Hart Trophy Talk: MacKinnon, Malkin, Kucherov the Early Favorites, Scoring at Highest Rates By Far.

[Loseipeg]

This is utter nonsense. Put McDavid on Tampa or Pittsburgh and there is less of chance his team is behind to the point where he gets overplayed thus his pts/60 would be a lot better.

And anything other than the coach playing McDavid because he has proven to be among the very best offensive players in the league is just silly. A coach would get fired if he didn't put out his best offensive players if his team is behind. Team Russia is famous for this.

Didnt you say earlier crosby should be recognized as the best player due to a grace period lmfao? So according to grace period clause why are we bothering with points vs points per 60? Lol.

 

[Empoleon8771]

The only 2 players who should win Hart at this point are Hall or Mackinnon sans something crazy happening

So neither the guy who's going to win the Art Ross or Rocket deserve the Hart? Interesting. So if Malkin wins both (which he can do, he's in striking distance for both), he won't deserve the Hart solely because Colorado without MacKinnon sucks? How does that seem fair?

 

[Based Anime Fan]

The only problem I have with 7 of the NHL awards, especially the Hart, is that they're voted on by the press... most of whome have no idea what it's actually like to play in the NHL, and this is where we see the hard-on for points totals and not much else.

I think the PHWA should vote on 0% of the awards and let the coaches/GMs/Players do all the voting.

 

[Puck93]

because it judges the player most valuable to his team, not necessarily the best player. The kings without Kopitar are a FAR better team than the Devils without Hall.

Capitalizing FAR doesnt make it true. At the start of the season everyone wrote kings off, saying they will need lots of luck to qualify for post season THEN Carter got injured, so Kings with no 2# center and with little to no depth and with lots of rookies are currently in 3rd spot in pacific. He has 26!! more points than Brown who is his linemate and second scorer on Kings, other linemate being Iaffalo(rookie). He plays in all situations, 2nd most TOI among forwards playing against top competition while playing selke defense. So if you have any other argument other than the word FAR please explain.

 

[TopT]

The only 2 players who should win Hart at this point are Hall or Mackinnon sans something crazy happening

Just no

 

[Lemonlimey]

The only 2 players who should win Hart at this point are Hall or Mackinnon sans something crazy happening

Correct.

 

[SaltySkywalker]

So neither the guy who's going to win the Art Ross or Rocket deserve the Hart? Interesting. So if Malkin wins both (which he can do, he's in striking distance for both), he won't deserve the Hart solely because Colorado without MacKinnon sucks? How does that seem fair?

Jesus, don’t you pens fans have enough accolades already? Greedy bastards. Malkin, while f***ing amazing, is on a two time defending cup champion team...who gives a shit if he’s first in points by the end. That’s why there’s an Art Ross trophy.

My god, anyone who can’t see how the strength of a team is relevant is beyond me. If you are absolutely CARRYING your team...your way more valuable to your team then a player with all stars up and down their lineup.

MacKinnon and Hall for me AINEC

 

[Empoleon8771]

Jesus, don’t you pens fans have enough accolades already? Greedy bastards. Malkin, while ****ing amazing, is on a two time defending cup champion team...who gives a **** if he’s first in points by the end. That’s why there’s an Art Ross trophy.

My god, anyone who can’t see how the strength of a team is relevant is beyond me. If you are absolutely CARRYING your team...your way more valuable to your team then a player with all stars up and down their lineup.

You certainly live up to the "salty" in your username. It was an example, chill the hell out.

The people who think that team strength has a significant impact on the Hart just want to justify someone getting the Hart that doesn't deserve it. Let's keep it simple, when was the last time someone won the Hart without winning the Art Ross or Richard outside of goalies or D? It has NEVER been awarded with a significant criteria going towards team strength, people here just want to believe it is so they can award the Hart to players who have no precedent of winning it.

 

[Meeqs]

So neither the guy who's going to win the Art Ross or Rocket deserve the Hart? Interesting. So if Malkin wins both (which he can do, he's in striking distance for both), he won't deserve the Hart solely because Colorado without MacKinnon sucks? How does that seem fair?

The award is who is the single most valuable player to their team. Both Mackinnon and Hall are single handedly carrying their team to success. If Pens lose Malkin they still have Crosby, Kessel, ect. He's surrounded by far more talent, could get easier match ups ect. Both Nate and Hall are a significantly larger % of their teams overall offense than Malkin is.

Also its not like Malkin is blowing the other 2 away.

Malkin has 78 points in 61 games.
Mackinnon has 76 points in 56 games
Hall has 70 points in 60 games.

 

[Empoleon8771]

The award is who is the single most valuable player to their team. Both Mackinnon and Hall are single handedly carrying their team to success. If Pens lose Malkin they still have Crosby, Kessel, ect. He's surrounded by far more talent, could get easier match ups ect. Both Nate and Hall are a significantly larger % of their teams overall offense than Malkin is.

Also its not like Malkin is blowing the other 2 away.

Malkin has 78 points in 61 games.
Mackinnon has 76 points in 56 games
Hall has 70 points in 60 games.

I'll ask you the same question I asked the other guy, when has he Hart actually been awarded like that? When was the last time someone won the Hart without the Art Ross or Richard, outside of goalies?

MacKinnon totally has a shot, but to think he's clearly in the lead when he's not in the lead for either the Art Ross or Hart is just dumb. Kucherov should be viewed as the favorite as of right now, for what should be obvious reasons.

 

[Meeqs]

Just no

What an insightful and clever response

 

[AfroThunder396]

If it were truly given to the player most valuable to his team, then it would easily be a two horse race between Mack and Hall.

Unfortunately in practice the award is usually just given to the most impressive/outstanding forward. Which probably means Kucherov and Malkin are the front runners.

