toby91_ca 620 Report post Posted April 12, 2010 Just thought of something else regarding Hart vs. Pearson and that it doesn't always work the way I think it should. In 1988/89, Yzerman won the Pearson and Gretzky won the Hart. If I was voting, I would have picked the other way around or even gave Yzerman both. Yzerman had 62 more points than his closest team, while Gretzky was only up 18pts on his next teammate. Points don't always tell the story, but when it's that much of a gap, I think you need to consider it. Therefore, I think Yzerman was probably more deserving of the MVP, but I wouldn't have had a problem with Wayne as the most outstanding player......actual results went the other way. I think there is 2 reasons, number 1, the Hart has generally been handed to the best player (not necessarily MVP, so you never know how the voters might vote, but I have seen a bit of a change in that regard), number 2, these awards are voted on by different groups of people, so comparing doesn't make a lot of sense anyway. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pepist 3 Report post Posted April 12, 2010 How can you possibly say that Henrik should win it? Even though Daniel has been injured, Henrik would still have much less points without him. I just can't give an MVP award to a 1/2 of a duo like that. Crosby or Miller it is now. Ovechkin would be there if it was given for the BEST player in the league as he has missed 9 games. But those missed games hurt him when its about the MVP. Also, I don't see how Bryzgalov could win it as he is basically just a Miller Lite. IMO that Buffalo team don't look that much better than Phoenix. They both have about the same number of points also. Miller has better stats of the two so no chance for Bryzgalov to win it. He kept the exact same scoring pace when Daniel was injured (19 games). He just gave Burrows and Samuelsson career years too.. Also, consider that no player has had more even strength points (83) since Jagr in '95. I'm not saying it's clear cut that he should get it, but it's certainly not clear cut that he shouldn't. It also counts that he's in the western conference and, like I said above, scored 21 more points than anyone else in that conference. That's more of a Pearson stat though, I suppose. As is the fact that his points/minute played is nearly identical to OVs, ie better than anyone else's but them two (and I think possibly Daniel actually). Also, 1/2 of a duo; last time I checked, Backstrom was fourth in scoring with 101.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Finnish Wing 110 Report post Posted April 12, 2010 He kept the exact same scoring pace when Daniel was injured (19 games). He just gave Burrows and Samuelsson career years too.. Also, consider that no player has had more even strength points (83) since Jagr in '95. I'm not saying it's clear cut that he should get it, but it's certainly not clear cut that he shouldn't. It also counts that he's in the western conference and, like I said above, scored 21 more points than anyone else in that conference. That's more of a Pearson stat though, I suppose. As is the fact that his points/minute played is nearly identical to OVs, ie better than anyone else's but them two (and I think possibly Daniel actually). Also, 1/2 of a duo; last time I checked, Backstrom was fourth in scoring with 101.. But it's the Sedin twins. They even have the same PPG. I just can't imagine give an MVP award for one of them. Maybe they can share it some season... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pepist 3 Report post Posted April 12, 2010 But it's the Sedin twins. They even have the same PPG. I just can't imagine give an MVP award for one of them. Maybe they can share it some season... Hehe. They are an entity I know what you mean. Funny how Hank is maybe considered because Daniel was injured. Only way one of them could possibly get it.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xtrememachine1 795 Report post Posted April 12, 2010 He's got the same number of points as your boy Crosby and one less goal in 9 fewer games? yeah, I thought so. Ovechkin's ppg is 1.51. Crosby's is 1.35. Ovechkin has a +45 and Crosby has a +15 on a team that only had 4 more goals against than Ovechkin's. Think about that-- the Penguins let 237 goals in and the Caps let 233 goals in. Yet Crosby is only a +15 compared to Ovechkin's +45. It's actually hilarious that you would say Ovechkin's not in the top 3. Hilarious. This The thing with the Hart Trophy is that its a popularity contest. Ovie could have more goals, points, assists, better plus minus, win the Presidents trophy and do it in less games and they would STILL give it to Crosby because he "scored the gold medal winning goal" or because Ovie's won it too many times already. Crap like this already happened. Check out 88-89, when the Ovie of the 80's, Mario Lemieux, had more goals, tied for most assists, a much better plus/minus (41 to 15), and finished with 31 more points than the 80's version of Crosby, Wayne Gretzky. Mario won the Art Ross and Gretzky won the Hart. What did Gretzky do in that season? He got traded and married. Hart Trophy = NHL Popularity contest Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Finnish Wing 110 Report post Posted April 13, 2010 This The thing with the Hart Trophy is that its a popularity contest. Ovie could have more goals, points, assists, better plus minus, win the Presidents trophy and do it in less games and they would STILL give it to Crosby because he "scored the gold medal winning goal" or because Ovie's won it too many times already. Crap like this already happened. Check out 88-89, when the Ovie of the 80's, Mario Lemieux, had more goals, tied for most assists, a much better plus/minus (41 to 15), and finished with 31 more points