2010-11 Hart Trophy Revisit.

[Michael Farkas]

95-03 Jersey Devils.

Quite similar actually, but because of rule changes and game evolution, teams defended in different ways. The Lemaire/Lamoriello Devils came from an era where shots were the enemy. Prevent shots was the name of the game. Prevent shots means defending lines and it means shooting lane defense.

As, categorically, butterfly (or butterfly-ish) goaltending proliferated and there became a level of consistency that arose (98% of unscreened, untipped shots were being stopped...a save was maybe the most expected result in the game), shots/saves held less value in terms of effort concentration. So, teams didn't have to sell out so hard to block shots or to control lines...they could focus their energy on the areas where actual goals and legitimate chances come from.

Also, it was ripe for the era. This area in the 2009-2015 zone had a lot of players too fast for their own good, not skilled enough to play at speed, etc. Plus, in the very very background (for most, hopefully) there was the publicizing of shot metrics like Corsi. So, guys didn't turn down shots very much...if they saw a chance to shoot it, they did. Claude Julien and some other smart coaches took advantage of this and designed a different kind of "trap". As opposed to the "trap" that forces a dump in - which everyone hated, even though someone had played it at some point in every single season we've ever watched probably - this type of "trap" forced a long shot.

The first "trap" doesn't register with both public goalie stats; the second one does. Same result for all intents and purposes...unless you're hellbent on shot metrics. In which case, the goalie gives up 2 goals in the first one and looks like ****, the goalie gives up 2 goals in the second one and is anointed some sort of demigod haha

 

[Felidae]

Once again I will refer back to Thomas's 2005-06 season.
Team was coached under Mike Sullivan and ranked 20th in GA. The goaltending was very much spread out. Raycroft with an abysmal .879sv% in 30 games, Toivanen with a .914 sv% in 2o games, and Tim Thomas with a .917sv% in 38 games, good for 7th best in the league.

Hell, even the next season he did an ok job under a garbage team. A .905 sv% isn't good (middle of the pack). But he was also on one of the worst defensive teams in the NHL (ranked 29th in GAA). Toivanen as the backup fared even worse, with a .875 sv%. Macdonald had a higher sv% than Thomas. But he played 7 games to Thomas's 60+

All im saying is that if we're gonna acknowledge his stats were propped by an elite defensive team and system that benefited him greatly, then you also have to acknowledge his teams before his peak years were really, not all that good across the board, and it's not like he was awful then either. He ranged from middle of the pack to very good.

 

[The Panther]

So, moving on from Tim Thomas....

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Q

 

[overpass]

I would take Toews in this weak year. He dragged the Hawks to the playoffs every bit as much as Perry did for the Ducks, if not more.

The Hawks had a big cup hangover. Duncan Keith had a straight up bad season and admitted after the year that his head hadn't been in the right place. Kane had an off year and after the season they found he had a broken wrist. Toews was by far their best player.

Toews had a Bobby Clarke-esque season where everything went right when he was in the ice. Dominant 5-on-5 numbers, hugely outscoring opponents, whether he was playing with Kane or not. As always, he scored less when they were leading and amped it up when they were trailing. He didn't score as many power play points as Perry and others, but Chicago's power play was very near the top of the league, and Toews played as big a role as anyone. And he was the Hawks' top PKer as well. Great on faceoffs which helped on both special teams.

And if we're giving any shootout credit, Toews is the greatest NHL shootout player ever and carried the Hawks in shootouts this season as well.

I recognize the narrative is more favourable to Perry, with his late season charge getting everyone's attention. And the Hawks finishing 15 points worse didn't look great for Toews if you didn't follow their season. But over 82 games I think Toews was the best and most valuable.

 

[JackSlater]

I would take Toews in this weak year. He dragged the Hawks to the playoffs every bit as much as Perry did for the Ducks, if not more.

The Hawks had a big cup hangover. Duncan Keith had a straight up bad season and admitted after the year that his head hadn't been in the right place. Kane had an off year and after the season they found he had a broken wrist. Toews was by far their best player.

Toews had a Bobby Clarke-esque season where everything went right when he was in the ice. Dominant 5-on-5 numbers, hugely outscoring opponents, whether he was playing with Kane or not. As always, he scored less when they were leading and amped it up when they were trailing. He didn't score as many power play points as Perry and others, but Chicago's power play was very near the top of the league, and Toews played as big a role as anyone. And he was the Hawks' top PKer as well. Great on faceoffs which helped on both special teams.

And if we're giving any shootout credit, Toews is the greatest NHL shootout player ever and carried the Hawks in shootouts this season as well.

I recognize the narrative is more favourable to Perry, with his late season charge getting everyone's attention. And the Hawks finishing 15 points worse didn't look great for Toews if you didn't follow their season. But over 82 games I think Toews was the best and most valuable.

This is a more detailed version of what I mentioned earlier but I at least agree that it was an underappreciated season. I don't really see how Stamkos or Sedin could be viewed as better centres that year, though I get Sedin finishing ahead of him in all star voting by the conventions of NHL voting.

 

[ESH]

Bringing up Tim Thomas in the History of Hockey forum is always a trap. We get it, you think he’s bad. Most people think he was actually pretty good though.

 

[Cruor]

Bringing up Tim Thomas in the History of Hockey forum is always a trap. We get it, you think he’s bad. Most people think he was actually pretty good though.

You would be left with the impression that Thomas actually pulled the wool over everyones eyes and conned his way into two Vezinas and a Smythe just judging by one or two prolific posters over here that are hellbent on their own minority opinion.

I think this post kind of sums up the last couple of years "debate" about it, and this is 6 years ago:

This is where I talk about him joining the Bruins in the second-half of 2005-06 and putting up top-10 numbers, and then you talk about 2006-07, and then I mention that his even strength numbers in 2006-07 weren't bad at all but a lack of discipline made him look worse than he was - something greatly improved in 2007-08 even if the penalty kill itself was still poor, and then you talk about Rask replacing him in 2009-10, and I say that Thomas had surgery after 2008-09 and that Rask was really good so he probably would have challenged most #1s but especially older ones recovering from surgery, and you say it means less because the Vezinas weren't consecutive, and I say there's still two of them, and you talk about a weak goal in the Stanley Cup Finals, and I say it was still one of the better Stanley Cup Finals in history, and then we freeze frame while the credits roll until this time next week.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

then and now my mvp was MSL. i have to remember my reasoning but i’ll come back to this. i was very sure of it at the time.

I agree (not about St. Louis)

ok i’ve been sitting on this and this is how i remember the 2011 season:

basically, after crosby got hurt, the year was dominated statistically by three sets of linemates: getzlaf/perry, stamkos/MSL, and the sedins.

perry had the absolutely bonkers stretch run, but outside of that he and getzlaf were producing at the same clip when both were in the lineup. so this is where my memory and me looking at the stats don’t quite add up: my memory is when getzlaf came back into the lineup after missing six weeks, perry exploded. but looking at the game logs, perry got hot two games before getzlaf’s return, two assists in a loss to SJ and all three goals in a 3-0 win against colorado, which brought his non-getzlaf scoring pace up to exactly the same pt/game average he had before getzlaf got hurt. but that was a very good stretch, with them each going 2 pts/game in getzlaf’s first five games back, before perry goes cold (2 pts in his next 7) but getzlaf keep scoring (7 pts). i think this is where my misremembering came from, and i think at large most ppl were giving getzlaf a lot of the credit here for their recent hot streak, which makes sense because through their careers getzlaf was objectively the key guy offensively in their duo.

then in the last month perry goes nuts. 19 goals, 30 pts in 16 games. getzlaf is not chopped liver (21 assists, 24 pts) but perry leaves him and everyone else in the dust.

i’m replaying all this because the reason i had MSL as my MVP that year was his scoring consistency that year, especially relative to his linemate stamkos.

