You and
@JackSlater nailed it in terms of how Goring didn't match up to Bossy and Potvin this postseason. Another angle I thought of too is as weak as Goring's case is on it's own against both his teammates, it's nearly impossible to make the case he was better than both in conjunction with one another, because making the case for him winning over one more or less negates his case over the other. This is especially true for his case over Bossy negating his case over Potvin.
Also, for the Isles other 3 cups, the most consistently best player through all 4 rounds won the Conn Smythe, so it wasn't as much of a Finals MVP as some are making it out to be.
This isn't the only CS I've disagreed with, but I could at least see where the voters were coming from in other years I thought they got the winner wrong. Not so when it comes to 1981.
Goring's case over both of them is actually the same: He outperformed both of them in the Final, voters of that era prioritized the Final more than they do now, therefore he won the Smythe.
How exactly can you see where the voters were coming from in 1979, but be completely baffled by 1981? It's pretty much exactly the same thing, especially when you adjust for the fact that the Habs didn't get an extra round to pad their stats. Lafleur outscored Gainey 23-16 through 3 rounds, Bossy outscored Goring 25-17 through the final 3 rounds, that's almost identical.
Trottier was pretty consistent in 1980, but Bossy in '82 and Smith in '83 were absolutely not the most consistently best Islanders through 4 rounds. Bossy was sub-PPG in the one series they almost lost, scoring 6 goals in his first 12 games, then 11 in his last 7 (including 7 in the SCF). Smith wasn't even the team's clear #1 goalie to begin with that spring, platooning with Melanson for the first 8 games before winning the outright starting job at the end of the NYR series and holding it despite playing very average in the Conference Finals. After 3 rounds, he was at .899, but because he shut down the Oilers in the Finals (.953) he got himself a Smythe.
Let me link
one of my old posts that gives more context about how voters viewed this era with respect to the SCF (particularly for repeat champions like the '81 Isles):
Here's my theory about Conn Smythe voting in that era: It became essentially a glorified Finals MVP if your team was also in the Finals the year before.
Looking at the history of the Smythe, it seems that voters were looking at the playoffs more or less as a whole in the earlier years, given that guys like Crozier, Keon, Savard, Orr in 1970 and Dryden would have won theirs at least in part because of their excellent performances in previous rounds. Leach in 1976 in particular was unquestionably picked based on his exploits in earlier series.
However, after 1976 the voters seemed to really emphasize the Finals in their selections. I expect this is a byproduct of having completely dominant dynasty teams in play, where since everyone expects them to get back to the Finals whatever happens in the early rounds is viewed as little more than a warmup act.
1977: Lafleur leads SCF in scoring
1978: Robinson leads SCF in scoring
1979: Gainey outscores Lafleur in SCF while shutting down Esposito line
1980: Trottier outscored by Bossy and Potvin in SCF but still wins Smythe
1981: Goring scores 5 goals in SCF, wins with only 20 playoff points
1982: Bossy scores 7 goals in SCF, wins over scoring leader Trottier
1983: Smith is at .899 through 3 rounds, then posts a .953 in the Finals
1984: Messier keys the Oilers in games 3 and 4 of SCF, wins over scoring leader Gretzky
1985: Gretzky ties for SCF lead with Coffey, voters had to pick one of them
The only real exception to SCF primacy in that period was Trottier in 1980, and he was also the only one of those players who did not play in the Finals the previous year.
Picking Gainey over Lafleur despite Lafleur having one of the greatest playoff series performances ever against the team's archrivals in the 1979 semifinals makes almost zero sense unless they were mostly focusing on the Finals. Goring is actually a completely defensible choice as Finals MVP in 1981, even if it is very tough to make a case for him being the Islanders' best player though all 4 rounds. Similarly, Messier would definitely have been viewed as the Finals MVP heading into game 5 in 1984, and I guess the voters had likely already made up their minds enough to give him the award.
This was an easy path, in large party because of the 1-16 format, with 16 teams making it in a 21 team league.
Interesting that you ask about this as an Oilers fan, because I thought Edmonton was the best team they faced. even purely looking at things in a 1981 context. I disagree with ContrarianGoltender about the North Stars being the Isles best opponent (and using that reasoning for why Goring should've won the CS). Not that the best team among this 4 is an impressive feat.
Since this is a 1981 context we're looking at, Gretzky has won his 2nd MVP in as many seasons, and the Art Ross outright. His 164 points broke Esposito's previous record of 152. So a record setting scorer, but still a season away from a record shattering scorer from when he'd have 212 points the next season. Already a great 50 goal scorer, but still a season away from the record shattering 92.
For the Oilers as a team, they did finish with a losing record of 29-35-16, meaning they were the #14 seed. But let's take a look at their month leading up to their mid April QF series against the Isles, which began on April 16. On March 15, they were 22-34-13. But in their final 11 RS games, they go 7-1-3, most notably going 5-0-1 in their final 6. Then in R1 against #3 seed Montreal, that was a series you'd definitely expect the Habs to win. Sure, their late 70's dynasty was waning with those key losses in the 1979 offseason. but you'd still expect those experienced vets to beat a team making their playoff debut. But the Oilers stomped them in a 3 game sweep, outscoring them 15-6.
Edmonton having the MVP, a hot finish to the RS, and sweeping the experienced champions in Montreal was IMO enough for them to clear the rather low bar of being the best of the Isles 4 opponents in 1981. It's no surprise they handed the Isles 2 of their only 3 losses, with their only other loss being to the North Stars when they already had a 3-0 lead. Only team to win at Nassau that postseason too. The Oilers were a better team at the time they were playing the Isles than their regular season record indicated.
It's fair to point out that the 1981 Oilers were better than their record, I agree that they were, but it wasn't because of their finish to the regular season. The Oilers finished strong because their schedule was super easy (the last 6 opponents averaged just 59 points in 1980-81). In their last 6 games against above .500 teams, the Oilers were only 1-2-3 with a -8 GD.
The reasons the Oilers were better than their record are:
1. Their goal differential was +1, meaning they underperformed their expected record
2. They fired their coach early after a bad start, then were at almost .500 under Glen Sather
3. Adding Andy Moog fixed their goaltending problems
4. Their young stars (especially Gretzky, Coffey and Messier) were improving with experience
But that doesn't make them better than Minnesota, who you pretty clearly aren't giving the same benefit of the doubt to even though there's just as much evidence that they were better than their record as well. #1 and #4 both apply to the North Stars, who were also a very young team (the average age of their top 10 playoff scorers was 22.4, the exact same as Edmonton's), and had guys like Dino Ciccarelli and Neal Broten showing up late in the season and becoming key contributors in the playoffs.
The North Stars were also coming off of a semifinal run in 1980, then beat three teams with better records in the 1981 playoffs (a more impressive run than the Oilers beating a Montreal team that won one playoff series during the entire Isles dynasty). In hindsight it is pretty obvious that they just had a team-wide offensive slump in the regular season in 1980-81 (offence fell to 16th in the league, after being 4th the year before and would be 5th the year after, despite the same coach and fairly consistent team defensive numbers in all 3 seasons), before regressing to the mean in the playoffs. To show this, their average GPG in the season before and after, both adjusted to 1981 scoring environment, was 4.20. In 1981 they averaged 3.64 GPG in the regular season and 4.33 in the playoffs.
I'd estimate the playoff Oilers were about an 85-90 point team, and the playoff North Stars were about a 95-100 point team (based on true offensive level and with springtime reinforcements included). Problem was that the 110 point Islanders were just too good for either of them. So yeah, I think the win probability logic still applies, but if you want to argue that the Oiler series should count some then that's fair too.
