The Hart nominees come in

by James Mirtle on Apr 29, 2009 11:23 AM CDT Comment 38 comments

More photos » by Alex Brandon - AP

For the first time ever, three Russians are up for the Hart Trophy:

Will Washington Capitals left winger Alexander Ovechkin, the top goal scorer in the NHL again this season, repeat as the winner of the Hart Trophy? Or will the title of most valuable player go to Art Ross Trophy winner Evgeni Malkin of the Pittsburgh Penguins or Detroit Red Wings center Pavel Datsyuk?

The voting members of the Professional Hockey Writers' Association had a tough challenge this season under the terms of the Hart, which is awarded to the "player adjudged most valuable to his team."

Ovechkin's going to win, becoming the first back-to-back MVP since Dominik Hasek did it 11 years ago in 1997-98 and only the second since Gretzky's eight straight Harts from 1980 to 1988. Who you take after Ovechkin isn't a huge deal, but I gave some credit to the excellent year Datsyuk had at both ends of the ice:

Alex Ovechkin, Washington
Pavel Datsyuk, Detroit
Evgeni Malkin, Pittsburgh
Zach Parise, New Jersey
Tim Thomas, Boston

Would be interested in hearing who else people can make a case for this year.

UPDATE Dirk from On The Forecheck goes off the board to select Ovechkin's teammate Mike Green. This is why this guy fares so well in my hockey pools.

0 recs | Comment 38 comments | Add comment | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Double kudos for a.) not picking the Ovechkin-Crosby-Malkin troika in your top 3, and b.) for recognizing Datsyuk. Easily the best player in the league in my eyes, although his surrounding cast is insanely good.

How about Steve Mason? I wouldn’t put him in the top 3 but he’s a solid 5a/5b option.

by R O on Apr 29, 2009 12:03 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs

I’m not sure about putting Datsyuk ahead of Malkin – it seems kind of strange having the highest scorer in the league third, particularly as Datsyuk had better wingers outside of the power play – but I get what you’re saying.

As you say, it’s all an academic exercise anyway as Ovechkin is going to run away with it.

Don Cherry must be having a fit.

by GOOLIAN on Apr 29, 2009 1:15 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I have a hard time seeing how a guy who, yeah, led the league in goals scored but also doesn’t play defense is more valuable than A) perhaps the best defensive forward in the game who also happened to be the league’s 4th lead scorer and B) the league’s leading scorer and takeawayer (that’s my word, nobody else’s). Heck, I’d put Mike Richards over Ovechkin.

by matskralc on Apr 29, 2009 1:47 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

ovechkin

Ovechkin will win because the hot thing these days is to call him the most exciting player in the game. I agree with that, but I also believe that Malkin had the better, more consistent year, and did so in more difficult circumstances (team struggles, lesser quality teammates). But its splitting hairs. Datsyuk will never win because he’s not flashy enough.

Glen Sather is a Hockey Genius.

http://glensathersucks.com/
http://twitter.com/ThGeneralissimo

by poploser on Apr 29, 2009 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think you can absolutely make a good argument for Datsyuk as league MVP, but I think many won’t pick him because of the team he plays on and the strong supporting cast there.

The Hart goes to the “player adjudged most valuable to his team,” and on that basis, you can see where some of the love for Ovechkin comes from.

Check out my blog at fromtherink.com

by James Mirtle on Apr 29, 2009 2:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

These Caps aren’t a one-player team any more, though. They’ll win the Hart and Norris, and they have Semin and Backstrom beyond that still. If you take Ovechkin and Malkin off their teams, I’m not sure it’s an easy question which team has the better remaining group of skaters.

There’s also the question of what you do when a good supporting cast just doesn’t play well. Of the three candidates, Datsyuk’s the only guy whose team was a minus at even strength without him on the ice. Yeah, Zetterberg, Hossa, Franzen, Lidstrom, and Rafalski are all marvellous players… but they didn’t look like it this year unless they were playing with Datsyuk.

by RyanV on Apr 29, 2009 2:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Mike Richards is a great player and does a whole lot of things really well, but there’s no one close to Ovechkin when it comes to goal scoring.

by David M. Getz on Apr 29, 2009 5:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

They have an award for “guy that scores the most goals”. It’s not this one.

by matskralc on Apr 29, 2009 8:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Kind of an off the wall pick...

And I don’t think he’s necessarily even Vezina-worthy, but Cam Ward started every game but one for Carolina after Christmas (excluding the season finale when they had already clinched a playoff spot).

He won’t get a single top 5 vote anywhere, but he was a workhorse and very effective down the stretch. I don’t think that team makes the playoffs without him.

by Make a play Whitner on Apr 29, 2009 2:01 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Ward had an awesome second half (and first round). I definitely think he was among the top 10 when you’re talking about the Vezina.

Check out my blog at fromtherink.com

by James Mirtle on Apr 29, 2009 2:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

along the same lines

Luongo put up some serious wins to get the canuckleheads into the post season, despite the media crowning Mats Sardines the undisputed MVP during the goalies absence. Certainly not the mvp of the league, but I’d say a top 5

by johnycakes on Apr 29, 2009 9:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

He was actually being vilified by fans and media alike down the stretch for letting in seemingly bad goals. His team was winning in spite of him, as was being said – one only needs to browse the Canucks message boards to witness this.

by R O on Apr 29, 2009 10:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

That’s not to say that I necessarily agree with that viewpoint – as long as he was stopping a high percentage of shots then the “badness” of the goals he does let in is rather subjective.

by R O on Apr 29, 2009 10:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Message boards say a lot of dumb shit. I haven’t seen enough to know for myself, but I’d take anything from a message board with a shaker’s worth of salt.

SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there)

by Doogie2K on Apr 30, 2009 7:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

How about that kid, Crosby? He never seems to get the recognition he deserves… Seriously, though, his points per game is identical to Malkin’s. Same number of ES points per minute, but Crosby gets more goals, Malkin more assists. Same number of PP points per minute, except Malkin gets a few more goals and a few more second assists. Crosby is also the most important player on Pittsburgh’s power play (as measured by GFOFF/60). If he didn’t play the set-up man every power play, he’d have more goals than Malkin, but it’s his role as set-up man that makes Pittsburgh’s power play go more than anyone else this year. Malkin’s been on the ice for fewer goals against, but Crosby does a much better job generating shots, so maybe Malkin just got lucky this year.

Another guy that should be in the conversation, but for missing 20 games, is Semin. More ES goals and points per minute than Ovechkin, and doing it with worse linemates against better competition (qualcomp, for whatever that’s worth). Also more ES goals per game if you exclude empty netters, despite less ice time. Much better +/- too. Ovechkin was better on the power play, but probably not by quite as much as you’d think.

by RyanV on Apr 29, 2009 2:13 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

He’s also got a wicket shot % and is incredible at taking the puck away. He was under utilized on the PK but his biggest weakness is he tends to take a lot of HHT penalties.

by snowburnt on Apr 29, 2009 3:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Without looking at the data yet

I’ve seen some worries about giving it to Datsyuk given the bad defense the Wings displayed throughout the year. Watching him night in, night out, that was not due to Datsyuk — he was phenomenal every zone this year. I think he deserves the MVP.

Personally, I feel Mike Green was the more valuable Caps player this year given his offensive contributions from the blue line and his solid-to-great defense as well.

I’d go:

Datsyuk, Malkin, Green, Ovechkin, Thomas, Mason.

by Mike Rogers on Apr 29, 2009 2:27 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree that Green deserves some lip service.

Much as the Habs fan in me hates to say it, I also think too many people are not giving enough weight to the phenomenal year Tim Thomas has had. While I like discussing skaters a lot more for this award, in the end I have to stick to my basic definition of MVP in sports: “What player causes his team to lose the most wins (or in hockey, points) if you were to replace his playtime with a league average player at his position?” To me, in 2008-09, that’s Tim Thomas.

1-Thomas, 2-Datsyuk, 3-Ovechkin, 4-Malkin, 5-Green

by Costa24 on Apr 29, 2009 2:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hey, I can get behind the Tim Thomas love for sure. I wouldn’t even necessarily disagree with your order, either.

by Mike Rogers on Apr 29, 2009 3:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Goalies and defencemen never seem to get enough love for the Hart, do they?

Check out my blog at fromtherink.com

by James Mirtle on Apr 29, 2009 4:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

If you stick to the absolute definition of the award a goalie should win every single year.

I don’t think goalies should be eligible as there are already two awards for their contributions.

by GOOLIAN on Apr 29, 2009 4:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

(Apologies for the long post upcoming)

If you stick to the absolute definition of the award a goalie should win every single year.

Well, yes and no. Remember that the definition I list above normalizes for position. As such, the absolute value of the goalie position with respect to forward and defensemen gets muted.

To illustrate what I mean:
Picture a season of a 2-on-2 dart league where each team has to be made up of an adult and a child of seven years old or less. Let’s say there are 4 teams with the following players, where the number in brackets is the number of points the player scored in a given season…

Team A:
Adult A (105)
Child A (10)

Team B:
Adult B (110)
Child B (5)

Team C:
Adult C (100)
Child C (30)

Team D:
Adult D (115)
Child D (10)

Who’s the best dart player? That would be Adult D, right? He gets the most points out of everyone. Of course, he’s also the player that contributes the most to his team (he got 115, his teammate only 10).

But should he be the MVP of the league? No, and I’m sure you can see why (particularly if you’re a baseball fan). When we’re comparing apples to apples, which is what we should be doing considering you can’t replace a child’s roster spot with an adult (and it would be dumb to do the reverse), the MVP is Child C. Simple math tells us why… The average output of an adult is 107 points, while the average output of a child is 11 points. That means replacing Adult D with an average adult dart player costs his team 8 points, but replacing Child C with an average child dart player costs his team 19 points. In fact, he’s so far ahead of the child pack that his team has the best overall score despite his being matched up with the worst adult. He could have had any one of them for a teammate and his team would be the best.

Bringing it back to what we were talking about, the fact that a goalie figures into the outcome of a given game so much more than a skater has been proven to be true many times by very smart people. Still, with so few goaltender roster spots available in hockey compared to forwards and defensemen, the overall talent pool gets limited to the cream, and replacement talent comes up with it.

What matters for an MVP therefore is not necessarily how much you contribute directly to the score (Adult D in my example was the best at this, and in hockey, yes, this would always the goalies), but what you can contribute above and beyond your peers. That makes any position capable of being the MVP.

by Costa24 on Apr 29, 2009 7:53 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

I'm surprised by how quickly you dismiss Malkin.

softpillowcase

by Selanne on Apr 29, 2009 3:35 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Because I said Ovechkin will win? He absolutely will.

Check out my blog at fromtherink.com

by James Mirtle on Apr 29, 2009 4:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

To be honest, is Malkin the most valuable player on his team? I mean, even when he was scoring all these points, the Pens were still losing. To me, Gonchar was a much more valuable player on his own team because he was the guy who basically stabilized their season.

To me, Datsyuk deserves it. Yes, I’m a Detroit fan, but Datsyuk has really kept Detroit together en route to the playoffs. Sure, they’re playing a lot better now, but during the season they were a rather miserable team when it came to defense. Despite all this, Datsyuk leads everyone in +/-, is third in takeaways, and has very few giveaways in comparison to the other two nominees. I think, this year, he was worth more to his team than just about anyone could have been.

"Don't touch my dream with your dirty hands!"

by Justice and Rule on Apr 29, 2009 11:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

There’s no doubt all three nominees had a lot of help. All three teams were excellent this year.

There isn’t a nominee like Iginla, who was one of the only things going on a bad team when he lost to Theodore.

by GOOLIAN on Apr 30, 2009 12:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

how many people

are in the PHWA?

Glen Sather is a Hockey Genius.

http://glensathersucks.com/
http://twitter.com/ThGeneralissimo

by poploser on Apr 29, 2009 4:24 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Something like 250, with 160 or so voting for awards. I’m not sure how they decide who does what, but this was my first year in the PHWA and I voted.

Check out my blog at fromtherink.com

by James Mirtle on Apr 29, 2009 4:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ovie vs Malkin

Personally, I hope that Ovie gets the Hart, but I’m good with Malkin winning it, too. Both are incredible players. So, let’s review the numbers

Goals: Ovie has 56 to Malkin’s 35 Advantage Ovie
Assts: Ovie 54 to Malkin 78 Advantage Malkin
Points: Ovie 110 to Malkin 113 All you can say is they’re both sick numbers, but close.
+/-: Ovie +8 to Malkin +17 Advantage Malkin
PIMs: Ovie 72 to Malkin 80
PP: Ovie 19 to Malkin 14
GWG: Ovie 10 to Malkin 4 Advantage Ovie
Shots: Ovie 528 to Malkin 290 Ginormous advantage Ovie.
Hits: Ovie 243 to Malkin 80 Ginormous advantage Ovie.
BlockS: Ovie 32 to Malkin 39
MissS: Ovie 220 to Malkin 115 – but the percentages are 41.6 vs 39.7
Gives: Ovie 107 to Malkin 81 Advantage Malkin (Ovie leads the league here, Malkin 11)
Takes: Ovie 60 to Malkin 94 Advantage Malkin (Malkin leads the league here, Ovie 26)
source: NHL.COM

Note that Hits, blocked shots, missed shots, shots, give aways, and take aways are subjective and at the discretion of the off-ice official for that rink. Some barns are more generous than others, some are kind of “homie” if you know what I mean.

IMHO, the big ones are goals, assists, GWG, +/-, and blocked shots. These are pretty objective. So it’s a coin toss.

Now, it gets to the intangibles. Since none of us schmucks are in the locker room or with these guys on a daily basis, we don’t know how these two guys really elevate the other players on their respective teams. However, Malkin has a designated Captain on his team in Crosby. Ovie has Clark, but Clark has been injured for 2 years. I can’t see Malkin’s quiet personality motivating the Pens, though I could be wrong. Ovie’s so over the top on the bench and on-ice that when he wasn’t in the game, the Caps felt his absense.

