2009 10 HART Trophy Revisit

[Felidae]

As suggested by bobholly, thought I'd do the other season where a Sedin brother actually ended up winning the Hart trophy in what was a very close race.

Sedin had 46 1st place votes to Ovechkin's 40, and there was also a small but noticeable fraction of votes going to a few others. Crosby had 20 1st place votes and Ryan Miller/Island Bryzgalov both had 13 1st place votes.


Here's some surface level info for the 3 Hart Finalists.

Henrik Sedin

- Art Ross Winner and 2nd in PPG

- 27 more points than next best teammate, his brother had a nearly identical PPG but missed 19 games.

- led the league in EVP with 83. 10 more than 2nd place, 27 more than 10th place. At the time this was the most EVP in a season this century, but it has since been surpassed by 5 players other players, all of whom played past 2015-16 when scoring has risen noticeably higher than it was in 2009-10


Alexander Ovechkin

- 1 goal shy of the rocket richard despite missing 10 games, but lead the league in GPG

- 3 points shy of the Art Ross Trophy, but demolished his peers in PPG. Had a sizeable lead over Sedin (1.51 to 1.37). 10th place had a 1.14 PPG. On a per game basis, this was the best season of his career from an overall production standpoint


Sidney Crosby

- won the rocket richard and was 2nd in GPG
- 2nd in points and 3rd in PPG

- out of the Hart Finalists, he probably had the weakest offensive supporting cast. 32 points more than Malkin who missed 15 games. An even larger gap over 3rd (59 points). Also had a 28 goal gap over the next best goalscorer on the team.


So, who do you think out of these 3 deserved the win, or maybe it should have gone to someone outside of these 3? Discuss.

 

[JackSlater]

I seem to remember thinking that it should be Miller or Crosby. I was never impressed with Sedin and didn't seriously consider him, not much of a contributor outside of offence and someone given pretty much his ideal spot to produce in. I seem to remember people talking up that he managed to score at a point per game level when Daniel was out, which seemed more like an indication of why he shouldn't win to me, and there was a lot of chatter about the much feared EAST COAST BIAS that year. I also would have been fine with Ovechkin winning.

Miller was simply excellent that year on a non-descript Buffalo team. Lots of game played, I seem to remember pretty consistent results. He had a lot of hype that year and it was deserved. I think that Crosby was somewhat underappreciated because frankly people were sick of him. Still, he was excellent (if not up to the standard people had envisioned a few years earlier) playing with spare parts on Pittsburgh and Malkin going through a mediocre year for his level. I seem to recall that Crosby had a ridiculous year in the shootout too, but that might have been another year. Ovechkin would be my pick for best player that year, even though he cooled off later in the season. The only reason I wouldn't give him the Hart is that he missed ten games, but it's a testament to how great he was that I'd seriously consider him that year. I wouldn't have had a problem with Ovechkin winning it as he was the best player that year, even though that isn't the point of the trophy.

So anyway for me it would be either Crosby or Miller, with Ovechkin close. Everyone else would be a step down from them.

 

[sr edler]

What happened with Henrik's game when Daniel was out injured that season wasn't that he "scored at a point per game" but that he scored 10-ish goals in 20 games, essentially a 0.50 clip which is eons above his normal goal scoring clip. Including the only hat-trick he ever scored in the NHL. What this showed is that he could change his game to the need of his team, because it wasn't like that team was drowning in snipers. Switching up or changing your game to meet your team's needs matter.

Also, we've been through this before, but Henrik had two games in the latter half of the schedule where he styled pretty hard both on Pittsburgh (Crosby) and on Buffalo (Miller), including a Gretzky-behind-the-net sequence against Pittsburgh to set up a goal, and a breakaway goal on Miller. This probably mattered to the narrative because Crosby and Miller were church mouse quiet in those games.

 

[JackSlater]

What happened with Henrik's game when Daniel was out injured that season wasn't that he "scored at a point per game" but that he scored 10-ish goals in 20 games, essentially a 0.50 clip which is eons above his normal goal scoring clip. Including the only hat-trick he ever scored in the NHL. What this showed is that he could change his game to the need of his team, because it wasn't like that team was drowning in snipers. Switching up or changing your game to meet your team's needs matter.

