[News] Hart finalists: Crosby, Ovechkin, Tavares

[Brewmaster]

Ovechkin is the obvious pick and deserves it in my opinion. He led the league in goals, captained his team to a division title, and played unbelievable down the stretch when it mattered most. He also finished 3rd in points.

I don't think you can give the award to a forward if they didn't even finish top 10 in league scoring (Toews, Tavares).

[Tinordi]

If Crosby stays healthy he walks away with it, otherwise I give it to Ovechkin.

[trackercowe]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Bull crap. Crosby scored 100 points in his rookie season playing with Colby Armstrong.



No player makes the playoffs on his own. The Islanders have a good team outside of Tavares. St.Louis doesn't have any legit stars besides Pietrangelo and he wasn't nominated.

Crosby would be more valuable to the Islanders then Tavares would be. Ergo he's the most valuable player.

What the heck are you talking about? The Islanders have a terrible team outside of Tavares. They probably finish in last without him in the lineup. The only reason someone like Moulson puts up career numbers is because of plays on the same line with Tavares.

As for Pietrangelo he's a very good player, but the Blues are still a playoff team without him. They have a ton of depth, solid goaltending, and great coaching, things that the Islanders don't have.

Also the Islanders play in the toughest division in hockey, where really there isn't one slouch among the five teams.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by Brewmaster

Ovechkin is the obvious pick and deserves it in my opinion. He led the league in goals, captained his team to a division title, and played unbelievable down the stretch when it mattered most. He also finished 3rd in points.

I'm not sure captaining his team to a division title holds much water, that division is pathetic.

Ovi finished with some nice stats, but for a good chunk of the season a lot of people were wondering where he was. I wouldn't be shocked if Ovi won it, but I'd like to see a guy who played well all season and led a crap team to the playoffs win it.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Bull crap. Crosby scored 100 points in his rookie season playing with Colby Armstrong.

Sure, and I'll readily admit that Crosby was a better play then and now. But is the Hart for the best player or most valuable player to his team? Its actual definition is the former and we saw that the Penguins tugged along even without Crosby.

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

No player makes the playoffs on his own.

No, of course not. But I would easily say the Islanders would have had exactly 0 chance of making it without Tavares.

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

The Islanders have a good team outside of Tavares. St.Louis doesn't have any legit stars besides Pietrangelo and he wasn't nominated.

I understand where your coming from with everything else but the Blues and Pietrangelo are an absolute terrible example. The Blues strength this year was that everyone on their team played their roles. I think you would find very mixed results if you asked Blue fans who their MVP was this year whereas you wouldn't need to ask an Islanders fan.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Kaine

The award is actually based on who was the most valuable player to his team, not the MVP in general.

One could make the argument that without Crosby (missed a lot of time as is) the Pens were a top team in the East. Without Ovie or Tavares neither team was much more than a basement dweller.

Yes, we all know that.

But the whole 'the Islanders would suck without Tavares but the Pens are still good without Crosby' is a silly argument.

It basically says that most valuable to your team automatically means a player on a team that just scraped into the playoffs.

Crosby would be just as valuable on any other team as he is on the Pens.

Also, guys like Crosby (and Gretzky, etc) make everyone on their team better. So to say that the Pens would be good without Crosby misses the mark.

Most Valuable To Their Team is meaningless, because we don't know how any of the teams would really be without them.

Valuable is valuable. I am pretty sure that Crosby, in replace of Tavares, would also have carried that team into the playoffs. In fact, he would have likely done it before this year.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Bull crap. Crosby scored 100 points in his rookie season playing with Colby Armstrong.

I think you forgot the rest of that line which was Lemieux for part of the season as well as Palffy. I mean they are no Brad Boyes, but who is.

[saillias]

Originally Posted by dustygoon

No Toews. What the? Is this a joke?

Eastern bias maybe.

Not eastern bias... Toews just didn't deserve to be nominated. If you pick a player from Chicago Kane was probably their MVP this year.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Yes, we all know that.

But the whole 'the Islanders would suck without Tavares but the Pens are still good without Crosby' is a silly argument.

It basically says that most valuable to your team automatically means a player on a team that just scraped into the playoffs.

Crosby would be just as valuable on any other team as he is on the Pens.

Also, guys like Crosby (and Gretzky, etc) make everyone on their team better. So to say that the Pens would be good without Crosby misses the mark.

Most Valuable To Their Team is meaningless, because we don't know how any of the teams would really be without them.

Valuable is valuable. I am pretty sure that Crosby, in replace of Tavares, would also have carried that team into the playoffs. In fact, he would have likely done it before this year.

Depends, could the Islanders have won a game when Crosby was on the sidelines injured?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Sure, and I'll readily admit that Crosby was a better play then and now. But is the Hart for the best player or most valuable player to his team? Its actual definition is the former and we saw that the Penguins tugged along even without Crosby.


No, of course not. But I would easily say the Islanders would have had exactly 0 chance of making it without Tavares.


I understand where your coming from with everything else but the Blues and Pietrangelo are an absolute terrible example. The Blues strength this year was that everyone on their team played their roles. I think you would find very mixed results if you asked Blue fans who their MVP was this year whereas you wouldn't need to ask an Islanders fan.

Crosby would have carried the Islanders to the playoffs as well.

Crosby is better than Tavares - should he be punished because his team is better than Tavares' team?

[Canada 02]

these award finalist threads should be turned into polls to see who CP would vote for among the finalists

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by FlamingLonghorn

Depends, could the Islanders have won a game when Crosby was on the sidelines injured?

If not, that only proves how valuable Crosby is

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

these award finalist threads should be turned into polls to see who CP would vote for among the finalists

Not a bad idea. I'll add one.

[Sylvanfan]

A healthy Crosby would have run away with this award. Glad to see Tavares get the nomination over a guy like Stamkos or St.Louis. Those guys had great seasons as players in terms of stats, but ultimately Tavares did something to help his team win games.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Crosby would have carried the Islanders to the playoffs as well.

Crosby is better than Tavares - should he be punished because his team is better than Tavares' team?

I don't know if punished is the best word here. The award is for the most valuable player to his team, I think Tavares was more valuable to his team. Alternate worlds aside, it's just what the award is supposed to be awarded for. Let the Lindsay go to Crosby for best player.

It's akin to the Jennings. Does it go to the best goalies always? Absolute not. Just the ones who let in the least amount of goals. The Vezina winning goalies missing out on this award aren't being punished, they just don't meet the criteria to win it.

[Sylvanfan]

I think Bobrovski had a pretty valid case too. He almost dragged the Jackets into the playoffs, and much of their success came once he was the guy put in net pretty much every game. That team didn't score a lot of goals either so he was really key in their success.

[Kaine]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Yes, we all know that.

But the whole 'the Islanders would suck without Tavares but the Pens are still good without Crosby' is a silly argument.

It basically says that most valuable to your team automatically means a player on a team that just scraped into the playoffs.

Crosby would be just as valuable on any other team as he is on the Pens.

Also, guys like Crosby (and Gretzky, etc) make everyone on their team better. So to say that the Pens would be good without Crosby misses the mark.

Most Valuable To Their Team is meaningless, because we don't know how any of the teams would really be without them.

Valuable is valuable. I am pretty sure that Crosby, in replace of Tavares, would also have carried that team into the playoffs. In fact, he would have likely done it before this year.

And yet that is exactly what the award is. You can not agree with it all you like and you are more than entitled to your opinion, but the award is what it is. It's based on how big a contribution said player(s) make to their teams. Crosby missed more than a few games of the season and the Pens were still a top team. Yes Tavares played the entire season so it's tough to say for certain how they would have done without him, but it is VERY unlikely they are even close to a playoff team without him considering how the carried the offense.

As someone else said if Crosby had played the entire season the argument could be made for him winning it since he really would have run away not only on his team, but the entire league. This wasn't the case however and in my opinion he had a much smaller impact to bringing his team to the post season than the other two nominees. I don't think missing a quarter of the season works in his favor for this particular award regardless of how good a player he is.

Also I think people need to get away from the mentality that the best player should win all possible awards just because they are the best. Sometimes we forget that certain awards have meaning aside from putting up the most numbers.

[driveway]

Not just a healthy Crosby would win this, but a Crosby who'd missed the first part of the season instead of the last part of the season would win this in a walk.

I hate the "most valuable" aspect of this award. The "most valuable" player in the NHL this year was Bobrovsky - oh, but the Hart doesn't really go to goalies and sure as heck doesn't go to non-playoff teams, wait .. what?

The MVP trophy should go to the best hockey player alive and that person is Sidney Crosby.

[d_phaneuf]

Originally Posted by saillias

Not eastern bias... Toews just didn't deserve to be nominated. If you pick a player from Chicago Kane was probably their MVP this year.

yep I don't see the Eastern bias at all

Sedin/Perry have won it 2 of the last 3 seasons

that's as west coast as you can get

[troutman]

Originally Posted by diane_phaneuf

yep I don't see the Eastern bias at all

Sedin/Perry have won it 2 of the last 3 seasons

that's as west coast as you can get

Except the last 3 years there was inter-conference play, and Eastern writers were forced to watch Western teams. Also, Eastern stats were not as inflated, by avoiding the stronger teams in the West.

Friedman said there was clearly Eastern bias.