Toggle sidebar

An idea to restructure defencemen trophies

It would navigate towards the Bobby Orr winner always getting the Norris, like the Hart trophy never goes to the selke winner.
 
Counterpoint: there is nothing wrong with the existing system, because awards are not meant to be taken seriously.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tasty Biscuits
Bobby Orr Trophy: Best offensive defenseman (most points or whatever).
James Norris Memorial Trophy: Best all-round defenseman,
Wayne Gretzky Trophy: The player with most primary assists. (most important of them three though. ridiculous that the NHL don't have one already.)
 
Morrison said:
Bobby Orr Trophy: Best offensive defenseman (most points or whatever).
James Norris Memorial Trophy: Best all-round defenseman,
Wayne Gretzky Trophy: The player with most primary assists. (most important of them three though. ridiculous that the NHL don't have one already.)
Click to expand...
I've proposed this for over a decade plus one more...

Gordie Howe Trophy: Best forward.

Then the Hart Trophy can be more reflective of the player who is most valuable to his team (be it F, D, G), instead of a defacto best forward award. The league could even have the Hart voters pick the winner among the Norris, Howe, and Vezina winners.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Morrison
S E P H said:
Since we can all agree on that the Norris is being handed out to the defenceman who has the most points at the end of the season and defensive defencemen are not getting a fair shake, my idea to transform it into two trophies, and one main trophy that was sparked from how the MLB does its awards. This is what I had in mind...

Award these trophies first:
- Bobby Orr Trophy: Awarded to the best offensive defenceman in the league (not based on points like the Art Ross)
- Nicklas Lidstrom Trophy: Awarded to the best defensive defenceman in the league

Then this one:
- Norris Trophy: Awarded to the best defenceman in the league (either the winner of the Orr or Lidstrom trophy)

I think this will give a better chance for a defensive defenceman to win the Norris when the competition gets cut down to two overall defenders. Yes, I think the majority who would win it, would still be OFD, but with the addition of the defensive defenceman trophy, it will give an element of our game that is currently still not being valued when it should be. Pure shutdown ability is in itself, talent.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Just name the 2nd one the Jaccob Slavin Award and be done with it.
 
Drake1588 said:
I don't think you need to create more trophies so much as you need better voters for the Norris itself.

Strip it from the PWHA. Let the GMs vote for the Norris instead.
Click to expand...

Staff tend to vote for awards based on reputation, not actual performance, unless you are giving then curated metrics and ordering them to use those metrics as their guide. You simply get different voting results, not better ones.

torniojaws said:
Have other D-men vote for it? Cannot vote your own team's players.
Click to expand...
Players are even worse judges of the actual impact of their fellows. Now you get reputational votes plus "look how cool that thing he does is!"

As far as I'm concerned, players should not be voting for awards meant to be taken more seriously than a magazine poll in any sport.
 
insomniac said:
Would the Norris necessarily need to go to an Orr or Lidstrom winner? Imagine a situation where:

Player A, Orr winner: #1 offense, #30 defense

Player B, Lidstrom winner: #30 offense, #1 defense

Player C: #2 offense, #2 defense
Click to expand...

20/21 is a great example. Fox won the Norris, but Barrie lead all dmen in scoring so he might take the Orr, and a guy like Slavin might win the Lidstrom.

Or 21/22 where you could give Makar the Norris, Josi the Orr, and McAvoy the Lidstrom.

Even last year, you probably give Hughes the Orr, but then not the Norris and instead give it to Makar who put up nearly as many points, but plays a much bigger role defensively (eg he plays 2 minutes a night on the PK vs Hughes who plays 10 seconds), and Ekholm the Lidstrom.
 
I sometimes think that the league should just eliminate individual trophies altogether. Only give award to teams for team accomplishments.
 
Agree with others -- just add a defensive d-man award. Been wanting that for years. Those guys are underappreciated when it comes to hardware.

A player that comes to mind who had a massive impact on the ice and success of his team is Chara. That dude's defensive fancy stats were absolutely sick year after year, yet he only got one Norris. Several other players in the same boat in that era. An elite defensive d-man can be every bit as important to team success as a high scoring forward.
 
Slavin if that happens right?
25b45c72-8b6e-47c7-ae82-82ac8c79a7e1_text.gif
 
the best players are usually the players who dominate their peers offensively, including defenceman.

so if anything you add the best defensive d-man.
 
This is badly needed mainly to prevent us idiots from fighting here. Its pathetic that Quinn is going to go the whole season not playing on the PK, getting very sheltered O Zone starts with all 4 lines, then sheltered D zone starts as rarely as possible but only with one of Miller/Peterrsson. The Canucks are going out of their way to make him play actual defense as little as possible. That should not be the "best defenseman in the league". Make a hybrid position out of it.

Orr - Top scorer. Easy. Points. Done (Art Ross D version)
Bourque - Most goals (Rocket D Version)
Pronger - Best defensive defenseman. Insert Slavin and Tanev type players. How do you quantify it though? PK, corsi, etc?
Lidstrom - Overall defeseman (Hart version). Need some sort of quantifiable defense associated. Points + PK% + Corsi + ????
 
benfranklin said:
This is badly needed mainly to prevent us idiots from fighting here. Its pathetic that Quinn is going to go the whole season not playing on the PK, getting very sheltered O Zone starts with all 4 lines, then sheltered D zone starts as rarely as possible but only with one of Miller/Peterrsson. The Canucks are going out of their way to make him play actual defense as little as possible. That should not be the "best defenseman in the league". Make a hybrid position out of it.

Orr - Top scorer. Easy. Points. Done (Art Ross D version)
Bourque - Most goals (Rocket D Version)
Pronger - Best defensive defenseman. Insert Slavin and Tanev type players. How do you quantify it though? PK, corsi, etc?
Lidstrom - Overall defeseman (Hart version). Need some sort of quantifiable defense associated. Points + PK% + Corsi + ????
Click to expand...
Overall defenseman would be Orr, since he was the best at both.
Having said that, that’s way too many awards.
 
Golden_Jet said:
Overall defenseman would be Orr, since he was the best at both.
Having said that, that’s way too many awards.
Click to expand...
Ill go with Lidstrom for longevity and playing in the toughest eras. We only saw Orr's prime and played pre-80s. Im sure he wouldve did fine/great vs Gretzky but we never saw it.

Forwards already have it. Why not give it to D?
 
benfranklin said:
Ill go with Lidstrom for longevity and playing in the toughest eras. We only saw Orr's prime and played pre-80s. Im sure he wouldve did fine/great vs Gretzky but we never saw it.

Forwards already have it. Why not give it to D?
Click to expand...
100% disagree, Orr was greater than Lidstrom at both ends of the ice, and it’s not even debatable imo.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TKB
Voight said:
Thing is, Orr was a better defensive player than Lidstrom. People think he was all offence, but he wasn't.
Click to expand...
Drives me nuts, every time this gets reposted its always name the offensive trophy after Orr and the defensive award after _________, Orr was the best at both ends of the ice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voight
Golden_Jet said:
100% disagree, Orr was greater than Lidstrom at both ends of the ice, and it’s not even debatable imo.
Click to expand...
You must be a boat load of fun in a sports conversation.

They played in two drastically different eras and its easily debatable, especially only pure defensive ability. Orr has the offense, there is no denying that, but defense. Please go on to why Orr was superior.
 
benfranklin said:
You must be a boat load of fun in a sports conversation.

They played in two drastically different eras and its easily debatable, especially only pure defensive ability. Orr has the offense, there is no denying that, but defense. Please go on to why Orr was superior.
Click to expand...
lol, you obviously didn’t watch him play, go read the history of hockey threads if you’re looking for who were the greatest defenders and why,

Orr was superior at both ends, you would be with a small minority thinking otherwise. I’m not looking to convince you, your mind is already made up.
But go read the HoH threads.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom