Prime Crosby & Malkin in Stanley Cup Runs

[Buddy Bizarre]

Ferrell's call of the cup win in 2009:

Came here to see this. Was not disappointed

 

[AuroraBorealis]

No, he was playing against lesser players because Crosby was getting the shutdown guys.

One of the main reasons why I never understood the Kessel for Conn Smythe talk in '16. He was facing easier competition, plus both Bonino and Hagelin were producing well themselves while doing all of the heavy lifting defensively on that line, they could have had just as good of a case at winning the Smythe IMO.
I thought Letang had the best case for the Smythe that year though. He was a beast at both ends of the ice and even scored the cup winning goal. That was him at his absolute peak.

Couture deserved that Smythe. 30 points. 11 points more than Sid. Most productive Forward in the Finals even.
Good defensive effort.
I don't see how any Penguin was better.
I guess the only chance would be Letang, but that's kinda apples and oranges.

 

[BusinessGoose]

Couture couldn't win a faceoff against Sid?

 

[Buddy Bizarre]

Couture deserved that Smythe. 30 points. 11 points more than Sid. Most productive Forward in the Finals even.
Good defensive effort.
I don't see how any Penguin was better.
I guess the only chance would be Letang, but that's kinda apples and oranges.

I said this in the other thread, just make a Playoff Art Ross if you're gonna do that.

Points are certainly valuable, but that's not the end all/be all. Couture got more points, but he wasn't miles above Sid/Kessel/Letang. Relying solely on points also doesn't account for a Final team that got a 1) an easy opponent OR 2) series that go beyond 5 or 6 games.

Points don't measure the key faceoffs Sid won en route to those Finals. Context is critical

 

[AuroraBorealis]

I said this in the other thread, just make a Playoff Art Ross if you're gonna do that.

Points are certainly valuable, but that's not the end all/be all. Couture got more points, but he wasn't miles above Sid/Kessel/Letang. Relying solely on points also doesn't account for a Final team that got a 1) an easy opponent OR 2) series that go beyond 5 or 6 games.

Points don't measure the key faceoffs Sid won en route to those Finals. Context is critical

Never said he was miles ahead in value, although that's a distinct possibility in this case.
I said he was the best player, and deserved the trophy. Kessel certainly wasn't better than him, when comparing winger to winger. No timeline in which that makes sense.
Kessel was not better than Couture defensively. He faced easier opposition.

Can't really bring up anything Couture did over the course of those playoffs, because no one here followed San Jose during that run. Nothing wrong with that either. It's not our team.
But if that's the case, why should I discuss with those pretending they know something about it? Their "opinions" will mean nothing, right?
So I bring up the points, because we have those stats for all to see. And that's a big disparity in a small number of games. It's glaring.

 

[Buddy Bizarre]

Never said he was miles ahead in value, although that's a distinct possibility in this case.
I said he was the best player, and deserved the trophy. Kessel certainly wasn't better than him, when comparing winger to winger. No timeline in which that makes sense.
Kessel was not better than Couture defensively. He faced easier opposition.

Can't really bring up anything Couture did over the course of those playoffs, because no one here followed San Jose during that run. Nothing wrong with that either. It's not our team.
But if that's the case, why should I discuss with those pretending they know something about it? Their "opinions" will mean nothing, right?
So I bring up the points, because we have those stats for all to see. And that's a big disparity in a small number of games. It's glaring.

Re: the bolded. That isn't the criteria for the CS. It's deemed who is "most valuable to their team" (which is a flawed definition, but that's another debate).

I can't say I watched the Sharks closely during their run, but I thought they were 1 of the best teams in the West so I kept an eye on them as much as I could. I inaccurately predicted the Sharks would win vs Pitt. Couture was very very good for them in the playoffs. But Burns and Martin Jones (before melting down in the Finals) could have made a case for being "most valuable" to SJ.

If you're on the losing team, your performance needs to be miles better than anyone else. Couture's wasn't. In fact, he got clowned on Sheary's OT goal in game 2.

sheary overtime goal - Google Suche

 

[Don'tcry4mejanhrdina]

Ahh, Burns and his ineffective forearm shivers to Crosby's back while Sid was protecting the puck. A mosquito in that moment would have bothered him more. Burns watches too much wrestling.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

Re: the bolded. That isn't the criteria for the CS. It's deemed who is "most valuable to their team" (which is a flawed definition, but that's another debate).

I can't say I watched the Sharks closely during their run, but I thought they were 1 of the best teams in the West so I kept an eye on them as much as I could. I inaccurately predicted the Sharks would win vs Pitt. Couture was very very good for them in the playoffs. But Burns and Martin Jones (before melting down in the Finals) could have made a case for being "most valuable" to SJ.

If you're on the losing team, your performance needs to be miles better than anyone else. Couture's wasn't. In fact, he got clowned on Sheary's OT goal in game 2.

sheary overtime goal - Google Suche

Everyone here kept talking about output in the Finals, and how that's so much more valuable than everything else, correct? Almost everyone harped on that.
Well, he did that better than everyone else. Suddenly it's less valuable because he didn't get enough teammate help?
Never understood this logic. That's out of his control. The award is supposed to be about what the player did, not what his team did.

Couture got "clowned" because he telescoped out to the point man and stood in the shooting lane? That's exactly what his job was there. No shot got through.
His stick was positioned to deflect the shot. He is delegating the Sheary assignment to Braun, as he should.
Braun is the problem here. Sheary is his man. He's slow to identify the Pens strategy and adjust his positioning to cut him off. So Sheary gets time and space to do what he wants.

 

[Turin]

Couture getting puck touches on an effective powerplay means he was more impactful than Sidney Crosby? Duh! This is exactly why context matters.

Just like how he got 3 of his 6 Final points in game 5 period 1 where Matt Murray couldn't stop a beach ball to start the game and then the Pens absolutely dominated the Sharks in a 8-1 Edmonton over Florida level, where the shots were 46-21 Pittsburgh and I specifically remember like 4 tap ins missed. Couture's 5 shifts there really outweight what Crosby was doing that Final? Because by points, sure I guess. His first period was almost as productive as Crosby's entire 6 games if you're just counting points.

 

[Turin]

I’m frustrated all over again just watching this game. Pens high danger chances are like 9-2, yet the Sharks one goal is a muffin through Murray and the Pens got completely robbed/whiffed on a billion goals. Btw count how many times Crosby shows up doing something vs Couture.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

One underrated thing that people forget is that Sid in his prime especially had tree trunks for legs, a huge butt, and skill with handling the puck, so that he was impossible to knock over or to take the puck from. He literally could hold the puck all night if he chose to.