The 'best player' vs 'most valuable to team' problem.

[skillhockey]

If a guy like Bergeron gets 85, he should beat someone around 100.

Datsyuk didn't beat Ovechkin with that margin(13 and 15) and second time he wasn't even In top 3.

 

[daver]

If a guy like Bergeron gets 85, he should beat someone around 100.

That's a pretty broad statement. Bergeron doesn't lead his team in scoring, let alone is the runaway team leader like some potential 100 point players may be. Players like Giroux and Crosby are pretty solid defensive players to begin with.

And most of all, making up for 15 goals with defensive play is a pretty hard pill to swallow. I am not sure you can comfortably claim the difference between the best starting goalie and an average starting goalie is 15 goals a season and they have a ton more influence on how many pucks get in the net.

 

[Aladyyn]

Datsyuk didn't beat Ovechkin with that margin(13 and 15) and second time he wasn't even In top 3.

2009 might as well be ancient history when it comes to our understanding of a player's tangible impact.

 

[Aladyyn]

That's a pretty broad statement. Bergeron doesn't lead his team in scoring, let alone is the runaway team leader like some potential 100 point players may be. Players like Giroux and Crosby are pretty solid defensive players to begin with.

And most of all, making up for 15 goals with defensive play is a pretty hard pill to swallow. I am not sure you can comfortably claim the difference between the best starting goalie and an average starting goalie is 15 goals a season and they have a ton more influence on how many pucks get in the net.

Bergeron is THE best defensive forward in the league. Has been for ages. If a guy like him gets above PPG, it's over.

 

[ovikovy817]

Tampa would be just fine without Kucherov. Where would the Devils be without Hall?

Replace Devils by Caps and Hall by Ovechkin.

 

[daver]

Bergeron is THE best defensive forward in the league. Has been for ages. If a guy like him gets above PPG, it's over.

Thanks for tightening it up.

 

[Spazkat]

The best player in the league is most valuable. Confusion only sets in when someone has an agenda.

This is exactly how it should be. Unfortunately, too many people want to turn it into a philosophical debate about the "meaning of most valuable".

Too often, this "new age" definition punishes great players on good teams and rewards decent players on bad teams.

It also places way too much emphasis on "this 8th seed wouldn't even make the playoffs without Player X!", ignoring the fact that great players on good teams also affect their team's standings. Maybe Tampa finishes 3rd in their division instead of first without Kucherov? Maybe Pittsburgh finishes in a wildcard spot instead of 2nd without Crosby?

A player who is a big part of his team finishing 1st or 2nd instead of 5th or 6th is every bit as valuable as a player who helps his team finish 7th or 8th instead of 10th or 11th.

This logic basically makes the Hart and Art Ross redundant. The leading scorer that season is almost always viewed as "the best player."

It should just go to the best player.

I would say the best player in the league is inherently the most valuable player as well.

The problem here is that the Hart is not actually for the "best player overall". Lots of media outlets shorten it down to try to simplify for readers / viewers, but the criteria for the Hart literally states it should go to "Player judged to be the most valuable to his team" which isn't the same thing at all in most cases

 

[Shwag33]

It should just be the best player regardless of team or circumstances.

If we really want to take the definition seriously that player would also have to have a very low cap hit.

 

[Roomtemperature]

The best player by definition has the most value.

 

[Keeptdos]

But since potential and youth is also calculated in value it's not always the case.

 

[daver]

But since potential and youth is also calculated in value it's not always the case.

For example?

 

[bobholly39]

Lots of talk of Kucherov and Hall.

Kucherov has 82 points (33 goals).
Hall has 68 points (27 goals).

In what universe should 68 points be considered more valuable than 82 points? It doesn't matter how stacked one team is vs another - 82 points is more valuable to a team than 68 points.

Now - if you look at Ovechkin. He always tends to make things interesting.

Kucherov has 82 points (33 goals)
Ovechkin has 71 points (39 goals). Because goals do have a slightly higher prestige/value than assists in a vacuum - someone like Ovi can win (and has in the past) is he's close enough to top of scoring race, while having a significant goal advantage. (I'd say right now Kucherov is still #1, but if Ovi was within 5 points or so it'd be close).