To me, that says Ovie. Like I said, I’m good with either of them winning.

by Greg S. on Apr 29, 2009 4:36 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs

With all due respect to Mr. Gretzky, goals are worth more than assists, particularly when you don’t break out second assists, so I think Ovechkin should have the edge on points.

Having said that, any of the three would be a good choice.

by GOOLIAN on Apr 29, 2009 5:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Note that Hits, blocked shots, missed shots, shots, give aways, and take aways are subjective and at the discretion of the off-ice official for that rink. Some barns are more generous than others, some are kind of "homie" if you know what I mean.

Along those same lines, Malkin has 90 adjusted giveaways (most in the league) and Ovechkin has 60 (11th). Malkin has 108 adjusted takeaways (first) to Ovechkin’s 38 (60th) and Ovechkin has 228 adjusted hits (fifth overall; fourth among forwards).

by David M. Getz on Apr 29, 2009 5:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I can’t see Malkin’s quiet personality motivating the Pens, though I could be wrong.

There was actually a story after the TB game (they were down 3-0 after the 2nd) where he plunked down some amount of money as a bounty to win the game…or something, I’m phrasing that poorly. That game was pretty much a turning point for the team this year- at that point, they were 10th, I believe.

That said, I’d like to see Malkin win, but I think Ovie’s got the press on his side.

Penn Staters belong at Penn State. The problem with a lot of kids is they just don’t know they are Penn Staters yet. -jesse. @ BSD

by TheK-GunNeedsReloaded on Apr 29, 2009 10:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Zdeno

I’d like to see Chara get some consideration and a few votes. Boston has a lot of great players but where would they be without Chara’s 26+minutes a game? 19 goals, 50 points, +23, one of the toughest players in the league, and he’s the Captain.

by general borschevsky on Apr 29, 2009 6:33 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Ovie

Ovechkin does more than put up numbers. Look at him on the ice, he’s exciting, he’s hard hitting, he celebrates with wild abandon when he scores.

Look what else he does, If he’s going in to shoot and they’re triple teaming him, he’ll dump off to the open guy to score. Then he tackles that guy in celebration. He celebrates harder when someone else scores. He’s always trying to involve other people in what he does. Even in that asinine hot stick thing he was trying to get his linemates involved (thank god they didn’t). Look at the allstar game. Before that there was a “rivalry” between him and Malkin, and Ovie involved Malkin in his routine.

Finally, before Christmas the Caps were down 4-0 vs the Rangers in MSG. Ovie refused to give up. He got the caps on the board, got them fired up. They put up three more and then won in overtime.

The feeling a Caps fan has with Ovechkin is that the game isn’t over until it’s over when he’s on the ice and you can’t look away because the next play might be something you’ll never forget.

by snowburnt on Apr 30, 2009 9:26 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

The Hart, by its definition, shouldn’t be awarded for “most exciting to watch” or “most creative in his creation and execution of goal celebrations”.

by R O on Apr 30, 2009 10:02 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

A compelling counter-argument should look at my main arguments rather than the tertiary ones. I like the snark though, it brings out the “brown” in your “teeth”.

The Hart, by it’s definition, should be awarded to “the player who was the most valuable to his team during the regular season”. (side note: I don’t recall reading anything about what it shouldn’t be awarded for…)

An exciting player can drive a team to better itself or rise to the next level to defeat an opponent or over come the odds, making him very valuable to his team.

I “appreciate” your “generous” “quotes” but I don’t “know” why you’re “quoting” them. I’m pretty sure I put down the only goal celebration he fabricated. The rest are pure emotion…I only brought up the celebrations because he celebrates his team more than himself.

by snowburnt on Apr 30, 2009 10:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well the quotes were obviously embellished but that’s what one does as a writer when one wants to entertain – embellishes :-)

You’re right about the Hart criteria, but some of the points you bring up can’t really be measured in any meaningful way. For instance, you posit that “an exciting player can drive a team to better itself”. Meanwhile, I’d counter that “a really good player can make a team better by playing really well”. Maybe that’s a tomato-tomahto thing, but the first point is intangible (and dubious, in my opinion) and the second point is both concrete and measurable (to a degree).

It doesn’t really matter, though – I think we’re both pretty much arguing the same point – Ovechkin is a great player and most probably MVP of the Caps and the running favorite for the Hart.

by R O on Apr 30, 2009 11:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sorry about my embellishment, I got a little excited :-\

It’s true that some things can’t be quantified, but I feel like an MVP after an entire season should be unquantifiable. They have awards for the best players in the main categories that are argued over, but it’s hard if not impossible to quantify what a player does for a team.

I guess that’s why homers don’t get to vote.

by snowburnt on Apr 30, 2009 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs