kovalchuk to Washington), then Atlanta is still at the bottom (just like with Kovy). Washington with Kovalchuk would still have a good chance to make it. So Ovechkin collects 1309 points (votes) more than Kovalchuk (he had 4 points), 'cause he has better support. It means that Ovechkin's teammates make him more valuable than Kovalchuk is. And the difference is not slight. In real life Kovalchuk is as valuable as Ovechkin.

IMHO Hart should go to the player, who has the most outstanding season (not counting teammates, team performance).

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Same could be said about some other players also. First name that pops-up is Kovalchuk. Without him Atlanta would be dead last. If we send Ovechkin to Atlanta (and Kovalchuk to Washington), then Atlanta is still at the bottom (just like with Kovy). Washington with Kovalchuk would still have a good chance to make it. So Ovechkin collects 1309 points (votes) more than Kovalchuk (he had 4 points), 'cause he has better support. It means that Ovechkin's teammates make him more valuable than Kovalchuk is. And the difference is not slight. In real life Kovalchuk is as valuable as Ovechkin.

IMHO Hart should go to the player, who has the most outstanding season (not counting teammates, team performance).

Actually the same cannot be said of other players. You're missing the point. Eva has it exactly right.

Not only is the MVP supposed to go to that player whose team needed him the most. There's a 2nd factor I believe and that is the success of your team. A bottom feeder is a bottom feeder no matter what. You take an average team and 1 player seemingly single-handedly carries them to new heights i.e. at least a playoff appearance and there's your MVP.

So its a 2 part picture

1. Which player is most valuable to his team

2. Did that team reach heightened levels of success, levels it would have no hope of reaching without that MVP player.

[jawbreaker 0]

Actually the same cannot be said of other players. You're missing the point. Eva has it exactly right.

Not only is the MVP supposed to go to that player whose team needed him the most. There's a 2nd factor I believe and that is the success of your team. A bottom feeder is a bottom feeder no matter what. You take an average team and 1 player seemingly single-handedly carries them to new heights i.e. at least a playoff appearance and there's your MVP.

So its a 2 part picture

1. Which player is most valuable to his team

2. Did that team reach heightened levels of success, levels it would have no hope of reaching without that MVP player.

Actually you are missing my point.

Would Atlanta performed a lot better with Ovechkin instead of Kovalchuk? I don't think so. Would Washington performed a lot worse with Kovalchuk? I don't think so. So that means Ovechkin's teammates made him MVP? I guess so.

[Hockeytown0001 7,652]

He put the entire Vancouver team on his back and carried them into the second round in 2007.

Agreed. He is one of the top 5 goalies in the league right now, and Vancouver would be completely lost without him in goal. Curtis Sanford as your number 1? He's the main reason why Vancouver made it to Round 2 in 2007, later being nominated for the Hart and Vezina and placing 2nd in voting for both. And he's the only reason for any success at all that Vancouver has this year, and also why he was named captain.

[seeinred 1,488]

The Hart trophy is award to the MVP. In other words, it's awarded to the player whose team needed him the most.

It doesn't say that though. It says "player adjudged most valuable to his team." Let's take Washington for example. Ovechkin is quite possible the most valuable player in relative terms because of the quality of his teammates. He may or may not be the best hockey player in the world, but last season, relatively at least, he was probably the player most valuable team.

But for the past however-many years, Nicklas Lidstrom has been, in absolute terms, the player most valuable to his team. So what I'm arguing is that the best player in the league IS the most valuable player in an absolute sense. And there's no reason voters can't look at it like that.

Edited October 5, 2008 by SeeinRed

[eva unit zero 271]

Same could be said about some other players also. First name that pops-up is Kovalchuk. Without him Atlanta would be dead last. If we send Ovechkin to Atlanta (and Kovalchuk to Washington), then Atlanta is still at the bottom (just like with Kovy). Washington with Kovalchuk would still have a good chance to make it. So Ovechkin collects 1309 points (votes) more than Kovalchuk (he had 4 points), 'cause he has better support. It means that Ovechkin's teammates make him more valuable than Kovalchuk is. And the difference is not slight. In real life Kovalchuk is as valuable as Ovechkin.

IMHO Hart should go to the player, who has the most outstanding season (not counting teammates, team performance).

The Hart goes to the player who was judged to be the most valuable player to his team. Generally, non-playoff teams are excluded as regardless of what a player may individually have done, he probably was not the most valuable player in the league (under most circumstances) if his team would have achieved the same fate, missing the playoffs, whether he was completely healthy all year or injured all season.

So we've cut it down to 16 teams. This means that we can now begin to judge which players had the most individual impact on getting their teams where they are at the start of the playoffs. Obviously, a President's trophy winning team with three potential Hart candidates is much less likely to see a winner than an 8th-seeded team with the Art Ross and Richard winner starring and a bunch of depth players backing him up.

Lidstrom was the best player last season in the regular season...but Ovechkin was the MVP.

A better question to be asked than 'why hasn't Lidstrom won a Hart' is 'Why didn't Steve Yzerman ever win a Hart?'

Hell...Steve Yzerman won a Pearson over Mario Lemieux's career high 199 points. Yzerman led the Wings in scoring by 62 points that season...SIXTY-TWO!! Only three of his teammates even scored that many points; two of which were on his line. And he received Selke votes, including first place mention, for the second consecutive season. How does he not win the Hart that year? The only other player to score 100 points that season without a linemate scoring 100 points was Joe Mullen. Mullen played with 50-goal scorer Joe Nieuwendyk; Yzerman's linemates scored 39 and 36 goals.

[jawbreaker 0]

So Hart is a ½ - team, ½ - individual award?

You are more likely to win it if:

1. You put up a great season.

2. You play forward.

2. Your team-mates doesn't suck (team makes the play-offs)

3. Your team-mates are not too good. (like in Detroit)

IMHO that is a very inaccurate way to give this award. Hart is an individual award. But in reality your team-mates count. But they shouldn't, because it's an individual award.

If we say that MVP, and the best player are two different things, then what award should get that "best player"?

MVP should go to a player who puts together the best season in the league, and I don't care if he plays in Detroit, or in Florida. If that palyers dominates the game more than the others, then he should be MVP. No matter who his team-mates are, or in which place his team finishes.

[shadow47 1]

Hart Trophy's description can say what it wants so fans can argue, it gets awarded to the BEST PLAYER IN THE LEAGUE. Period. There is no BEST PLAYER award so that's what the Hart is used for. Sure one good player on a s*** team looks better but in the end it is the top player in the league that wins it.

[shadow47 1]

Lidstrom was the best player last season in the regular season...but Ovechkin was the MVP.

.

Alex Ovekchin was the BEST player in the league last year, bar none. C'mon, the guy was an absolute FORCE every shift crushing opposition teams with his checks despite not being that big, led the league in goals on not a great team and was the s*** in the stretch drive scoring goals, leading his team. You CANNOT CANNOT say Lidstrom had a better season, c'mon now.

[jawbreaker 0]

Alex Ovekchin was the BEST player in the league last year, bar none. C'mon, the guy was an absolute FORCE every shift crushing opposition teams with his checks despite not being that big, led the league in goals on not a great team and was the s*** in the stretch drive scoring goals, leading his team. You CANNOT CANNOT say Lidstrom had a better season, c'mon now.

Yep, Ovechkin was the best player last season. Lidstrom probably wasn't even the best player on the Wings last year. Datsyuk had a very strong season.

[norrisnick 1]

Alex Ovekchin was the BEST player in the league last year, bar none. C'mon, the guy was an absolute FORCE every shift crushing opposition teams with his checks despite not being that big, led the league in goals on not a great team and was the s*** in the stretch drive scoring goals, leading his team. You CANNOT CANNOT say Lidstrom had a better season, c'mon now.

You serious? AO is 6'2" 220lb. He's maybe an inch shorter than Franzen, but just as solidly built.

[egroen 384]

Yep, Ovechkin was the best player last season. Lidstrom probably wasn't even the best player on the Wings last year. Datsyuk had a very strong season.

Lidstrom did outperform his competition in points by a greater percentage than Ovechkin did, despite Lidstrom missing more games. In addition to leading all defensemen offensively, he was at the top defensively, as well. Not too shabby of a year.

The 65 goals is pretty unique, but so is the best defensive defenseman leading all defensemen offensively as well. A case can be made for Datsyuk as well - both of them were better than Iginla and Malkin, IMO.

[eva unit zero 271]

So Hart is a ½ - team, ½ - individual award?

You are more likely to win it if:

1. You put up a great season.

2. You play forward.

2. Your team-mates doesn't suck (team makes the play-offs)

3. Your team-mates are not too good. (like in Detroit)

IMHO that is a very inaccurate way to give this award. Hart is an individual award. But in reality your team-mates count. But they shouldn't, because it's an individual award.

If we say that MVP, and the best player are two different things, then what award should get that "best player"?

MVP should go to a player who puts together the best season in the league, and I don't care if he plays in Detroit, or in Florida. If that palyers dominates the game more than the others, then he should be MVP. No matter who his team-mates are, or in which place his team finishes.

You have a flawed understanding of the term MVP if you believe the MVP award should be awarded to the best player no matter who his teammates are or how well his team would have done without him.

There is a fundamental difference between best player and MVP. Best player is simply the player who performed the best. MVP is the player whose individual impact made the greatest tangible difference in his team's results over what they would have accomplished without him. Typically, this means players on stacked teams (teams with several players in the 'best player' conversation) and players on bottom feeders are much less likely to win the Hart, because their individual impact on their team's result is reduced either through the team being terrible with them being present, or the team being great in their absence.

Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemieux, and likely Sidney Crosby in the future are the only players I can think of offhand who will win Hart trophies despite playing with other elite level talent over players who had arguably better seasons on weaker teams.

The reason the Hart trophy is typically awarded to a forward is because the NHL doesn't have an award like the Norris or Vezina for forwards. We would see better representation from those two positions if there was a 'most outstanding forward' award created.