The best player is the most valuable player.

The hart is about the most valuable player.

It's not about picking the player whose team happens to suck the most so that he's the biggest part of their pie.

Now - if instead of 68 points Hall had like 80, or even 79 to Kucherov's 82? Ok. Because it's so close, maybe you can start looking at Hall's team sucking more without him than Tampa without Kucherov and maybe that's enough to warrant picking Hall over Kucherov. But not when the gap is so big.

 

[Keeptdos]

For example?

Wheeler is better than Matthews but Matthews has higher value due to his age and potential. Then there is always contracts that affect value.
I'm guessing I went the wrong direction in terms of value though, in which case the best player is the most valuable player. My bad.

 

[Selyanin]

For example?

I think his talking about trade value which is completely different thing.

 

[Adam Warlock]

The Hart should take everything into consideration...but its always going to go to the highest scoring forward unless a D or G have a ridiculous year.

Hockey fans, for whatever reason, love the idea of having those 2 or 3 players in every era that just rack up the awards. I think the Hart and the Conn Smyth kinda cater to that.

It always amazes me how upset people get when an unexpected name leads the league in points.

 

[StevenF1919]

Replace Devils by Caps and Hall by Ovechkin.

Hall is 27 points ahead of the 2nd highest scorer on the Devils, Ovi is 10 points ahead of Kuznetsov. He definitely deserves consideration if he hits 50 goals though (which he will).

 

[Its a Trap]

Lots of talk of Kucherov and Hall.

Kucherov has 82 points (33 goals).
Hall has 68 points (27 goals).

In what universe should 68 points be considered more valuable than 82 points? It doesn't matter how stacked one team is vs another - 82 points is more valuable to a team than 68 points.

Now - if you look at Ovechkin. He always tends to make things interesting.

Kucherov has 82 points (33 goals)
Ovechkin has 71 points (39 goals). Because goals do have a slightly higher prestige/value than assists in a vacuum - someone like Ovi can win (and has in the past) is he's close enough to top of scoring race, while having a significant goal advantage. (I'd say right now Kucherov is still #1, but if Ovi was within 5 points or so it'd be close).

The best player is the most valuable player.

The hart is about the most valuable player.

It's not about picking the player whose team happens to suck the most so that he's the biggest part of their pie.

Now - if instead of 68 points Hall had like 80, or even 79 to Kucherov's 82? Ok. Because it's so close, maybe you can start looking at Hall's team sucking more without him than Tampa without Kucherov and maybe that's enough to warrant picking Hall over Kucherov. But not when the gap is so big.

Except the award is about most valuable to their team. If you take Kucherov off Tampa, are they still the top team in the league?

 

[57special]

Taylor Hall is the exact definition of MVP. I don't see how anyone could argue against a guy who has a 27 point lead (while missing 5 games) on the next highest scorer on his team. He has a 35 point lead on the 3rd leading scorer. The Devils are in a playoff spot and would likely be one of the 5 worst teams in the NHL without him.

However, he is far down the scoring and doesn't have a big name. The award will go to Kucherov most likely unless McDavid goes on a tear and wills Edmonton to the playoffs. There are some other good candidates like Wheeler, Mackinnon, etc. but Hall is very clearly the "most valuable player to his team".

Kucherov should get the Lindsay, which is not really punishing him. Also, this is all as of right now, things could easily change.

Hall doesn't have a big name?

 

[RDTBay4]

Except the award is about most valuable to their team. If you take Kucherov off Tampa, are they still the top team in the league?

Not even close.

 

[george14]

Hall doesn't have a big name?

I should have used a different word. Hall certainly is not at the "superstar" level as some of the other guys.

 

[Cousin Eddie]

Nathan Mackinnon is on pace for 96 points in 74 games. There's a very good chance he will be considered the best player in the NHL AND the most valuable to his team.

