Nikita Kucherov is the clear favorite for the Art Ross Trophy

[The Nuge]

1977-78 NBA season Geroge Gervin of the San Antonio Spurs and David Thompson of the Nuggets were competing for the scoring title. Last day of the season Thompson played first and scored 73 points and Gervin followed up with 63 which was enough to hold off DT for the title 27.2 to 27.1.

Last game of the season between Colorado and Edmonton has potential to be an epic of cherry picking.

I doubt it. “It’s nice, I guess,” shrugged McDavid. “It’s a position I’ve been in many times before. But we’re playing for things bigger than that — making sure our game is in order, and we’re still playing for positioning.“

 

[Leksand]

It's an exciting race to follow.

Just so boring it seems the Hockey Writers decided MacKinnon is the MVP in early November.

(Because he's really good and Taylor Hall got the MVP several years ago (and apparently Greg Wyshynski wrote an opinion piece in favor of Hall on the last day of Hart voting) and they decided a long time ago that only forwards can be MVPs to their teams).

 

[bossram]

It's an exciting race to follow.

Just so boring it seems the Hockey Writers decided MacKinnon is the MVP in early November.

(Because he's really good and Taylor Hall got the MVP several years ago (and apparently Greg Wyshynski wrote an opinion piece in favor of Hall on the last day of Hart voting) and they decided a long time ago that only forwards can be MVPs to their teams).

This. PHWA basically came together before the New Year and decided what narrative they were going to push so they can pre-decide all the awards and not have to bother to pay attention to the league besides that.

Based on precedent and how the Hart has been awarded before, it should be Kucherov.

But Mackinnon "is due" and he's having a good season so they just automatically decided to give it to him. There's not even any chatter for MCDAVID winning from the media, despite him now leading the scoring race.

Can probably count MacK out of this race with 0 points so far vs Columbus and them being the last easy team he has to actually post a 3-4 point to have an outside chance, shall see though

Mack is winning the Hart. Foregone conclusion. It was already decided in December. PHWA are incredibly lazy and don't want to follow the league. Mackinnon "is due" for a Hart and he's having a great season, so the narrative was conceived and he's going to win it. Look at the betting markets for the Hart. Mackinnon is the overwhelming favourite.

The Art Ross will be a fun race though.

 

[Spirits]

But Mackinnon "is due"

Sure is.

 

[bossram]

Sure is.

No one is "due" an award. You win it based on performance in the current season. They're not lifetime achievement awards.

People voting based on a "he's due" criteria are simply idiots. Full stop.

 

[Spirits]

No one is "due" an award.

Yup, but he has been the 2nd or 3rd best player for 6 years or so, got snubbed in 2018 and is now easily having an MVP season. Unlike some he even scores goals.

People voting based on a "he's due" criteria are simply idiots. Full stop.

The media likes narratives. This is like Life 101.

 

[Czechboy]

Can someone remind me how many games McD missed this season? 2?

 

[bossram]

Yup, but he has been the 2nd or 3rd best player for 6 years or so, got snubbed in 2018 and is now easily having an MVP season. Unlike some he even scores goals.


The media likes narratives. This is like Life 101.

Sure, all of the above can and is true.

That, should in no way, be part of the criteria for the award. If Mackinnon isn't having the "most valuable" season this year only, then he should not win. The award is based on one season, not career achievements.

And to be clear, I think Mackinnon has a legitimate case to win this year, based on this season alone. But if your argument is "he's due", that is a stupid and wrong argument. Make a case on the merits. We can easily create a narrative that Mackinnon is deserving, beyond something incredibly braindead like, "he hasn't won yet". This is a fantastic player! He's great! Surely the media can think of something else.

 

[AvroArrow]

Can someone remind me how many games McD missed this season? 2?

Not sure, but he played the first month or so pretty banged up and it was obvious, he looked slow and hesitant to make certain plays.

 

[crowfish]

Just cant go as long as the finals. Maybe one day

He didn't need to reach the finals to score more points than Crosby ever did in a playoff run

 

[Czechboy]

Not sure, but he played the first month or so pretty banged up and it was obvious, he looked slow and hesitant to make certain plays.

Trying to forget that first month.lol

But I 'think' he missed 3 games.

So 1 point apart...

MacK has 7 games left
Kuch has 9 games left
Connor has 8 games left

I haven't waivered once with McD (even when he was 20 behind) but Kuch is in a nice spot.

If I got it right.

 

[Video Nasty]

Trying to forget that first month.lol

But I 'think' he missed 3 games.

View attachment 844997

So 1 point apart...

MacK has 7 games left
Kuch has 9 games left
Connor has 8 games left

I haven't waivered once with McD (even when he was 20 behind) but Kuch is in a nice spot.

If I got it right.

MacKinnon has 7 left.
Kucherov has 8 left.
McDavid has 9 left.

 

[Spirits]

But if your argument is "he's due", that is a stupid and wrong argument

What an incredibly stupid thing to say. He is tied for first place in the league in points atm. Of course the argument isn't simply, "he is due".

 

[Sanderson]

Sure, all of the above can and is true.

That, should in no way, be part of the criteria for the award. If Mackinnon isn't having the "most valuable" season this year only, then he should not win. The award is based on one season, not career achievements.

And to be clear, I think Mackinnon has a legitimate case to win this year, based on this season alone. But if your argument is "he's due", that is a stupid and wrong argument. Make a case on the merits. We can easily create a narrative that Mackinnon is deserving, beyond something incredibly braindead like, "he hasn't won yet". This is a fantastic player! He's great! Surely the media can think of something else.

That might be true, but you are ignoring that there can be cases when it isn't even clear who the most valuable player is. If two or three players are neck and neck in terms if performance and/or importance, then it basically becomes a coin toss. Under those circumstances, since a voter has to choose, he might go with "one has already won the trophy and the other hasn't, so I'll pick the latter", especially when the latter has been among the best players for years.

In other words: it isn't a case of a voter ignoring performance just to hand a player he likes an award. Instead it's coming to the conclusion that there is no right choice, and thus going with what feels right. In this particular case someone might think that a) McDavid has won often already, and hasn't seperated himself like he usually did in the past, b) that Kucherov has won already as well, and c) that MacKinnon has not and that you might never know if he will be in such a position again. Hence choosing option C among three basically equal choices.

In the same way one could instead choose McDavid, because he is on par with the other two even though his first month got ruined thanks to an injury. Or because what a difference it made in how his team performed while he was injured / played injured and how it performed when he was healthy.
Or you could opt for any other reason, as you can always present something in a way that suits your logic. E.g. picking the one whose team is highest in the standings, or choosing the one whose team is lowest and arguing that it is only due to this player that they are even in the playoffs, the list goes on and on.

If all three stay this close together the rest of the way (and Tampa doesn't miraculously drop out of the playoffs) than all three are good choices. And as much as some people will claim that "X got robbed" if their favourite doesn't win, that simply won't be true.

 

[bossram]

Sure, all of the above can and is true.

That, should in no way, be part of the criteria for the award. If Mackinnon isn't having the "most valuable" season this year only, then he should not win. The award is based on one season, not career achievements.

And to be clear, I think Mackinnon has a legitimate case to win this year, based on this season alone. But if your argument is "he's due", that is a stupid and wrong argument. Make a case on the merits. We can easily create a narrative that Mackinnon is deserving, beyond something incredibly braindead like, "he hasn't won yet". This is a fantastic player! He's great! Surely the media can think of something else.

I'll quote myself, in the post I responded to you, because you are incapable of arguing against the actual points I made, and crop stuff out

What an incredibly stupid thing to say. He is tied for first place in the league in points atm. Of course the argument isn't simply, "he is due".

I literally said above, there is a case to be made for Mackinnon to win beyond "he's due".

The only argument YOU have posed thus far is "he's due". And that is a stupid argument. This is the first time you've said anything beyond that.

 

[Spirits]

The only argument YOU have posed thus far is "he's due". And that is a stupid argument. This is the first time you've said anything beyond that.

If you need to be told what MacKinnon has done this season to win the Hart, then you don't even watch hockey lmao.

Edit: Saying he is due to win isn't an argument that he should win for that reason. It is simply stating the obvious as you will find littered all over the internet similar sentiments.

 

[bossram]

That might be true, but you are ignoring that there can be cases when it isn't even clear who the most valuable player is. If two or three players are neck and neck in terms if performance and/or importance, then it basically becomes a coin toss. Under those circumstances, since a voter has to choose, he might go with "one has already won the trophy and the other hasn't, so I'll pick the latter", especially when the latter has been among the best players for years.

