1988-1989 Hart Memorial Trophy

KingGallagherXI

Registered User
Jul 10, 2009
3,890
19
Could someone explain to me why Gretzky won the Hart with 54 goals 114 assists and 168 points against Lemieux who scored 85 goals 114 assists and 199 points?

Lemieux had more game winning goals and, well, more everything.

Sorry if this has already been asked.
 

Dangler99*

Guest
Lemieux was clearley robbed that season. I believe he set the record for % of teams offence. Lemieux was def MVP that season.
It's funny how Gretzky won his MVP's in a landslide with his 200 point seasons but Lemieux Loses in his. 199 points in 76 games? and I'm not even going to talk about his linemates that season.
 

nik jr

Registered User
Sep 25, 2005
10,798
7
probably b/c LAK improved from 18th (4th worst) in '88 to 4th best in '89.

nicholls also scored 150p.

a few months ago in a thread about gretzky in '89, someone posted that LAK's goaltending was much better in '89.

LAK sv% in '88: .863
LAK sv% in '89: .880
 

JackSlater

Registered User
Apr 27, 2010
18,074
12,730
I agree with nik jr's assessment. In sports, players tend to be given extra credit for a great season if it coincides with their first season with a new team.
 

BM67

Registered User
Mar 5, 2002
4,776
281
In "The System"
Visit site
Mario built most of his scoring lead in the early part of the season as well as LA did much better down the stretch than Pittsburgh did.

Post all-star game: Mario 58 pts to Gretzky 51.
On Feb. 1 LA had 58 pts in 52 games, while Pit had 60 pts in 50 games. At the end of the season LA had 91 pts and Pit had 87.
 

KingGallagherXI

Registered User
Jul 10, 2009
3,890
19
Ok, the reasons you guys mentioned explain why he won. Now, do you guys agree with that?

I don't think these reasons are enough to justify giving the Hart to Gretzky. Lemieux's impact on the Pens was greater because he scored 31 more goals - the Pens ended up with 347 goals for and 349 goals against. With 31 less goals for (if Lemieux had exactly the same stats as Gretzky) the Pens wouldn't have made the playoffs. Gretzky's linemates were also better (I'm assuming he played with Robitaille that year but I'm not sure).
 

Irato99

Registered User
Nov 8, 2010
316
13
Ok, the reasons you guys mentioned explain why he won. Now, do you guys agree with that?

I don't think these reasons are enough to justify giving the Hart to Gretzky. Lemieux's impact on the Pens was greater because he scored 31 more goals - the Pens ended up with 347 goals for and 349 goals against. With 31 less goals for (if Lemieux had exactly the same stats as Gretzky) the Pens wouldn't have made the playoffs. Gretzky's linemates were also better (I'm assuming he played with Robitaille that year but I'm not sure).

I don't agree, Gretzky's impact was a lot greater for the Kings for all the reasons mentioned earlier in this post. Don't forget that Gretzky's linemates were the same players that finished 4th to last the year before.
 

shazariahl

Registered User
Apr 7, 2009
2,030
59
Ok, the reasons you guys mentioned explain why he won. Now, do you guys agree with that?

I don't think these reasons are enough to justify giving the Hart to Gretzky. Lemieux's impact on the Pens was greater because he scored 31 more goals - the Pens ended up with 347 goals for and 349 goals against. With 31 less goals for (if Lemieux had exactly the same stats as Gretzky) the Pens wouldn't have made the playoffs. Gretzky's linemates were also better (I'm assuming he played with Robitaille that year but I'm not sure).

A better question is why didn't Lemieux win the Pearson/Lindsay that year? I mean sure - Gretzky turned the kings around and took them from 4th worst to 4th best in a single season. That, combined with 160+ points, may have been enough to edge out Lemieux (I wouldn't have said so, but I can see SOME people who might think that way), but I can't really see proper cause for Yzerman to win the Pearson over Lemieux. While 155 points is certainly impressive, come on - 199 is just monstrous.
 

Ohashi_Jouzu*

Registered User
Apr 2, 2007
30,332
11
Halifax
A better question is why didn't Lemieux win the Pearson/Lindsay that year? I mean sure - Gretzky turned the kings around and took them from 4th worst to 4th best in a single season. That, combined with 160+ points, may have been enough to edge out Lemieux (I wouldn't have said so, but I can see SOME people who might think that way), but I can't really see proper cause for Yzerman to win the Pearson over Lemieux. While 155 points is certainly impressive, come on - 199 is just monstrous.

I tend to agree. That was a crazy year. I think it was after that season that trading cards re-exploded on the scene (Upper Deck's first series, O-pee-chee Premier, Score with the Yzerman "Magician" card, etc). Thinking back, the Hart was definitely between Gretzky and Lemieux in my mind, with Yzerman close behind - and there are plenty of reasons why Gretzky deserved it - but the Pearson was definitely between Lemieux and Yzerman for me... if you reward the most outstanding season instead of the "best" player... if that makes sense. I still think Lemieux and Gretzky were the obvious 2 "best" players in the league that year, but...

I think Yzerman kinda lucked out by getting rewarded for an absolutely amazing season, while I think Lemieux kinda got gypped for not quite topping the 200 plateau. It's not hard to imagine that if he actually got that one more point to hit 200, he would have gotten the Pearson, that's how close it must have been. I mean, Yzerman's season might have been more "surprisingly" impressive (by far his best ever, and as close as anyone was coming to Gretz/Lem. without actually playing beside one of them), but the best player in the league was still either Lemieux or Gretzky as far as I was concerned. Maybe the voters just didn't try hard enough to give Lemieux other trophies since he was getting the Art Ross already, I don't know. Either way, Lemieux lost 2 though decisions there, but it's hard to conclusively call them the "wrong" choices.
 

Dangler99*

Guest
Lemieux Was Robbed of Both Awards Pearson and Hart. If You score 199 points you are 100% the most outstanding player. His were like Bob Errey and I forgot the other player. When Gretzky was getting his 200 point seasons he won 8 MVP's in A row than when Lemieux does his he gets nada only the art ross.
 

JT Dutch*

Guest
... I think Lemieux should have won the Hart that season, for sure.

I believe that Gretzky actually won because there was significance tied to stuff off the ice. The Kings weren't a relevant team in the NHL before he arrived, nor were they even a relevant team in Los Angeles if you really want to be honest about it. I think it was partially his play, partially the improvement of some of the players around him, partially the improvement of the Kings in the standings, and partially for the way the Kings dramatically improved their standing in the NHL community as well as the L.A. community.

Being a Kings' fan pre- and post-Gretzky, I can tell you first-hand that being a hardcore Kings' fan before Gretzky arrived was almost like being part of an exclusive club; almost as if the Kings and hockey were our own little secret. After Gretzky came to the Kings, everyone seemed to want a ticket and everyone claimed to be a diehard hockey fan, and those bandwagon jumpers provided me with some of the most annoying, amusing, and fun times I've ever had at Kings' games.
 

McRpro

Cont. without supporting.
Aug 18, 2006
10,005
7,038
Clown World
Lemieux Was Robbed of Both Awards Pearson and Hart. If You score 199 points you are 100% the most outstanding player. His were like Bob Errey and I forgot the other player. When Gretzky was getting his 200 point seasons he won 8 MVP's in A row than when Lemieux does his he gets nada only the art ross.

He may have been the most outstanding player but the Hart Memorial Trophy is supposed to be rewarded to the player deemed most valuable to his team. It doesn't always go to the best player. Taking a 4th last place team to 4th best is a pretty major accomplishment for 1 player. Although I'm sure there was a healthy bit of Gretzky bias in the decision of some voters as well....
 

Infinite Vision*

Guest
He may have been the most outstanding player but the Hart Memorial Trophy is supposed to be rewarded to the player deemed most valuable to his team. It doesn't always go to the best player. Taking a 4th last place team to 4th best is a pretty major accomplishment for 1 player. Although I'm sure there was a healthy bit of Gretzky bias in the decision of some voters as well....

