1988-1989 Hart Memorial Trophy

[Maupin Fan]

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

Proven offensive force where? In juniors against other boys? Or in the minors in what should have been his prime?

 

[JackSlater]

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

He was definitely not a proven offensive force. Care to explain why Brown was shipped out of Pittsburgh 1.5 year later if he was helping Lemienx and why he was at best a marginal NHLer from that point on?

 

[Irato99]

Proven offensive force where? In juniors against other boys? Or in the minors in what should have been his prime?

He was definitely not a proven offensive force. Care to explain why Brown was shipped out of Pittsburgh 1.5 year later if he was helping Lemienx and why he was at best a marginal NHLer from that point on?

To this day Rob Brown still holds the points and assists records in the WHL for a season, I think that's a legitimate proof of an offensive force. I honestly don't know why his NHL career went this way, is it size, lack of discipline, motivation, I don't know. But you can't deny that he knew what to do with the puck and playing with Mario was surely helping both players.

P.S.: He was still a 1 pt/game player the year he was traded to Hartford, but after that it really went down.

 

[Maupin Fan]

To this day Rob Brown still holds the points and assists records in the WHL for a season, I think that's a legitimate proof of an offensive force. I honestly don't know why his NHL career went this way, is it size, lack of discipline, motivation, I don't know. But you can't deny that he knew what to do with the puck and playing with Mario was surely helping both players.

P.S.: He was still a 1 pt/game player the year he was traded to Hartford, but after that it really went down.

Thats proof that he was a force against other boys in a boys league, the WHL, not against men in the men's league, the NHL, which happens to be the league we are discussing here.

I find it really hard to believe that if he were the true offensive force you describe that he would have spent all of the years from 25 to 28 in the minor leagues, especially when there were a number of new or relatively new franchises in the NHL that could have used some scoring pop.

 

[Big Phil]

Wasn't Lemieux thought of as a bit "difficult" with the league establishment, the media etc. especially in the early parts of his career?

Yes he was. I don't think it was until his Cup wins and then especially his comeback from cancer that finally gave him the near unanimous respect. He never got that until then. Making comments like bringing up how his offseason training program was "not ordering the fries with my sandwich" gave him the reputation as a lazy player.

Even after his incredible season in 1989 there were still many critics of his. However, the posters that wonder why Gretzky was a lock everytime for the MVP when he had his 200 point seasons need to remember one thing. Starting in 1981-'82 when he really started to embarass the rest of the NHL the closest anyone got to him in a six year span was Bossy with 147 points in 1982 and even then he was 65 points off of Gretzky. No comparison there.

Gretzky was at least in the same universe as Mario in 1989 although I would agree that I would have personally picked Mario. But the Pearson award was a joke. No offense to Yzerman's great year, but how in the world the players picked him over Mario is mind boggling. Mario beat Yzerman in every way imaginable. It just goes to show you that the Hart is a much more relevant award than the Pearson which has had many more head scratching choices.

 

[Irato99]

Thats proof that he was a force against other boys in a boys league, the WHL, not against men in the men's league, the NHL, which happens to be the league we are discussing here.

I find it really hard to believe that if he were the true offensive force you describe that he would have spent all of the years from 25 to 28 in the minor leagues, especially when there were a number of new or relatively new franchises in the NHL that could have used some scoring pop.

When you're the best boy in a boys league, it usually means you're going to be a great man in a men's league, even though there are exceptions.

Like I said, I don't know what happened to Rob Brown's career but he surely didn't lack talent, how many dummies had a 115 pts season playing with Lemieux?

 

[shazariahl]

Yes he was. I don't think it was until his Cup wins and then especially his comeback from cancer that finally gave him the near unanimous respect. He never got that until then. Making comments like bringing up how his offseason training program was "not ordering the fries with my sandwich" gave him the reputation as a lazy player.

Even after his incredible season in 1989 there were still many critics of his. However, the posters that wonder why Gretzky was a lock everytime for the MVP when he had his 200 point seasons need to remember one thing. Starting in 1981-'82 when he really started to embarass the rest of the NHL the closest anyone got to him in a six year span was Bossy with 147 points in 1982 and even then he was 65 points off of Gretzky. No comparison there.

Gretzky was at least in the same universe as Mario in 1989 although I would agree that I would have personally picked Mario. But the Pearson award was a joke. No offense to Yzerman's great year, but how in the world the players picked him over Mario is mind boggling. Mario beat Yzerman in every way imaginable. It just goes to show you that the Hart is a much more relevant award than the Pearson which has had many more head scratching choices.

Agreed. The Pearson has had some extremely strange choices over the years. I sometimes see threads arise asking which people would rather win, the Hart of the Pearson/Lindsay. Honestly, the answer to that should always be the Hart. I don't know how or why the Lindsay is even selected most times. I feel like they take the names of the top 10 players, and then just draw randomly from a hat some years.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

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

I think I said the exact same thing, if you go back and read it.

"I think it was after that season that trading cards re-exploded on the scene."

 

[revolverjgw]

Agreed. The Pearson has had some extremely strange choices over the years. I sometimes see threads arise asking which people would rather win, the Hart of the Pearson/Lindsay. Honestly, the answer to that should always be the Hart. I don't know how or why the Lindsay is even selected most times. I feel like they take the names of the top 10 players, and then just draw randomly from a hat some years.

Stamkos getting nominated ahead of St. Louis this season shows how broken the Lindsay is

 

[BraveCanadian]

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.

There is a difference between the Art Ross and the "most valuable player to his team". Gretzky was voted for because he had a huge impact on the Kings that year while still putting up gaudy totals.

Sometimes the voters/fans get confused about these things.

See also: Lemieux winning the Hart over Gilmour in '93 despite the fact he didn't even play for a quarter of the season. (although his comeback was an incredible feat) Remove Gilmour from that Leafs team and they do nothing. Remove Lemieux and the Pens just keep on truckin' with all those stars.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Wasn't Lemieux thought of as a bit "difficult" with the league establishment, the media etc. especially in the early parts of his career?

Yes, he wasn't particularly media friendly.

It wasn't until much later that he really matured and turned into the spokesman for the game he became.. he was nothing like he was in the 2002 Olympics early in his career.

 

[BraveCanadian]

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.

Not this again.

Although it is a great example of why statistics really don't tell the story all the time.

 

[Ogopogo*]

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.

Because the Hart Trophy is for the MOST VALUABLE player. Gretzky took one of the very worst teams in the NHL and made them a Stanley Cup contender immediately. That is the very definition of being MOST VALUABLE.

 

[Ogopogo*]

When you're the best boy in a boys league, it usually means you're going to be a great man in a men's league, even though there are exceptions.

Like I said, I don't know what happened to Rob Brown's career but he surely didn't lack talent, how many dummies had a 115 pts season playing with Lemieux?

Brown was very talented (still holds the record for most points in a WHL season with 212) but, his skating wasn't as strong as it needed to be to compete at the NHL level. He put up excellent numbers in the AHL.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

I think I said the exact same thing, if you go back and read it.

"I think it was after that season that trading cards re-exploded on the scene."

very weird that i was correcting you but still managed to repeat exactly what you had said. what i meant was that the explosion was TWO years after. sundays, am i right?

mario's 1999 year, the year messier took bourque's hart, then the card explosion.

or, as i'd remembered in my head, the push pins set, the blue tops and bottoms set, then the upper deck year.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

Because the Hart Trophy is for the MOST VALUABLE player. Gretzky took one of the very worst teams in the NHL and made them a Stanley Cup contender immediately. That is the very definition of being MOST VALUABLE.

Thing is they are not very consistent with that description, just like in every other sports MVP award voting they can't decide if it's for best player or player most valuable to his team...description be damned.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Thing is they are not very consistent with that description, just like in every other sports MVP award voting they can't decide if it's for best player or player most valuable to his team...description be damned.

They definitely do seem to go back and forth in how they vote.

 

[Ogopogo*]

Thing is they are not very consistent with that description, just like in every other sports MVP award voting they can't decide if it's for best player or player most valuable to his team...description be damned.

Truth be known, I would prefer if the award was for the best player. Judging who is most valuable to their team is a lot more subjective. As well, just because a guy plays on a bad team or in a bad situation, does that diminish the fact that he is the best player? The best player should get the award regardless of his place on his team, IMO.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

very weird that i was correcting you but still managed to repeat exactly what you had said. what i meant was that the explosion was TWO years after. sundays, am i right?

Well, you can define your limits however you like. The '88/89 season ended in spring of '89, and on March 20, 1990 Upper Deck was granted it's license by the NHL. That seems to be one year, not two, to me. I dunno, call me simple, but if the season ended near mid-1989, and the "hockey card explosion" is usually described using 1990 as a starting limit (in your defense, it's often described as 1990-91)...

Heck, I never even said it was "one year later", though, as I wasn't endeavouring to be precise. I said "after that season"... which is true. Almost immediately after that season, featuring Lemieux's big year and Gretzky awakening a hockey giant below the 49th parallel, trading card companies really started getting mobilized and ramping up production. And sure, it took a while for those cards to get from the production stage into our hands, but why have you even started to pick my statement apart to this level, lol?

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Well, you can define your limits however you like. The '88/89 season ended in spring of '89, and on March 20, 1990 Upper Deck was granted it's license by the NHL. That seems to be one year, not two, to me. I dunno, call me simple, but if the season ended near mid-1989, and the "hockey card explosion" is usually described using 1990 as a starting limit (in your defense, it's often described as 1990-91)...

Heck, I never even said it was "one year later", though, as I wasn't endeavouring to be precise. I said "after that season"... which is true. Almost immediately after that season, featuring Lemieux's big year and Gretzky awakening a hockey giant below the 49th parallel, trading card companies really started getting mobilized and ramping up production. And sure, it took a while for those cards to get from the production stage into our hands, but why have you even started to pick my statement apart to this level, lol?

haha, who knows? i was just interjecting to clarify.

but you're absolutely right. no gretzky in LA, no upper deck, score, etc. upper deck was lucky in that, by the time they started production for the '90-'91 season, they could build their campaign not only around LA gretzky, who was far and away their focal point, and yzerman, but also messier freshly off his hart trophy and hull, who had just broken out in a big way. had to be more successful than if they'd started five years earlier and had to hire hawerchuk, stastny, and savard as their spokesmen beside gretzky. did lemieux have a deal with one of the other companies? seems weird that he wasn't included on the upper deck box displays as part of the big four.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

haha, who knows? i was just interjecting to clarify.

but you're absolutely right. no gretzky in LA, no upper deck, score, etc. upper deck was lucky in that, by the time they started production for the '90-'91 season, they could build their campaign not only around LA gretzky, who was far and away their focal point, and yzerman, but also messier freshly off his hart trophy and hull, who had just broken out in a big way. had to be more successful than if they'd started five years earlier and had to hire hawerchuk, stastny, and savard as their spokesmen beside gretzky. did lemieux have a deal with one of the other companies? seems weird that he wasn't included on the upper deck box displays as part of the big four.

Totally agree with the first bolded point. Obviously the market was primed for their product. As for the second bolded point, that's a good question, and it does seem a bit weird looking back.

 

[Dangler99*]

How do you lose the Hart trophy when you score 199 points. A 200 point scorer should never lose the MVP award ever.

 

[tazzy19]

In 1991, Gretzky also lost the Hart Trophy after winning the scoring title by the same margin, but no one talks about that. He beat Brett Hull by 32 points - 163 points to 131 - yet the NHL award Brett Hull the Hart simply on the basis of his 86 goals (everyone forgets he only had 45 assists... The difference when Gretzky was scoring his 87 goals and 92 goals, is he was also scoring 120 assists...but that's another story).

And how about the time in 87-88, when Lemieux won the Hart, despite Gretzky beating him handidly in PPG average. Gretzky would have easily won the Art Ross had he not been injured...and thus would have won 10 straight Hart Trophies.

 

[tazzy19]

How do you lose the Hart trophy when you score 199 points. A 200 point scorer should never lose the MVP award ever.

It was that one extra point that he missed. So funny, because it's probably true. But I agree that Lemieux was robbed that season. As was Gretzky in 1988 and 1991.

 

[Dangler99*]

It was that one extra point that he missed. So funny, because it's probably true.

I know. To me Lemieux is a 200 point scorer and your right if he had gotten 1 more point he probably would have won the award. It would have been he joined Gretzky as the only other player so he has to win the award. Lemieux is a 200 point scorer.