Hall of Fame

[Ogopogo*]

I generally agree here. But why not reward all three nominees with some kind of weighted system? Is there a reason you leave them out?

Lack of data. If I had that information for the entire history of the award, I would use it. Until recently, I did not realize the runner up information was available.

 

[DETROIT SKABOY]

i like the name in the hat method myself

 

[Mothra]

I tire of going through this over and over again but, here goes:

The awards are voted on by people that actually saw the players play. Every season was voted on by the people that covered the league. Is it perfect? No. Is it the best we have? Yes. Award winners supplemented with relevant statistics is very effective.

but....the award winners are often very debatable....often in heated debates...also add that its not uncommon to see a player receive these honors because of past performances....making the selection of awards and all-star teams somewhat political as well.......this is just one of the reasons that your HOF calculations are not accurate....not even going to get into the intangibles a player brings.

Tell me, who on the Hall of Fame selection committee has seen Eddie Shore play? Cy Denneny? Howie Morenz? OK, having said that, how can they compare the value of, say, Pat Lafontaine to those players? If they are basing it on what they saw, their selection process is sadly lacking. If they are basing it on raw stats - without really analyzing them - their selection process is hurting again.

What does it matter if a HOF selection member hasnt see Denneny or Morenz play....last I looked they were already in the HOF, most likely selected by the era that watched them........just like the current era will vote on players they saw. I dont get what you are saying here even a little bit.

 

[Ogopogo*]

but....the award winners are often very debatable....often in heated debates...also add that its not uncommon to see a player receive these honors because of past performances....making the selection of awards and all-star teams somewhat political as well.......this is just one of the reasons that your HOF calculations are not accurate....not even going to get into the intangibles a player brings.



What does it matter if a HOF selection member hasnt see Denneny or Morenz play....last I looked they were already in the HOF, most likely selected by the era that watched them........just like the current era will vote on players they saw. I dont get what you are saying here even a little bit.

It is very obvious that you don't get what I am saying.

Award selections are not perfect and neither are most statistics.

But, award selections and runners up, are better than no eyewitness accounts at all. Other than goals and assists, there really isn't an NHL stat that gives us an accurate representation of a player's worth.

Award votes do have their bias but, I think that at least 80% of voters do an honest attempt at getting it right. So, by rewarding the winner and the runner up, I think I capture a close to accurate picture of the best players each season.

Give me some examples of the awards that were handed out for past performances.

A HOF voter knows why he voted for Denneny or Morenz. The orignial HOF voters set the original HOF bar. Nobody below X player could get in. So, all of those voters are long gone now. Where is the new bar? Is it higher? Is it lower? How does Lafontaine compare to Nels Stewart? The voters of today have set a new bar that might not be anywhere close to what it was in past eras. So, saying that Lafontaine or Federko should be in is nice but, based on what bar? If the standards are not the same today as it was in 1950, the selection process is flawed.

Make sense?

 

[hfboardsuser]

A Hart trophy voter knows why he voted for Shore or Nighbor. The orignial Hart trophy voters set the original Hart trophy bar. Nobody below X player could get it. So, all of those voters are long gone now. Where is the new bar? Is it higher? Is it lower? How does St. Louis compare to Nels Stewart? The voters of today have set a new bar that might not be anywhere close to what it was in past eras. So, saying that Iginla or Kiprusoff should have won it is nice but, based on what bar? If the standards are not the same today as it was in 1950, the selection process is flawed.

 

[Ogopogo*]

A Hart trophy voter knows why he voted for Shore or Nighbor. The orignial Hart trophy voters set the original Hart trophy bar. Nobody below X player could get it. So, all of those voters are long gone now. Where is the new bar? Is it higher? Is it lower? How does St. Louis compare to Nels Stewart? The voters of today have set a new bar that might not be anywhere close to what it was in past eras. So, saying that Iginla or Kiprusoff should have won it is nice but, based on what bar? If the standards are not the same today as it was in 1950, the selection process is flawed.

You are very confused.

There is one Hart trophy winner every year. That's it. The bar is always the same, one guy wins it.

HOF could be 5 each year, one each year or nobody. The vote is wide open to let in as many or as few as the voters want. That is very different.

Make sense?

 

[hfboardsuser]

The bar is not always the same. There is much confusion over what the award's really for- even amongst the voters themselves. Sure ,the official description is that it's to be awarded to the person most valuable to their team... but would TB not have done well without St. Louis? Therefore, in that case, it's being awarded to who the voters think was the league's best player.

 

[Ogopogo*]

The bar is not always the same. There is much confusion over what the award's really for- even amongst the voters themselves. Sure ,the official description is that it's to be awarded to the person most valuable to their team... but would TB not have done well without St. Louis? Therefore, in that case, it's being awarded to who the voters think was the league's best player.

I use winners and runners up so, if the "true" MVP is slighted, he almost always finishes 2nd. Both get credit on my system.

Without eyewitnesses (award voters) we are at a serious disadvantage in terms of comparison. We would have no idea how good anybody was before we started watching games. Other than goals and assists, statistics are not very useful in determining a player's value.

Awards are not perfect but they are valuable tools.

 

[Malefic74]

I use winners and runners up so, if the "true" MVP is slighted, he almost always finishes 2nd. Both get credit on my system.

Without eyewitnesses (award voters) we are at a serious disadvantage in terms of comparison. We would have no idea how good anybody was before we started watching games. Other than goals and assists, statistics are not very useful in determining a player's value.

Awards are not perfect but they are valuable tools.

This is quite possibly the best statement on the value of these awards I have seen in some time.

I don't agree with you on a lot of things, but I think you're right here. It's a shame there's no resource to find all the nominees for these awards though...

 

[norrisnick]

This is quite possibly the best statement on the value of these awards I have seen in some time.

I don't agree with you on a lot of things, but I think you're right here. It's a shame there's no resource to find all the nominees for these awards though...

None that are readily available online but I'm sure they exist somewhere, likely the HHOF. I'd be stunned if they didn't have all the ballot results from every award ever handed out.

If I were at all financially set I have a dream to fully digitize and catalog every piece of information I could get my hands on regarding the NHL and all its players and teams. Then compound it on one easy to access and read system.

 

[Ogopogo*]

This is quite possibly the best statement on the value of these awards I have seen in some time.

I don't agree with you on a lot of things, but I think you're right here. It's a shame there's no resource to find all the nominees for these awards though...

I would love to be able to use the top 7 vote getters for the Hart, Norris, Vezina and post season all star teams. If anybody finds that data, post the source.

I agree with norrisnick that the info must be somewhere. Just nowhere that I have looked.

 

[God Bless Canada]

Actually, the HHOF inducts up to four candidates each year. It used to be up to three and possibly one from the Veteran's Committee, but the VC was eliminated in the 1990s, which is a good thing, as they were responsible for some of the "softer" inductions.

 

[KOVALEV10*]

Go to HHOF.net or HHOF.com if i remember correctly and the part where they show the award winners year by year. Choose a year like for instance 1976 it sais who the two runner ups were. That's for you Ogopogo.

 

[Ogopogo*]

Go to HHOF.net or HHOF.com if i remember correctly and the part where they show the award winners year by year. Choose a year like for instance 1976 it sais who the two runner ups were. That's for you Ogopogo.

It has the winner and the runner up. Unfortunately it doesn't go any further than that.

 

[KOVALEV10*]

It has the winner and the runner up. Unfortunately it doesn't go any further than that.

Oh.. I think I had a book or something that was about awards and in the end it had all that data about all the runner ups each year and stuff. I dont think I have it anymore and I'm not even sure I'm not confusing things here. I'll try to go look for it sometime tommorow.

 

[mcphee]

If I were at all financially set I have a dream to fully digitize and catalog every piece of information I could get my hands on regarding the NHL and all its players and teams. Then compound it on one easy to access and read system.

My dreams revolve more around sex and inventing a remote that would freeze family members in mid conversation.

 

[gary69]

Oh.. I think I had a book or something that was about awards and in the end it had all that data about all the runner ups each year and stuff. I dont think I have it anymore and I'm not even sure I'm not confusing things here. I'll try to go look for it sometime tommorow.

Official NHL yearbooks (you know, that thin pre-season book) have all the Awards & All-Star team votes from early 1990's onwards at least. I'm sure you can find/buy back copies from somewhere.

 

[Ogopogo*]

I am going to email the Hall of Fame and request the voting information. If it exists, they probably have it. Hopefully, they will want to accomodate my request.

 

[norrisnick]

My dreams revolve more around sex and inventing a remote that would freeze family members in mid conversation.

LOL that goes without saying. That other thing would be just to occupy my time between the sex and whatnot.

 

[Chili]

Awards? How many games did Ted Nolan win after he won coach of the year?

They are a collective opinion at a certain point in time. Just like opinion polls they can change from week to week.

They do have some merit because they identify recognition but they are not definitive. An example would be the Hart and the Lester B. Pearson award where we have seen different winners.

I've listened to journalists say they would not vote for so and so, simply because they were refused an interview or didn't like the person...thus the popularity influence.

 

[ClassicHockey]

Veteran's category

I'm of the opinion that they should have kept the veteran's category. The HHOF says that they exhausted all the potential candidates which is not true. Even if 'softer' inductions happened like Leo Boivin, what do they call a few of the recent inductions that are suspect? It's a curious call by the HHOF selection board. Even if a year comes by that they don't feel a 'veteran' should be inducted, why do away with it? The next year, or 5 years from now, there might be a player that would deserve to be inducted because he was missed years prior. Supposedly, these veterans like Lorne Chabot and Sid Smith can still be inducted as one of the 4 allowed every year but they would have to compete against players like Bourque, Coffey and other recent inductees. Good luck on that.
Also, it could be said that the veterans should be compared to other players from their era, and not to players from a modern time - standards and hockey change over the decades. Baseball has the right idea about the veteran category - the voting is done by players who are already inducted in their Hall - by their peers?

Actually, the HHOF inducts up to four candidates each year. It used to be up to three and possibly one from the Veteran's Committee, but the VC was eliminated in the 1990s, which is a good thing, as they were responsible for some of the "softer" inductions.

 

[reckoning]

None that are readily available online but I'm sure they exist somewhere, likely the HHOF. I'd be stunned if they didn't have all the ballot results from every award ever handed out.

If I were at all financially set I have a dream to fully digitize and catalog every piece of information I could get my hands on regarding the NHL and all its players and teams. Then compound it on one easy to access and read system.

Compared to the other major sports, the NHL has done a lousy job keeping track of past statistics and organizing them for the fans. Currently I`m going through game summaries from the 70s in newspaper archives to determine goalies` save percentages from those seasons since the league never kept track of it. You`d think the NHL would put someone on their office staff in charge of improving the situation. It`s not like they`ve been busy doing anything else the last year.

 

[norrisnick]

Compared to the other major sports, the NHL has done a lousy job keeping track of past statistics and organizing them for the fans. Currently I`m going through game summaries from the 70s in newspaper archives to determine goalies` save percentages from those seasons since the league never kept track of it. You`d think the NHL would put someone on their office staff in charge of improving the situation. It`s not like they`ve been busy doing anything else the last year.

That's exactly what I want to do. I want to create a database that has every statsheet from every game ever played. Make it entirely sortable so you could in theory click on say the year '04 and look at the goal scoring leaders. Then click on Kovalchuk's goal total and bring up a list of every game in which he scored and every player that assisted on his 41 goals. It would be an unbelievably huge undertaking to catalog the 40,000 odd games, but that's what I want to do. There is a ton of other information I'd like to throw in there, but I won't get into it all now.

 

[missK]

Compared to the other major sports, the NHL has done a lousy job keeping track of past statistics and organizing them for the fans. Currently I`m going through game summaries from the 70s in newspaper archives to determine goalies` save percentages from those seasons since the league never kept track of it. You`d think the NHL would put someone on their office staff in charge of improving the situation. It`s not like they`ve been busy doing anything else the last year.

They laid off a bunch of people during the lockout and put some staff on reduced work schedules, I don't think anybody's sitting around with nothing to do at the NHL offices.

 

[chooch*]

But, award selections and runners up, are better than no eyewitness accounts at all. Other than goals and assists, there really isn't an NHL stat that gives us an accurate representation of a player's worth.

Why dont you take the time to read newspapers or books rather than relying on your computer?

Award votes do have their bias but, I think that at least 80% of voters do an honest attempt at getting it right.

And you base that on what exactly....


To be a complete player you need to play offensively AND defensively. But, the players that contribute both defense and scoring means they are well rounded and often better players. funny coming from a gretzky lover!!!