McDavid snubbed as finalist for Hart

[ToeMcDrag83]

The Lindsay nod is decent consolation.
Team success obviously played a part. This is not the writer's doing, it's the same people responsible for our failures this season as a team.

 

[nexttothemoon]

Its quite clear that any metric that so obviously overvaluates one position to another is not entirely an objective barometer. Realizing that goalies are inherently important, yes, but the points share measure seems to result in higher scores for goalies in general. D seem pretty undervalued in the stat.

That said I have no idea how point shares are derived or of what non biased objective reliance it is. Because Goalies are highly skewed up in the numbers. 7/10 of the NHL top point shares. 4/5 of the top 5. Considering theres far less goalies than players that's crazy skewed.

Top goalies play 60 minutes a games for 65+ games so obviously the best ones are very, very valuable to their teams and their performance has dramatic effects on their team's success.

Ie... Talbot was arguably as valuable as McDavid when the Oilers made the playoffs.

McDavid led every single forward and dman this year in point shares and blew them all away in relative point share % as well. Not close.

 

[Drivesaitl]

Top goalies play 60 minutes a games for 65+ games so obviously the best ones are very, very valuable to their teams and their performance has dramatic effects on their teams success.

Ie... Talbot was arguably almost as valuable as McDavid when the Oilers made the playoffs.

McDavid led every single forward and dman this year in point shares and blew them all away in relative point share % as well. Not close.

TopD play more minutes than any forward and play more important roles on clubs as difference makers. Success is through D.

Any stat that evaluates a guy like Forbort as better than Muzzin this year is just crazy. That's just stat noise and not differentiating at all that the Forbort numbers are due to Doughty.

Garbage in garbage out. These are still pretty elementary stats and seemingly not worth the time.

The site doesn't even define what Points shares is or the dervivation. not that I could find.

In anycase its of course not an objective stat if D role are undervaluated. Subban not even listed and less important than Rinne? seriously? Burns less important or valuable than Jones? Seriously?

In the whole time I've watched hockey 3 D made all the difference to their respective clubs. Orr, Robinson, Pronger. Aside from Gretz these being the biggest results benders I have ever seen play the game. I wonder they fare in this metric.

 

[nexttothemoon]

Looking a little deeper at McDavid vs all the Hart candidates...

McDavid 13.1 pt shares and 16.88% pt share %

MacKinnon 12.2 pt shares and 12.40 pt share %
Hall 12.2 pt shares and 13.53% pt share %
Kopitar 11.0 pt shares and 10.64% pt share %


McDavid beats them all in point shares and pt share pct as well. Clear win for Mcdavid across the board.

 

[nexttothemoon]

TopD play more minutes than any forward and play more important roles on clubs as difference makers. Success is through D.

Any stat that evaluates a guy like Forbort as better than Muzzin this year is just crazy. That's just stat noise and not differentiating at all that the Forbort numbers are due to Doughty.

Garbage in garbage out. These are still pretty elementary stats and seemingly not worth the time.

The site doesn't even define what Points shares is or the dervivation. not that I could find.

In anycase its of course not an objective stat if D role are undervaluated. Subban not even listed and less important than Rinne? seriously? Burns less important or valuable than Jones? Seriously?

In the whole time I've watched hockey 3 D made all the difference to their respective clubs. Orr, Robinson, Pronger. Aside from Gretz these being the biggest results benders I have ever seen play the game. I wonder they fare in this metric.

Well would you agree Doughty is more valuable to the Kings than Kopitar? The eye and point shares both say so... yet Kopitar is nominated for the Hart.

Having Kopitar nominated for the Hart when he's not even the most valuable player on his team is ridiculous.

Muzzin had higher point shares than Forbort by the way... not sure where you are seeing that.

Ok I see now... you are just looking at defensive point shares for dmen.... look on each team's stats page and you'll see total point shares which are defensive and offensive point shares combined.

The stat obviously isn't perfect but it does allow comparison between dmen, forwards and goalies and their relative importance to each team and few (if any) other stats do that.

Point shares explanation and calculation methods:

Calculating Point Shares | Hockey-Reference.com

 

[Drivesaitl]

Well would you agree Doughty is more valuable to the Kings than Kopitar? The eye and point shares both say so... yet Kopitar is nominated for the Hart.

Having Kopitar nominated for the Hart when he's not even the most valuable player on his team is ridiculous.

Has Doughty been more valuable several seasons and in the Cup wins? Certainly. Was he this season? Its not as clear. Doughty had a lot of overplay in his game this year resulting in egregious turnovers. Stats don't necessarily reflect that but watching the games does.

In anycase you didn't even touch on the very valid criticism I have of this stat (which upon a quick look is the #1 criticism of pts shares) That D are totally undervaluated in this metric. To the point of it being ridiculous.

You said this was the most objective measure of players value. That's complete bunk because if this was used a D would never win the Hart.

Another common criticism I'm seeing is that for some reason the stat biases modern era players over previous players.

The first thing I'm learning about this "Points Shares" stat is that theres a ton of criticism of it. Something I picked up on in a few minutes.

 

[Aceboogie]

The Hart is the dumbest trophy in all of sports. You can put Wayne Gretzky on a team full of ECHLers and he could score 200 goals and lead them to 20th place in the NHL and he wouldn't be a Hart nominee

It should not matter what a player does when hes off the ice, that's out of their control. The Hart is essentially "who is the best player on the team that improved the most in the year". Ditto goes for Jack Adams and GM of the year

Not sure how voters can do the mental gymnastics to say "Ok McDavid won this last year and has only gotten better, but somehow hes less valuable". Likewise for the Jack Adams "Ok this coach was great last year and won, but all of a sudden he changed his methods and now hes not a good coach anymore"

 

[nexttothemoon]

Has Doughty been more valuable several seasons and in the Cup wins? Certainly. Was he this season? Its not as clear. Doughty had a lot of overplay in his game this year resulting in egregious turnovers. Stats don't necessarily reflect that but watching the games does.

In anycase you didn't even touch on the very valid criticism I have of this stat (which upon a quick look is the #1 criticism of pts shares) That D are totally undervaluated in this metric. To the point of it being ridiculous.

You said this was the most objective measure of players value. That's complete bunk because if this was used a D would never win the Hart.

Another common criticism I'm seeing is that for some reason the stat biases modern era players over previous players.

The first thing I'm learning about this "Points Shares" stat is that theres a ton of criticism of it. Something I picked up on in a few minutes.

You need to look at each teams stat pages to see the total point shares for dmen. That's why it looks undervalued because you are only looking at defensive point shares.

Last season Burns led the entire NHL in point shares and Erik Karlsson had the 2nd most point shares last season among all skaters as well.... so dmen are actually represented quite well in the stat.

 

[nexttothemoon]

Top NHL dmen this season in point shares:

Doughty 11.7
Hedman 11.0
Subban 10.5
Klingberg 10.5
Josi 10.0
Jones 9.9
Carlson 9.8
Pietrangelo 9.8
Gostisbehere 9.8
Dumba 9.3
Burns 9.1


Not a bad collection of dmen. I wouldn't mind a couple of them on the Oilers.

 

[Drivesaitl]

^ Its all confusing to me. I don't know how to look up the team by team stats on that site. Its a nightmare to navigate. Also confused about DPS, which was listed on your link, and those scores being different than the ones you are quoting above.

In anycase ALL the D have lower point shares than any of the highest ranked forwards. Despite D being more important to team success typically. In anycase the stat provides some pretty unusual lists and not what I intuitively think. I certainly wouldn't value the contributions of Klingberg, Jones, Carlson, Goatgetmeabeer, Dumba, over Burns.

 

[nexttothemoon]

Defensive point shares + offensive points shares = total point shares.

I see your confusion as they should have it explained slightly better but that link up above goes into all the calculations.

Like I said it isn't perfect (nothing is... which is why we are arguing over what's better and everyone has different opinions)... but it's a pretty good stat in objectively comparing dmen, forwards and goalies all together under one methodology.

No dman this year was as good as Burns was last season (or Karlsson was last season for that matter).

No one this year is talking about a dman for the Hart... and that's in line with the point share stats as well.

Doughty and Hedman would be my picks as well for the Norris nominees this year... Subban/Klingberg aren't bad 3rd choices either... which is again in line with what the point shares are showing.

The point share stats looks at offense, defense, toi and other factors (as explained above). Again it's not perfect but I think it does a decent job of comparing the best goalies, dmen and forwards on a fairly equal platform.

 

[Panthera]

If the MVP player does not lead the team to some sort of success what part of valuable is there? To me it logically follows that Value is related to success in this regard. If the value is not related to team success than what other variable is it linked to? What other valuable rational is there?

So how is it not a travesty that he's even in the conversation for the Lindsay? If value and success go hand in hand, how can you be "outstanding" when by definition you had a failure of a season where you didn't contribute anything? If team success is the determining factor, McDavid should be ranked in both Hart and Lindsay voting below every single player on a playoff team, because by definition he contributed less than they did.

 

[McJadeddog]

As another example of how ridiculous the Hart trophy is, the top-4 NHL scorers this year were not nominated. Has that every happened before in league history?

 

[Jumptheshark]

Only comment will be he was not snubbed and it is only oiler fans who people who want to cause trouble who will say he was

 

[BoldNewLettuce]

Only comment will be he was not snubbed and it is only oiler fans who people who want to cause trouble who will say he was

nah.

if you have to explain to someone why the mvp isn't the best player in the league than you're doing it wrong.

 

[Hockey Nightmare]

Who gives a crap, seriously. Harping over this so much is just making oiler fans and media look desperate.

 

[Gord]

nah.

if you have to explain to someone why the mvp isn't the best player in the league than you're doing it wrong.

I don't think he was the most valuable player to his team this season.
I think he's the offensive MOP if it was as the CFL awards, but to me it's a fair debate if he should be the Hart winner.

I would only be ticked by any voters who didn't have McDavid in their top 5. I don't see 5 players you could argue should be the hart winner over McDavid.

considering we have 95 years of history saying it is a playoff based award, it's not shocking, surprising or really that unfair. voting has been consistent in that regard for far longer than any of us have been alive.

If you consider a finalist someone who was top 3 in voting,
18 out of 282 Hart Trophy finalists since 1923-24 did not make the playoffs. Since 1967 expansion, 6 out of 150 Hart Trophy finalists did not make the playoffs.

This is a playoff-driven award. Non-playoff seasons comprise 6.4% of all Hart Trophy finalists' seasons. Since 1967, that number is 4%. (numbers from poster Blade Paradigm)

 

[BoldNewLettuce]

I don't think he was the most valuable player to his team this season.
I think he's the offensive MOP if it was as the CFL awards, but to me it's a fair debate if he should be the Hart winner.

I would only be ticked by any voters who didn't have McDavid in their top 5. I don't see 5 players you could argue should be the hart winner over McDavid.

considering we have 95 years of history saying it is a playoff based award, it's not shocking, surprising or really that unfair. voting has been consistent in that regard for far longer than any of us have been alive.

If you consider a finalist someone who was top 3 in voting,
18 out of 282 Hart Trophy finalists since 1923-24 did not make the playoffs. Since 1967 expansion, 6 out of 150 Hart Trophy finalists did not make the playoffs.

This is a playoff-driven award. Non-playoff seasons comprise 6.4% of all Hart Trophy finalists' seasons. Since 1967, that number is 4%. (numbers from poster Blade Paradigm)

How many won the art ross?

 

[Arpeggio]

It's a vague award which will always result in some outliers winning. Same thing happens in the NBA, where Lebron could probably win nearly every MVP award but doesn't because reasons.

They should make the award for the best player in the game, by definition that is also the most valuable player. This year it has literally turned into who was the best player among teams that weren't too great but also not too bad. It's a dumb award when it's voted on this way.

Edit: I really don't understand how Giroux wasn't nominated for this. I would even give it to him over McDavid using the current definition of the award, considering 6 points over a season isn't that large a cap and his team was better. Of the nominees I think Hall should probably get it.

 

[sepHF]

How many won the art ross?

Benn just a few years ago

 

[BoldNewLettuce]

Benn just a few years ago

It was a real question

 

[voxel]

People, you have it all wrong. aUsToN MaTtHews is da BEStz Toronto Maple Leafs: Auston Matthews Is Better Than McDavid

Can you imagine Toronto Sports Media if the Leafs actually won a playoff series? Maybe Kadri would be considered better than McDavid?

 

[Laineux]

Good. Makes him more motivated for next year.

 

[joestevens29]

Could careless never put a lot of value in the Hart. Maybe now if they are releasing votes and maybe getting rid of guys that are clearly idiots, but until that time it's a meaningless trophy. Especially with the Lindsay being a trophy you can win.

 

[Dohilers]

I never understand this narrative. What they did for their respective teams wasn’t as impactful as what McDavid did but the rest of their team played better, so that elevates them. They might as well change the criteria to player who helped the team teach the playoffs the best.

I never said it was fair or made sense, but it's just the way the voting goes. Always has. Only 4 players have ever won the Hart on a team with a losing record, and Lemieux is the only one to do it in the past 60 years. Not enough voters thought McDavid deserved it more than the others. It sucks, but there's nothing we can do about it. Better luck next year.