Also, we've been through this before, but Henrik had two games in the latter half of the schedule where he styled pretty hard both on Pittsburgh (Crosby) and on Buffalo (Miller), including a Gretzky-behind-the-net sequence against Pittsburgh to set up a goal, and a breakaway goal on Miller. This probably mattered to the narrative because Crosby and Miller were church mouse quiet in those games.

Sure, I remember the argument more or less. Sedin scored more goals, and his overall scoring went down. I don't think it's a ringing endorsement, and if goals become a focus then it only helps Ovechkin and Crosby more than it does Sedin.

I can't say I remember the specifics of two Vancouver games against Pittsburgh and Buffalo but those would be the sorts of things that don't really matter but do impact voting.

 

[sr edler]

I need to check up those stats again but I think Crosby had a ridiculous amount of points in three games against the Islanders that season, like 15 points, but then went radio silent head-to-head against Henrik Sedin. Of course it matters.

 

[Matsun]

Henrik without Daniel in 19 games:
10-9-19
It's ok, and it means that with Daniel he was producing points at the same level as OV. 63 games with Daniel:
19-74-93 (121 point pace)

I would've voted for OV, but it was a great season by Sedin that I think is really underrated because it always get lumped in with D.Sedin the next year and Benn in 2015. I don't think those seasons would have a chance against the competition that H.Sedin beat this year.

 

[The Panther]

I think I'm okay with Henrik winning this one.

In all these close-Hart races, there is always some kind of media-driven narrative that pushes one player over the other contenders in running to win the Hart.

For example, five years ago, when McDavid missed 10 games or whatever, and Draisaitl ripped it up. Media voters in the East -- who basically never watch the western games anyway -- suddenly were, like, "Oh! He's actually a good player, not just a product of McDavid." So he won the Hart.

So, I tend to think that Daniel Sedin's missing nearly 20 games is (oddly) what won the Hart for Henrik. Henrik started scoring more goals than usual, and this perhaps convinced some voters that one of the twins could still play very well (and eat, sleep, breathe maybe) without the other.

(The other big factor, of course, was Ovechkin's missing 10 games and thus not winning the scoring title. But he was the best player in the League that year, I think.)

 

[bobholly39]

I voted for Sidney Crosby. Here's my rationale:

Crosby vs Henrik Sedin - this one is close. I'm actually open to rewarding first time winners when it's close, and this was definitely a very worthy season by Sedin, so didn't have a huge issue with him winning at the time but I do prefer Crosby's season. A lot more goals than Sedin, and I actually like that he performed so well down the stretch, helps his team enter playoffs on a high, which has value:

First 43 games - 49 points. Pace of 93 over 82 games
Last 38 games - 60 pointys. Pace of 129 over 82 games

Contrast to Sedin:

First 45 games - 62 points, pace of 113. Last 37 games, 50 points, pace of 111, so very similar

Some might say they prefer consistency - but imo they were all 3 top teams who were safely in playoff position all year, so I like Crosby's strong finish. With hindsight, I might have said different if Crosby had run out of gas come playoffs and underperformed - but to his credit he didn't.

So - Crosby over Sedin for me.

As for Ovechkin....objectively, he was the best player that year on a per game basis, and very deservedly won the pearson. Most valuable season though? You have no value when you miss games, so the 10 games missed hurt him. Also - I definitely believe in the idea of "voter fatigue". With 2 back to back harts - the bar should be higher for #3 in a row, which is why I didn't vote for him.

I think this was the clear top 3 though. Miller had a strong year, but definitely behind the 3 forwards for me in the hart race.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Looking back to late March of that season, I had "Ryan Miller has been my vote all year, but it's closer now...still, it's Miller's to lose."

I had Crosby in my top 3.

I did not have Sedin or Ovechkin in the top 3.

I can't immediately find who the third player was in my top 3, but I believe it would have been Drew Doughty or Ilya Bryzgalov.

 

[GlitchMarner]

I don't have a strong opinion here, but it's really impressive Crosby had the season he had considering his linemates and that the Caps had the season they had considering their roster (look at that defensive group). For all the comments that Ovechkin's style of play back then wasn't conducive to helping his team win, the Capitals had the kind of success they had in large part because of their top line (that he drove).