In other words: it isn't a case of a voter ignoring performance just to hand a player he likes an award. Instead it's coming to the conclusion that there is no right choice, and thus going with what feels right. In this particular case someone might think that a) McDavid has won often already, and hasn't seperated himself like he usually did in the past, b) that Kucherov has won already as well, and c) that MacKinnon has not and that you might never know if he will be in such a position again. Hence choosing option C among three basically equal choices.

In the same way one could instead choose McDavid, because he is on par with the other two even though his first month got ruined thanks to an injury. Or because what a difference it made in how his team performed while he was injured / played injured and how it performed when he was healthy.
Or you could opt for any other reason, as you can always present something in a way that suits your logic. E.g. picking the one whose team is highest in the standings, or choosing the one whose team is lowest and arguing that it is only due to this player that they are even in the playoffs, the list goes on and on.

If all three stay this close together the rest of the way (and Tampa doesn't miraculously drop out of the playoffs) than all three are good choices. And as much as some people will claim that "X got robbed" if their favourite doesn't win, that simply won't be true.

It is a very stupid argument. Point blank, The award is for this season only. If you are voting based on criteria for not this season, then that voter is wrong. Full stop.

There are tons of reasons to pick any of the leading candidates. A voter can lean on those. Look into the data more. Watch more video. You're right. There is no "right" choice". That's why we can debate. So choose based on the most persuasive argument! Regarding the bolded, yes! Do that! Pick one of those that you think makes the most sense.

But don't base the winner on a criterion that is literally not applicable to the award.

If you need to be told what MacKinnon has done this season to win the Hart, then you don't even watch hockey lmao.

Edit: Saying he is due to win isn't an argument that he should win for that reason. It is simply stating the obvious as you will find littered all over the internet similar sentiments.

I can absolutely guarantee I watch FAAAAAR more hockey than you. And I can quite easily make a far more complex and in depth case for Mackinnon winning than you.

I'm simply pointing out your complete lack of logic and painfully poor arguments.

 

[Spirits]

I can absolutely guarantee I watch FAAAAAR more hockey than you.

Then why do you need me to tell you that MacKinnon deserves the Hart?

 

[bossram]

Then why do you need me to tell you that MacKinnon deserves the Hart?

Because it's obvious you don't actually know. You're in a thread debating the players and your only argument was "he's due".

Again, more selective cropping from you because you can't actually counter or provide any legitimate arguments. Very typical.

 

[Spirits]

I'm simply pointing out your complete lack of logic and painfully poor arguments.

Imbecile logic to assume the only argument is, "he is due" just because I said that he is due. I can tell you grew up on the internet.

 

[missionAvs]

MacKinnon has 7 left.
Kucherov has 8 left.
McDavid has 9 left.

The more intriguing part is that of those 7-9 games, McJesus and MacK play each other twice. Could make for a huge story line. If I was a betting man, I would bet on McJesus securing the Ross and if he does, he deserves the Hart as well IMO.

 

[bossram]

The more intriguing part is that of those 7-9 games, McJesus and MacK play each other twice. Could make for a huge story line. If I was a betting man, I would bet on McJesus securing the Ross and if he does, he deserves the Hart as well IMO.

You can still get McDavid at +550 for the Hart.

I have an early season position on Kucherov that would pay veeery nicely if he wins. I also have a midseason position on Mackinnon. I should probably bet McD now to hedge off and cover myself.

 

[gretzkyoilers]

Trying to forget that first month.lol

But I 'think' he missed 3 games.

View attachment 844997

So 1 point apart...

MacK has 7 games left
Kuch has 9 games left
Connor has 8 games left

I haven't waivered once with McD (even when he was 20 behind) but Kuch is in a nice spot.

If I got it right.

Given McDavid was injured in the beginning of the season has caught up to be a contender for the Art Ross (an impossible feat for anyone but McDavid), is he a candidate for the Bill Masterton Memorial Trophy?

 

[McVespa99]

No one is "due" an award. You win it based on performance in the current season. They're not lifetime achievement awards.

People voting based on a "he's due" criteria are simply idiots. Full stop.

True. But that is what will happen

 

[bossram]

True. But that is what will happen

I know. I have wagers on Mackinnon to win the Hart.