| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Guest2371
( )
|
 Posted - 03/21/2008 : 04:14:36
|
Poll Question:
Should Alexander Ovechkin be awarded the Hart Trophy if the Washington Capitals don't qualify for the playoffs?
|
|
|
|
Guest2371
( )
|
Posted - 03/21/2008 : 04:22:27
|
| I think Ovechkin should get the Hart Trophy. |
 |
|
|
mytor4
Rookie
Canada
134 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2008 : 05:35:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest2371
Should Alezander Ovechkin be awarded the Hart Trophy if the Washington Capitals don't qualify for the playoffs?
playoffs or not ov deserves the hart this yr .
57 career losses,46 shutouts and 5 vezina trophys.6 Stanley Cup rings in 8 yrs |
|
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2008 : 09:22:30
|
i don;t know, i think the playoffs shouldn't be the reason he doesn;t get it, but i don't think he should get the heart this year, the mvp is exactly that the most valuable player ,, and noone is more important to his team than iginla, iggy carries that team, i'm not saying ovechkin doesn;t carry the caps,, but iginla has been absolutly everything to calgary there is no player in the nhl more important to their team or more valuable to their team then mr. iginla
Pasty |
|
|
|
Guest2377
( )
|
Posted - 03/21/2008 : 10:48:09
|
| I don't agree with you pasty7 |
|
|
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2008 : 11:22:30
|
I firmly believe that the Hart Trophy should not be handed out to a team that does not make the playoffs.
The Hart Memorial Trophy given to the player judged to be the most valuable to his team - http://www.nhl.com/trophies/hart.html
How much inherent value does a team have if they don't make the playoffs, and since he is a member of that team then his value is diminished by that. You might be the most prolific scorer in the league but if your team fails then you couldn't have brought that much value to it.
Sorry, I know how everyone loves Ovechkin right now because he's on top. But right now, with 8 games remaining I would give it to Brodeur, Iginla, or Luongo (assuming they all made the playoffs) before I gave it to Ovechkin (if the Caps come up short on the season). |
|
|
|
Devils Fanatic
Top Prospect
Canada
87 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2008 : 14:36:37
|
I would give to Brodeur first, simply because with the Devils horrible scoring this year, and less experienced defense, he has kept them in the hunt for first in the East. And at 35 years old to boot.
Devils fan for life |
Edited by - Devils Fanatic on 03/21/2008 14:37:18 |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2008 : 15:03:49
|
I think there are a number of players that would fit the mold for most valuable to their team. Ovechkin, Brodeur, even Luongo. We all seen how weak Vancouver is when Luongo is not on top of his game.
That being said, I don't think the it should matter if the Hart (not Heart people) is handed out to a player from a playoff team or a non-playoff team. When you think of what Ovechkin means to the Caps, I think they are a cellar dweller without him compared to fighting for a playoff spot with him.
And normally, a good playoff team (I think of Ottawa, Anaheim, or Detroit) are going to be a playoff team even without their top player. |
|
|
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2008 : 15:22:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
....When you think of what Ovechkin means to the Caps, I think they are a cellar dweller without him compared to fighting for a playoff spot with him.....
Exactly! Take Ovechkin off the team and replace him with a nobody and they would be in the same position...out of the playoffs. If they make the playoffs then I would agree he is a strong candidate. But if they don't, he shouldn't get it.
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
....And normally, a good playoff team (I think of Ottawa, Anaheim, or Detroit) are going to be a playoff team even without their top player......
This I agree with, that's why I think Luongo, Brodeur or Iginla make excellent candidates. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2008 : 16:45:24
|
But Leigh, is there not a huge difference between fighting for a playoff spot and fighting for the #1 round draft pick??
And if you talk about Iginla and what he brings to his team, I can't see why you can not talk about Ovechkin and what he brings. Calgary has 2 more wins and 2 more losses in overtime compared to Washington. That really isn't much of a difference in the long run of the season.
I just can't understand how Iginla would be a candidate and Ovechkin wouldn't. They are both vital to their teams success and their teams have a closer record than one thinks. |
|
|
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2008 : 17:02:01
|
Beans, the difference is the playoffs. If Calgary does not make it, Iginla would not be a candidate in my mind. Plain and simple. He would of course still be the most valuable player on his team, but clearly someone else in the league would have made a bigger difference to their team and therefore they would deserve it more than him.
