OT: Around the NHL: Go Cats Go

[AuroraBorealis]

Or maybe the people who actually vote on these awards understand the guidelines and you're just wrong?

All they are doing is voting on the good story, because having a losing Finalist win the CS is bad optics for the league, like when Giguere won in 2003 with his sad expression.
That's all that's happening here. It's not any deeper than that.
They are just being dishonest relative to the criteria of the trophy.

If you feel that the written guidelines should be changed, that's another story. But until they are, they should be honest about who was better in the playoffs and vote based on numbers and facts, not feelings.

 

[canadianguy77]

If players on non-playoff teams can't win the Hart, then players on teams who don't win the cup shouldn't win the Conn Smythe.

Players on losing teams should never win the Conn Smythe.

Sometimes a goalie from a losing team deserves it if no one from the winner stands out.

Last time I saw a skater who maybe had an argument from a losing team, was Chris Pronger when Edmonton last went to the Final.

 

[Empoleon8771]

All they are doing is voting on the good story, because having a losing Finalist win the CS is bad optics for the league, like when Giguere won in 2003 with his sad expression.
That's all that's happening here. It's not any deeper than that.
They are just being dishonest relative to the criteria of the trophy.

If you feel that the written guidelines should be changed, that's another story. But until they are, they should be honest about who was better in the playoffs and vote based on numbers and facts, not feelings.

Again, or maybe they actually understand what the trophy means and your narrow interpretation or what it should mean is wrong?

The idea that they won't give it to a guy on a losing team because "Giguere was sad when he won it in 2003" is absolutely hilarious, in a bizarre "holy shit do you actually believe that?" kind of way.

This whole argument about the Conn Smythe is funny because it's completely subjective on how you interpret "most valuable player" aspect. This isn't an objective "the guy with the most points wins" type of award, it's entirely based on the interpretation of the voters. To say that the voters are wrong and bullshit because they don't believe your interpretation is just absolute arrogance from you.

 

[Tom Hanks]

Conn Smythe is most valuable to your team. If your team wins the cup it’s considerably more valuable than losing ergo almost always Conn Smythe will be on the cup winners.

 

[Fiji Water]

All they are doing is voting on the good story, because having a losing Finalist win the CS is bad optics for the league, like when Giguere won in 2003 with his sad expression.
That's all that's happening here. It's not any deeper than that.
They are just being dishonest relative to the criteria of the trophy.

If you feel that the written guidelines should be changed, that's another story. But until they are, they should be honest about who was better in the playoffs and vote based on numbers and facts, not feelings.

Dude everybody is fine with the fact that you love McDrai. The problem is you finger point and mock everyone who poses legitimate arguments about why they think Sid and Geno were better in their prime. It is not a stretch to say that if Sid and Geno played together for 25 min a night in the playoffs, they could have scored more than 1.5 pts per game. However, that likely means they don't win the cup 3 times because that would have neutered their depth. The greatness of Sid and Geno was their ability to dominate play while being flanked by middle and bottom sixers. I have yet to see McDavid or Drai do the same.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Conn Smythe is most valuable to your team. If your team wins the cup it’s considerably more valuable than losing ergo almost always Conn Smythe will be on the cup winners.

I don't understand why this even needs to be said

The only way that a player on a losing team will win the Conn Smythe is if:

1. There is no clear favorite on the winning team
2. The guy on the losing team performs to such an absurd level that it makes up for the fact that they lost in the finals. Basically the losing team is so outclassed, but because of one guy, the series ends up close.

That's sure as hell not happening here, especially if the Oilers get swept in the finals.

Dude everybody is fine with the fact that you love McDrai. The problem is you finger point and mock everyone who poses legitimate arguments about why they think Sid and Geno were better in their prime. It is not a stretch to say that if Sid and Geno played together for 25 min a night in the playoffs, they could have scored more than 1.5 pts per game. However, that likely means they don't win the cup 3 times because that would have neutered their depth. The greatness of Sid and Geno was their ability to dominate play while being flanked by middle and bottom sixers. I have yet to see McDavid or Drai do the same.

I didn't even know it was this aspect, I just thought this was some weird opinion that no one else has

 

[Fiji Water]

Also Geno and Sid's performance in the 2009 cup finals was light years ahead of McDavid. Geno was a beast at both ends of the rink and Sid was able to win his matchups despite often going against the greatest defensemen of his generation (Lidstrom) and another Selke caliber center (Zetterberg)..

 

[AuroraBorealis]

Or the finals matter the most, and most people recognize that compiling points is not how you become the most valuable player. Couture got dummied by Sid in the finals, and that has way more weight than Couture racking up PP points in the 1st and 2nd round or whatever while Sid dragged Hornqvist with a broken hand and Sheary around vs teams like Washington.

Gimme a break with this revisionist history bullshit.
Couture had 6 points in 6 games in the Finals. 2g 4a. He had balanced output throughout the playoffs.
Crosby had 0g 4a in 6 games, no better than McDavid in this series.

And like I said before, you don't partake in the Finals without help earlier on. It's a journey. You need 16 wins, not 4. If Bobrovsky disintegrates in R1 and gets them eliminated, he's not eligible to shine in R4, is he?

 

[canadianguy77]

Gimme a break with this revisionist history bullshit.
Couture had 6 points in 6 games in the Finals. 2g 4a. He had balanced output throughout the playoffs.
Crosby had 0g 4a in 6 games, no better than McDavid in this series.

And like I said before, you don't partake in the Finals without help earlier on. It's a journey. You need 16 wins, not 4. If Bobrovsky disintegrates in R1 and gets them eliminated, he's not eligible to shine in R4, is he?

Sid and Geno were more complete players in their primes than your two heros. Get over it. it’s not the end of the world.

 

[GilbertSeinfeld]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1801458500356476992

What a little bitch

You have a funny way of showing it, Knoblauch.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

Dude everybody is fine with the fact that you love McDrai. The problem is you finger point and mock everyone who poses legitimate arguments about why they think Sid and Geno were better in their prime. It is not a stretch to say that if Sid and Geno played together for 25 min a night in the playoffs, they could have scored more than 1.5 pts per game. However, that likely means they don't win the cup 3 times because that would have neutered their depth. The greatness of Sid and Geno was their ability to dominate play while being flanked by middle and bottom sixers. I have yet to see McDavid or Drai do the same.

I'm neutral. I don't love or hate them. You just see it as love because it's at a different place on the spectrum from the straight up hatred here, which many have admitted to.
If I loved them then I would watch more Oilers games than I do throughout the season. I'm merely willing to acknowledge their performance in the playoffs. They are dominating the active P/PG.

Who's mocking who here? I get mocked 5x here before I dish it out, just for having a contrasting opinion from the herd. But yeah, at some point I'm ofc gonna push back. You want me to just eat it?

 

[Tom Hanks]

I found the 2024 Conn Smythe voting card

 

[AuroraBorealis]

Sid and Geno were more complete players in their primes than your two heros. Get over it. it’s not the end of the world.

You're a self-professed hater of the team. As such, your "opinions" about them are worthless. You're not capable of being objective on this issue.
So stop interfering. I wanna talk to people who can think rationally about this.

 

[Empoleon8771]

The only times players have won a Conn Smythe while being on a losing team was when they had downright historic playoff performances. It has only happened 3 times in the last 50 years:

-Giguere: .945 save% in 21 games in the playoffs, with a .960 save% through the first 3 rounds of that playoffs
-Hextall: put up a +22 GSAA in 26 playoff games and nearly managed to beat the dynasty Oilers in the cup finals
-Leach: Scored 19 goals in 16 games in the playoffs, while no one else in the NHL had more than 19 points in the playoffs that year

Connor McDavid putting up 30 points in 20 games isn't even close to what gets you the Conn Smythe if you lose in the cup finals.

The Hextall one is actually bananas to me. The Flyers gave up 30 shots a game on that playoff run and would have averaged an additional goal against per game had they gotten league average goaltending. That's an absolutely insane level of performance over the average.

 

[canadianguy77]

You're a self-professed hater of the team. As such, your "opinions" about them are worthless. You're not capable of being objective on this issue.
So stop interfering. I wanna talk to people who can think rationally about this.

I’m not a “self-professed”anything lol. I just know Florida is the better team and I know that your 2 heroes don't hold a candle to Sid and Geno in terms of overall hockey.

You really need to calm down. Your love might be too strong lol.

 

[BusinessGoose]

I agree, conn smyth shouldn't be an award

 

[GilbertSeinfeld]

Kris Knoblauch is very unlikeable, IMO.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

The only times players have won a Conn Smythe while being on a losing team was when they had downright historic playoff performances. It has only happened 3 times in the last 50 years:

-Giguere: .945 save% in 21 games in the playoffs, with a .960 save% through the first 3 rounds of that playoffs
-Hextall: put up a .+22 GSAA in 26 playoff games and nearly managed to beat the dynasty Oilers in the cup finals
-Leach: Scored 19 goals in 16 games in the playoffs, while no one else in the NHL had more than 19 points in the playoffs that year

Connor McDavid putting up 30 points in 20 games isn't even close to what gets you the Conn Smythe if you lose in the cup finals.

That's the issue right there. They shouldn't need to dominate others that much just to be considered better. That's not logical.
It's not written in the definition of the trophy that the losers are at the much of a disadvantage, where they need to be like 30% better than everyone else.
This is just a trend that developed because of better feelings when winners win it.

 

[Empoleon8771]

That's the issue right there. They shouldn't need to dominate others that much just to be considered better. That's not logical.
It's not written in the definition of the trophy that the losers are at the much of a disadvantage, where they need to be like 30% better than everyone else.
This is just a trend that developed because of better feelings when winners win it.

You sound like the kind of person that says someone is "speeding" for going 2 MPH over the speed limit.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

You sound like the kind of person that says someone is "speeding" for going 2 MPH over the speed limit.

Either talk hockey or spare me, if you're incapable of maturity.

 

[wheelz87]

Kinda annoyed McDavid managed two garbage points tonight. End it Saturday, Florida.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Either talk hockey or spare me, if you're incapable of maturity.

My point with that comment was to show there’s a difference between the literal word definition and a practical definition. You seemingly don’t understand that.

How the voters vote on the Conn Smythe is the correct interpretation of the wording of the award, because they’re the ones who decide that. Just like the concept of “speeding” isn’t based on the word definition, but how it is enforced.

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

Fun fact, Reggie Leach is a friend of the family. Dude's hilarious. Used to run a landscaping company around here, I'd work for him in the summers when I was in middle school and high school.

Also he f***ing hates Jeremy Roenick. Says Roenick is easily the least liked person at any Flyers alumni gathering, by miles.

 

[Gurglesons]

Kinda annoyed McDavid managed two garbage points tonight. End it Saturday, Florida.

So close to Malkin’s record prevailing.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

My point with that comment was to show there’s a difference between the literal word definition and a practical definition. You seemingly don’t understand that.

No, your aim was to put me down because I'm disagreeing with you and you're not man enough to consider a different viewpoint. You've never handled contrasting arguments well over these 7 years, outside of talking to people you respect and are afraid to rock the boat with, like Peat or w/e.
The difference in 2024 is you have a shorter fuse before you lash out with personal attacks, like Pixies. You used to keep it civil for longer before you broke, so at least some value was squeezed out of the conversation before it went to shit like this one.

Anyways, I tried. If there's not gonna be any respect then it's pointless.