- through the first month and a half, stamkos had 19 goals in 19 games, and was 5 pts up on crosby for the league lead (MSL was in third place, one assist from an assist/game)

nov 18		goals	assists	pts
1.	stamkos	19	15	34
2.	crosby	13	16	29
3.	MSL	8	18	26
9.	perry	9	13	22

- then he cooled down and only scored 2 goals, 6 pts in his next 9 games (MSL has 8 pts).

dec 7		goals	assists	pts
1.	crosby	24	24	48
2.	stamkos	21	19	40
3.	ovechkin	12	23	35
4.	MSL	11	23	34
14.	perry	12	16	28

- then stamkos gets going again: 10 goals, 16 pts in 10 games. MSL has the same 16 pts, but with the assists and goals inverted.

dec 30		goals	assists	pts
1.	crosby	32	33	65
2.	stamkos	31	25	56
3.	MSL	16	34	50
6.	perry	20	22	42

- then cold again: 0 goals, 1 assist in the next 6 (MSL also cools down but has 1 assist, 2 goals, both GWGs — one was in OT, the other broke a third period tie in an eventual 2-1 game).

jan 12		goals	assists	pts
1.	crosby	32	34	66
2.	stamkos	31	26	57
3.	daniel	25	30	55
4.	henrik	9	46	55
5.	MSL	18	35	53
8.	perry	22	25	47

- and one last good run for stamkos: 9 goals, 17 pts in 12 games. MSL has “only” 11 assists, 13 pts.

feb 12		goals	assists	pts
1.	stamkos	40	34	74
2.	daniel	29	44	73
3.	henrik	12	55	67
4.	MSL	20	46	66
4.	crosby	32	34	66
8.	perry	28	31	59

- over the rest of the season, stamkos scores only 5 goals and 17 pts in the remaining 26 games. by contrast, MSL takes the team by the horns and puts up 11 goals, 22 assists, 33 pts. he’s third in the league, within spitting distance of perry and getzlaf over those last seven weeks. and most importantly (and this got lost in perry’s hot streak that propelled the ducks into the #4 seed), in the last eight games, tampa went 7-1, pulling them from 11th in the league to tied for 7th (although unfortunately for their playoff seeding they only passed western teams, and the team they tied — boston, same amount of wins and pts, but lost on the tiebreaker — ended up getting the game 7 home game over them in the eastern finals). anyway, this was tampa’s first playoff berth in four years and MSL outscored everyone in that span other than perry and a bonkers 1.5 goals/game//2+ pts/game run by ginla, carrying lecavalier back from the dead.

end		goals	assists	pts
1.	daniel	41	63	104
2.	MSL	31	68	99
3.	perry	50	48	98
4.	henrik	19	75	94
5.	stamkos	45	46	91

doing all this again, i think i’m still convinced that MSL was my MVP. he just was the motor no matter what. no shade to perry’s rightfully excellent season, and daniel sedin, who was marvellous as well. but hard to give it to daniel when that team had four absolutely top guys (previous year’s hart/ross winner, the selke winner who also was top five in goals, and a vezina finalist) and the depth to be the league leader in pts, GF, and GA.

 

[Felidae]

Small sample size but the poll results are more lopsided than the actual voting results.

 

[sr edler]

Bruins were even better in 2013 without Thomas, so claiming they built their whole team around him when they had a bunch of real HHOF calibre talent there (Bergeron, Chara, Marchand, Recchi), plus really solid depth both on F and D, plus a very good/effective system going on, comes across a bit far-fetched to say the least.

 

[JianYang]

Really, really good. They should have only given up five and shortened that series. But because of goaltending, it was left up to chance...

Like these first three goals in this video...



It's also why the team most familiar with him (Montreal) - who had a bottom five offense, scored 17 on him in the ECQF. That series was a post away from going south, a Michael Ryder save from going south...Thomas was flat out not good in that series overall.

Boston typically had alot of problems with Montreal back then. Even in the regular season, it was a struggle for Boston against them. If you recall, the habs had built up a 4-0 lead prior to that pacioretty/Chara incident in a late season game.

The one thing montreal had that year was decent special teams. 7th on the PP and 7th on the PK. However, since markov was not available for the series and most of the season, it was a bit surprising they got as far as they did that year.

 

[Cruor]

Bruins were even better in 2013 without Thomas, so claiming they built their whole team around him when they had a bunch of real HHOF calibre talent there (Bergeron, Chara, Marchand, Recchi), plus really solid depth both on F and D, plus a very good/effective system going on, comes across a bit far-fetched to say the least.

I think this is a good point that never really got addressed. Farkas identified Thomas as a fraud that would get exposed once Rask got the nod. How did that work out? I dont't think he ever got back to us on that.

 

[CaptBrannigan]

Thanks!

This is still unsourced outside of ‘I read it on the internet’.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

This is still unsourced outside of ‘I read it on the internet’.

OK

 

[Yozhik v tumane]

This is still unsourced outside of ‘I read it on the internet’.

https://x.com/i/web/status/1635636690172665856

This might be the tweet in question? I never had a twitter account and am blocked from expanding on the context, but it looks like him saying he received a slash from Thomas for blocking what would have been an easy save.

Edit: Oh, didn’t realize I got the expanded context (the question Ward replied to) when I linked the tweet here.

 

[Cruor]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1635636690172665856

This might be the tweet in question? I never had a twitter account and am blocked from expanding on the context, but it looks like him saying he received a slash from Thomas for blocking what would have been an easy save.

Right so was it because he wanted to artificially increase his save percentage as per Farkas or was it that he wanted to get a feel for the puck and game like Hasek?

 

[Yozhik v tumane]

Right so was it because he wanted to artificially increase his save percentage as per Farkas or was it that he wanted to get a feel for the puck and game like Hasek?

Aaron Ward seems to imply the team knew it was about his save percentage, but maybe Thomas just had to fetch a few lob-ins to get into his zone.

 

[Cruor]

Aaron Ward seems to imply the team knew it was about his save percentage, but maybe Thomas just had to fetch a few lob-ins to get into his zone.

Interesting. Do you know if he had any contractual bonus incentives for that?

 

[Crosby2010]

I said Thomas, but I am equally okay with Perry winning it. He did go on an epic tear at the end of the season. The last 20 games won it for him for sure.

Thomas played in a surprisingly low 57 games that year, so that could have been why he didn't win it. What a weak year either way though.

 

[sr edler]

I think this is a good point that never really got addressed. Farkas identified Thomas as a fraud that would get exposed once Rask got the nod. How did that work out? I dont't think he ever got back to us on that.

No one needs to get back to anyone. Boston showed they were elite without Thomas, Thomas didn't show he was elite without Boston.

If Thomas had a series like Jonathan Quick in 2018 against Vegas, where he was lights out but didn't get any type of serious support, you guys might have some type of case, but alas.

 

[Cruor]

No one needs to get back to anyone. Boston showed they were elite without Thomas, Thomas didn't show he was elite without Boston.

If Thomas had a series like Jonathan Quick in 2018 against Vegas, where he was lights out but didn't get any type of serious support, you guys might have some type of case, but alas.

Right and he was what, 39 years old at the time? Tuukka was...34 (?) when he retired entirely from hockey? That's about the age Hasek started showing his chops.

I realize you are butthurt over that Canucks fiasco, but Thomas was neither a flash in the pan or a fraud.

 

[JackSlater]

Right and he was what, 39 years old at the time? Tuukka was...34 (?) when he retired entirely from hockey? That's about the age Hasek started showing his chops.

I realize you are butthurt over that Canucks fiasco, but Thomas was neither a flash in the pan or a fraud.

Hasek was a professional at 16, the Czech goaltender at the WJC as a 17 year old, and the starter for Czechoslovakia at the best on best level by the time he was 19. I think his chops were somewhat visible before he turned 34. I guess Hasek 2.0 just hid his chops better before and after Boston.

 

[MadLuke]

That's about the age Hasek started showing his chops.

Even in the nhl, Hasek was not yet 30 when he won his first Vezina

 

[daver]

How does Mario get 2nd place in 00/01 after playing 43 games and Crosby gets no recognition in 10/11?