 

[Ivan13]

So neither the guy who's going to win the Art Ross or Rocket deserve the Hart? Interesting. So if Malkin wins both (which he can do, he's in striking distance for both), he won't deserve the Hart solely because Colorado without MacKinnon sucks? How does that seem fair?

You already know who will win Art Ross and Rocket? Can I get Eurojackpot numbers while you're at it?

What if Nate wins the Art Ross?

And riddle me this, who is more valuable, a guy who gets no secondary scoring help and is the sole focus of the other team, or a guy who plays with a guy who Pens fans call the best player in the world and that Kessel guy?

 

[td_ice]

I tend to view it as most valuable to their team. But I realize it is usually given to best season regardless of team or teammates. Sticking with the former, I would probably go Hall or MacKinnon, unless they don't make playoffs.

 

[Empoleon8771]

You already know who will win Art Ross and Rocket? Can I get Eurojackpot numbers while you're at it?

What if Nate wins the Art Ross?

And riddle me this, who is more valuable, a guy who gets no secondary scoring help and is the sole focus of the other team, or a guy who plays with a guy who Pens fans call the best player in the world and that Kessel guy?

I said if. Read my posts if you're going to reply to me.

 

[cgf]

Though it's colloquially referred to as the MVP award, it is just as much the Most Outstanding Player award. That's why a lack of team success can disqualify a candidate, but it can't be the basis of a candidacy.

MacK is a viable candidate for the Hart because he has been the most outstanding player in the league when on the ice this season, not because the avs are toothless without him.

 

[Meeqs]

I'll ask you the same question I asked the other guy, when has he Hart actually been awarded like that? When was the last time someone won the Hart without the Art Ross or Richard, outside of goalies?

MacKinnon totally has a shot, but to think he's clearly in the lead when he's not in the lead for either the Art Ross or Hart is just dumb. Kucherov should be viewed as the favorite as of right now, for what should be obvious reasons.

With Hall and Mackinnon it is obvious that they are the driving factors and for what its worth in most of the coverage of the league they are the main candidates that have come up in Hart discussions so far. I'm not worried about trying to find correlations from the past, I just don't find them too useful.

Kuch is definitely up there but its tough to say how much of his success has come from playing with a previous Hart candidate in Stamkos (2012). If I were to give Kucherov the Hart over Hall or Mackinnon at this point he would have to out produce them by a significant margin.

For Hart I really like to look at which players contribute the largest % of the teams overall offense in the case of forwards. Due to that the 3rd person I would have on the list would be last years winner, McDavid.

 

[Ivan13]

I said if. Read my posts if you're going to reply to me.

Looks like you have no idea what you wrote. I suggest you re-read the post you were responding to and your first sentence. You know where you said neither Hall or Nate will win the Art Ross.

 

[cgf]

[snip]
I'm not worried about trying to find correlations from the past, I just don't find them too useful.
[snip]

Wut?

 

[Empoleon8771]

Looks like you have no idea what you wrote. I suggest you re-read the post you were responding to and your first sentence. You know where you said neither Hall or Nate will win the Art Ross.

Maybe you don't understand this little thing called context. Put on your critical thinking cap. The other guy said that Hall and MacKinnon are the only people being considered for the Hart. I said "what about the people who win the Art Ross or Richard", as in, what if someone else wins the Richard or Art Ross. I never said he couldn't win it, I was responding to the asinine comment that those two were the only 2 in the running. Seeing how I followed that up with "what if Malkin wins both", it should have been clear I was talking about a scenario of someone else winning the awards.

If MacKinnon wins, it will be individually merit based, not because his team sucks without him.

 

[Meeqs]

Wut?

Haha sorry I'm multitasking at work so it was poorly worded. I don't think trying to support an argument by quickly trying to simplify trends over the past few years is that impactful on such a nuanced topic. There are too many assumptions and biases that factor in to methods like that. There are better ways to go about it. Things like that just get off topic, over complicate things and derail threads imo.

 

[cgf]

Haha sorry I'm multitasking at work so it was poorly worded. I don't think trying to support an argument by quickly trying to simplify trends over the past few years is that impactful on such a nuanced topic. There are too many assumptions and biases that factor in to methods like that. There are better ways to go about it. Things like that just get off topic, over complicate things and derail threads imo.

It's not really simplifying trends when you have to go back eons to find a Hart winning forward who wasn't top 4 (I think) in the art Ross as well, or who failed to make the playoffs. Plus how can we discuss the naunce of the various candidates' cases without examining how the league awards this trophy? That's literally the most important thing to know to be able to assess how good someone's case is, whether you personally agree or not.

 

[Meeqs]

It's not really simplifying trends when you have to go back eons to find a Hart winning forward who wasn't top 4 (I think) in the art Ross as well, or who failed to make the playoffs. Plus how can we discuss the naunce of the various candidates' cases without examining how the league awards this trophy? That's literally the most important thing to know to be able to assess how good someone's case is, whether you personally agree or not.

I just don't think its necessary. The handful of top candidates who are in the discussion are obviously there for a reason, so if you are the MVP its likely you are high up on another awards as well. That doesn't mean its a requirement or that the reverse is true.

There are far better ways to evaluate this years hart trophy contenders than looking at years that aren't this one and different players.

 

[TopT]

What an insightful and clever response

want a better one, Anze Kopitar

 

[cgf]

I just don't think its necessary. The handful of top candidates who are in the discussion are obviously there for a reason, so if you are the MVP its likely you are high up on another awards as well. That doesn't mean its a requirement or that the reverse is true.

There are far better ways to evaluate this years hart trophy contenders than looking at years that aren't this one and different players.

What better way is there to figure out what the voters will do than to look at what they have done?