Should NHL awards and All-Star selections factor in the Playoffs?
- Thread starter Jetsfan79
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
No, but they could always make playoff versions of all of the bigger awards, and not just the MVP.
Incognito
Registered User
No. The best players on the best teams would end up winning a disproportionate amount of the time (even more than they already do), since the odds of receiving an award would be stacked in favour of players on elite teams that go deeper into the playoffs. And deserving players on weaker teams would routinely get robbed through no fault of their own.
I wouldn’t be opposed to an end of year MVP after the other awards I guess, but I don’t think we should based current awards on the playoffs. Still, it’s a bit like the arguments for adding another trophy for defensemen in that you’re going to end up with a lot of overlapping winners
That absolutely isn't the reason and the analogy to academic awards while ignoring final exams doesn't make sense....do half the students skip final exams?
The reason "individual awards" are based on regular season is because is the only way each individual player is given an equal opportunity to compete. How can you assess a player on the weakest team vs. a player on the best team in the league?
Even if you tried to rationalize why it makes sense, it would still default to guys going deep in the playoffs because of recency and more constant eyeballs on the guy.
Voight
#winning
I'd be against it. I thought it was really dumb when the NBA introduced MVPs for the conference finals. MLB did it because playoffs were only two rounds at the time (conference finals and championship)
The whole point is that these awards are based on the expectation that it's an even playing field (82 games). For the same reason that people get discounted for getting injured and not playing a full year, a player shouldn't get extra credit because his team happened to play an extra X number of games.
There's also a larger element of recency bias if you include the playoffs, which is why the voting on those things happens after the season is done and not closer to the awards date.
This is also why they created the Conne Smythe, but I also wouldn't be opposed to them having "lesser" playoff awards like the playoff equivalent of a Vezina/Norris. Maybe also a Ted Lindsay Award equivalent?
There's also a larger element of recency bias if you include the playoffs, which is why the voting on those things happens after the season is done and not closer to the awards date.
This is also why they created the Conne Smythe, but I also wouldn't be opposed to them having "lesser" playoff awards like the playoff equivalent of a Vezina/Norris. Maybe also a Ted Lindsay Award equivalent?
Golden_Jet
Registered User
- Sep 21, 2005
- 27,955
- 14,879
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
I don't think that Best Defenseman and Best Goalie for the playoffs would hurt anything.
Jetsfan79
Registered User
The academic analogy still holds because the idea is about measuring a full body of work, not just part of it. In school, final exams are included in a student’s overall grade because they test performance under pressure, just like the playoffs do in hockey.
As for fairness, I get the concern about players on weaker teams having fewer or no playoff games, but that doesn’t mean the current system is the best one. Right now, we already acknowledge that certain players benefit (or suffer) based on team situations—whether it’s linemates, coaching, or system fit. Yet, we still evaluate them.
A weighted system could account for this, ensuring playoff performance is factored in without completely overshadowing regular-season contributions. Why should a player who dominates in the most crucial moments of the season be ignored just because their regular-season stats were slightly lower? It’s about recognizing the best performances when they matter most. Recency bias can be counteracted if the selection criteria is enforced with balance. And even if it doesn't fully, leaning or tipping the scales towards an effective playoff performer ' to me that would nt be the end of the world IMO.
Also, Isn't allstar selections already recency bias based on performance on the 1st half only?
Last edited:
Neil Racki
Registered User
If you have to make something really complicated to prove your point ... well, you've proved it but not in the way you were intending to...
Golden_Jet
Registered User
- Sep 21, 2005
- 27,955
- 14,879
The acedemic analogy does not hold water, otherwise 1/2 the students wouldn’t be writing final exams.
Half the students would be finishing school 2 months before the other half of the students.
The all star selection was referencing first team and second team all stars, from the end of the season.
Not for the rinky dink game, where every team needs to be represented.
No other league waits until playoffs are over, I don’t see the NHL setting a new precedent, that doesn’t make any sense.
Jetsfan79
Registered User
Guy has 40 regular season goals and 70 poinds but disappears in the playoffs. ...Another guy has 30 goals 60 points in reg season and also played well and at that pace in the playoffs. IF both are up for an offensive minded award , I'd probably go with the 2nd player. Now if the regular season guy had 60 goals , 100 points but misses the playoffs, I d likly go with him because of the disparity . His massive reg season performance would supercede. I don't think it's too complicated to weigh in on the entire body of work with (some) extra credence on the games that matter most.
benfranklin
Registered User
- Jun 29, 2024
- 913
- 806
Yes/no, Hart and Norris should be for playoff players only, but I dont want McDavids 150+ point season to not giv him the MVP because they got knocked out prematurely.
Spo some awards you only get if your team makes the playoffs.
Spo some awards you only get if your team makes the playoffs.
TMLeafer
Rest in Peace Johnny Bower
No, but wouldn't mind a couple of additional playoff performance awards. Although, that's what makes the Conn Smythe so valuable, that it's the only playoff player award.
Jetsfan79
Registered User
The academic analogy is about evaluating a full body of work, not making an exact 1:1 comparison to how students take exams. The key point is that the playoffs are a crucial part of the season, just like final exams are a crucial part of a student’s performance evaluation. Ignoring them when handing out individual awards is like grading students only on their coursework and ignoring how they handle high-pressure testing situations.
As for fairness, yes, not every player gets the same number of playoff games—but that’s also true for regular-season stats. Some players miss games due to injury, and others benefit from stronger teams or easier schedules. Yet, we still assess them fairly within context. A weighted system could do the same for playoffs without unfairly punishing players on weaker teams.
Regarding All-Star selections, ,why not include playoff performances to ensure the best players of the entire season are recognized? If a player dominates the postseason but wasn't outstanding in the first half, shouldn't that matter?
Finally, just because no other league does something doesn’t mean it’s a bad idea. The NHL has broken precedent before—whether it was introducing the shootout, expanding video review, or changing playoff formats. If something makes sense, tradition alone shouldn’t prevent innovation. But yeah as I said off the top, people would resist this change. Thats probably because peaple are used to it.
Fundamentally , nothing wrong if one chose a player to win an award ( under my hypothetical scenerio) who was a playoff difference maker if the other player was very similar but tanked in the playoffs. I don't think we would hear uproar from people saying the playoff tanking player was robbed because he had somewhat better reg stats.
