EuroTwin 240 Report post Posted March 12, 2009 AHAHAHAAAAA HAHAHAHAHAHAAA. Funniest thread on LGW. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
seeinred 1,488 Report post Posted March 12, 2009 You do realize the Hart trophy is not a "Best Player" award but a "Most Valuable Player" award and therefore being a very good player who plays with very bad teammates pretty much makes you the kind of player who SHOULD be winning that award. The league's best player is not necessarily the league's most valuable player. The Hart trophy should be awarded to a player who is among the league's elite players and who was most important to his team's success, but whose team would probably not have made the playoffs without him. This automatically rules out players on non-playoff teams; as the player did not exactly do much for his team's success if they missed the postseason. So you consider who the most valuable player on each playoff team was. Sometimes, you'll have a clear winner, such as Steve Mason or Alexander Ovechkin. Other times, you'll get situations where multiple players could be challenging for MVP, such as Datsyuk vs Zetterberg vs Lidstrom or Malkin vs Crosby. Those situations would increase team success due to multiple high level players, but that would also reduce the chances of those players winning the Hart. For example: If two teams finished with the same record, but one team had three All-Stars and one had only one All-Star, I'll tell you who the best bet of the two teams for the Hart should be. The only "Best Player" award given out officially by the NHL is voted on by members of the NHLPA. It is the Lester B. Pearson Award and is given in most years to the same player as the Hart Trophy, with rare exception. This is due to the Hart trophy being voted on as a "Best Player" award rather than the "MVP" award it is supposed to be. I realize fully what the awards say. It says player deemed most valuable to his team blah blah blah. What it does not say, however, is "Given to the most important player on a team where the difference in importance between numbers 1 and 2 is the greatest." In my mind, the best player in the league is the most valuable to his team (and vice-versa). Playing on a lesser team does not make a player's absolute worth/value any greater (although it may make their value relative to their teammates' increase). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjlegend 155 Report post Posted March 12, 2009 Danny Markov was a'ight. I'd take Danny over Andrei. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Shoreline Report post Posted March 12, 2009 Derek Meech. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Electrophile 3,554 Report post Posted March 12, 2009 AHAHAHAAAAA HAHAHAHAHAHAAA. Funniest thread on LGW. Correction, the funniest thread was the one calling for someone else to replace Nick as captain because Nick is quiet and doesn't throw s*** around the locker room while going on expletive-laced tirades. Now THAT was funny. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eva unit zero 271 Report post Posted March 12, 2009 I realize fully what the awards say. It says player deemed most valuable to his team blah blah blah. What it does not say, however, is "Given to the most important player on a team where the difference in importance between numbers 1 and 2 is the greatest." In my mind, the best player in the league is the most valuable to his team (and vice-versa). Playing on a lesser team does not make a player's absolute worth/value any greater (although it may make their value relative to their teammates' increase). I guess I would put it out this way. I'll just rate a player's skill as a number from 1-10 for the example's sake. Say two teams are tied for the conference lead. One team has two lines of forwards which are 6s and one which is an 8 and two 7s, and then a first line with a 9 and two 8s. Their defense is two 8s, two 7s, and two 6s, and they have a goaltender who is a 9. The other team has a defense with a 9, two 8s, two 7s, and a 6; a first line with a 10, a 9, and a 7, a second line with a 9 and two 8s, a third line with three 7s, and a fourth line with a 7 and two 6s; their goalie is an 8. The best player is obviously the 10. But he's not the most valuable on the two teams; that would probably be the goaltender who is a 9. His team has much weaker talent yet is competing at the same level. As the team's goaltender, he is probably more valuable than the first line forward of the same skill level. I guess the difference between best player and MVP for me is defined when a team really needs a player to win or not. If your team is able to win more than half their games with you out of the lineup, you are not the league's MVP even if you are it's best player. Yes, this does mean that great players on bad teams get a better shot at the Hart by that logic. But if two players are of equal skill, and one is on a great team which has several other players close to his caliber, while the other is far above the skill level of any of his teammates...them wouldn't you say that the player who is on the bad team IS the more valuable player? The only situation where I would give an MVP award to one player over another when the second player's teammates were obviously worse and the skill levels of the players weren't drastically different is if one team doesn't make the playoffs; i.e. the player who would be winning the MVP award hasn't done anything for the team worth being named MVP for. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reds4Life 51 Report post Posted March 12, 2009 French Canadians. That's all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SouthernWingsFan 854 Report post Posted March 12, 2009 Markov perhaps may be better this year, haven't watched enough of the Canadiens or him to determine accurately, but I'll take Lidstrom over him still pretty much every time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
toby91_ca 620 Report post Posted March 12, 2009 The only "Best Player" award given out officially by the NHL is voted on by members of the NHLPA. It is the Lester B. Pearson Award and is given in most years to the same player as the Hart Trophy, with rare exception. This is due to the Hart trophy being voted on as a "Best Player" award rather than the "MVP" award it is supposed to be. I'm not so sure about that. I think that's the way it used to be, but not so much anymore and certainly not when the Pearson was first introduced. Between the early 80s and late 90s, the Pearson would very rarely go to someone other than the Hart winner, however, during those years you had guys like Gretzky and Lemieux winning most of these awards. In the last 8 seasons, the Pearson had gone to someone other than the Hart winner 4 times (I wouldn't call those rare exceptions). In the 37 year history of the Pearson, it's gone to players other than Hart winners 15 times. I'm thinking we might start seeing it going to the same guy most years again though with guys like Crosby and Ovechkin, you would have to imgine they will battle for the awards most years and if one gets more votes for the Hart than the other, you have to figure they'd also get the Pearson (held true for the past couple years anyway). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest mindfly Report post Posted March 12, 2009 Havent watched many montreal games, but lidström has had some brutal games, some mediocre and some brillian games... markov has more points has he not, so i'd say Markov.. THIS season. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
12Newf 0 Report post Posted March 12, 2009 Since Markov isn't even one of the 10 best defensemen in the league, I'd hate to think where that puts Lidstrom on this moron's list. Laughable comparison. This must be one of those people who goes on imdb to tell everyone that "The Dark Knight" is better than "The Godfather". okay for starters this particular comparison between markov and lidstrom is mind bogglingly stupid. but as for your point about imdb this may be my biggest pet peeve because seriously how in God's name is The Dark Knight considered the 6th best movie ever made?!? not that i didnt like the movie, in fact i thought it was great but they need to ban 15 year olds from voting on that site. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pjgj13 30 Report post Posted March 12, 2009 I have asked numerous times, but what does scoring goals and getting assists have to do with being a Norris nominee? While Lids has been one of the top scorers on D the last decade and change, it shouldn't matter if he isn't even the top scorer on the Wings D. Does that mean Rafs is a leading nominee? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RWK23 0 Report post Posted March 12, 2009 (edited) Havent watched many montreal games, but lidström has had some brutal games, some mediocre and some brillian games... markov has more points has he not, so i'd say Markov.. THIS season. How do you know Markov hasn't had any brutal or mediocre games? He's a -2 while Nick is +23. Obviously, +/- is a team stat, but still. That's a whopping difference. Looking at points to judge a defenseman is extremely short-sighted. Not to mention, it isn't like Markov is blowing Lidstrom away in points. He has five more than him. Lidstrom is having the better season. Edited March 12, 2009 by RWK23 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sureWhyNot 19 Report post Posted March 12, 2009 Who, especially on this board - but in general would claim, with a straight face, that Markov is better then Lidstrom. Don't get me wrong but it's Lidstrom and it's a no brainer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eva unit zero 271 Report post Posted March 13, 2009 I'm not so sure about that. I think that's the way it used to be, but not so much anymore and certainly not when the Pearson was first introduced. Between the early 80s and late 90s, the Pearson would very rarely go to someone other than the Hart winner, however, during those years you had guys like Gretzky and Lemieux winning most of these awards. In the last 8 seasons, the Pearson had gone to someone other than the Hart winner 4 times (I wouldn't call those rare exceptions). In the 37 year history of the Pearson, it's gone to players other than Hart winners 15 times. I'm thinking we might start seeing it going to the same guy most years again though with guys like Crosby and Ovechkin, you would have to imgine they will battle for the awards most years and if one gets more votes for the Hart than the other, you have to figure they'd also get the Pearson (held true for the past couple years anyway). What is odd is years like 1988-89, when those who voted on the Hart trophy decided that the "MVP" was the second leading scorer, one of four players with 150+ points, and one of two players on his line to clear that mark. This is while those who voted on the Pearson decided that the "Best player" was the only 150+ point scorer who didn't have at least one linemate with 100+ points; in other words the two trophies were awarded using the criteria of the other trophy looking at the circumstances surrounding the players. It's like Gretzky's eight consecutive Hart trophies; I find it hard to believe that another player was not more valuable to his team in any one of those seasons. Not discounting Gretzky's ability...but Ray Bourque as a Hart winner in 1986-67 might have been a better pick, as one example. Edmonton was still a top team even if you take Gretzky away. Bourque was Boston's top scorer by a wide margin, as well as being their top defensive player. He did win his first of five Norrises in eight seasons that year, however. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wing Across The Pond 196 Report post Posted March 13, 2009 This year ? Honestly ? Markov. sorry. Career-wise, Lidstrom is obviously better. But the poll and debate is THIS year, so I think you could make a solid case for Markov. Statistically, with the exception of +/-, Markov is technically "better" than Lidstrom THIS year. The differences between Markov's and Lidstrom's +/- could partially be attributed to the team surrounding each of them and does not necessarily reflect how well or poorly they as an individual are playing. Therefore, I say it is a push THIS year. Still no... Lids makes more unnoticed plays than any Dman I've seen. Granted I dont get to watch much hockey but I've never seen a Dman make so many play-breaking pokechecks or dig out so many pucks from the boards or behind the net. Plus, over first 2 periods against Calgary last night, he was on fire. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bellarina 1 Report post Posted March 13, 2009 French Canadians. That's all. What about French Canadians?? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reds4Life 51 Report post Posted March 13, 2009 What about French Canadians?? History proves French Canadians (Habs fans) tend to overrate (more than other fans) their players. No other fans are even close to Habs fans when it comes to craziness. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Valas19 50 Report post Posted March 13, 2009 I had to check to verify that Markov is actually leading the team in scoring. True enough. That seems to me to be absolutely pathetic and speaks volumes about the offense. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SuperNovaXll 124 Report post Posted March 13, 2009 Geez....at first I thought this was a joke topic Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
uk_redwing 495 Report post Posted March 13, 2009 Aww I thought it was gonna be Danny Markov I miss that guy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ms_Hockey 0 Report post Posted March 13, 2009 ...? This isn't even a contest. Markov is a great d-man, but to compare him to the likes of Lidstrom - and to say he's better on the whole - is ridiculous. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bellarina 1 Report post Posted March 13, 2009 History proves French Canadians (Habs fans) tend to overrate (more than other fans) their players. No other fans are even close to Habs fans when it comes to craziness. Hab fans had some of the best teams and players ever. I agree with you that they overrate their players but it is not as bad as Toronto. One thing about Hab fans, they will jump on their players faster than any other team, over rated or not. In Montreal no one is safe except The Rocket. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lomekian 201 Report post Posted March 14, 2009 Ummm Godfather II sucked ass. You give off such a vibe of ignorance. Some people might have licked the Dark Knight better than the Godfather. Godfather III surely..godfather II was a wonderful film... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lomekian 201 Report post Posted March 14, 2009 Oh and Lids...by a disttance...as one poster mentioned the number of minimum fus plays he makes in tight situations is incredible. Ok he's not been at his best this year, but he's probably still got a half-chance of retaining hte norris... Markov...Norris....never..simple as.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