On this matter it's black and white to me; if your team makes the playoffs, you got a shot; if they don't, you don't. |
|
|
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2008 : 17:04:26
|
| Ok it's time for a poll on this...stay tuned. |
|
|
|
Leafsfan_94
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1070 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2008 : 17:51:33
|
so this is where you got the idea
quote:
Originally posted by leigh
Ok it's time for a poll on this...stay tuned.
Leafsfan_94
|
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2008 : 10:13:59
|
Leigh, that makes no sense at all to me. If Calgary were to miss the playoffs by one point. By a single Shoot Out lose, you are saying that Iginla is no longer a candidate for the Hart??
Ok, fine. Let's say that for one second that Calgary misses the playoffs. Is there another player in the league that you could replace Iginla with that would have got them into the playoffs??? |
|
|
|
Axey
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
877 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2008 : 13:12:00
|
| This seems odd and no one has really mentioned it too much but, how about Alfredsson for the Hart. If he had played the same amount of games as Ovechkin, he would have relatively the same amount of points and did u see the Sen's record while he is not in the line-up...Atrocious |
|
|
|
Guest9323
( )
|
Posted - 03/22/2008 : 15:32:13
|
Leigh is absolutely right! The success of a team is generally considered in terms of making the playoffs. If a team does not make it to the playoffs, they have been unsuccessful. They have not even been able to position themselves to "win it all". I think that there is nothing wrong with this and does not represent old-school thinking. You are either succesful or not.
I think it would be interesting to note that, in my opinion, the current MVP award should likely go to a player whose team secures one of the last playoff positions thus providing them with the chance for ultimate success and demonstrating that if not for this particular player's abilities, the team would never have been in the position to "win it all". In other words a team which, with the absence of this particular player, would not have had success or the chance for ultimate success. Ovechkin fits this role but only if he can put them in this position. He is, of course, the most valuable to his team, however how valuable is his team? Who even cares about this team if they can't make it to the dance? He is the most valuable on one of the least valued teams!
I think the award is bizarre. Perhaps there should be another one that simply goes to the best player in the league (which I suppose is similar to the Pearson Award which is voted on by peers (other players)) but it should be voted on by the writers/broadcasters. That way this MVP most-valuable-to-his-team award WILL go to a player who's team sneaks in to the playoffs that would otherwise not have without the contributions of this particular player. I have never liked the idea that a player who happens to do well on a good team often is the one to get this particular award: his team, or at least some, or many, of his teammates, have likely helped no small amount in the success of the team, so to be able to judge a Lidstrom, for example, as the most valuable to their team seems ludicrous to me when Zetterberg or Datsyuk have been arguably equally valuable to them, and Ovechkin, for example, is probably way more valuable to Washington than Lidstrom to Detroit. |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2008 : 17:23:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by leigh
If they make the playoffs then I would agree he is a strong candidate. But if they don't, he shouldn't get it.
Leigh - as mentioned in the other thread you created related to this, it doesn't make a lot of sense to have making the playoffs as a cutoff for candidacy for this award. Just as the Cap's current points total was affected by lots of factors other than Ovie, whether they make the playoffs will also depend on a lot of factors.
I'll go one step further here than I did in the other thread when I mentioned the example of the Caps getting in on Game 82 due to a tremendous performace by Huet. And that is, what if the opposite happens? What I mean is, what if in these last few games Ovie does something really unbelievable (scores 10 to 15 more goals for example) but due to awful goaltending or defence, or just really bad luck, Washington loses some high scoring games, and on the last game of the year are edged out of the playoffs (not only that, but by a shootout goal!)?
So, in the above example, Ovie is disqualified as a candidate, but in the "Huet pulls the Caps into the playoffs" example, Ovie is a candidate. As I say, it just doesn't make a lot of sense.
Edit - Beans, just read your earlier post - nice to see that we are thinking alike for a change |
Edited by - andyhack on 03/22/2008 17:34:33 |
|
|
|
Guest9323
( )
|
Posted - 03/23/2008 : 01:18:25
|
| The spirit of this award emphasis the team and Washington is a bad team with Ovechkin. Winning a few more games than the worst teams is NOT success. If the season ended right now, he is the only one in Washington that achieved ANY success, the team did NOT... Unless they can squeak into the playoffs and have a chance for ultimate success. They would then be considered a team that had success this year BECAUSE they made the playoffs. Otherwise he is just a really good hockey player. |
|
|
|
mytor4
Rookie
Canada
134 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2008 : 04:50:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9323
The spirit of this award emphasis the team and Washington is a bad team with Ovechkin. Winning a few more games than the worst teams is NOT success. If the season ended right now, he is the only one in Washington that achieved ANY success, the team did NOT... Unless they can squeak into the playoffs and have a chance for ultimate success. They would then be considered a team that had success this year BECAUSE they made the playoffs. Otherwise he is just a really good hockey player.
no ,The spirit of this award doesn't emphasis the team . it emphasis the player MOST IMPORTANT to his team. no where does it state that the award goes to a successful team. if that was the case than tell me why the most successful team wouldn't have the winner. it goes to the player that is mostly irreplaceable on that specific team in that yr.
ov is that person this yr. note he will win the award this yr.
PS ov is not just a good player,he right now is the best player in the nhl which translate into he's a great player.
57 career losses,46 shutouts and 5 vezina trophys.6 Stanley Cup rings in 8 yrs |
Edited by - mytor4 on 03/23/2008 05:34:26 |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2008 : 06:07:43
|
Unless Boston puts a puck or two in the net, Ovie could be an MVP candidate by mid-week. Then again, he could be a candidate on Wednesday, and then just a really good player (but not a candidate) on Thursday, a candidate again on Friday, but then just a really good player (but not a candidate) on Saturday, AND THEN, on Sunday, as a result of a shootout, he is a 
Guys - I've never known exactly what the "patently" in "patently absurd" meant, but I am willing to call your logic that there should be a connection between getting into the playoffs and candidacy for the Hart trophy "PATENTLY ABSURD"! |
Edited by - andyhack on 03/23/2008 06:09:21 |
|
|
|
davbid
Top Prospect
12 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2008 : 13:00:28
|
The spirit of this award does indeed emphasize the team and the winning player's contribution to it, otherwise it would just be MVP as in "best" player (or the Pearson) and this would all be moot. Of course it goes to an individual but the concept of team success has got to be stressed with this particular award. This particular trophy emphasizes that without this player, the team would not be achieving any success. AND, unless they make the playoffs, THEY ARE NOT ACHIEVING ANY SUCCESS!!
It is the Art Ross trophy will give him recognition as the best offensive player that he is, which is ALL HE IS. |
|
|
|
mytor4
Rookie
Canada
134 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2008 : 14:52:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by davbid
The spirit of this award does indeed emphasize the team and the winning player's contribution to it, otherwise it would just be MVP as in "best" player (or the Pearson) and this would all be moot. Of course it goes to an individual but the concept of team success has got to be stressed with this particular award. This particular trophy emphasizes that without this player, the team would not be achieving any success. AND, unless they make the playoffs, THEY ARE NOT ACHIEVING ANY SUCCESS!!
It is the Art Ross trophy will give him recognition as the best offensive player that he is, which is ALL HE IS.
how can you say
[This particular trophy emphasizes that without this player, the team would not be achieving any success. AND, unless they make the playoffs, THEY ARE NOT ACHIEVING ANY SUCCESS!! ]
sorry all my mistake. wayne never won the hart on a non-playoff team.
57 career losses,46 shutouts and 5 vezina trophys.6 Stanley Cup rings in 8 yrs |
Edited by - mytor4 on 03/23/2008 18:02:52 |
|
|
|
davbid
Top Prospect
12 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2008 : 15:45:02
|
| Check your facts MyTor4, every year Wayne won the HART his team made the playoffs. I can't vouch for the accuracy of the following because I haven't researched this, but as read on another forum, apparently no one has won the Hart who's team did not make the playoffs. Coincidence, I think not! Ovechkin should get the Ross and maybe the Pearson but that's it. |
|
|
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2008 : 16:29:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by andyhack
quote:
Originally posted by leigh
If they make the playoffs then I would agree he is a strong candidate. But if they don't, he shouldn't get it.
...Leigh - as mentioned in the other thread you created related to this, it doesn't make a lot of sense to have making the playoffs as a cutoff for candidacy for this award. Just as the Cap's current points total was affected by lots of factors other than Ovie, whether they make the playoffs will also depend on a lot of factors.
I'll go one step further here than I did in the other thread when I mentioned the example of the Caps getting in on Game 82 due to a tremendous performace by Huet. And that is, what if the opposite happens? What I mean is, what if in these last few games Ovie does something really unbelievable (scores 10 to 15 more goals for example) but due to awful goaltending or defence, or just really bad luck, Washington loses some high scoring games, and on the last game of the year are edged out of the playoffs (not only that, but by a shootout goal!)?
So, in the above example, Ovie is disqualified as a candidate, but in the "Huet pulls the Caps into the playoffs" example, Ovie is a candidate. As I say, it just doesn't make a lot of sense....
Well essentially I think you have it right. Your example is a little bit of a lame duck though, what I mean is that you have singled out the last game of the season...when that same game could have happened in the first game of the year, or the middle for that matter. Everyone is entitled to a bad game (or a good one) now and again. And for that matter any loss in the year could be used as the excuse for not making it. Truthfully a game at the beginning of the year is no less (or more) valuable than one at the end.
If the Caps make the playoffs then good on Ovie (I'd probably vote for him - at least with 7 games left at the moment). If they don't make it then his value on the 07/08 season would be the same as if he were TIE DOMI reincarnated; the result is the same - their season is OVER with no shot at the cup, while a diminishing 60% of the NHL's players continue to play for up to 2 more months. Suddenly he does not seem that valuable (some would argue that all he did was give them a worse draft pick and no cup - not me of course!)
NOW having said that, I don't live in a black and white world, there are exceptions to everything. If someone came along that absolutely anihalated the rest of the league in some way or made some incredible impact on history, then perhaps the exception could be made. But I don't think that Ovechkin's 07/08 performance (as good as it has been) offers him that pass in my book.
Or contrary to that, if everyone else's performance was soooooo lame that it completely paled in comparison (ie: no one else broke 75 points or something similar) Then his 110 to 120 point performance might make the exception. But again...this is not the case this year at all; there are many deserving candidates! |
|
|
|
mytor4
Rookie
Canada
134 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2008 : 18:03:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by davbid
Check your facts MyTor4, every year Wayne won the HART his team made the playoffs. I can't vouch for the accuracy of the following because I haven't researched this, but as read on another forum, apparently no one has won the Hart who's team did not make the playoffs. Coincidence, I think not! Ovechkin should get the Ross and maybe the Pearson but that's it.
sorry all, my mistake. wayne never won the hart on a non-playoff team.
57 career losses,46 shutouts and 5 vezina trophys.6 Stanley Cup rings in 8 yrs |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2008 : 18:31:17
|
Leigh - I only singled out the last game to point out that it could very well come to that to determine if a team gets in the playoffs or doesn't get in the playoffs. I am not saying that we should focus on that game as being more important than game 24, 48 and so on, BUT the fact is that by its very placement in the schedule it is of course a key game for determining whether some teams make it or don't make it into the playoffs. So actually (and ironically I guess), it is not me but rather those who argue that making the playoffs should be a requirement for the Hart who ARE focusing much more attention on that final game of the year, as for them it could determine whether a guy is a Hart candidate or not.
As for the meaning of the Hart, my approach has always been to imagine the team with an average guy in place of the player in question. How far would the team drop with that trade-off? Actually, that leads me to Luongo (last year, and this year too).
So I am not arguing for Ovie to win the Hart, but I am saying that if you think he should be disqualified as a candidate solely based on not making it to the playoffs, it makes about as much sense to me as one of those George Bush speech clips shown on Letterman. |
|
|
|
davbid
Top Prospect
12 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2008 : 01:12:01
|
quote:
how can you say
[This particular trophy emphasizes that without this player, the team would not be achieving any success. AND, unless they make the playoffs, THEY ARE NOT ACHIEVING ANY SUCCESS!! ]
Perhaps they would be enjoying SOME success but it should be understood that the team would not be enjoying the success they currently ARE without this player, and in the case of the Caps, it's not much and just might be nil in the next couple of weeks. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2008 : 06:11:23
|
Of course Ovechkin is the MVP.
Other good candidates are Brodeur, Malkin, Luongo, Iginla, and Thornton.
Very simple, really - break down the stats, and decide who is the most valuable player to their respective team. Figure out the number of games that team had no business winning without their star player. Figure out the clutch goals/plays that helped them win a game.
Going through the numbers, it would seem to me to be a race between Luongo, Ovechkin, and Malkin, actually.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2008 : 08:36:19
|
Sorry to double post, but I went through some game-by-game stats, and tried to determine the number of games some of the top candidates won "all by themself".
Number of games where their team won by one or two goals, and player:
- got at least three points, or 2 goals in a low scoring one-goal game WIN (3 goals or less)
- got at least three points in a one goal game WIN
- got the lone goal in a 1-0 game
- got at least a goal and an assist in a 2-1 or 2-0 game, or the winning goal in a 2-0 game that has an empty net goal
Ovechkin - 10
Iginla - 8
Malkin - 8
Overtime losses for their teams, games where they scored at least three points, 2 goals, or the lone goal, OR, where they scored the tying goal late:
Ovechkin - 2
Iginla - 3
Malkin - 2
Dominating performances, where the player got 4 or more points in a one goal game (or a win by two goals with an empty netter, not scored by the player):
Ovechkin - 3
Iginla - 1
Malkin - 1
Now, for the goalies!
Games where the team wins:
- by 1 goal, with 30 or more SOG and score not more than 3-2
- by score of 1-0 or 2-1 or 2-0, with 25 or more SOG
Luongo - 8
Brodeur - 10
Games lost in overtime or shootout, where goalie faced 30 or more SO, or any 1-0 game lost in o/t or shootout:
Luongo - 6
Brodeur - 3
Dominating games, 40 SOG or more, with a win/OTL, or a 1-0 or 2-0 shutout win with at least 30 SOG:
Luongo - 3
Brodeur - 2
So, points gained for the team that they couldn't have possibly gotten without their star player:
forwards
Ovechkin - 22
Iginla - 19
Malkin - 18
goalies
Brodeur - 23
Luongo - 22
Now who's your MVP?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
ThorntonisTHEMAN
PickupHockey Pro
499 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2008 : 09:38:45
|
wow! my hat is off to you Slozo! wow!
"I'm not dumb enough to be a goalie."
Brett Hull. |
|
|
|
tbar
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
376 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2008 : 09:59:46
|
| To me the absolute most valubale player to his team this year is Malkin. He has done wonders for the Pens especially when Crosby went down and everybody wrote them off. Not only has he brought them to the top in their Div. at the moment but he has also put up over 100 points. He is the reason Pitsburgh is playing for top spot in the East. |
|
|
|
davbid
Top Prospect
12 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2008 : 18:53:07
|
Good work on the stats, Slozo. Thanks.
You make a valid case for Ovechkin, the best so far, but I have to maintain that the current value of his team is ultimately too low (unless they make the playoffs) for it to matter enough, where the other team's values are currently high enough for their respective MVP candidates to be worth more.
Where he'll get the Ross and, deservedly, the Pearson, the value of the team at the end of the regular season is what counts the most in evaluating the worth of their most contributing player. This is also why voting takes place AT THE END of the season (though I like this premature debate).
And considering that Iginla and Malkin are close to Ovechkin in the wonderful terms you have outlined, and their teams being well-positioned to be considered successful, they are more deserving, even though they, perhaps, have done slightly less with more, so to speak. |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2008 : 19:34:13
|
davebid - first of all, hi and welcome...
Here's the thing I still don't get from the guys in your camp. If I understand you and Leigh correctly, if the Caps make it into the playoffs in this last little stretch, suddenly Ovechkin becomes not only a contender for the Hart, but quite possibly the favorite. Is that what you are saying?
My problem is not with anyone who argues that someone (Iggy, Luongo or others) is more worthy of the Hart than Ovechkin. I agree actually! But if you are telling me that the value of Ovechkin suddenly goes from "non-contender" to "favorite" based on the result of what now has come down to a handful of remaining hockey games (and potentially what could come down to THE last game), as I have said in previous posts, that way of thinking just isn't computing for me. I mean, would you catapult him from "non-contender" to "favorite" if Washington gets in on the last night on a shootout goal? If the answer is yes, I have to put this to you like Denzel Washington did to the Court in the movie "Philadelphia",
"Explain it to me like I am a three year old"
|
Edited by - andyhack on 03/24/2008 19:42:00 |
|
|
|
davbid
Top Prospect
12 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2008 : 21:17:49
|
Hello to you and thanks for the welcome.
Here goes the explanation, a summation of what I've already written, but hopefully a little more clear.
First of all, the voters will look at the entire season and not the last game or the "playoff push" (though they will likely give this some consideration if they do get in), so regardless of if they get in on the last day or they've been comfortably positioned for months, the debate doesn't ACTUALLY begin till the last regular season game is played.
At the end of the season, teams that are in the playoffs will be considered to have acheived a certain amount of success, those that did not make it will be considered unsuccessful. Ovechkin, while leading his team for a third straight year in points, will be considered just as valuable to his team as the other years when they failed to make it, that is, of GREAT value, BUT not as valuable as someone who led their team to the playoffs. While he most certainly will get plenty of votes, the reason that he won't win(if the Caps don't make the playoffs) is because, just as every other year I believe, voters consider that making the playoffs is a great determining criteria on valuing a team and therefore their greatest contributing player. In other words: what, or rather, who was the reason for their success? Is there one player that stands out more than any other on any other team that can be considered responsible for the success of the team. And this is why their position at the end of the regular season is crucial to voting.
Vote-getting might be swayed by things like: what is the difference in points from last year? Well, not much and certainly not as much as Philly. But is there one player on Philly that is deserving? Richards maybe? Carter? Don't think so. Not as deserving as some of the other teams' candidates. And the biggest difference between the Caps this year and last is Backstrom!
More numbers to crunch: Consider that Iginla has more game-winning-goals per goals scored with 107 fewer shots.
Consider, also, that with Ovechkin shooting over 400 shots on net this year, he has the lowest shooting percentage among the four best goal-scorers in the league - by far. What if he had passed a few more times? Maybe a few more goals and his team is in a better position! Perhaps he SHOULD try to use his team a little more. Just because he's trying to do it all, doesn't mean he's the most valuable to his team just because he's putting up numbers. Some might think he's a selfish player and in fact some have called him that.
It is the Ross and not the Hart trophy that is given to the greatest point-getter. And that is really all that he is.
Hope I've answered to your satisfaction. |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2008 : 22:12:32
|
Last quick post before sleep - thanks for the explanation davbid. But your explanation touched more on what you think the voters will do rather than what you think should be done so let me ask you this. Yes or no. If the Caps get in the playoffs by way of shootout on the last night, does Ovechkin change FOR YOU (forgetting what you think the voters will do) from total "non-candidate" to one of the persons YOU would consider a strong and deserving candidate for this award? Again, if the answer is yes, I just don't get it (and don't get it even if you take away my extreme example of the shootout, which I am just putting in there to highlight the logic problem with the "playoffs or no consideration for the Hart" way of thinking).
Sleep time! |
|
|
|
mytor4
Rookie
Canada
134 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2008 : 02:31:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by andyhack
Last quick post before sleep - thanks for the explanation davbid. But your explanation touched more on what you think the voters will do rather than what you think should be done so let me ask you this. Yes or no. If the Caps get in the playoffs by way of shootout on the last night, does Ovechkin change FOR YOU (forgetting what you think the voters will do) from total "non-candidate" to one of the persons YOU would consider a strong and deserving candidate for this award? Again, if the answer is yes, I just don't get it (and don't get it even if you take away my extreme example of the shootout, which I am just putting in there to highlight the logic problem with the "playoffs or no consideration for the Hart" way of thinking).
Sleep time!
also to touch on what your saying. we all know this won't happen but it's the final game of the season and the caps need to win to make the playoffs. they win 7-six with ov getting 6 goals.. would that vault ov into the favorate position to win the hart. what happens if they lose 7-6 with ov scoring 6 in a losing effort. same amount of goals in the last game but now not even considered for the hart . people must remember that this is a team sport and 1 player can only do so much no matter how great he plays . i look at it this way .take your brodeur's and iginla's off there teams and they still make the playoffs.ov is the only reason that the caps have a shot at making the playoffs.
