| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| admin |
Posted - 03/29/2010 : 10:49:40
Assuming Henrik Sedin wins the NHL's regular season scoring race in 2009/10, by how many points does he have to beat the next place player (all contenders are crushing him in the goal category) in order to win the Hart Trophy? |
| 40 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| irvine |
Posted - 04/06/2010 : 15:55:24
@ Slozo:
The reason I find weighting goals and assists differently is because in the game of hockey (nevermind basketball, different sport.) they are weighted the same!
Regardless of often more than not, a second assist is not very pretty of a pass, it is still an assist in the game of hockey. Thus, I weight them as they are. Simple as that for me.
If I take a guy like Joe Thornton, who often has a ton of assists, it's safe to say it's not luck or another player that is responsible for him getting so many points.... so why should I weight a guy like Ovechkin (who scores so many goals) higher than Joe Thornton, even if Thornton were to finish with more points. Something tells me, Joe did something rite to get that many assists.
It has been the same since I can remember... 1 Goal = 1 Point, 1 Assist = 1 Point. To me, they are equal.
To you, they are not. Which is fine, just differing opinions.
Irvine/prez. |
| Guest2218 |
Posted - 04/06/2010 : 10:14:42
I think it should be Bryzgalov as well. There's so team that's so dependent on one singular player as Phoenix. The Coyotes have no business being in the playoffs, much less contending for the conference title, without him. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 04/06/2010 : 09:26:06
It's hard to switch a measure after it has been used for so long, but I personally like the basketball method of assists. The assist only counts if the pass leads directly to a basket. So if I pass the Ball to Willus and he drops in a 3 pointer, assists for me. Or if I throw a lob pass to Alex116 for a rim rattling 2 hand jam, assist for me. But if I pass the ball to Slozo, he dribbles in with a couple of dazzling moves for a 360-Windmill Dunk, no assists for me. (Geez Slozo, don't you know I get bonus for assists!! Start shooting jump shots ya ball hog!! )
I don't think is would be right to simply weigh one higher than the other. For every garbage 2nd assist, there is a gabage tap in goal. In some cases, the breakout pass by the defensemen to start the 2-1 the other way is just as significant to the play as the text book pass to the goal scorer when the defender committs and the tap in goal by the goal scorer. The cross seam pass on the PP is as important or more important than the shot saved by the goalie to fall in front the the crease and jammed in by the forward.
I think assists should be more specific as to the impact of the play rather than who the last 2 players to touch the puck were.
|
| n/a |
Posted - 04/06/2010 : 05:19:40
Fair enough, Irvine . . . but you still mention that it's "crap" that someone weights goals and assists differently.
I actually don't know of many serious sports people who wouldn't weight them differently.
As I went through before, there are probably about 5 assists for every 3 goals, so that right away MUST weight them differently. And as much as one can tout all the times an assist is the thing that made the goal, more often than not a goal is scored by a skillful shot or deflection . . . and that doesn't count even the second assist, which is a gift stat in my mind.
Of course writers are inconsistent for the most part . . . they want to sound smart and savvy and generally they repeat what someone or everyone else is saying to do so. They'll brag on and on when they were right about (often reading into a vague statement as if it was a specific prediction alongside other contradicting statements) and never admit to being wrong. And I'll tell you why they do all this . . . they want to keep their jobs! Happens in every other workplace as well.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| irvine |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 22:41:38
@ Slozo:
My big thing with Ken Campbell is not solely regarding his most recent crap about weighting goals and assists differently.
It's that he is always being inconsistent and writes garbage more often than not, while being a professional sports writer. Not writing on forums, but actually making a living talking the things he does.
He is often full of bias, inconsistency and self contradiction.
This week, he talks about assists not being as important as goals, yet next week he'll have an article about Joe Thornton being an amazing playmaker, who does not get enough credit because he doesn't up 40+ goals to go with it.
Which, drives me.
Irvine/prez. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 17:06:25
Good points Slozo and we could debate this forever really but we're talking about little things now. Garbage goals vs rebound goals vs flukey goals (off a players skate or body for example) vs, etc, etc. I cannot say that an assist is more important, and in turn, you have a more valid point about a goal being more important. I'll admit, i've seen guys score some unreal unassisted goals where they've done ALL the work themselves. I've yet to see an "ungoaled" assist. Those are just simply referred to as unbelievable plays, with no finish! That's not really my argument anyway. All along, all i was trying to say was that IF Henrik somehow came out on top, there's an argument to be made. Assist guys have won before, Forsberg in 03 for example. Ironically, it was a Canuck who he beat (Naslund), one with 48 goals on the year. Forsberg has just 29, ironically, same as Henrik as of today. Hey, didn't Thornton have 29 in his Hart season as well? Maybe Hank shouldn't try to get his 30th? 
Like i said, i don't see Henrik walking away with the Hart, but i don't think it'd be a travesty or a diservice to anyone else if he did. There are 4 or 5 legitimate candidates this season, and imo, he's one of them. I still say, i'll be quite surprised if he's not at least nominated!
I completely agree with you that for him to have a better shot, he'd have to be far and away (more dominant) the points leader. I do think it's mostly to be noticed more though, not just to make up for the assist to goal ratio. |
| n/a |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 10:30:40
For Alex 116:
A lot of the times a goal wouldn't be a goal without the assist, no . . . but conversely, a lot of the time, there wouldn't be two guys getting an assist without some great shot or snipe!
Hold up - let's track back . . . TWO guys?
That's right - most goals have two assists. So if about 2/3 of the time (I am sure it is more, but I am talking off the top of my head - so I am putting it low for argument's sake) there are two assists to one goal, doesn't that lower the value of the assist right there? See Alex, it's the second assist that is very often the "garbage" assist, the one players get by just being on the ice with the guy who deserves all the credit for the goal . . . whether it be the primary assist guy some of the time, or the goal scorer most of the time.
And no, I am not Ken Campbell, and I didn't even take the time to read his article, lol.
In terms of an ignorance bias . . . I can easily concede such a possibility. But I think the real thing against Henrik is the point about assists not being as valuable as goals, and that he would have to be a bit more dominant to win MVP. And, your point about "the twins" might be right as well, I often hear them as a pair, and it's only this year that I have been hearing them seperated.
But look at it this way . . . twins or not, whenever there is a "dynamic duo" that racks up the points, there is always something taken away from the top guy. Look at Hull and Oates back when they were playing together . . . was Hull given his due as a goal scorer? Not his fair share I'd reckon as he was getting all these great assists . . . and was Oates given his due? Not really, because he had an elite sniper. It is a bit of a no win situation at times, but depends on the style of player (Ovechkin doesn't get this with Backstrom, for instance).
I think Henrik is breaking away from the "he needs Daniel" stigma, but it takes time away from Daniel to truly prove that, and the sampling is still pretty small.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Guest8605 |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 09:35:04
Slozo.........Are you Ken Campbell? |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 08:41:54
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
I see by the pile-up of comments on this sports writer that most of you here think that assists are just as important as goals?
Count me out of that one too - I definitely think goals are more important than assists.
I know many of you will point out the assist during a deflection goal as being more important, and the pretty assist resulting in a tap-in as more important - and you'd probably be right a lot of the time. But the majority of goals IMHO are more important, and require more skill, in my opinion, than an assist, and frankly - the goal is what changes the score, not the assist. So yes, I definitely do place a greater value on the goal scorer as opposed to the pure assist guy.
That's not to say a pure assist guy can't be the MVP - I was totally on board when Forsberg won. Foppa was a dominating player who created the chances to score by holding on to the puck for an unimaginable amount of time while being forechecked by two or three players at a time before dishing off a pass to one of his open teammates . . . he was a great example of an assist guy that really did create something out of nothing a lot of the time.
But I don't see Henrik Sedin as that kind of player, and that's fine - he is a great finesse player with awesome skills, I will give him that. And, I certainly think he deserves to be nominated . . . whether it is alongside any two of Crosby, Ovechkin, Miller, or Bryzgalov. But I don't think he's the mvp this year, myself . . . I see Crosby, Miller, Bryzgalov as more valuable to their team. And knowing that it's not me voting and picking, you'd have to think that Ovechkin will also stand a good chance of getting nominated as well, considering his star power and numbers.
But to say that assists overall are as important as goals . . . this is not something I can agree with.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
Tough to argue with that logic Slozo, but i will. Well, sorta.....An assist isn't an assist if someone doesn't put it in the net, so really, you are correct. But, many times a goal wouldn't be there without an assist! Obviously they're both extremely valuable and to be honest, i don't know if the Hart will really come down to either on anyway. I don't think Henrik's got a real good chance to win it, but i'd be surprised if he's not nominated. However, it's kinda funny how no forward is having a stand out year (compared to other years) yet i still don't see Miller or Bryzgalov winning it either. Kind of a strange year. Those, mostly Canucks fans of course, who think he deserves it, point to Henrik's breakout year, the fact Daniel was hurt for almost 1/4 of the year and the fact that Luongo's had a less than spectacular year as being the proof that he's carried this team. Throw in the fact that Burrows is having a career year and anyone else who plays on that line seems to score (see Samuelsson) and i can't see how anyone would complain if he did steal this award somehow, unless of course, they simply can't stand anything Vancouver!
Sorry to bring this up again, but the thing that's really holding him back from a serious shot at it in my mind is still the eastern bias. I know you don't agree with this, and perhaps it's the wrong word? Bias tends to make it sound intentional, as though the voters have something against the west? A better word might be ignorance, and i don't mean that in an insulting way. Ignorance is usually a very negative word but what i mean is that due to the lack of exposure most stars in the west get back east due mostly to the time difference, the voters don't get much of a chance to appreciate them like they would if they were more local! Many voters who don't get to see Henrik play have already one thing in their minds when it comes to the Canucks. That is that it is Luongo's team and they'll go as far as Luongo will take them. That's something that people all over say about the Canucks, however, unless you've seen this team play this year, and i don't mean once or twice, you might not realize just how important Henrik has been to them and just how much Luongo's struggled. I'd be willing to bet that there are voters out there who don't even realize just how much Luongo's struggled!
Regardless, Miller or Bryzgalov are the one's who, by the wording of the award, should be battling for this award, but in the end will prob be lucky to be even nominated. I've always thought that since there's the Vezina and the Norris, there really should be an award for the best forward. That way, maybe the Hart would be awarded to the real MVP? Just seems that it takes an incredible year by a dman or a goalie, combined with a year where no forward really goes above the rest, to win the Hart. I don't see that being this year, but then again, i don't have a vote either.  |
| HawkinOilCountry |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 08:27:29
I tend to agree with Slozo saying that assists don't hold as much weight as goals, which might very well put the Hart out of reach for Sedin.
Another thing that I feel is going to hurt him is the way he's perceived outside of Vancouver. I'll try to explain:
A lot of people I talk to around edmonton don't talk about Henrik, they talk about the Sedins. I find, and I could be very wrong in this, that the Sedins are talked about like they're a single entity. When people talk about the best players this season I hear this alot:
Ovie
Crosby
Miller
The Sedins
Stamkos
I wouldn't be surprised if the twin-syndrome hurts Henrik's chances as well.
I'm not sure if I said what I meant to say there, so if it doesn't make sense let me know.
The arena wall in chicago should be credited with a goal. |
| n/a |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 04:46:09
I see by the pile-up of comments on this sports writer that most of you here think that assists are just as important as goals?
Count me out of that one too - I definitely think goals are more important than assists.
I know many of you will point out the assist during a deflection goal as being more important, and the pretty assist resulting in a tap-in as more important - and you'd probably be right a lot of the time. But the majority of goals IMHO are more important, and require more skill, in my opinion, than an assist, and frankly - the goal is what changes the score, not the assist. So yes, I definitely do place a greater value on the goal scorer as opposed to the pure assist guy.
That's not to say a pure assist guy can't be the MVP - I was totally on board when Forsberg won. Foppa was a dominating player who created the chances to score by holding on to the puck for an unimaginable amount of time while being forechecked by two or three players at a time before dishing off a pass to one of his open teammates . . . he was a great example of an assist guy that really did create something out of nothing a lot of the time.
But I don't see Henrik Sedin as that kind of player, and that's fine - he is a great finesse player with awesome skills, I will give him that. And, I certainly think he deserves to be nominated . . . whether it is alongside any two of Crosby, Ovechkin, Miller, or Bryzgalov. But I don't think he's the mvp this year, myself . . . I see Crosby, Miller, Bryzgalov as more valuable to their team. And knowing that it's not me voting and picking, you'd have to think that Ovechkin will also stand a good chance of getting nominated as well, considering his star power and numbers.
But to say that assists overall are as important as goals . . . this is not something I can agree with.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Guest0965 |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 03:41:07
i dont think hank will win the hart because of sooo many eastern bias.
plain and simple.
watch and learn.
you'll all see what i mean. |
| Utemin |
Posted - 04/02/2010 : 22:03:24
I say Henrik just snatched it up a few games ago.  |
| irvine |
Posted - 04/01/2010 : 20:27:40
Shortly after replying here, I actually found the post on another website... where I commented on it. And yeah, it was Campbell.
I can never understand that guy.
Irvine/prez. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 04/01/2010 : 15:32:32
quote:
Originally posted by irvine
@ ReyR:
I have not opened your URL, but I would place my last dollar on a bet that Ken Campbell wrote the article you posted.
The reason I say this, (and I have honestly not opened it),
is that I read a similar article elsewhere from this guy, and it was complete and utter garbage. Ken Campbell is the worst sports writer going... I have read many of his articles and each one leaves me wondering how this guy has a job writing his junk.
Irvine/prez.
LOL Irv! I don't have time to read it but openned it to see if you were correct......BINGO! Funny thing is, he was just interviewed locally here and the local radio guys, although showing respect for him, didn't agree with his points either! One in particular (David Pratt) was pretty animated and thinks Ovie shouldn't even be on the ballot and that it should be a race between Crosby, Miller and Sedin. Of course, he is talking about taking it as it's worded. His big argument is that the Caps are 7-2-1 without Ovie?
Anyway, gotta run but thought it was pretty funny you nailed the reporter without reading the article! Kudos.... |
| irvine |
Posted - 04/01/2010 : 14:39:08
@ ReyR:
I have not opened your URL, but I would place my last dollar on a bet that Ken Campbell wrote the article you posted.
The reason I say this, (and I have honestly not opened it),
is that I read a similar article elsewhere from this guy, and it was complete and utter garbage. Ken Campbell is the worst sports writer going... I have read many of his articles and each one leaves me wondering how this guy has a job writing his junk.
Irvine/prez. |
| Utemin |
Posted - 04/01/2010 : 10:20:55
quote:
Originally posted by ReyR
This is probably part of the reason why Henrik won't win and it's absolutely absurd. Scary thing is that this guy actually has a vote and say for the Hart trophy.
"Yes, he deserves to be included in the conversation. No, in my mind, he doesn't deserve to win it.
And the reason I will give is the same reason I stand behind the notion that Peter Forsberg is overrated – too many assists and not enough goals."
Article: http://www.sportingnews.com/nhl/article/2010-04-01/why-henrik-sedin-wont-win-hart-trophy
It's not the fact that he says Henrik doesn't deserve to win it; it's the reason why.
O and spinnerama assists are not as nice as goals? |
| ReyR |
Posted - 04/01/2010 : 09:49:57
This is probably part of the reason why Henrik won't win and it's absolutely absurd. Scary thing is that this guy actually has a vote and say for the Hart trophy.
"Yes, he deserves to be included in the conversation. No, in my mind, he doesn't deserve to win it.
And the reason I will give is the same reason I stand behind the notion that Peter Forsberg is overrated – too many assists and not enough goals."
Article: http://www.sportingnews.com/nhl/article/2010-04-01/why-henrik-sedin-wont-win-hart-trophy
It's not the fact that he says Henrik doesn't deserve to win it; it's the reason why. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 03/31/2010 : 11:26:39
Slozo, unlike Beans, i can't be bothered to spend my time looking for examples. It's tough enough to find info on history of the major awards and who their nominees were that i don't wanna start researching stats and events from years past. I'm sorry, but i don't have any recollection of specific examples although i do recall the year Fedorov won, there was talk (around here of course) that Bure would have been a deserving winners as well. Can't even recall if he was even nominated? Either way, i'm not saying this is an example, i'd have to go back and look at stats if i were gonna say so.
Regardless, the topic of an EASTERN bias is something that's thrown around every year in the media, in interviews with players/team officials, etc and whether or not it exists or not is difficult to prove. I feel there is one and i don't think it's intentional in any way to slight the West. I feel it's just, as i've pointed out, the fact that the number of voters is greater in the east, they see the eastern players more and therefore if it were a debatable or close race, they'd prob vote for the guy they know more about. That's it, my opinion. You disagree, really not a big deal...... |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 03/31/2010 : 10:53:07
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
Beans - you utterly missed the point.
Having way more nominations and winners from the east may just indicate that, for whatever reason, the top three players in the league any given year were usually in the east.
Did Messier not deserve the Hart the year he won in New York, and who would have been the western player who was more deserving who you think was snubbed as a result of western bias? These are the kinds of examples I am looking for . . . because, if the right person won - or at least, the top three candidates were deservedly nominated - then your point is moot.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
I did not utterly miss the point. I utterly disagreed with your flipping a coin analogy as it is not comparable in the least.
Now, I agree with you if and when the winner is deserving. However, it's hard to appreciate, the complete lack of Western representation in any of the kind in the awards for 'best' (Selke, Norris, Hart, Vezina.)
I will do some homework when I get home on this and start a new thread, because this isn't really part of the Sedin for Hart thread any longer. |
| leigh |
Posted - 03/31/2010 : 10:35:09
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
quote:
Sorry, got my years mixed up...they tend to run together at my age. Yes last year they were smoked 4-2 by Chicago in the second round, thanks for the reminder. It was 08, 06 and 05 that they missed - 3 out of the last five playoff seasons, you can understand why I got confused.
yes, it can be confusing keeping up with all those different outcomes - of course, the flames are pretty easy and consistent, pick any year since 1990 and say "out in the first round" or "didn't qualify" and you get it right for all but one year.
Haha! fair enough! I'm getting hammered on the boards today. My eager quick retort was once again done without full thought. I feel shame. 2 minutes in the box.
Ahhhh our beloved 2004 run! 10 years more recent than the Canucks 1994 run. Yes, 2004, the year the Flames won the cup in the 6th game...but the goal was called back and they lost in 7. But we still have 89.  |
| n/a |
Posted - 03/31/2010 : 10:19:17
Beans - you utterly missed the point.
Having way more nominations and winners from the east may just indicate that, for whatever reason, the top three players in the league any given year were usually in the east.
Did Messier not deserve the Hart the year he won in New York, and who would have been the western player who was more deserving who you think was snubbed as a result of western bias? These are the kinds of examples I am looking for . . . because, if the right person won - or at least, the top three candidates were deservedly nominated - then your point is moot.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 03/31/2010 : 09:12:57
Hey Slozo, you are talking about the probability of an event completely random event compared to a vote by people.
45 of 51 winners from the east is the simple fact that needs no qualification. This is not a pull a name out of a drum kind of system. Players are nominated and voted on by people. Most of those people are in the east.
I am not saying it's good or bad, right or wrong. But it would be like saying that there is no bias towards offensive players winning the Hart when it has happened the majority of the time.
I have a bit of a busy day at work, however I will dig in and find the history of the nominees, the number of teams and players from each area, and then show there is a clear line that significantly more eastern players have been nominated and awarded the Hart than those in the west. Even comparatively to the number of players from each area. |
| n/a |
Posted - 03/31/2010 : 08:57:02
If you guys truly believe there is a western bias . . . throwing out stats about how many times a western player has won the Hart are meaningless.
The only reason this stat would have any meaning, is if you bring alongside it voting contests where a western player was excluded from the nominations or lost to an eastern player as a potential result of this bias. I actually pointed out two close contests where the western player beat out at least one eastern player . . . but besides the Theodore year he beat out Iggy (which I brought up), no one has given any specific examples of this supposed western bias.
Please, support your assertions with specific examples, Alex and the rest of you westerners - otherwise, it just sounds like a lot of hot air.
If I flip a penny 10 times, it may come up as heads 8 times . . . does that mean I automatically assume that the coin is weighted so that it lands heads more?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 03/31/2010 : 08:40:55
quote:
Sorry, got my years mixed up...they tend to run together at my age. Yes last year they were smoked 4-2 by Chicago in the second round, thanks for the reminder. It was 08, 06 and 05 that they missed - 3 out of the last five playoff seasons, you can understand why I got confused.
yes, it can be confusing keeping up with all those different outcomes - of course, the flames are pretty easy and consistent, pick any year since 1990 and say "out in the first round" or "didn't qualify" and you get it right for all but one year.
|
| Guest4813 |
Posted - 03/31/2010 : 00:24:56
quote:
Originally posted by leigh
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
leigh:
quote:
One argument I would give to Sedin is that the rest of the hockey universe outside of Vancouver wasn't even sure if the Canucks would make the playoffs this year - with their bunch of no-name guys (aside from Luongo and the Sedins - who most thought were 80pt players at best) They missed the dance last year and on paper their team didn't look much better.
The canucks didn't "miss the dance" last year, they lost in the second round to a very good Chicago team. I'm pretty sure that most in the hockey world thought that the canucks would at least make the playoffs, and there seemed to be an even split that the canucks and flames would be battling for the division title.
Sorry, got my years mixed up...they tend to run together at my age. Yes last year they were smoked 4-2 by Chicago in the second round, thanks for the reminder. It was 08, 06 and 05 that they missed - 3 out of the last five playoff seasons, you can understand why I got confused.
More days running together I guess but no teams made the playoffs in 05, there wasn't a season, and before that they made the playoffs from 01-04. |
| leigh |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 22:45:19
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
leigh:
quote:
One argument I would give to Sedin is that the rest of the hockey universe outside of Vancouver wasn't even sure if the Canucks would make the playoffs this year - with their bunch of no-name guys (aside from Luongo and the Sedins - who most thought were 80pt players at best) They missed the dance last year and on paper their team didn't look much better.
The canucks didn't "miss the dance" last year, they lost in the second round to a very good Chicago team. I'm pretty sure that most in the hockey world thought that the canucks would at least make the playoffs, and there seemed to be an even split that the canucks and flames would be battling for the division title.
Sorry, got my years mixed up...they tend to run together at my age. Yes last year they were smoked 4-2 by Chicago in the second round, thanks for the reminder. It was 08, 06 and 05 that they missed - 3 out of the last five playoff seasons, you can understand why I got confused.
However at the beginning of this season there were major concerns that they didn't have the proven depth to take them to the playoffs, and in the first 30 games that fear was being realized. They certainly weren't pegged to win the division unless Luongo was a major stud. Turns out that Luongo was average (by his standards) and the rest of the team performed better and was deeper than projected. |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 22:05:02
leigh:
quote:
One argument I would give to Sedin is that the rest of the hockey universe outside of Vancouver wasn't even sure if the Canucks would make the playoffs this year - with their bunch of no-name guys (aside from Luongo and the Sedins - who most thought were 80pt players at best) They missed the dance last year and on paper their team didn't look much better.
The canucks didn't "miss the dance" last year, they lost in the second round to a very good Chicago team. I'm pretty sure that most in the hockey world thought that the canucks would at least make the playoffs, and there seemed to be an even split that the canucks and flames would be battling for the division title. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 21:01:57
Slozo, easy boy, bad day or something? No need to freak out. personally i don't feel i have a chip on my shoulder and see no need for you to claim that as a result of you not properly wording your opinions. If you can't see that in what you wrote, then i guess i must have misunderstood your entire point? 
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
Every single team will send tapes to get their player nominated for various awards. Even the biggest market teams like Toronto, Montreal and the NY Rangers do. You didn't know this?
Actually yes, well, i assumed they prob did, but what i was getting at was i'm pretty sure that it was the western teams which originally did this (back in the day) when they felt the need due to lack of exposure. I don't know this for certain but it's what i recall from years back.
quote:
You put words in my mouth. I pointed out that Bryzgalov didn't get the exposure that Miller got, because he was a back-up for a team that didn't medal, whereas Miller got tonnes of exposure due to him being American and winning silver. And I guess you missed the part earlier on where I state that Bryzgalov deserves to be nominated (in other posts).
My bad, i didn't read it as lack of exposure and if i read your other posts you speak of, i've failed to recall you saying Bryzgalov should be nominated. There are a lot of posts and i read many of them. I'm sorry, but i don't recall everyone's posts about every topic. I interpreted it that you were saying Miller would get the nod over Bryzgalov and one of your points was that he didn't start for his country and Miller did. I now understand your point, it's about the exposure. Wish you'd just said that?
quote:
No, that does not mean he's an automatic . . . what's with you and jumping to conclusions? It simply means that with Ovechkin's huge star status and world wide exposure, and with the general consensus of his supreme talent, it gives him an ENORMOUS EDGE over the lesser stars having great years
Same for Crosby - gives him a lot more exposure to a lot more people, gives him a HUGE EDGE. Cripes, knock the chip off your shoulder.
No offense, but perhaps if you'd explained what you were getting at a wee bit better it would have made a little more sense? No where in your original post do you mention anything about "world wide exposure" or "general consensus of his supreme talent" etc. Prior to the mention of Ovie and Crosby and even Bryzgalof, all you're talking about is the eastern bias (which for the record, you keep calling western bias). Sorry to say, but IMO, your attempt at getting your point across in this post of yours is rather poor.
quote:
See Alex, if you went back over some of my posts on Henrik Sedin, you'd realise that my opinion on his play and my opinion on who will and should get nominated are not all the same . . . but the huge chip on your shoulder is blinding your view of that fact.
Really, what's with your obsession with a "chip on my shoulder"? The point i've been trying to make the entire time is that there is an eastern bias. You disagree and your reasoning is because guys like Iginla and Datsyuk have been nominated and or won big awards in the pat. Whoopee! My eastern bias theory is cooked because of this? Did i say anywhere that there's a bias EVERY year and that a western player will NEVER win an award? I'm assuming you read the stats Beans threw out there. If you didn't, maybe you should.
quote:
I stated earlier that in my opinion both Bryzgalov and Miller should be nominated, along with Crosby third - that is based on my opinion of the true Most Valuable player to his team. I might actually vote for a three way tie, as they are all very close in my opinion.
Does that make me a Phoenix lover? A huge homer for Buffalo, or an American? Or do I just gush about Crosby so much I can't help but vote for him?
Great, i like those nominations. They might not be the exact same as mine, but i don't have a problem with them. See, even with this chip on my shoulder you speak of, i can see around it enough to notice that the award isn't given out to "the most valuable player to his team" like it is worded! Maybe IF YOU, read some of my posts, you'd realize i've already mentioned this!
quote:
Give yer head a shake.
Wow, i must really have frustrated you to resort to a comment like that? |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 12:14:04
Hey Slozo, the bias is based on time zone, not conference.
In the entire history of the Hart trophy, only 4 players (Forsberg, Sakic, Gretzky, and Messier) have won the Hart Trophy playing an entire season on a team West of the Central Time zone.
If you consider Thornton as another, even though he played 1/2 his Hart season in Boston, that makes 5 out of 51 players that have won the Hart played Central or East.
Now, there may not be a bias there. For about 20 of those 85 seasons there were few or no teams in the West. However, since 1967 there definately has been teams and great players in the West. That being said, there are more teams and therefore more players to choose from in the East. However, it's hard to argue that less than 1 out of 10 Hart winners are from the West. |
| leigh |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 11:46:27
Oh and those of you arguing for Bryzgalov are spot on. 40 wins, 8 shut outs, 2.28 GAA and a .921 S%. On a team with no stars, that historically NEVER makes the playoffs, in a town that almost didn't have a team this year. Wow!! Seriously, WOW!!! Miller is close, but the Phoenix story is just too compelling for the writers to ignore. He may have single-handedly saved a franchise!!! Hat is off to head coach Dave Tippett as well. |
| leigh |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 11:29:00
I'm pretty confident that if Henrik won the race by 10 or more points he'd get the Hart. He'd be a serious contender at 5 points above but a no go in my opinion. Here is why....
Ovechkin has only played 65 games so far to Sedin's 75 and there is only a 1 point spread in the race. If Ovechkin had missed too many more games I think you could argue that his injuries were no longer an "asset" to his Hart candidacy and were in fact a "liability". But missing only ten games is not too bad and really shows your ability to take over. My point is that the voters will have to take this into account when comparing their stats, so I think that think Henrik would need 5 points just to put that argument to rest.
Then he'd need another 5 points to put the goals vs. assists comparison to bed. No matter how you spin it goals tend to be more valuable of a stat than assists. So even though they count as 1 point each, all other things being equal, the goal scorer will be the winner.
The last thing to consider is the positioning of the teams, Washington is in first in the league with 109 points to Vancouver's 3rd in the West. Edge goes to Ovechkin. Yes I know it's a team sport and this is an individual award but if humans are doing the calculations these things will always matter. It's the same if a team didn't make the playoffs, that player is not going to get serious consideration for the Hart. I know this is a bone of contention but it's reality.
One argument I would give to Sedin is that the rest of the hockey universe outside of Vancouver wasn't even sure if the Canucks would make the playoffs this year - with their bunch of no-name guys (aside from Luongo and the Sedins - who most thought were 80pt players at best) They missed the dance last year and on paper their team didn't look much better. Instead they destroyed their division with one half of the Swedish connection out of action for a large part of the first half, and a goalie who was off his game (still a great goalie though) and a defense core that has been riddled with injuries. Admittedly their role players have done their jobs and many have overachieved, but without Henrik playing like a man possessed they would not be in the position they are currently in, not by a long shot. Yes the same could be said for Ovechkin - remove him and the Caps would be in big trouble - but they were expected to be at the top of their division/conference this year, they have been building up to this point for years now...Vancouver, not so much. |
| Guest1756 |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 11:22:39
I think another good 'automatic' situation will be to see if Lindstrom gets nomninated for the Norris. His name has been around that award for about a decade now and this is the first year IMO that I don't think he deserves a nomination (still a awesome Dman but not top three THIS YEAR) but I certainly don't think there would be a huge fuss if he did get nominated again because of his reputation |
| n/a |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 11:10:46
quote:
Slozo, why so is it then that western teams always seem to be the ones to send tapes of their potential award winners in an effort to showcase them to those who don't see them enough?
Every single team will send tapes to get their player nominated for various awards. Even the biggest market teams like Toronto, Montreal and the NY Rangers do. You didn't know this?
quote:
*Because Bryzgalov didn't start for his Olympic team means he shouldn't be considered? Hogwash! Does that mean Mike Green won't get a nomination for the Norris?
You put words in my mouth. I pointed out that Bryzgalov didn't get the exposure that Miller got, because he was a back-up for a team that didn't medal, whereas Miller got tonnes of exposure due to him being American and winning silver. And I guess you missed the part earlier on where I state that Bryzgalov deserves to be nominated (in other posts).
quote:
*Ovechkin is the "face of the NHL" and "perhaps the best player to have come from Russia...." and this means he's an automatic? For how long then? What if he were having an off year, would he still be nominated? You make it seem like he's a shoo-in regardless of his play. (again, i've picked him to win it so don't think i'm saying he's not deserving THIS YEAR)
No, that does not mean he's an automatic . . . what's with you and jumping to conclusions? It simply means that with Ovechkin's huge star status and world wide exposure, and with the general consensus of his supreme talent, it gives him an ENORMOUS EDGE over the lesser stars having great years.
quote:
*Crosby is the "marketing baby" of Canada and he's won awards and a cup? Uh, so what? This means he's automatic as well for the Hart? Again, is this gonna be every year like Ovie?
Same for Crosby - gives him a lot more exposure to a lot more people, gives him a HUGE EDGE. Cripes, knock the chip off your shoulder.
See Alex, if you went back over some of my posts on Henrik Sedin, you'd realise that my opinion on his play and my opinion on who will and should get nominated are not all the same . . . but the huge chip on your shoulder is blinding your view of that fact.
I stated earlier that in my opinion both Bryzgalov and Miller should be nominated, along with Crosby third - that is based on my opinion of the true Most Valuable player to his team. I might actually vote for a three way tie, as they are all very close in my opinion.
Does that make me a Phoenix lover? A huge homer for Buffalo, or an American? Or do I just gush about Crosby so much I can't help but vote for him?
Give yer head a shake.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 10:14:05
Slozo, why so is it then that western teams always seem to be the ones to send tapes of their potential award winners in an effort to showcase them to those who don't see them enough?
As to some of your other points.....
*Because Bryzgalov didn't start for his Olympic team means he shouldn't be considered? Hogwash! Does that mean Mike Green won't get a nomination for the Norris?
*Ovechkin is the "face of the NHL" and "perhaps the best player to have come from Russia...." and this means he's an automatic? For how long then? What if he were having an off year, would he still be nominated? You make it seem like he's a shoo-in regardless of his play. (again, i've picked him to win it so don't think i'm saying he's not deserving THIS YEAR)
*Crosby is the "marketing baby" of Canada and he's won awards and a cup? Uh, so what? This means he's automatic as well for the Hart? Again, is this gonna be every year like Ovie?
On to Henrik......MOST years, yes, he'd be second (maybe lower) to Luongo in team MVP voting. That's not even debatable, moreso a fact. Know what else is a fact, THIS SEASON, he's the Canucks MVP and a candidate for the Hart. I agree the twin brother thing could hurt his chances but this year, it almost helps. His performance without his brother should only strengthen his chance with voters. The fact he's never won a scoring race or a major award should mean nothing. Is there a stipulation that you need to have one of these before you get the Hart? Pretty sure there's not. Maybe we could ask Marty St. Louis? And the idea that he's only been a first liner for a couple years is an even bigger joke! I really don't think that's gonna come into play in a voters mind!