than the 80's version of Crosby, Wayne Gretzky. Mario won the Art Ross and Gretzky won the Hart. What did Gretzky do in that season? He got traded and married. Hart Trophy = NHL Popularity contest No. It's about being more important to your team. Ovechkin missed 9 games. Caps went on and it was barely even noticeable that he wasn't there. As said, if it was about the best player in the league Ovechkin would have better chances. Crosby was more important to his team this regular season, because Malkin was injured as well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carman 387 Report post Posted April 13, 2010 This The thing with the Hart Trophy is that its a popularity contest. Ovie could have more goals, points, assists, better plus minus, win the Presidents trophy and do it in less games and they would STILL give it to Crosby because he "scored the gold medal winning goal" or because Ovie's won it too many times already. Crap like this already happened. Check out 88-89, when the Ovie of the 80's, Mario Lemieux, had more goals, tied for most assists, a much better plus/minus (41 to 15), and finished with 31 more points than the 80's version of Crosby, Wayne Gretzky. Mario won the Art Ross and Gretzky won the Hart. What did Gretzky do in that season? He got traded and married. Hart Trophy = NHL Popularity contest Gretzky only got traded to a non hockey market and helped grow the sport by a huge margin. That was one of the biggest and most important moves in the history of hockey, while he probably didn't deserve the Hart on paper what he did to the sport by winning that trophy means a hell of a lot more to hockey. Obviously that's not fair, but you can't deny that Gretzky winning the Hart helped grow that fan base on the West coast. Get over your hate for Crosby, it's not healthy to hate the sport because you can't accept that a certain 22 year old has in the last year Won a Stanley Cup Scored one of the biggest goals in hockey history and had yet another 100 point and MVP type season(Not saying he 100% outright deserves it, but he is definitely in the discussion.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Opie 308 Report post Posted April 13, 2010 Carman no offense as that post was spot on but when you said: Scored one of the biggest goals in hockey history I had to think what goal of his you were talking about, that to me says wrong answer my man. I still am not sure what goal you mean, but I assume you mean the Olympic gold medal goal, which is not even close to the Miracle goal. You need to let this anti-Crosby poster hate go man, if some one can not recognize the talent that he is, at age 22 (more impressive) than are they really worth it, to me that says they know jack s*** about hockey. Trying to make his goals greater than they are is really not helping your cause. Some people will never forgive him for the fact that the NHL made him the face of the league, yeah you read that right, they blame Sid for the LEAGUE putting his face all over the place, like if they were in his shoes they would have said "Oh Hell no, that would make me a sell out" or whatever other crap they call him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carman 387 Report post Posted April 13, 2010 (edited) Well I didn't say it the greatest goal or anything. But in recent history there haven't been many great goals. If you don't think an overtime game winning goal in the Olympic gold medal game is big, then that's your opinion. But I think it is. Edited April 13, 2010 by Carman Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Free_Candy 38 Report post Posted April 13, 2010 (edited) Sid's got a good shot at it because he hasn't gotten a lot of help. Malkin and Fleury's play this year has made me want to punch babies. (okay not seriously on the last part, but yes, frustrating.) Would have no problem with Sedin winning, though. As far as Ovie goes, Bäckström's been so awesome I'm not so sure this is his year. He'd probably still get the LBP though. Edited April 13, 2010 by Free_Candy Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Finnish Wing 110 Report post Posted April 13, 2010 Vancouver Olympics 2010 were considered the best of the best so far. Scoring the OT winner in the gold medal game is pretty big goal IMO. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheOwl 77 Report post Posted April 13, 2010 Personally, I think they should figure out a system where goaltenders have their own "Hart" trophy. Or have two Hart trophies, one for the goalie, one for the forward. Their is no way on earth you could ever say Henrik, or Crosby is more valuable too their team then Miller for example. Or maybe just make it a forward only category, just have the Vezina. You could make a decent argument for why a dozen goaltenders in the league should be considered for the Hart. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xtrememachine1 795 Report post Posted April 13, 2010 Get over your hate for Crosby, it's not healthy to hate the sport... Hate the sport? I dislike Crosby because he's Mr Good Guy when everything's going his way and he's a whiny little punk when things aren't going his way. He matched Ovechkin in points, has just one more goal while playing in 9 more games. As for importance to the team, the Capitals don't win the Presidents trophy without Ovechkin. They would probably be 4th or 5th best team in the conference... maybe. As for Crosby's importance, when he got injured a couple years ago and Malkin was the top gun, he almost carried the team to the 1st seed in the East. Earlier this year Malkin missed 7 games, during that time Crosby scored zero goals, had 3 assists, and was a -5. You tell me who's more important to the team. Seems like they miss Malkin a hell of a lot more when he's gone than Crosby. 1 Nev reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crotty99 302 Report post Posted April 13, 2010 Hate the sport? I dislike Crosby because he's Mr Good Guy when everything's going his way and he's a whiny little punk when things aren't going his way. He matched Ovechkin in points, has just one more goal while playing in 9 more games. As for importance to the team, the Capitals don't win the Presidents trophy without Ovechkin. They would probably be 4th or 5th best team in the conference... maybe. As for Crosby's importance, when he got injured a couple years ago and Malkin was the top gun, he almost carried the team to the 1st seed in the East. Earlier this year Malkin missed 7 games, during that time Crosby scored zero goals, had 3 assists, and was a -5. You tell me who's more important to the team. Seems like they miss Malkin a hell of a lot more when he's gone than Crosby. He hates losing, it might not be a great thing but its something I could understand. If i was getting my ass handed to me in the stanley cup finals I'd be pissed too. Ovechkin is just as bad in this respect, possibly worse since he begins to shun the media. Take a look at the recent olympics for an example, do you hate Ovechkin too? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
toby91_ca 620 Report post Posted April 13, 2010 Hate the sport? I dislike Crosby because he's Mr Good Guy when everything's going his way and he's a whiny little punk when things aren't going his way. He matched Ovechkin in points, has just one more goal while playing in 9 more games. As for importance to the team, the Capitals don't win the Presidents trophy without Ovechkin. They would probably be 4th or 5th best team in the conference... maybe. As for Crosby's importance, when he got injured a couple years ago and Malkin was the top gun, he almost carried the team to the 1st seed in the East. Earlier this year Malkin missed 7 games, during that time Crosby scored zero goals, had 3 assists, and was a -5. You tell me who's more important to the team. Seems like they miss Malkin a hell of a lot more when he's gone than Crosby. What does 2 years ago have to do with this year? Crosby missed only 1 game this year, they lost that game. He was there for all other games, which is a + when comparing to Ovechkin who wasn't there for 10 games.....therefore, couldn't help his team. Suggesting Washington would probably be 4th or 5th in the conference at best is nothing more than complete speculation, you can only go by facts and in the 10 games he was out, they had a better record than the 72 games he was in. If you only consider these 2 guys, I vote for Ovechkin for Pearson, but I vote for Crosby for Hart. When it comes right down to it, the Hart can be awarded to any 1 of 5 guys and you wouldn't have too many people questioning the result. I can't remember that ever being the case in the last number of years I've been watching. Vancouver Olympics 2010 were considered the best of the best so far. Scoring the OT winner in the gold medal game is pretty big goal IMO. Perhaps, but not sure why this would have any impact on Crosby's chances at an NHL award. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xtrememachine1 795 Report post Posted April 13, 2010 What does 2 years ago have to do with this year? Crosby missed only 1 game this year, they lost that game. Maybe you didn't see this part... Earlier this year Malkin missed 7 games, during that time Crosby scored zero goals, had 3 assists, and was a -5. You tell me who's more important to the team. Seems like they miss Malkin a hell of a lot more when he's gone than Crosby. Crosby needs Malkin in order to be successful. If Malkin isn't there, Crosby is invisible. How can Crosby win an award as being the most valuable player when he's not the most valuable player to his team? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carman 387 Report post Posted April 13, 2010 Maybe you didn't see this part... Crosby needs Malkin in order to be successful. If Malkin isn't there, Crosby is invisible. How can Crosby win an award as being the most valuable player when he's not the most valuable player to his team? You really think Malkin and his 79 points is more valuable this year than Crosby? This is exactly what I mean about the Crosby hate. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
toby91_ca 620 Report post Posted April 13, 2010 Maybe you didn't see this part... Crosby needs Malkin in order to be successful. If Malkin isn't there, Crosby is invisible. How can Crosby win an award as being the most valuable player when he's not the most valuable player to his team? I saw that part, but didn't understand the relevance. Crosby has done better with Malkin in the lineup than without....not sure what that shows from an MVP perspective. Also, there was a hell of a lot more than just Malkin missing for those 7 games that you are referring to, not that it matters. If you don't think Crosby was the MVP of the Pens this year, then it's probably a non-starter from a debate perspective. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crotty99 302 Report post Posted April 13, 2010 You really think Malkin and his 79 points is more valuable this year than Crosby? This is exactly what I mean about the Crosby hate. I know what you mean, People here go to great lengths to discredit the guy at every opputtunity. He's hardly perfect but he's a great player simple as that, and for the record so is ovechkin. That's right I like ovechkin AND Crosby! How strange... 1 MacK_Attack reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Finnish Wing 110 Report post Posted April 13, 2010 Perhaps, but not sure why this would have any impact on Crosby's chances at an NHL award. Nobody said it would. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