Henrik definitely had a great season and beat very good competition. I'm not sure I would have voted for him, but I don't have a problem with his win.

 

[MadLuke]

I need to check up those stats again but I think Crosby had a ridiculous amount of points in three games against the Islanders that season, like 15 points, but then went radio silent head-to-head against Henrik Sedin. Of course it matters.

In a positive or negative way (has the game against the Isles are way more valuable for a direct rival than against a western team) ?

You could still go Ovechkin, but in the context of Hart count, Sedin was a perfectly fine winner, as pointed out scoring and winning games without Daniel probably help...

When you look at this:

https://www.naturalstattrick.com/pl...ne&fd=&td=&tgp=410&lines=single&draftteam=ALL

The top 3 forward candidate all look incredible, Crosby is lower a bit but he is the only one with no linemate-teammate showing up.

Ovechkin had 70% GF that year, by far the best team in the nhl but missed game and slow down post Olympics with some what you done for me lately bias always there make him OK to lose, but would have been a valid Hart season, his team went 47W-13L-12OT-with him, the Caps were 7W-2L-1OT without him, showing it was ok to be a Pearson but not Hart winner.

EV +/-, versus their team's EV +/- without them / team power play % (Crosby-Sedin lead their team, Ovechkin single point behind Backstrom)

Ovechkin: +51 / +28 / 25.2%
H.Sedin.: +35 / .+2 / 20.9%
Crosby..: +18 / .-6 / 17.2%

All good jump, but Sedin +37 shift was the best by far, does not mean much for who the best but for MVP is not a nothing metric.

Once the playoff start, how important was Pronger to those Flyers (what are their playoff odds if he miss 30 games ?), maybe him and Chara for the Bruins get a bit underrated for the Hart, but that part of the course. Miller going 41W-18L on the not so stacked anymore Sabres that when face on salary issue would also be fine.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Is this the year that the Caps have the league's best offense whether or not Ovechkin scores any goals at all? I recall there being a year like that somewhere in there.

 

[JackSlater]

I need to check up those stats again but I think Crosby had a ridiculous amount of points in three games against the Islanders that season, like 15 points, but then went radio silent head-to-head against Henrik Sedin. Of course it matters.

No, it doesn't really matter whether Crosby scored against Sedin's team. It's a bizarre argument to make, it's not a boxing match. I do remember Crosby lighting up the hapless Islanders once or twice near the end of the year, I guess what he really should have done is play at a point per game pace and scored not quite as many goals while playing with crap linemates, which is apparently a plus when Sedin does it.

 

[MadLuke]

It's a bizarre argument to make, it's not a boxing match.

It feels a bit NBAissh, when 2 mvp candidate playing the same position face each other x time a year, where it can make more sense because of how much more they can control what the other achieve to do or not and the game being understood to be in part about the mvp title.

Crosby-Sedin in the whole 2010 season were on the ice at the same time for a little bit less than 6 minutes.... (in a single game)

 

[JackSlater]

It feels a bit NBAissh, when 2 mvp candidate playing the same position face each other x time a year, where it can make more sense because of how much more they can control what the other achieve to do or not and the game being understood to be in part about the mvp title.

Crosby-Sedin in the whole 2010 season were on the ice at the same time for a little bit less than 6 minutes.... (in a single game)

It's certainly more prevalent in the NBA, and it does make more sense there than the basically zero sense it makes here. Of course when the head to head doesn't fit the desired result (Chamberlain routinely cleaning Russell's clock for instance) then it can get thrown away. Comparing quarterbacks this way is also one of the dumber discussion points in football considering they share the field usually for 0 seconds.

 

[Buffalowing1988]

The heater Miller went on from February-May 2010 was a higher peak than anyone else that season, IMO. But I entirely understand the Ovechkin vote otherwise.

 

[sr edler]

No, it doesn't really matter whether Crosby scored against Sedin's team. It's a bizarre argument to make, it's not a boxing match.

I'm talking about why he won here, or multiple reasons as to why he won, not who's best or who should've won or anything of that sort. These are fairly easy concepts to hold aside. Also there's really no good reason to talk about basketball or American football here since this is a hockey discussion. Of course in a very tight race something like how you perform head-to-head can absolutely matter and strengthen your narrative, and potentially tip some voting scales, especially if you look like prime Gretzky behind the net and one of your main opponents (for an award) is defending the crease as if he's trying to impersonate a less enthusiastic version of Alex Yashin.

