Buddy Bizarre
Registered User
- Jul 9, 2021
- 6,321
- 4,493
Ferrell's call of the cup win in 2009:
Came here to see this. Was not disappointed
Ferrell's call of the cup win in 2009:
Couture deserved that Smythe. 30 points. 11 points more than Sid. Most productive Forward in the Finals even.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.
Never said he was miles ahead in value, although that's a distinct possibility in this case.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.
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.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.
08 featured perhaps MAF's best performances of all time, too.
09 was almost entirely Sid and Geno saying "get on our backs, boys."
Fleury was out of his mind good in 2008. Probably deserved the Smythe.
Ferrell's call of the cup win in 2009:
I believe in judging the Conn Smythe based on the definition of the trophy, meaning the entirety of the playoffs. People tend to ignore the first 3 rounds and that never made sense to me, since you need 16 wins for the Cup, not 4. All the games have the same value, from R1 G1 to R4 G7.That goal that he let squeak through his pads in 2008 that was the Cup winner for Detroit, I'm a goalie and it hurts to think about losing games because you allow goals like this.
Say and think what you want but I still take 2009 MAF or 2017 MAF vs. Caps over 2008 MAF just because he got done what he needed to do when we needed him to do it the most. Perhaps it took that 2008 experience to get him there.
I believe in judging the Conn Smythe based on the definition of the trophy, meaning the entirety of the playoffs. People tend to ignore the first 3 rounds and that never made sense to me, since you need 16 wins for the Cup, not 4. All the games have the same value, from R1 G1 to R4 G7.
I'm not taking .908 Flower over .933 Flower, regardless of the variance vs Detroit in both years.
Fleury's lucky the offense bailed him out in the Caps series. He wouldn't have even participated later on without all that help.
Then the voters need to be replaced by those who will follow the NHL's written guidelines for the trophy. They can't just be allowed to take liberties like this, ignoring whatever they feel like.From an objective standpoint, you're right.
But the voters do not believe that to be the case. A guy who goes bonkers in RD1 and is silent the next 3 rounds likely doesn't get many votes if he's not at the top of the scoring list.
And that leads me to my next observation: voters tend to go with the most points in the playoffs. Which is why I've said "just make a post season Art Ross a separate award from the CS"
Then the voters need to be replaced by those who will follow the NHL's written guidelines for the trophy. They can't just be allowed to take liberties like this, ignoring whatever they feel like.
Or they need to adjust the guidelines/definition of the trophy to the voters.
Just make it a Finals-only trophy, where only winning players are eligible. Put it in writing.
95% of the time the voters are gonna vote with that in mind anyway, so just commit to it and leave no grey area.
This way the correct player will win it far more frequently.
I'm kind of against that playoff Art Ross thing because of how much variance there will be in GP throughout the 16 teams.
Like what if you got a great P/GP statline but your team is knocking out opponents in 4 or 5 games on the way to the Finals? Good luck winning it against a player who had his series' go the distance every time.
The trophy just wouldn't be representative of who was actually the best scorer. It would largely be luck-based.