57 career losses,46 shutouts and 5 vezina trophys.6 Stanley Cup rings in 8 yrs |
Edited by - mytor4 on 03/25/2008 07:01:53 |
|
|
|
PhillyFan12
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
399 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2008 : 03:16:46
|
| Ovechkin deserves the Hart this year. |
|
|
|
davbid
Top Prospect
12 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2008 : 16:49:52
|
Sorry, in my posts I was in fact arguing for the validity of this thinking and my acceptance of it. I think it started with my opinion but changed into why I think this way and then someone mentioned past winners and why the voters do vote this way and why they should. But to be clear, I do agree with this. I don't care how Ovechkin does individualy, it is the success of the team that he leads that will determine his worth as compared to other worthy candidates. The logic behind it is simple, make the playoffs and your team is a success, don't make the playoffs and your team is not a success. How valuable is a player whose team is worthless? And how valuable is a player whose team has a chance for the ultimate success (i.e. is worth more)? You are a legitimate Hart trophy candidate if you can get your team to the playoffs! Otherwise, you're just a great player on a lousy team.
As I said before, he WILL be considered and he WILL get votes, but ultimately he WILL fall short because making the playoffs is A BIG DEAL when evaluating the worth of a team and their biggest contributor!
As I said before, mytor4, and as you said: this IS a team sport. So if that is the case, and Ovechkin is doing it all, then how does he contribute to his teammates success if he is the only one enjoying success? Winning games for them is not enough unless he wins a certain amount for them (enough to get to the playoffs)! What kind of a team sport is Ovechkin scoring six goals in a 6-5 win or a 7-6 loss?
And in my opinion, without Iginla, Brodeur, or Luongo, those teams would likely be in a similar position to Washington.
Why is the Ross and the Pearson not good enough for Ovechkin? There ARE other worthy candidates for this award.
And why do people not see that making the playoffs is a serious advantage to determining a Hart candidates worth? |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2008 : 06:18:01
|
Likely my only post today. I'll stick with the topic I'm currently debating as opposed to shifting to the Great Debate (Good luck to Pain Train over there!).
davbid - there is a huge difference between competing for the playoffs to the last game of the season (like Washington) or being out of it well before then (like Tampa Bay). AND, for those of us who were around when there was less parity, there is even a huge difference between the 2007/2008 Tampa Bay team and some sad teams with REALLY poor records over the years (thinking of California Golden Seal type teams or early Caps or Devils teams).
I guess, amongst other things, I fundamentally disagree with the point that not making the playoffs equals no success, particularly in this day and age where almost half the teams in the league don't make the playoffs (as opposed to back in the day when only a very small portion of the teams - less than 1/3 - didn't make the playoffs). Anyway, there is an important nuance I believe that enters this discussion which you seem to be ignoring in honor of a sort of, "Win or you are worth NOTHING" mentality, and that is, how badly did the team miss the playoffs by.
But even for teams that miss by miles, I think focusing on missing the playoffs misses the point of the Hart. I put focusing in bold, because I am not saying missing the playoffs shouldn't be considered. But it's a matter of the weight you put on that factor.
Let's say hypothetcally that you have a Bobby Clarke type player heartwise who also is quite gifted offensively on a California Golden Seals like team for example. The team has a VERY poor record, making this year's version of Tampa bay look quite respectable. The player, however, is OUTSTANDING, not only point-wise, but overall game-wise, and relatively speaking on his team the contribution is RIDICULOUS (i.e. he is in on a HUGE percentage of all the goals that the team scores, his Plus-Minus, considering the team's awful defence, is very respectable, and his heart is so evident every shift that it is AWE INSPIRING). To me, there is no question that such a guy should, at the very least, be a candidate, and, unless there is a really good alternative, should be a Hart winner, DESPITE HIS TEAM'S AWFUL RECORD.
I think Leigh made a comment to the effect that he wouldn't look at the playoffs cutoff rule black and white. I think as soon as one concedes that point (which I think one has to actually, because the above example is far from impossible), it opens the door to the point that making the playoffs is something to be considered , yes, but you can't just focus on it. It is one of a number of factors.
I'll throw this quote at you from a "not so famous, closing in on over the Hill, former star of, well, not too much" guy for you to think about in the context of this discussion,
"Black and white rules are overrated. Discretion is underrated"
AndyHack, March 26, 2008 9:31 a.m. now (Toronto time)
Back to work!
Edit - lots of typos originally, but I think I got them all - Ok, enough fun! |
Edited by - andyhack on 03/26/2008 06:43:06 |
|
|
|
davbid
Top Prospect
12 Posts |
Posted - 03/27/2008 : 13:15:34
|
Many fans think that half the teams making the playoffs is too many. Look at baseball for example, only four teams make the post season (I think THAT'S ridiculous). I, myself, like it the way it is, but you have to admit that's a lot of teams. Now, considering all the extra points nowadays for overtime/shootout losses, that just means the Capitals would be that much worse without these points.
I think it's pretty logical that half the league would be considered successful and the other half unsuccessful especially with this convenient way of deciding (the better (or successful) half are in the playoffs, the worse (or unsuccessful) half are not). And you're misquoting me. I didn't say "win or you are worth nothing", but merely win more than the bottom half of the league or your worth is not as high. And I don't think that's particularly hard to do!!!
I don't see the rules as black or white, I've never been this kind of person. But all you have to do to realize what it takes to win the Hart is understand that making the playoffs adds SO MUCH value to the other candidates that making the playoffs is effectively necessary to win this award, because there would really never be any REALLY extenuating circumstances, IN ADDITION TO there being NO OTHER candidate worthy.
I think the real reason that no player has or is ever likely to win this trophy with their team not in the playoffs is because there is always going to be (and there has always been) someone similarly as worthy but whose team is in the playoffs, and this will increase their worth. Because making the playoffs is perhaps not the criteria but it IS a HUGE criteria for worth of a candidate.
If we were to hypothetically value making the playoffs in terms of points, Iginla, for example, would get an extra fifty points, while being the scoring leder might only get Ovechkin an extra twenty-five. |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/27/2008 : 15:02:57
|
davebid - I wasn't quoting you, but was just using the "win or you are worth nothing" wording as a label for your way of thinking about this matter. And I said "sort of" to try to make it a general label too. I think calling a team that does not make the playoffs, even by a single point, "unsuccessful", and therefore excluding a player on such a team from Hart contention kind of shows this sort of way of thinking. Anyway, I certainly didn't mean the label as an attack on you.
But the thing that I am not sure you are getting from me is that I don't have a problem with you arguing that Ovechkin is not the MVP this year. I just think your reason for not even considering him is faulty. If you are going to pass him by, pass him by for the right reason (see earlier post which mentioned the "what happens when you replace the player in question with an average player" test).
And what you never really answered for me, which is really the crux of the flaw in logic I think on your side, is how do you feel if they indeed do make the playoffs. Does he become your favorite then? Leigh said something like that, and that is what really doesn't jive with me - the from "total non-candidate" to "favorite" thing.
One other point I want to add - you talk a bit about how the Hart has been voted on over the years, as if the guys who have voted have done a good job . Personally, I wouldn't want to have to turn to the Hart voting over the years for support for my argument as I think the Hart has been the most poorly understood and screwed up award of them all. I've mentioned this before but look how few defencemen (let alone goalies) are on the list of winners. Some will argue that they have their own trophies, but I think if you give out the award to them sometimes, then they should be eligible and looked at the same way as forwards, under the true definition of the award every year. If the voters would have been thinking the same way over the years, you would now be seeing at least a few more defencemen and goalies on the Hart winner list.
Edit - another point came to me - this is actually in response to Alex who was asking Beans how one could consider Vinny given Tampa Bay's low point total. He asked something like, "How can they get any worse?". Well, my answer is "Very easily!". You guys of the modern generation have not really seen some of the REAL sad sack teams in history - check out the Seals point totals for example. A team can get a hell of a lot worse than Tampa Bay this year (like about HALF their point total). So if the answer to the "what happens if you replace the guy with an average player" test in Vinny's case results in us thinking that they might have only reached HALF of their current point total, I would say Vinny was extremely valuable to them, and depending on how others fare with that test, is maybe a very worthy candidate this year (I'm not making an argument for Vinny here so much as pointing out how he could at least be viewed as a candidate). |
Edited by - andyhack on 03/27/2008 15:36:43 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
2008 Hart Trophy - Ovechkin? 
