Eastern Bias exists - No Gaudreau for Hart

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Has that been confirmed? I wouldn't be shocked if he fell further than that as I have a feeling Oilers media may have not even put him on their ballots.

I think someone posted on here where Staples tweet a poll of who will win the Hart. Gaudreau didn't even make the poll.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

Are you a secret Oiler fan?! You really think Gaudreau is more important to the Flames than McDavid is to the Oilers?

That only works if you believe that Tkachuk and Lindholm are fourth line bums that Gaudreau elevated to first line players à la Thornton or Crosby. Otherwise, as any true Flames fan would proudly proclaim, the Oilers are absolutely terrible without McDavid.

Remove Gaudreau from the Flames, yeah they probably don't make the playoffs but this year they're probably still fighting down to the wire against Vegas and the Kings. Remove McDavid from the Oilers, they're probably also still fighting down to the wire for a playoff spot....against the Gulls and Roadrunners.

Yes….?

Where were the Flames thought to finish before the season started, vs the Oilers? Where did the Flames finish?

The Flames were 2nd in the conference this year because the top line was dominant. The top line was dominant because Gaudreau was the best 5 on 5 player in the league.

Simply put, Gaudreau was better offensively, and WAY better defensively than McDavid.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

McDavid finished the season playing 242 more minutes than Gaudreau (and McDavid played 2 less games).

If my math isn't totally screwed up (I'm tired) McDavid played the equivalent of 13 more games than Johnny.

[Flame On]

Look everyone, the NHL just want to flip the Oilers a bone when they bomb out of the playoffs again, to the last place wildcard team of rookies. Think of McBum as a Hart finalist as being a soother to a baby to shut it up.

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by MacDaddy77

Playing in 10 less games than Markstrom and Saros helps inflate his leading GAA and SA% in my opinion.

10 extra games and Markstrom has .922 SA% 2.22; Saros has .918 SA% 2.64 GAA

That shows a higher level of play over a longer season i would have both Markstrom and Saros ahead of Shesterkin for Vezina.

Performing worse in more games is an argument? Lol
Markstrom was great but Shesterkin had a better year. It happened.

[Flamesfan05]

It’s close for Johnny and Huberdeau also. There are valid arguments for each of them. Anybody saying otherwise is not being honest.

[OldSam]

Let McBaby have his individual trophy. It is the only thing he wants. I feel bad that a generational even strength season goes unnoticed but the media did such a trash job on their predictions, I am certainly not surprised.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

Performing worse in more games is an argument? Lol
Markstrom was great but Shesterkin had a better year. It happened.

Until the playoffs started

[agubuan]

Connor McDavid is the Dominique Wilkins of the NHL. Puts up ungodly numbers accompanied by a human highlight reel, while middling on a fringe playoff team year in year out.

[MacDaddy77]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

Performing worse in more games is an argument? Lol
Markstrom was great but Shesterkin had a better year. It happened.

I honestly dont read these stats like that. Am I missing something

I read them as with 10 more games both Saros and Markstrom maintained a level of play to have year end numbers comparable with Shesterkin.

Numbers are based on averages and this is a what if i guess but if Shesterkin played 10 more games his numbers might have dipped below the averages of Saros and Markstrom.

I think having the comparable numbers with more games played shows a sustained level of high play over a longer period but this isn't factored in I guess. I'm not arguing Shersterkin didn't have a fantastic year but if he plays 10 more games do his stats get reduced? maybe

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by looooob

ok now I'm sort of obsessed by this- in 74-75 Bobby Orr won the ART ROSS (all the while also a pedestrian +80), now he did finish 3rd (so was a finalist in modern terms) for the Hart but it was pretty close between him and Parent for 3rd even. (Clarke and Vachon were 1-2)

Vachon was killing it. 92.7% when next best goalie is Parent at 91.8% save percentage. The Kings weren't a great team the year before and then got shuffled into a division where the Canadiens were supposed to easily walk away with the division win but ended up barely ahead of the Kings in the standings. They were defensively focused (only finished behind Philly in GAA) but had no star players upfront (Nevin being 35th overall scorer with 72 points in 80 games compared to Orr's 135 and Clarke's 116). So in terms of MVP to their team criteria, probably fair that Vachon was up there as the best player, in the most important role, on a surprisingly good team.

Very much the opposite, the year before the Bruins had won the equivalent of the President Trophy and the top four league leading scorers were Esposito, Orr, Hodge and Cashman, all Bruins. They would eventually lose to the Flyers in the final but they were a clear favourite entering into the 1975 season. But that off-season they got moved to a bad division (Sabres missed playoffs year before, Toronto got the last spot in the East and the Seals were the worst team in the league by far).

So the Bruins were supposed to come out of that division as the easy leaders. Instead they were well behind the Sabres. Despite Orr winning the second Art Ross of his career, the Bruins disappointed.

The Flyers were just sort of doing what they were supposed to do. Easily winning the division. Bobby Clarke also ended the season on fire with like 45 points in 20 games.

So Orr I think had everything working against him that year. His team disappointed. He had good supporting cast (Esposito finishing just behind him in second place in scoring race and had won the Hart the year before). There was probably Orr fatigue (Orr had already won his Art Ross in a much more convincing fashion in 1970), Orr had his own trophy locked up in the Norris (his eighth straight) so it's not like anyone felt they would be snubbing them, and weirdly the introduction of the Leaster B. Pearson award in 1971 had not gone to Orr yet indicating to the media voters that the players themselves didn't see him as the best player (ironically it would go to Orr that year).

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by agubuan

Connor McDavid is the Dominique Wilkins of the NHL. Puts up ungodly numbers accompanied by a human highlight reel, while middling on a fringe playoff team year in year out.

Take that back. 'Nique was awesome. McDoesn'tBackCheck is NOTHING like him...

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Until the playoffs started

Definitely. Markstrom is king in the playoffs but this is not about the playoffs

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by MacDaddy77

I honestly dont read these stats like that. Am I missing something

I read them as with 10 more games both Saros and Markstrom maintained a level of play to have year end numbers comparable with Shesterkin.

Numbers are based on averages and this is a what if i guess but if Shesterkin played 10 more games his numbers might have dipped below the averages of Saros and Markstrom.

I think having the comparable numbers with more games played shows a sustained level of high play over a longer period but this isn't factored in I guess. I'm not arguing Shersterkin didn't have a fantastic year but if he plays 10 more games do his stats get reduced? maybe

There is a huge difference between 0.935 and 0.922 and 0.918 though

[FanIn80]

I wouldn't be surprised if, other than McDavid, the top 5 is all eastern time zone once the ballot totals are released. Huberdeau and Crosby.

I'd like to see them switch to an eastern and western nominee for all awards. Eastern media votes on East, Western on West. Then they all vote amongst the winners. Maybe even have a wildcard in there, so it's the top eastern and top western vote getters, plus the next highest vote getter from everyone else combined.

The only way this works though is to have equal voters from all time zones. Maybe even have fans vote for the media that votes, so it's not always the same stale people voting every year.

[Matty81]

I don't even know how Shesterkin is up for the Vezina... guy played 50 games, he's not even a full time starter this year

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Yes….?

Where were the Flames thought to finish before the season started, vs the Oilers? Where did the Flames finish?

The Flames were 2nd in the conference this year because the top line was dominant. The top line was dominant because Gaudreau was the best 5 on 5 player in the league.

Simply put, Gaudreau was better offensively, and WAY better defensively than McDavid.

Where were they thought to finish? By who? I thought the Flames under Sutter would finish ahead of the Oilers. The people who didn't are those we are blaming of having bias.

But those expectations are still based on the Oilers having McDavid. If McDavid found out his contract was invalid (I'm sure he rereads his contract every off-season looking for an out) and signed with the Devils in the off-season and the Oilers didn't replace him, the only off-season question would be if the Oilers would win the lottery or not. Maybe some bets on if they would finish ahead of or below the 1975 Washington Capitals...

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by Matty81

I don't even know how Shesterkin is up for the Vezina... guy played 50 games, he's not even a full time starter this year

Gone are the days of Broduer and Kiprsuoff playing 80 out of 82 games. Shesterkin's 52 starts was 13th in the league (12 if you don't include Fleury's combined starts between two teams). Unless the argument is there are only like 5 NHL starters now, I'm not sure how you can't quantify him as the starter. Though I do think the less games he plays, the more it should hurt his consideration for the Hart.

Also I don't think the Vezina will be particular close, and unlike any media bias argument, the Vezina is voted on by the GMs.

[Matty81]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

Gone are the days of Broduer and Kiprsuoff playing 80 out of 82 games. Shesterkin's 52 starts was 13th in the league (12 if you don't include Fleury's combined starts between two teams). Unless the argument is there are only like 5 NHL starters now, I'm not sure how you can't quantify him as the starter. Though I do think the less games he plays, the more it should hurt his consideration for the Hart.

Also I don't think the Vezina will be particular close, and unlike any media bias argument, the Vezina is voted on by the GMs.

You don't need to play 80 games but 50ish is almost a platoon goalie.

When there are goalies who played 60-70 games with similar stats for me a 50 game guy who played 60% of his team's minutes shouldn't be in the conversation unless his stat line was on another planet which it wasn't. But for sure he will win being a NY player

[TheIronMaiden]

I hope NY Toronto and Edmonton lose in the first round.