blundluntman
Registered User
- Jul 30, 2016
- 3,051
- 3,352
Team success is part of the equation but to say that a player can't be the best if their team doesn't win is making it way too big of a factor. Good players make their teams better, but they don't automatically make them good enough. That's an extremely all-or-nothing, narrative-driven view, not a logical one.The difference though is that you are looking at something worth $600K vs. something worth $400K, their value is clear/objective. Determining the best player or who is more valuable is very subjective and the success of the team is part of that subjective determination. If you are that good of a player, shouldn't your team have performed better? It's a bit unfair as it's hard, 1 player can only do so much, but 1 player can make a difference for sure. I really don't think you find situations all that often where people think the best player was on a bad team and missed out on the award because of it anyway....so logic that good players must make their team good seems to make sense.
Maybe.....but a skater can help the team score and defend....a goalie isn't going to help you score, so in some respects, doesn't matter how good the goalie plays, if you don't score, you can't win.
It may not happen very often where the best player's team doesn't make the playoffs but it's certainly possible.