I totally agree with you about Pahlsson. I have been singing his praises the past two years along with many other worthy Selke candidates, while attention is paid to the amazing two-way forwards like Zetterberg and Datsyuk.

I also agree that several, if not many Eastern writers must skip parts, if not all of some weekday matchups in the PST. Just as some L.A. based reporters must surely skip some of the 10 AM EST weekend games.

Your point is valid. I just think you may be exagerating the effect a little. Even if every Eastern writer completely ignored every period of every game between two teams from California, and paid zero attention to the boxscores and recaps the following day, the fact that as much as 57% of the voting originates in the Eastern time zone cannot be blamed for Boyle’s lack of a Norris this year, or Marleau’s lack of a Lady Byng. Most of the examples of snubs that you cite come from the Central time zone, whose games end at 10:30 EST.

There is no cartel of Eastern voters. The truth is that the concentration of teams in the East actually causes more animosity between cities. Toronto reporters are critical of Sens and Habs. Rangers beat writers have a bias against Flyers and Devils. If anything, the slight prejudices serve only to favour Western candidates. The issue is visibility, where Sakic may only visit MSG once every 5 years or so, and Thornton didn’t play an entire period in Boston until 2009. That same issue applies evenly to both Conferences, so the only difference is that every Sharks writer sees Columbus and Detroit 4 times per year.

You throw out the Masterton for some reason, while keeping an emphasis on the Lady Bing and Selke. I don’t see much distinction between these three subjective awards. If you were to focus solely on the three main awards that writers vote on, I feel that your argument would be less watered down.

With that in mind, I also wonder why you exclude the Pearson from your analysis. After all, the same proportion of players live in the East, and in fact, while many writers are switching over to a Sharks game, those Pearson voters are busy showering and getting dressed.

I do not take issue with the methodology of your study. I just think that your conclusions place too much importance on the assumption that writers all go to sleep at 9:30, and that that causes them to not know how good a player Niedermayer may be. The bias does exist, but it is far less important than other biases.

How many Dallas or Phoenix reporters watch a game between Calgary and Edmonton? How many Columbus writers tune into a Habs-Sens matchup?

The truth is that, as a beat reporter who is attending a game, the odds that you’ll be watching another game that is being played at the same moment is far smaller than the odds that you’ll be watching the West Coast game that starts after your “real” job is over.

Your assertion that the West gets ignored sounds eerily similar to a typical Canadian perception that American media ignores an all-Canadian matchup. Just look at the argument against holding a Winter Classic in Canada. The majority of people, on both sides of the border, argue that Americans would never tune into such a game, the way they might for a game at Wrigley or Fenway.

Maybe the fact that, since the lockout, most awards have gone to teams in the Eastern time zone has far, FAR more to do with merit, and far less to do with a perceived bias. I’m not denying the bias exists, but your contention that it is the driving factor is far off, IMO.

Anyway, who cares? So Datsyuk gets a Lady Bing every year. So what? You have stated that Lidstrom deserves his Norris trophies. Obviously Ovie deserves his Harts. Kane got a Calder.

Are you simply arguing that more Westeners deserved 3rd and 4th place finishes than they have been getting? Point out a single trophy that was wrongly awarded to an Eastern-based guy, when it belonged to a Central, Mountain or Pacific player.

I’ll get you started with Pahlsson over Brind’Amour in 2007. Just like Datsyuk this year, Brind’Amour garnered enough name-recognition votes in 2007 because he was the incumbent. I don’t see a case for any other snubs, and I think that your annual complaint is much ado about nothing. Not to say that it isn’t a good feature of your blog, but it does seem like a stretch and even at that, a fairly manufactured controversy.

BTW, your cutoff at 2006 skews the results to favour your pre-conceived conclusion. What about Forsberg, Sakic or Pronger winning Harts a few years earlier? Is it your contention that this bias is somehow related to the “new” NHL? You can point out how Detroit is in the EST, but I can assure you that every Toronto writer sees far more Canucks games. You can say that the past four years have seen the West win only a few awards, but can you point to anyone who didn’t deserve them?

For your own readers, the Jibbles Awards offer a light read and fun diversion, but how many among them were actually snubbed by PHWA voters?

Personally, I don’t see why the PHWA isn’t looked to for their opinions on goalies and coaches. Maybe the Adams was dedicated to the broadcasters alone for some reason, and has simply retained its intial dedication, but the Vezina used to go to the best GAA. By the time it was re-dedicated, the PHWA already had their 6 trophies. Why’d they get left out of a seventh?