Kucherov on pace for 105 in 81 games
Malkin's on pace for 98 in 78 games
McDavid on pace for 98 in 82 games
Giroux is on pace for 96 in 82 games
Hall is on pace for 90 in 78 games

So Mackinnon is on pace to finish fourth in points if every player plays every scheduled game their team has left. 2 points behind Malkin and McDavid with fewer games played.

If things continue to trend the way they have been I would guess the Hart argument between forwards comes down to Kucherov and Mackinnon. If Kucherov is healthy and good to go, I'd say it's him.

 

[george14]

Lots of talk of Kucherov and Hall.

Kucherov has 82 points (33 goals).
Hall has 68 points (27 goals).

In what universe should 68 points be considered more valuable than 82 points? It doesn't matter how stacked one team is vs another - 82 points is more valuable to a team than 68 points.

Now - if you look at Ovechkin. He always tends to make things interesting.

Kucherov has 82 points (33 goals)
Ovechkin has 71 points (39 goals). Because goals do have a slightly higher prestige/value than assists in a vacuum - someone like Ovi can win (and has in the past) is he's close enough to top of scoring race, while having a significant goal advantage. (I'd say right now Kucherov is still #1, but if Ovi was within 5 points or so it'd be close).

The best player is the most valuable player.

The hart is about the most valuable player.

It's not about picking the player whose team happens to suck the most so that he's the biggest part of their pie.

Now - if instead of 68 points Hall had like 80, or even 79 to Kucherov's 82? Ok. Because it's so close, maybe you can start looking at Hall's team sucking more without him than Tampa without Kucherov and maybe that's enough to warrant picking Hall over Kucherov. But not when the gap is so big.

There is so much wrong with this post lol.

Your main premise is: "most points = most valuable". Then you proceed to say: "well if it's close, maybe it's different". Then you go into the classic "goals vs. assists" argument to boost up Ovechkin.

Secondly, you said "it's not about picking Hall is essentially the biggest part of the NJ pie, and they suck". Don't you think that's a bit disingenuous? Hall is single-handedly carrying that team to the playoffs, with only one other 40 point producer on the team. They have a negative goal differential for crying out loud.

Finally, going off your logic, Kessel is more valuable to PIT than Hall to NJ because he has more points. Can't you see how that makes no sense? People are trying to stretch the argument so far to make it seem like any team that is garbage automatically should give the MVP to their best player. No one is saying that. People are saying Hall is having a great season (missed 5 games) on a team that is not good at all, with a massive lead in points and currently in a playoff spot.

 

[ovikovy817]

Hall is 27 points ahead of the 2nd highest scorer on the Devils, Ovi is 10 points ahead of Kuznetsov. He definitely deserves consideration if he hits 50 goals though (which he will).

Ovechkin is more than stats for WSH this year.
If you look to the 3rd player (Carlson), Ovi has 21 points more, and the 3rd forward (Backstrom) is 25 points behind.

Kuznetsov has played the begining of the season with Ovi, then Backstrom took his place. And Carlson is the 1D in his contract year who also benefits of Ovi on the PP (and not only on PP). And his also benefited of those 15 games that Niskanen missed to play almost 30 minutes per night.

19,70% of total goals scored by Ovechkin for his team (IIRC, the league best)
14,36% of total goals scored by Hall for his team

 

[george14]

Nathan Mackinnon is on pace for 96 points in 74 games. There's a very good chance he will be considered the best player in the NHL AND the most valuable to his team.

Kucherov on pace for 105 in 81 games
Malkin's on pace for 98 in 78 games
McDavid on pace for 98 in 82 games
Giroux is on pace for 96 in 82 games
Hall is on pace for 90 in 78 games

So Mackinnon is on pace to finish fourth in points if every player plays every scheduled game their team has left. 2 points behind Malkin and McDavid with fewer games played.

If things continue to trend the way they have been I would guess the Hart argument between forwards comes down to Kucherov and Mackinnon. If Kucherov is healthy and good to go, I'd say it's him.

Not accusing you of this, but I find it hilarious that people will bash Crosby for this exact same argument.

 

[Its a Trap]

Not even close.

Not even close? I think that’s a bit of an overreaction.