(But yes, scoring the most even strength points in an NHL season since 90s Lemieux and Jagr probably mattered more)

 

[JackSlater]

I'm talking about why he won here, or multiple reasons as to why he won, not who's best or who should've won or anything of that sort. These are fairly easy concepts to hold aside. Also there's really no good reason to talk about basketball or American football here since this is a hockey discussion. Of course in a very tight race something like how you perform head-to-head can absolutely matter and strengthen your narrative, and potentially tip some voting scales, especially if you look like prime Gretzky behind the net and one of your main opponents (for an award) is defending the crease as if he's trying to impersonate a less enthusiastic version of Alex Yashin.

(But yes, scoring the most even strength points in an NHL season since 90s Lemieux and Jagr probably mattered more)

Yeah I don't buy that what happened in one random game, in the middle of the season more or less, mattered in the least. I do not recall any media member mentioning what happened in a generally meaningless, in terms of standings or rivalry, Vancouver-Pittsburgh game from months prior to voting. Doesn't mean it didn't happen, but I'm confident I never saw any of them say that and I would probably remember such a bizarre argument being put forth. If any media member did mention it they would of course appear stupid given its irrelevance. From year to year the only games that the voters seem to care about are games late in the season if a team is on the brink of missing the playoffs or not.

 

[sr edler]

It wasn't just one game though, he scored steadily over the whole season. But perhaps he shouldn't have done that. Perhaps he should have fluff-scored all his points against the Matthew Moulson era Islanders instead. Because where and when you score isn't that important.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

I really dont see an argument against Sedin here outside of a hindsight argument for a player who's career trophy count fell short and trying to find where they were "cheated"

 

[JackSlater]

It wasn't just one game though, he scored steadily over the whole season. But perhaps he shouldn't have done that. Perhaps he should have fluff-scored all his points against the Matthew Moulson era Islanders instead. Because where and when you score isn't that important.

... you are the person who suggested that that single game mattered to the narrative. No one has said that it was just one game or that he didn't score steadily over the whole season or whatever strawman you are going for here.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

i don’t imagine i’ll be able to convince anyone about henrik’s MVP this year but predictably i ride for 2010 henrik.

the biggest argument is something unlocked in him when daniel was out of the lineup and he stepped into a leadership role and took the reins of that team. it was a weird year because luongo was entering year two of being captain, but was under a lot of pressure not only from the weight of the captaincy itself but the meltdown in the previous year’s playoffs against chicago. it was also the first year without mattias ohlund, and sundin, who had done a great job filling the leadership void and changing the culture after naslund moved on and linden retired, was also gone.

so the argument doesn’t squarely rest on henrik — a guy who in his entire career, before and after, never hit the 20 goal mark — scoring 10 goals in the 18 games he played without his brother and lifelong linemate, it’s the transformative impact that him leveling up as a player and leader had on the team. this is something that was easier to see at the time than now, when we’re just looking at stats. you could watch the canucks becoming a true upper echelon team, and you could see on a night-to-night basis that they were capable of beating anybody anytime. that hadn’t been the case previously.

the difference between 103 pts in 2010 and 100 pts in 2009 doesn’t look like much (5th vs 7th in the league) but it absolutely was. and the other context is that with henrik taking over, AV completely changed the system. previously, the gameplan was hang back, don’t press, rely on luongo. but after him falling apart in the stretch run of 2008 and then again in the 2009 playoffs, the belief in the goalie that a defensive team needs to have was eroding. here’s the most telling stat for the shift between 2009 and 2010, even more than the sedins leveling up from pt/game to superstar numbers:

2009: 7th in the league overall, 11th in GF, 7th fewest GA​

2010: 5th in the league overall, 2nd in GF, 11th fewest GA​

(and to be clear, while the luongo of 2010 was no longer the MVP luongo of 2007, he was still an excellent goalie squarely in his hall of fame prime; but my point here is he no longer was the cornerstone that the team and its gameplan was built around.)

i have access to this as a game-in, game-out follower of the team obviously, but none of this was lost on observers at large. this is just the kind of stuff that time forgets and makes everyone turn around and go, “wait a minute, 18 pts in 18 games? why was everyone impressed by that?” my gut says part of the increased attention on the minutiae of this canucks team was because of the 2010 olympics and just plain more coverage of vancouver and by extension the canucks that year. but still, that really just levels the playing field to how many eyeballs were always on crosby and ovechkin in pittsburgh and washington (and the leafs, rangers, and so on).

the last leadership thing is the variable of the olympics. this weighed somewhat on luongo leading up to the games (but only so much, because he was expected to be brodeur’s backup), but then after the olympics, with luongo almost coughing up a 3-0 lead in the last ten minutes of the semi-finals game with slovakia and then letting the finals against USA go to OT with a lead entering the final minute of regulation, it was absolutely necessary down the stretch to have henrik be the captain in all respects other than the letter on the jersey (and of course, he would then be named the captain in the offseason). but even luongo aside, the year was also a circus because of heightened olympics-generated noise everywhere in the city. it wasn’t about the players who were going (less guys than you’d think: just luongo, sedins, kesler, salo, demitra, and ehrhoff), it was really everyone. i’ll note that i didn’t live in vancouver at the time and hadn’t lived in vancouver since the steve moore year, but as someone living in a US non-NHL market, it was infinitely easier to follow the day-to-day of the team in 2010 than in previous seasons. there just was more press and more access.

the team’s record over the year tells a story:

​

first four games (with daniel) — 1-3 record, it looked to be a growing pains year with the leadership transition. the win was in the fourth game, a convincing 7-1 drubbing of montreal with the sedins combining for seven pts. daniel’s broken foot was diagnosed the next day.​

​

18 games without daniel — 11-7-0, pulling the team to just above .500 in the last two non-daniel games.​

​

from daniel’s first game back through january — 22-8-2 record, with henrik scoring 12 goals, 42 assists, 54 pts in 32 games, daniel with 16, 31, 47. ovechkin is second during this stretch of games with 49 pts, crosby is fourth with 46, backstrom 5th with 40. henrik and ovechkin have identical pts/game averages.​

​

then in the two weeks leading up to the olympics, the team goes cold — 3-4-0 record during a prolonged eastern road trip due to the olympics (like an extended version of the rangers’ “circus trip”). henrik has only two assists during this run. he went from ending january at number one in the scoring race to falling nine pts behind ovechkin entering the olympic break.​

​

but then after the olympics, the slate was clean, even with a second epic two-week road trip to start the post-olympic stretch. 12-6-3 over the rest of the season, beginning with a 4-1-1 stretch during that post-olympics road trip. henrik scored 4 goals, 28 assists, 32 pts in the remaining 21 games, leading the league. right behind him were daniel and crosby with 31, but each playing only 20 games, so they were both slightly above him in pts/game. ovechkin had what was for him a fairly pedestrian post-olympics stretch, with “just” 8 goals, 20 pts in 18 games.​

​

and i’ll just add one statistical bit: for a guy who was the centerpiece of arguably the league’s second best powerplay (tied with philly for 2nd in total PPG, fourth in PP%), henrik dominated at ES. he had 83 ES pts, which is the most anyone scored between jagr in 1996 and mcdavid in 2018. in his own era, the only other players to score more than 75 ES pts in a year were the hart/ross seasons of ovechkin and malkin. in 2010, ovechkin had 73 ES pts (same ES pts/game ratio as henrik) and crosby had 72 over 81.

 

[Matsun]

The heater Miller went on from February-May 2010 was a higher peak than anyone else that season, IMO. But I entirely understand the Ovechkin vote otherwise.

I think the first 30 games of the season were his best stretch:

First 30 games 09-10	GP	SV%
Miller	30	0,938
Kipprusoff	31	0,927
Bryzgalov	32	0,924
Vokoun	29	0,924
Nabakov	31	0,923

 

[dalewood12]

I think Ryan Miller should have cracked the Top 3 finalists, if not win the Hart.

 

[Felidae]

I think Ryan Miller should have cracked the Top 3 finalists, if not win the Hart.

This was a pretty strong year for forwards. He probably would have been a Hart Finalist if he had a season like this one the next season.

And I do agree, but I'm not sure who I would replace him with among the Hart Finalists.