Again, in case you missed it, i'm not here saying Sedin "SHOULD" win it, i'm just saying that there's enough of an argument to have him in the conversation. Don't believe me? Here, straight outta Toronto of all places, this outlines why Sedin should be nominated if nothing else:http://www.torontosun.com/sports/hockey/2010/03/23/13328116-qmi.html
Nothing's a given, especially with a couple of goalies having very good years, but i'm betting Henrik, unless we see a complete collapse over the last couple weeks, will be in Vegas to shake Ovie's hand when the Alex collects his Hart trophy for the 3rd year in a row. |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 10:13:52
quote:
Henrik Sedin plays for a team where he would probably come second in voting for his own team MVP to Luongo, has a twin brother who he plays with who has very similar stats, and has never won a scoring race or any trophy and has only been a first line player for a couple of years.
I would have to disagree there slozo. I think there is widespread belief in Vancouver that Hank is our team MVP this year. Luongo has not been his best when he has to be (on more than one occasion), and Hank proved that he was not joined at the hip to Daniel in the early part of the season, and really came into his own this year. He has been a different kind of player and a difference maker every night (with his brother and without), and has made those that play with him not named Daniel better. Team MVP for sure.
League MVP, no. |
| n/a |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 09:26:19
What you are missing in your analysis, Alex116, is actual close races that went to the western player - Thornton in 05/06 (over Kipper and Jagr), and Forsberg (in 02/03 over Brodeur and Naslund).
Where was the western bias then, eh? In both cases, you had two out of three players nominated from the western conference, and the guy who probably should have won did. Period!
When Theodore won over Iginla, the closest vote ever, it deserved to be very close . . . and there is nothing to point to an eastern bias there as much as a "Montreal marketing machine" bias.
Like I said before, the bias, if any, is against goalies (who should almost always win the Hart based on Most Valuable to the team), against defencemen, and maybe way behind that for the bigger name.
Miller is very well known now, even in Buffalo, after his Olympic tournament where he won the silver. Bryzgalov has been stuck in the desert of Phoenix and didn't even start for his Olympic team! Plus, one can imagine the marketing power coming from Phoenix . . . (crickets chirping) . . .
Ovechkin is the face of the NHL. MVP last two years, and perhaps the best player to ever come from Russia and he should be one of the best for many years to come.
Crosy is Canada's marketing baby, and he is the face of the NHL as well, and we all remember his awards and cup win.
Henrik Sedin plays for a team where he would probably come second in voting for his own team MVP to Luongo, has a twin brother who he plays with who has very similar stats, and has never won a scoring race or any trophy and has only been a first line player for a couple of years.
OF COURSE Henrik will get short shrift, like it or not.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 08:56:13
Slozo, i don't think the "eastern bias" is so much for nominations really. The eastern voters obviously see the stats, they just don't see the guys play as much. I agree that most of the time, the right guy wins. Well, maybe not so much as the way the award is worded (most valuable to their team) but as far as we've become accustomed i guess? Where i think the bias comes into play is in a close race. If it were to come down to Sedin and Ovie, Ovie would win and it's likely the eastern bias would play a role. These two guys could have identical stats, identical seasons, etc and Ovie would prob win because more voters see him more often and would therefore appreciate his skills and accomplishments more.
I'm not for a second here saying i think Sedin deserves it. If i went by the actual wording, i'd say it's Bryzgalov's or Millers, unfortunately it takes a very special year by a goalie to get this award. The only thing they have going for them is that the top scorers are just over 100 pts and not in the 120-130 range whereby the skaters would dominate clearly. I still don't see a goalie being nominated and if so, just one. And, i can't see Henrik not being on the ballot. That will actually surprise me quite a bit considering the season he's had.
Again, not saying he SHOULD win it, but there's an argument to support him if he did.
|
| n/a |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 08:40:47
I apologise for the last post as this is in Henrik Sedin's question . . . but I really feel that with two very strong goalie candidates that could both easily be nominated (Miller and Bryzgalov) and with the two premier players of our game playing great and in the top three in points and top two in goals (Ovechkin and Crosby), that there is absolutely no WAY Henrik squeezes into a nomination for Hart.
And I really throw out the supposed "Eastern Bias" crap . . . the only bias there is is STAR bias and big market team bias - and that's why a guy like Henrik Sedin and Bryzgalov might get short shrift.
If there was such a western bias, how did Datsyuk get nominated last year? Iginla the year before? Luongo the year before that? That's all during the time of Crosby and Ovechkin, btw. Before that, it was Kipprusoff and Thornton in 2006, Iginla in '04, Forsberg and Naslund in '03 . . . you get my drift. It's for the best player, and usually, the best man really does win.
If anyone gets overlooked, it's usually because they haven't the pedigree or big market exposure, IMHO.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Guest7886 |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 08:34:15
I don't really think Sedin will get much consideration. Ovi's point total is on par, yet he has way more goals and his +/- is unreal... |
|
|
