Quote:
Originally Posted by moon
Crosby carried the team on his back for the start of the season and to a much better record than anything Ovechkin has done. Malkin hasn't played as well as he normally has, Fleury has been his inconsistent self and they had injuries before Crosby went down. The Penguins haven't played as well without Crosby in the line-up as with him either.
Basically you are saying that if you are on a good team you can't win. Crosby has been much, much better than Ovechkin, as valuable if not more valuable to his team than him, contributed to a top team in the league not one struggling to make it in and contributes in all areas of the team not just one.
If Crosby can't win because of some BS notion that his team is too good despite him clearly being the better and more valuable player then why not a guy like Stamkos who has been better than AO and on a team that would be god awful without him? Getzlaf has been better and Anaheim would be a mess without him (but I guess they are too good a team).
Ovechkin is borderline top 5 MVP candidate (likely 8-10th) and not remotely close to Crosby even with his injury.
|
Fleury is having his best year ever.
Malking did not get off to slow start by any means. He had 15 points in his first 11 games.
Ovechkin has been a more important piece to his team's regular season than Crosby has been. And yes, a player who stands out on a bad team has a better chance of winning the Hart than the same player on a better team. That's just how the award works. It's not the best player; it's the most valuable to their team.
I'm not saying Crosby shouldn't be considered, but your statment was more than a bit much:
Quote:
|
If any writer/Gm/Coach (whoever votes for these awards at end of the season) votes for Ovechkin over Crosby for MVP they should be fired from their position and banned from hockey for at least 5 years.
|