Any Undeserved Norris Trophy winners?

[The Panther]

Talking about the Norris trophy's history: Are there any winners you think were undeserving?

I'll just get Randy Carlyle out of the way -- on the 1980-81 Penguins, Carlyle had an impressive 83 points but an unimpressive -16. His team had the fourth-worst defence in the NHL. Meanwhile, Denis Potvin of the Isles had 76 points and was +39, but finished second. His team had the fourth-best defence in the NHL. Larry Robinson was third with 50 scoring points and a +47.

Click to read more...

 

[Normand Lacombe]

Langway over Howe in 1983 immediately came to mind.

 

[seventieslord]

Subban

 

[psycat]

Due Drew, Lidström's last Norris are the ones I think of instantly.
That said I believe Norris is one of the more fairly handed out trophies.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I think the value of the Norris ranges wildly from year-to-year, so I wouldn’t necessarily say any are undeserved but rather that because the league hands out exactly one Norris Trophy each year, there are times when someone has to win (2011) and times when someone has to lose (1994).

1981 and 2016 do strike me as years when the 2nd place finisher was competing against more than just the other players - be it their previous heights or an arbitrary punishment for being on a terrible team. I’d almost want to put Coffey in this category as well (1984), but I don’t think Langway (2nd in Hart voting) was a bad Norris winner or anything.

 

[JackSlater]

Looking at the winners, the Norris doesn't seem to be clearly wrong very often. The most egregious examples to me (Carlyle, Langway both times) were already mentioned. You can make a case for a few others like Blake or Subban but only Carlyle and Langway strike me as completely undeserved.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

i still think

1991 bourque slight win over macinnis' career year

Place	Player	Votes	Vote%	1st	2nd	3rd	G	A	PTS	+/-
1	Ray Bourque	257	77.88	35	27	1	21	73	94	33
2	Al MacInnis	228	69.09	27	28	9	28	75	103	42

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

1992 leetch's career year, landslide victory over bourque

Place	Player	Votes	Vote%	1st	2nd	3rd	G	A	PTS	+/-
1	Brian Leetch	335	97.10	65	3	1	22	80	102	25
2	Ray Bourque	112	32.46	3	25	22	21	60	81	11

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

1993 chelios clear victory over bourque, but not close to unanimous like leetch

Place	Player	Votes	Vote%	1st	2nd	3rd	G	A	PTS	+/-
1	Chris Chelios	201	80.40	33	10	6	15	58	73	14
2	Ray Bourque	97	38.80	6	19	10	19	63	82	38
3	Larry Murphy	93	37.20	9	11	15	22	63	85	45

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

1994 bourque two first place votes over stevens' career year

Place	Player	Votes	Vote%	1st	2nd	3rd	G	A	PTS	+/-
1	Ray Bourque	199	73.70	26	21	6	20	71	91	26
2	Scott Stevens	195	72.22	24	23	6	18	60	78	53

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

is wrong

 

[Staniowski]

i still think

1991 bourque slight win over macinnis' career year

Place	Player	Votes	Vote%	1st	2nd	3rd	G	A	PTS	+/-
1	Ray Bourque	257	77.88	35	27	1	21	73	94	33
2	Al MacInnis	228	69.09	27	28	9	28	75	103	42

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

1992 leetch's career year, landslide victory over bourque

Place	Player	Votes	Vote%	1st	2nd	3rd	G	A	PTS	+/-
1	Brian Leetch	335	97.10	65	3	1	22	80	102	25
2	Ray Bourque	112	32.46	3	25	22	21	60	81	11

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

1993 chelios clear victory over bourque, but not close to unanimous like leetch

Place	Player	Votes	Vote%	1st	2nd	3rd	G	A	PTS	+/-
1	Chris Chelios	201	80.40	33	10	6	15	58	73	14
2	Ray Bourque	97	38.80	6	19	10	19	63	82	38
3	Larry Murphy	93	37.20	9	11	15	22	63	85	45

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

1994 bourque two first place votes over stevens' career year

Place	Player	Votes	Vote%	1st	2nd	3rd	G	A	PTS	+/-
1	Ray Bourque	199	73.70	26	21	6	20	71	91	26
2	Scott Stevens	195	72.22	24	23	6	18	60	78	53

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

is wrong

So, you think the 2nd place vote-getter in each case should've won the Norris?

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

So, you think the 2nd place vote-getter in each case should've won the Norris?

no, i just think that brian leetch almost unanimous norris decision sticks out like a sore thumb here

 

[Staniowski]

no, i just think that brian leetch almost unanimous norris decision sticks out like a sore thumb here

I do remember that I thought MacInnis deserved to win the Norris one year in the early '90s, over Bourque. It was probably in '91, though I don't remember for sure. I definitely would've seen both of them play a lot those seasons.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

I do remember that I thought MacInnis deserved to win the Norris one year in the early '90s, over Bourque. It was probably in '91, though I don't remember for sure. I definitely would've seen both of them play a lot those seasons.

i'm totally happy with bourque winning the '91 norris over macinnis. the way i see it, it's just bad luck that seriously amazing seasons by macinnis and stevens had to coincide with bourque's peak, just like mark howe's crazy 1986 season had the misfortune to be in the same year as coffey's absolute highest scoring season.

i guess my point is i feel like a healthy peak bourque should only lose the norris to chelios or when coffey scores 120+ points. going by recent norris history, there is no good reason i can think of that leetch should have won that norris while macinnis and stevens didn't for "just" a 102 point season.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

i'm totally happy with bourque winning the '91 norris over macinnis. the way i see it, it's just bad luck that seriously amazing seasons by macinnis and stevens had to coincide with bourque's peak, just like mark howe's crazy 1986 season had the misfortune to be in the same year as coffey's absolute highest scoring season.

i guess my point is i feel like a healthy peak bourque should only lose the norris to chelios or when coffey scores 120+ points. going by recent norris history, there is no good reason i can think of that leetch should have won that norris while macinnis and stevens didn't for "just" a 102 point season.

This might be a factor:
1990-91: Bourque 94 points. Won the Norris.
1991-92: Bourque 81 points. 2nd to Leetch
1992-93: Bourque 82 points. 2nd to Chelios
1993-94: Bourque 91 points. Won the Norris.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

This might be a factor:
1990-91: Bourque 94 points. Won the Norris.
1991-92: Bourque 81 points. 2nd to Leetch
1992-93: Bourque 82 points. 2nd to Chelios
1993-94: Bourque 91 points. Won the Norris.

scoring might correlate bourque losing to leetch and chelios, but it doesn't begin to account for macinnis (-29), leetch (+223), chelios (+104), stevens (-4)

65/68 first place votes feels flat out bonkers to me

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

scoring might correlate bourque losing to leetch and chelios, but it doesn't begin to account for macinnis (-29), leetch (+223), chelios (+104), stevens (-4)

65/68 first place votes feels flat out bonkers to me

It was right around when I started following hockey seriously, so I don't have any real memories of voting trends at the time, but it does seem to me like perhaps Bourque was competing against himself.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

It was right around when I started following hockey seriously, so I don't have any real memories of voting trends at the time, but it does seem to me like perhaps Bourque was competing against himself.

tbh, i remember being flabbergasted. not that i had any access to the voting records at the time, but you have to remember that bourque had swept the norrises since 1987 with the exception of the year he missed 20 games. my feeling was if 103 point macinnis couldn't win it, neither should 102 point leetch.

but you're probably right that he was competing against the years he was a hart finalist, though i'd add that the novelty of the rangers suddenly becoming relevant again and winning the presidents trophy probably gave leetch just as much of a push.

 

[golffuul]

Drew Doughty's is the only one in recent history that sticks out. Only player to win, in recent memory, on a team that didn't make the playoffs. That and he was being promoted heavily by the PHWA from before the season and all the way through it. Wasn't even clear he should have been a finalist with amazing years by Karlsson, Klingberg, and Letang as well as Krug and Gostisbhere.

 

[VEGASKING]

Drew Doughty's is the only one in recent history that sticks out. Only player to win, in recent memory, on a team that didn't make the playoffs. That and he was being promoted heavily by the PHWA from before the season and all the way through it. Wasn't even clear he should have been a finalist with amazing years by Karlsson, Klingberg, and Letang as well as Krug and Gostisbhere.

The Kings finished 2nd in the Pacific with 102 points the year he won the Norris.

 

[MXD]

Drew Doughty's is the only one in recent history that sticks out. Only player to win, in recent memory, on a team that didn't make the playoffs. That and he was being promoted heavily by the PHWA from before the season and all the way through it. Wasn't even clear he should have been a finalist with amazing years by Karlsson, Klingberg, and Letang as well as Krug and Gostisbhere.

... Did Doughty stole your lunch or something? It's one thing to suggest that Karlsson should've won the Norris, but implying that Torey Krug and Shayne Gostisbehere were better than Doughty in 2015-16 is, for a lack of a better term, credibility-damaging.

 

[Neutrinos]

Randy Carlyle in '81 was the first one to come to mind

 

[The Panther]

i still think

1991 bourque slight win over macinnis' career year

Place	Player	Votes	Vote%	1st	2nd	3rd	G	A	PTS	+/-
1	Ray Bourque	257	77.88	35	27	1	21	73	94	33
2	Al MacInnis	228	69.09	27	28	9	28	75	103	42

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Fun stat about Ray Bourque in the 1990-91 season:

First 40 games
38 points, +11

Last 36 games
56 points, +22 (4th in NHL scoring)

 

[Nick Hansen]

The history of this award seems pretty clean overall. Blake in 98 might look bad in hindsight as Lidstrom turned out to be a legendary player but I don't know how the talk of the town was like then. 23 goals for a defenseman of his type is damn impressive as well. Kind of like the Shea Weber of his day.

What about Harry Howell? Although it seems like it was a pretty drab year...

 

[quoipourquoi]

The history of this award seems pretty clean overall. Blake in 98 might look bad in hindsight as Lidstrom turned out to be a legendary player but I don't know how the talk of the town was like then. 23 goals for a defenseman of his type is damn impressive as well. Kind of like the Shea Weber of his day.

Lidstrom scored just 3 goals in the last half of the season too. If the halves flipped, it’s possible that one of Lidstrom or Pronger takes it.

 

[EpochLink]

This might be a factor:
1990-91: Bourque 94 points. Won the Norris.
1991-92: Bourque 81 points. 2nd to Leetch
1992-93: Bourque 82 points. 2nd to Chelios
1993-94: Bourque 91 points. Won the Norris.

Chelios winning the Norris in 1993 was in due the Blackhawks were number 1 in goals against that year, in the high scoring 1992-1993 season..the Blackhawks gave up the least amount of goals.

Chelios winning the Norris also played in part of Beflour winning the Vezina that year too.

 

[Big Phil]

Okay, I'll agree here. Carlyle in 1981 immediately comes to mind here. I just still don't get it. Potvin had a great year, was on the 1st place team, had a much better +/-. What does Carlyle have? 7 more points? I will say though, it was very close in voting. Carlyle had 120 points to Potvin's 113. You know, it could have been voter fatigue with Potvin too. He won three Norrises already, was in the middle of a dynasty and captained that team. Plus, there are players I just never feel like the media liked and it reflects their voting history. Pronger comes to mind as well as someone who was snarly with the media (for good reason) and because of that has a strangely less impressive Norris voting finish than you would think. Potvin did win it three times, but he was snubbed in 1981 and had some years in the 1980s where he got a surprisingly low vote count.

Subban is a weird case in 2013 because he had a shocking lack of competition in that shortened season. I know Ryan Suter is a guy many mention, but was he really robbed? He isn't a guy whose season stands out to me that he needed to win that. I think Letang wins it if he doesn't miss 25% of the season. Who knows what happens if Karlsson plays a full year too. So I think Subban was probably the right choice that year. Not a historically strong year by any means of course.

I guess Wilson is an alright choice in 1982? Hard to see who else deserved it. That one stands out in that era as a weaker year. Bourque was hurt a bit but still finished 2nd. Potvin missed a bit of time and Coffey just had his first explosive season but his defensive play at that time probably hurts him. No, I think 39 goals for a defenseman is hard to ignore for Wilson.

I actually don't mind Langway in 1983. This one makes more sense than 1984 as it was a stronger year (Potvin, Bourque, Coffey all could win it and had huge years). I get why he won it. He took the Capitals in a totally different direction defensively. That much can't be ignored. In fact I think he deserved finishing 2nd in the Hart in 1984. It was one of those unusual times when the defense and the fortunes of the team because of it overrode any lack of offensive contribution he made. I am fine with it to be honest.

 

[seventieslord]

Drew Doughty's is the only one in recent history that sticks out. Only player to win, in recent memory, on a team that didn't make the playoffs. That and he was being promoted heavily by the PHWA from before the season and all the way through it. Wasn't even clear he should have been a finalist with amazing years by Karlsson, Klingberg, and Letang as well as Krug and Gostisbhere.

Yikes man.