What The Hell Is A 'Hart Trophy'?
by FlyingV on Mar 26, 2010 2:30 PM PDT
Email
PrintOkay, so I haven't posted before. Nor have I commented. I live in Montreal as I study, and coverage of the Canucks here is usually mildly condescending and usually nonexistent. I feel better because the Habs have Scott Gomez, who is super awesome at hockey. Lurking this board for the entire season has quickly made it my favourite among those I follow regularly. Anyhow, I usually read posts as I rush off to class (or in class...) and don't really have the time to think of anything genuinely constructive to say.
So why the, have I chose now to start posting? Well, when I woke up this morning (early afternoon) I saw that Puck Daddy's Sean Leahy had posted an interesting article on the five leading candidates for the Hart. According to Senor Leahy, they were Alex Ovechkin, Henrik Sedin, Sidney Crosby, Ryan Miller and Ilya Bryzgalov. None of these are a surprise, and are all are certainly worthy or Hart consideration. But why? What does it actually mean to be a Hart Trophy candidate? I attempt to answer this semi-rhetorical question after the jump!
Here is the page for the Hart Memorial Trophy at NHL.com. This is the first sentence:
The Hart Memorial Trophy is an annual award given to the player judged to be the most valuable to his team.
Great. That's an excellent idea for a trophy. This is the second sentence:
The winner is selected in a poll of the Professional Hockey Writers' Association in all NHL cities at the end of the regular season.
Now, this is not as great. Professional hockey writers make their money because people want to consume the hockey media content they create. This means that the more interest there is in their own markets, more demand will be created for hockey media content, and the more money the writers stand to make. Based on this analysis, it would seem that it would be in the interest of hockey writers to promote their teams' own guys. Furthermore, if one player is deemed as 'better' for the image or marketing of the league, writers stand to gain from promoting him (or her, in the case of certain players - Sidney, here's looking at you).
I'm not saying that all writers choose their votes this way, but it would be naive to think that this doesn't happen. The problem is that this style of voting doesn't really lend itself to deciding which player is most valuable to his team, but which player is most valuable to the league or to the writers.
I think you all know why I'm going on about this. Henrik Sedin is in heavy in Hart discussions. But does anybody think Henrik Sedin is going to win more votes from writers than Ovechkin? Crosby? Probably not. Yet the Caps have done fine without Ovechkin. The Pens had to 'struggle' through the season without a 100% Evgeni Malkin, and had to tough it out with only Crosby, Staal, Fleury, and Gonchar (without Crosby, they still easily would have made the playoffs). (I'm not going to get into stats here as I am already rambling on and on and on, but the Puck Daddy article has plenty of 'em.) Miller and Bryzgalov are the reasons their teams are where they are, yet because it seems to be impossible for a goalie to win the Hart, they will probably not get the recognition they deserve, either.
So what's the answer? Well, remember that talk about how the NHL should change the names of its awards? Let them do it. Change the names. Then let's take the old names and create a new set of awards. Untelevised. No red carpet. Hell, we don't even have to have trophies or a ceremony! But here's the deal: the players vote on all of the awards. We'll have the Hart, the Lady Byng, the Calder, the Vezina, the Norris, the Selke, and the Adams. And they'll all be decided by the players. Sure, they have some stake in the results as well, but not even close to the same amount as the writers. The players have more respect for what these awards mean, know what's its like to have their shot blocked by the same guy over and over again, know what it's like to run into an unstoppable goaltender, know what its like to have their line matched relentlessly by a feisty coach. They can create a set of honest results that will give fans real insight into what the league is like.
Alright. This is unrealistic, and probably not even that great of an idea, but whatever. It would be interesting, to say the least, and maybe some goalies and western conference players will finally get their due. Also, I promise next time I post something it will be half this long.
30 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Thanks for posting, Flying V!
But does anybody think Henrik Sedin is going to win more votes from writers than Ovechkin?
Not me. But then again, it’s gotta be close. Ovechkin only has 1 more game winning goal than Hank, for example. But if Hank wins the scoring race you never know. Ilya Bryzgalov’s numbers are awesome. I don’t see why he doesn’t get a shot either.
I trust the writers’ judgment, actually.
I think the Province put together a very good argument for Hank winning the Hart. See here:
Botchford points out that even though Ovechkin has quite a few games in hand, the actual ice time only differs by 55 minutes (the equivalent of about three games of ice time), so the gap isn’t really so huge. And he also mentions the Caps still have a very good GFA without all the goals Ovechkin has been in on, while the Canucks can’t say the same about Henrik.
I think Ovechkin is probably still going to win the Hart, but if no bias is present (which there probably will be) then it should be a very close race at this point.
Yeah…I read that one.
Hank does it with less ice time too. Even with the suspensions, Hank has only had 55 more minutes all season.
I get what Vee and Sean are saying about Bryz’.
Except that a lot of those wins are shootout, and he benefits from the same defense that Luongo did his first year here.
They play that “system”. That helps a good goalie become very good pretty quick. Of course he has had a good season, and is a very good goalie. But even a goalie almost as good would put up career numbers on a defense system team like Phx. They are like the NJD of the East, with less scoring!
It probably will be Ovie. To me, it should be Hank.
But I am a Canuck fan…so biased…right?
;-)
"I’m not asking for first-line money or top six money," Burrows said. "I don’t think it changes anything. I still consider myself a checker. That’s what I think I am first. That’s how I want to be paid. "If I can generate offence once in a while, I think it’s a plus for the team." Alex Burrows...Mar/09
Once again, I agree completely with Dan.
I was gonna say the same about Bryz. Turco put up great numbers under Tippett as well and look at him now.
I think it should really be down to Hank, Ovie, and Miller. You could argue for Crosby instead of Ovie since the Caps can win with or without him.
Poutine & Meatballs
Nah! Did you project the Coyotes to pull this shit off? I didn’t. Sure, Tippett gets the Adams and Breezie gets the MVP. Just my opinion.
by Sean Zandberg on Mar 26, 2010 8:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Ovechkin is a great player but Washington has shown time and time again that it doesn’t even matter if he’s in the lineup or not. They can win and dominate hockey games even when he isn’t in the lineup. It wouldn’t make sense to give him the MVP but not much about the NHL makes much sense so he’ll probably get it.
it doesn’t even matter if he’s in the lineup or not. They can win and dominate hockey games even when he isn’t in the lineup.
The issue that I have with this line of reasoning is that when Ovechkin is gone, the other Caps clearly step their game up because they know they need to make up for his loss. With Boudreau (and presumably many of the Capitals) thinking the suspensions were unwarranted, it served as a motivational factor.
by sixsevenfiftysix on Mar 30, 2010 4:37 PM PDT up reply actions
What difference does that make though? They are clearly good enough to win and score a ton of goals without him. So he isn’t as valuable to his team as someone like Bryzgalov. Does the motivation for why the team plays well without Ovie really matter?
"We love them, We mourn for them, Unlucky boys of Red" - Morrissey
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"He's got a man deep..wait, no that IS Mandeep!!" - Don Taylor
by Section 312 on Mar 30, 2010 4:42 PM PDT up reply actions
If we were taking “the player judged to be the most valuable to his team” literally, any voter who doesn’t list a goaltender first, second, and third should have to resign. We’re obviously not.
They are clearly good enough to win […] without him.
But to be first in the league going away? Doubtful.
Does the motivation for why the team plays well without Ovie really matter?
Not in and of itself—I’m just using it to show why saying “the Caps won most of their games without Ovechkin!!!!” is an inherently flawed argument.
by sixsevenfiftysix on Mar 30, 2010 7:44 PM PDT up reply actions
You take away Ovie’s goals and they still lead the league in Goals For. So they probably would still win their terrible division and have a shot at first in their conference.
"We love them, We mourn for them, Unlucky boys of Red" - Morrissey
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"He's got a man deep..wait, no that IS Mandeep!!" - Don Taylor
by Section 312 on Mar 30, 2010 10:00 PM PDT up reply actions
You take away Ovie’s goals and they still lead the league in Goals For
Hopefully anyone who reads a blog about hockey can see why this is a fallacy.
by sixsevenfiftysix on Mar 30, 2010 11:46 PM PDT up reply actions
Not in and of itself—I’m just using it to show why saying "the Caps won most of their games without Ovechkin!!!!" is an inherently flawed argument.
Not flawed at all. What better way is there to see how a team does if their star player isn’t in the lineup.
"We love them, We mourn for them, Unlucky boys of Red" - Morrissey
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"He's got a man deep..wait, no that IS Mandeep!!" - Don Taylor
by Section 312 on Mar 30, 2010 10:01 PM PDT up reply actions
The issue that I have with this line of reasoning is that when Ovechkin is gone, the other Caps clearly step their game up because they know they need to make up for his loss. With Boudreau (and presumably many of the Capitals) thinking the suspensions were unwarranted, it served as a motivational factor.
Short version: Ovechkin doesn’t have to be in the lineup to make his mark on the team.
by sixsevenfiftysix on Mar 30, 2010 11:47 PM PDT up reply actions
Ovechkin doesn’t have to be in the lineup to make his mark on the team
I am going to end this discussion now since clearly you are some sort of Ovie fanboy who has no interest in basing this discussion in the real world.
"We love them, We mourn for them, Unlucky boys of Red" - Morrissey
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"He's got a man deep..wait, no that IS Mandeep!!" - Don Taylor
by Section 312 on Mar 31, 2010 10:10 AM PDT up reply actions
It’s your right to think that, and this is probably my last comment here, but I don’t think it’s absurd to suggest that when a key player on a team has to miss some time that other players will step up. That’s not unique to Ovechkin.
by sixsevenfiftysix on Mar 31, 2010 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions
That should say that other players TRY to step up. Not all teams are good enough to make up for injuries or suspensions to their top guys. The Caps are one of the teams that is more than talented enough to step up. But that has nothing to do with Ovechkin. That’s not Ovechkin exerting some sort of influence over the team. That isn’t Ovechkin making his mark on the team. That’s just guys getting more ice time in key situations.
It’s not absurd to suggest that other players try to and are forced to try to step up when a superstar goes down. It is the height of absurdity to suggest that
Ovechkin doesn’t have to be in the lineup to make his mark on the team
"We love them, We mourn for them, Unlucky boys of Red" - Morrissey
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"He's got a man deep..wait, no that IS Mandeep!!" - Don Taylor
by Section 312 on Mar 31, 2010 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions
So...
That’s not unique to Ovechkin.
?
Everybody knows
That the world is full of stupid people
Well I got the pistols so I'll keep the Pesos
Yeah that seems fair
Right. Nearly every team in the league has at least one or two guys like this.
As I said above, I’m not even coming close to saying that the fact that the Caps play well without Ovechkin should be used as evidence for why Ovechkin should win a Hart Trophy. I’m simply using it as a counterpoint against people who think that simply because the Caps didn’t tank while Ovechkin missed a small number of games spread around throughout the season he must not be “valuable” (or “most valuable”) to his team.
by sixsevenfiftysix on Mar 31, 2010 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Well that’s not “simply” why I think Ovie shouldn’t win it but it’s a part of the reason.
"We love them, We mourn for them, Unlucky boys of Red" - Morrissey
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"He's got a man deep..wait, no that IS Mandeep!!" - Don Taylor
by Section 312 on Mar 31, 2010 4:33 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, that’s fair. I absolutely see the logic in why someone might think either Henrik Sedin, Crosby, Ryan Miller, Bryzgalov, Ovechkin, and maybe one or two others could be a deserving Hart winner. I just wanted to provide an alternate viewpoint on that one line of reasoning that I think is flawed, just as I would want to refute flawed lines of reasoning in favor of Ovechkin.
by sixsevenfiftysix on Mar 31, 2010 4:47 PM PDT up reply actions
Speaking of Bryzgalov:
Wayne Gretzky said today(?): "
In my mind Bryzgalov has been the most valuable player," Gretzky said of the key player behind what is arguably the story of the year in the NHL. “Nobody picked Phoenix to be where they are today and in my mind that’s how you pick an MVP.”
So when Gretzky won all those Hart Trophies in the mid-80s nobody picked them to be a world-beating team? Riiiiight Gretz.
www.nucksandpucks.com
http://twitter.com/nucksandpucks
by nucksandpucks on Mar 26, 2010 5:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Great post V. Thanks for joining the conversation.
I like what you were proposing. Knowing the NHL, it will never happen!!
Though, they do have a player voted award. The Lester Patrick. Naslund won it once ( year escapes me…2003(?).
Its pretty obvious that Hank has MVP credentials. Just imagine the Canucks without his 100 points.
But, sadly, it is probably just as obvious that the Eastern Media Cabal have their own ideas. Never mind that Hank does it in the tougher West. And let us not forget folks like Douche Cox, amongst others with a vote, who have already stated an anti Vancouver bias on numerous occasions. (both city and team, but that is another story… ;-( )
Good insight on the goalies…most writers seem to think “they have the Vezina”.
Lets see how relevant they are this year. If you go by the definition of MVP “to their team”, it has to be Henrik.
Sadly, it becomes more…political than that.
"I’m not asking for first-line money or top six money," Burrows said. "I don’t think it changes anything. I still consider myself a checker. That’s what I think I am first. That’s how I want to be paid. "If I can generate offence once in a while, I think it’s a plus for the team." Alex Burrows...Mar/09
I’m not buying the Eastern bias on this one, Dan. Unless you can start pointing out biases in the past from this list I think those players were deserving. Plus, the Lester Pearson award winners don’t differ all that much.
by Sean Zandberg on Mar 26, 2010 5:48 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree Sean…it just comes from being a life long Westerner. That sense of what’s the right word…alienation? And it does happen. To the point where close losers of awards ..like Luongo his first season here. But of course you cannot argue with players on either list. They are the elite of the league. It just comes down to preference…and numbers.
There is the few writers that have obvious biases like Cox, but mostly its just a numbers game, and the fact that they see less games from out West.
Being in bed and all. The fact that there are probably way more writers in the Eastern time zone than the Left Coast…can’t help either.
Even with all that, I still hope that, in the end, when and if Hank wins the Art Ross, the numbers just become too high.
Thats what I meant, not the differing between the two lists.
But you can’t be saying that, in all leagues, there have not been deserving players in the PDT zone that have not gotten recognition because of where they played. Its a common theme.
Hell, look at the NCAA, for instance. The PAC-10 got 2 teams in the dance, and as low seeds? Washington and St Mary’s both had to win first and second round games before some Eastern writers started saying they were for real.
"I’m not asking for first-line money or top six money," Burrows said. "I don’t think it changes anything. I still consider myself a checker. That’s what I think I am first. That’s how I want to be paid. "If I can generate offence once in a while, I think it’s a plus for the team." Alex Burrows...Mar/09
To the point where close losers of awards ..like Luongo his first season here
I dunno, Crosby had 120 points that season…dominating..not just numbers
Yeah, I don’t have a problem with Crosby winning that year.
But man, that was such a sick year by Lu. Don’t know if we’ll ever see that again.
Poutine & Meatballs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Nucks Misconduct Store
Your clothing sucks. Go fix it.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