Except it wasn't one player who did that. The team had a worse goal differential with Gretzky on the ice than they did with him off it.
 

Infinite Vision*

Guest
Also about Lemieux's linemates, Paul Coffey and Rob Brown. Helps, doesn't hurt.
 

Dangler99*

Guest
He may have been the most outstanding player but the Hart Memorial Trophy is supposed to be rewarded to the player deemed most valuable to his team. It doesn't always go to the best player. Taking a 4th last place team to 4th best is a pretty major accomplishment for 1 player. Although I'm sure there was a healthy bit of Gretzky bias in the decision of some voters as well....

199 points is way to good and he was in on like 57% of his teams offence which is a record.
 

Irato99

Registered User
Nov 8, 2010
316
13
I would have given it to Lemieux.



Brown was hardly a benefit for Lemieux.

Brown had a season of 212 pts in 63 games in the WHL, his NHL career may have been a failure but he was far from being a dummy. The fact is Mario had his most productive season playing with him.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Sentinel

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,779
16,218
I tend to agree. That was a crazy year. I think it was after that season that trading cards re-exploded on the scene (Upper Deck's first series, O-pee-chee Premier, Score with the Yzerman "Magician" card, etc). Thinking back, the Hart was definitely between Gretzky and Lemieux in my mind, with Yzerman close behind - and there are plenty of reasons why Gretzky deserved it - but the Pearson was definitely between Lemieux and Yzerman for me... if you reward the most outstanding season instead of the "best" player... if that makes sense. I still think Lemieux and Gretzky were the obvious 2 "best" players in the league that year, but...

I think Yzerman kinda lucked out by getting rewarded for an absolutely amazing season, while I think Lemieux kinda got gypped for not quite topping the 200 plateau. It's not hard to imagine that if he actually got that one more point to hit 200, he would have gotten the Pearson, that's how close it must have been. I mean, Yzerman's season might have been more "surprisingly" impressive (by far his best ever, and as close as anyone was coming to Gretz/Lem. without actually playing beside one of them), but the best player in the league was still either Lemieux or Gretzky as far as I was concerned. Maybe the voters just didn't try hard enough to give Lemieux other trophies since he was getting the Art Ross already, I don't know. Either way, Lemieux lost 2 though decisions there, but it's hard to conclusively call them the "wrong" choices.

the hockey card boom, where it went from two companies to who knows how many, came a year after mario's 199 year.

also, i am unsure about the voting for the pearson, whether you just choose one guy or whether it's a first place vote, a second, and a third, but i always suspected that gretzky and lemieux split the first place votes, leaving yzerman to take it on the strength of second and third places. otherwise, yeah it's baffling.
 

JackSlater

Registered User
Apr 27, 2010
18,074
12,730
Brown had a season of 212 pts in 63 games in the WHL, his NHL career may have been a failure but he was far from being a dummy. The fact is Mario had his most productive season playing with him.

I do not see what Brown's accomplishments as a drafted junior player have to do with anything. When Brown got to play with Lemieux he put up big numbers, and then he faded from the NHL without him. That Lemieux had his highest point total with Brown is very likely a coincidence. Lemieux's age, health, playing with Coffey and the high scoring nature of that season had much more to do with it.
 

blogofmike

Registered User
Dec 16, 2010
2,180
927
A giant number of powerplays (491) helped too. Pittsburgh was the leader in powerplays by a large margin, and was over 1 PP/game above both the league average (403) and the LA Kings (395).
 

Irato99

Registered User
Nov 8, 2010
316
13
I do not see what Brown's accomplishments as a drafted junior player have to do with anything. When Brown got to play with Lemieux he put up big numbers, and then he faded from the NHL without him. That Lemieux had his highest point total with Brown is very likely a coincidence. Lemieux's age, health, playing with Coffey and the high scoring nature of that season had much more to do with it.

Honestly it's hard to deny that Brown helped Lemieux, he was a proven offensive force.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad