Any Undeserved Norris Trophy winners?

[The Panther]

Any year Coffey won.

I think Coffey deserved his Norris in 1984-85 and probably 1985-86, too. And I have no problem with his 1995 Norris, either. I think a case could be made that Coffey should have won over Langway in 1983-84, as well. I don't think I would want to give him any more than that one extra, however.

I presume -- since you're decaffeinated as far as Norrises go -- that you interpret "best defenceman" as meaning the player has to be the best defensively, but I don't see it that way. Coffey had his defensive lapses to be sure, and at times that hurt his team, but if you're +60 and your team is at the top of the League, and you put 120 points on the board, I think "best defenceman" should be interpreted as "best player at the defence position". It's like if we said "best forward", it doesn't necessarily mean best offensively.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

There is no argument whatsoever against Coffey winning the Norris in 94-95. It was one of the easiest calls, ever.

 

[kmad]

Ray Bourque deserved every Norris that Rod Langway and Paul Coffey won in the 80s

 

[Voight]

As I recall, Mark Giordano was the heavy favorite until his injury - which occurred about a week into Ottawa’s 21-3-3 run to end the season.

You're correct, I just felt that 2015 was arguably DD's best overall season.

& it was great to see Gio win this year after what happened in 2015.

 

[The Panther]

Ray Bourque deserved every Norris that Rod Langway and Paul Coffey won in the 80s

Er... I love Bourque as much as anyone, but that's going too far.

I think Langway was deserved enough to win his 1982-83 Norris. Washington (perennial doormats) went from 65 points to 94 in his first season there. Sure, Engblom helped, but Stevens was just a rookie then at age 18. There were no big scorers on the club, yet they improved by 30 points overnight when Langway arrived. Sure, the Bruins were 1st overall that season, but Bourque's missing 15 games probably killed his chance.

In 1983-84, I like Coffey or Bourque for the Norris -- it's a toss-up. The Bruins were still near the top of the League, and Bourque had 96 points and a +51. Coffey was +52 and second in the League in scoring (Bourque was 5th on his team), and his team was better. It's close, but I think I'd take Coffey over Bourque in 1983-84. (Langway? Forget it. He had his one, which was enough, and now he's got Hall of Famers Stevens and Murphy helping out.)

The problem for Bourque in 1984-85 and 1985-86 is that the Bruins were in decline. In '85 the Bruins fell from 1st to 4th in their division. Sure, Bourque led the team and was its best player, but when a team drops 20-25 points and there are other, sexy candidates, the team-dropping guy never wins. Coffey's plus/minus was way better than Bourque's, and he massively outscored him, too.

1985-86: Again, the Bruins weren't overly impressive as a team, and Bourque was third in team scoring with a modest +17, while Coffey was +61 and broke Bobby Orr's scoring record.

So, no.

 

[JackSlater]

Langway has no legitimate case in my eyes for either of his Norris wins, but I wouldn't give either of them to Bourque. Howe pretty easily in 1983, Coffey in 1984 though I can see a case for Bourque. The criteria for the Norris mentions nothing about team and it doesn't say to focus on defensive play. Bourque kind of had bad luck where he would miss just enough games in a few seasons to potentially cost him some Norrises, and in the 90s he performed more poorly in voting than he should have.

 

[quoipourquoi]

There is no argument whatsoever against Coffey winning the Norris in 94-95. It was one of the easiest calls, ever.

It’s a shame there has been no publication of the awards voting for each Conference in 1995. I’d like to see if he actually took the Western-half of the Hart Trophy vote.

 

[Voight]

A lot of Langway hate over here, wowzas.

As some have mentioned, when the team transforms over night and doesn't have any high end players, its a big deal when their only major addition was a defenseman. It was also nice to see a pure defensive guy win the award for once.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

It’s a shame there has been no publication of the awards voting for each Conference in 1995. I’d like to see if he actually took the Western-half of the Hart Trophy vote.

i can't imagine who else would have even been close

 

[Iron Mike Sharpe]

I'm thinking the Langway haters are young whippersnappers who did not see him play during that time period. Langway was a top 5 defender in the league before he moved to Washington, no question, he was an elite shutdown guy. I could see it from as early as the 79 Finals when Langway pretty much owned the Rangers & destroyed all their zone entries. When he was traded to the Caps, they restructured their entire team around Langway & made him their franchise player, & a once sad sack team with horrendous defence was transformed into one of the best defensive teams in the league & a perennial playoff contender. The Caps had not made the playoffs in their first 8 seasons - they were the laughing stock of the NHL for the longest time - until Langway.

While some may have preferred another candidate to win the Norris in the years that Langway won, NOBODY at the time thought the wins were "UNDESERVED." Broad consensus at the time in the hockey world supported the idea that he was a Norris-worthy player.

 

[JackSlater]

I'm thinking the Langway haters are young whippersnappers who did not see him play during that time period. Langway was a top 5 defender in the league before he moved to Washington, no question, he was an elite shutdown guy. I could see it from as early as the 79 Finals when Langway pretty much owned the Rangers & destroyed all their zone entries. When he was traded to the Caps, they restructured their entire team around Langway & made him their franchise player, & a once sad sack team with horrendous defence was transformed into one of the best defensive teams in the league & a perennial playoff contender. The Caps had not made the playoffs in their first 8 seasons - they were the laughing stock of the NHL for the longest time - until Langway.

While some may have preferred another candidate to win the Norris in the years that Langway won, NOBODY at the time thought the wins were "UNDESERVED." Broad consensus at the time in the hockey world supported the idea that he was a Norris-worthy player.

People are aware that Langway was elite defensively. The issue is that in 1983 for instance, there was another defenceman who was elite defensively in Mark Howe, and Howe happened to be a far superior player than Langway was at the other end of the ice. If anything I lean toward Langway getting too much credit. Washington added another all star defenceman in Engblom, added a good rookie in Stevens, added an elite defensive forward in Jarvis, and added a better goaltender to replace Parro, who ended up playing a total of 77 career NHL games, from the year before. The team gave up a good forward and a good defenceman, but it added more than it lost even if Langway wasn't in the trade. His competition also didn't have the luxury of having voters see a sort of "before and after" effect.

 

[Big Phil]

Any year Coffey won.

Rod Langway over PAUL coffey both years was insane

These are two posts that couldn't be anymore different if they tried. One is more correct than the other though.

For starters, come on, any year Coffey won? 1985, 1986 and 1995? Those are some pretty heavy years. There was a historical record breaking year for defensemen in 1986 with Coffey's points. I don't know who else you pick there. 1985 was just a year where he was just too darn good offensively to ignore although it wasn't any different than 1984. 1995 I remember him carrying the Wings that year, doesn't everyone? I am not necessarily going to say he should have won more than three, but I certainly don't think he deserved less. He was an all-time great.

The other one saying Langway over Coffey both years was insane. Offensively those two couldn't have been more different and I think you look at that offense and wonder "What the heck?" I think the context is how great defensively Langway was and how much he turned Washington around. Then the following year doing even better. Throw in the fact he didn't have a great supporting cast like Coffey and I am guessing that had a lot to do with the voting.

 

[Big Phil]

The modern example of a Langway-type of player (not in style) winning over an offensive player might have been 2012 if Shea Weber had won it. In 2011 and 2012 he lost by the slimmest of margins for the Norris. But in 2012 he had 49 points to Karlsson's 78, who was the winner. I thought Karlsson hadn't quite rounded his game up to what he has now and figured Weber would win the Norris. Weber was the better all around defenseman and 30 points wasn't going to change my mind. He was a lot like how Langway was to the Caps, the way he was with Nashville. A team with little support, not taken too seriously and who everyone knew Weber was the life support and core of that team. Langway was like that in Washington. If Weber won in 2012 you might look back in 30 years and wonder how a guy won it with 49 points vs. Karlsson, a HHOFer.

But everyone at that time wouldn't have been surprised. So I guess it is a bit like that with the Langway vs. Coffey/Bourque/Potvin thing, but I guess the Langway argument has a bigger offensive gap.

 

[ImporterExporter]

I don't award Norris's to players who enjoyed playing on MULTIPLE of, the most dominant teams of all time. With the all time greatest offensive forwards ever, to boot.

Nor will I consider for beat defensemen, players who stylistically, are nothing more than a 4th F. Ignoring the impact of positive defensive play is a non starter for me.

Coffey is vastly overrated. I've said this for a long time.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I don't award Norris's to players who enjoyed playing on MULTIPLE of, the most dominant teams of all time. With the all time greatest offensive forwards ever, to boot.

I mean, he led the President’s Trophy winning 1995 Detroit Red Wings in scoring by 8 points in a 48-game season, so even though they would no doubt count as one of the most dominant teams of all-time (pace of 56 wins per 82), he was their best player. Top plus-minus on the team too. 3rd in Western Conference scoring, 6th overall (there was no inter-conference games).

Even if you only look at his offensive contributions, he’s still a player who scored at a 105-points-per-82-games pace for literally 15 seasons, so he’s going to have some good years in there, and 1995 was one in which he was out of the shadow of all of his teammates at Center who had their best years with him.

 

[ImporterExporter]

I mean, he led the President’s Trophy winning 1995 Detroit Red Wings in scoring by 8 points in a 48-game season, so even though they would no doubt count as one of the most dominant teams of all-time (pace of 56 wins per 82), he was their best player. Top plus-minus on the team too. 3rd in Western Conference scoring, 6th overall (there was no inter-conference games).

Even if you only look at his offensive contributions, he’s still a player who scored at a 105-points-per-82-games pace for literally 15 seasons, so he’s going to have some good years in there, and 1995 was one in which he was out of the shadow of all of his teammates at Center who had their best years with him.

None of that registers.

It's that he bastardized the defensemen position/role. People will say, "oh, well, Bobby Orr was a crazy offensive guy". The easy reply to that is Orr was also an elite defensive player as well. Coffey was non existent for most of his career in that regard. He wasn't a DEFENSEMAN.

The guy played with Gretzky, Messier and Kurri in Edmonton and was essentially a 4th F. His numbers are vastly inflated. Pittsburgh, he gets to run with Mario. Both players who dominated the league until well into their 30's, offensively speaking. They did that continually without Coffey. Even in Detroit Coffey was playing with a stacked Wings squad.

He's the guy you get excited about as a youngster but as you age and understand the game, form a more critical analysis of his game. I always felt he was a speed demon skater who was obviously gifted offensively, but was always surrounded by vastly better players, offensively. And he didn't play a lick of D until he got to Detroit.

Blah.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I mean, he led the President’s Trophy winning 1995 Detroit Red Wings in scoring by 8 points in a 48-game season, so even though they would no doubt count as one of the most dominant teams of all-time (pace of 56 wins per 82), he was their best player. Top plus-minus on the team too. 3rd in Western Conference scoring, 6th overall (there was no inter-conference games).

Even if you only look at his offensive contributions, he’s still a player who scored at a 105-points-per-82-games pace for literally 15 seasons, so he’s going to have some good years in there, and 1995 was one in which he was out of the shadow of all of his teammates at Center who had their best years with him.

He was also pretty decent in his own end in 94-95, which surprised a lot of people.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

the corollary of this thread: seasons where a defenceman deserved the hart trophy (but didn’t win it).

ones that i saw: 1990 bourque, 95 coffey, 2003 macinnis. i feel like there must be a year in the late 70s where it should have gone to potvin.

 

[Sadekuuro]

i feel like there must be a year in the late 70s where it should have gone to potvin.

It would have been interesting to see whether his 78-79 would have done it had it not also been Trottier's best season.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

the corollary of this thread: seasons where a defenceman deserved the hart trophy (but didn’t win it).

ones that i saw: 1990 bourque, 95 coffey, 2003 macinnis. i feel like there must be a year in the late 70s where it should have gone to potvin.

I just struggle to find a case for MacInnis over Forsberg in 2003, though I'm sure you watched more Western Conference hockey than I did.

 

[The Panther]

I don't award Norris's to players who enjoyed playing on MULTIPLE of, the most dominant teams of all time. With the all time greatest offensive forwards ever, to boot.

Nor will I consider for beat defensemen, players who stylistically, are nothing more than a 4th F. Ignoring the impact of positive defensive play is a non starter for me.

Coffey is vastly overrated. I've said this for a long time.

I guess I don't really understand this way of thinking at all. The charge that Coffey played on multiple of the most dominant teams of all time being a bad thing... isn't that, like, what players are supposed to do? Would he impress you more if his teams had been thoroughly average? In any case, it's not really an accurate observation. When Coffey joined the Oilers, they had just finished in 16th place of 21 teams. When he was a rookie, they were .463 (and he was +5 on that team). It's not as if he joined the team and they were already great.

Sure, by 1983-84 they were a great team (though still hadn't won a Cup), but Coffey was 2nd in NHL scoring (to only Gretzky, in arguably his greatest season). He was 22 years old, and second in NHL scoring. I mean, think about that.

In the '84 Canada Cup, Coffey is remembered for a key defensive play in overtime (after a brutal gaffe by his partner, Doug Wilson), and then for the shot that won the game vs. USSR (tipped by Bossy).

In the 1985 playoffs, he hit a ridiculous level that has rarely been matched by any player, let alone by any defenseman. 37 points in 18 games, while going +23. He was incredibly dominant against Winnipeg and Philadelphia (the latter, the League's best team and probably best defensive team). 11 points in five games in the Finals against a top defensive team? That's insane.

Like in Edmonton, when he joined Pittsburgh they were not a very good team, yet they won the Cup in 1991. I do think that his Pittsburgh years were the weakest of his 1980-1996 prime -- largely because Eddie Johnston and the Pens had no defensive system to speak of, which exacerbated Coffey's weaker points -- but even then, the Mario-led team only made the playoffs after he played his first full season there, and of course they won the Cup (though his contribution wasn't overwhelming).

He was fantastic at the 1991 Canada Cup, both offensively and defensively.

Detroit was the only team he joined (in his prime) when they were already good, but even then they were only 8 games over .500 when he joined, and they were 19 games over at season's end. The three and-and-a-bit seasons he was in Detroit, the team was 159-62-23 (.699). The (almost) three seasons prior to his joining, they were 105-83-25 (.552), and the three seasons after he was traded they were 125-81-40 (.589). They also made the Finals in 1995 for the first time in 30 years.


Next, I also don't understand the attitude that you can't be Norris-worthy if you play like a rover, or have a large offensive game. That's not how the award is defined. It's defined as being awarded to the "defense player who demonstrates throughout the season the greatest all-round ability in the position." Note "all-round ability". It doesn't say "greatest defensive ability". Players should be judged according to their impact on goal-differential to their teams (which is what decides wins and losses), not how good they are in one specific ability. From 1981-82 through 1995-96, Coffey scored the 2nd-most points in the NHL and had the 4th-highest plus/minus. In those 15 consecutive seasons, Coffey was on the ice for 2,670 goals for and 1,703 goals against in 1,080 games, for a positive average of 72 goals per 80-game season, for fifteen consecutive seasons.

So, did that translate to wins? You bet it did. With the possible exception of Mark Messier, I don't think there is another player in those 15 years who had as much team success as Coffey:
1982 - team 2nd overall
1984 - team 1st overall / Stanley Cup
1984 - Canada Cup 1st
1985 - team 2nd overall / Stanley Cup
1986 - team 1st overall
1987 - team 1st overall / Stanley Cup
1987 - Canada Cup 1st
1991 - Stanley Cup
1991 - Canada Cup 1st
1995 - team 1st overall / Conference Champion
1996 - team 1st overall
1996 - World Cup 2nd

Coffey went to the Cup Finals with three different franchises, and his teams finished 1st overall five times with two franchises.


Anyway, I sense I'm arguing with a brick-wall here because you've already stated it's a non-starter unless we isolate defensive acumen in a vacuum. Which doesn't actually exist in hockey, but never mind that...

 

[bobholly39]

I guess I don't really understand this way of thinking at all. The charge that Coffey played on multiple of the most dominant teams of all time being a bad thing... isn't that, like, what players are supposed to do? Would he impress you more if his teams had been thoroughly average? In any case, it's not really an accurate observation. When Coffey joined the Oilers, they had just finished in 16th place of 21 teams. When he was a rookie, they were .463 (and he was +5 on that team). It's not as if he joined the team and they were already great.

Sure, by 1983-84 they were a great team (though still hadn't won a Cup), but Coffey was 2nd in NHL scoring (to only Gretzky, in arguably his greatest season). He was 22 years old, and second in NHL scoring. I mean, think about that.

In the '84 Canada Cup, Coffey is remembered for a key defensive play in overtime (after a brutal gaffe by his partner, Doug Wilson), and then for the shot that won the game vs. USSR (tipped by Bossy).

In the 1985 playoffs, he hit a ridiculous level that has rarely been matched by any player, let alone by any defenseman. 37 points in 18 games, while going +23. He was incredibly dominant against Winnipeg and Philadelphia (the latter, the League's best team and probably best defensive team). 11 points in five games in the Finals against a top defensive team? That's insane.

Like in Edmonton, when he joined Pittsburgh they were not a very good team, yet they won the Cup in 1991. I do think that his Pittsburgh years were the weakest of his 1980-1996 prime -- largely because Eddie Johnston and the Pens had no defensive system to speak of, which exacerbated Coffey's weaker points -- but even then, the Mario-led team only made the playoffs after he played his first full season there, and of course they won the Cup (though his contribution wasn't overwhelming).

He was fantastic at the 1991 Canada Cup, both offensively and defensively.

Detroit was the only team he joined (in his prime) when they were already good, but even then they were only 8 games over .500 when he joined, and they were 19 games over at season's end. The three and-and-a-bit seasons he was in Detroit, the team was 159-62-23 (.699). The (almost) three seasons prior to his joining, they were 105-83-25 (.552), and the three seasons after he was traded they were 125-81-40 (.589). They also made the Finals in 1995 for the first time in 30 years.


Next, I also don't understand the attitude that you can't be Norris-worthy if you play like a rover, or have a large offensive game. That's not how the award is defined. It's defined as being awarded to the "defense player who demonstrates throughout the season the greatest all-round ability in the position." Note "all-round ability". It doesn't say "greatest defensive ability". Players should be judged according to their impact on goal-differential to their teams (which is what decides wins and losses), not how good they are in one specific ability. From 1981-82 through 1995-96, Coffey scored the 2nd-most points in the NHL and had the 4th-highest plus/minus. In those 15 consecutive seasons, Coffey was on the ice for 2,670 goals for and 1,703 goals against in 1,080 games, for a positive average of 72 goals per 80-game season, for fifteen consecutive seasons.

So, did that translate to wins? You bet it did. With the possible exception of Mark Messier, I don't think there is another player in those 15 years who had as much team success as Coffey:
1982 - team 2nd overall
1984 - team 1st overall / Stanley Cup
1984 - Canada Cup 1st
1985 - team 2nd overall / Stanley Cup
1986 - team 1st overall
1987 - team 1st overall / Stanley Cup
1987 - Canada Cup 1st
1991 - Stanley Cup
1991 - Canada Cup 1st
1995 - team 1st overall / Conference Champion
1996 - team 1st overall
1996 - World Cup 2nd

Coffey went to the Cup Finals with three different franchises, and his teams finished 1st overall five times with two franchises.


Anyway, I sense I'm arguing with a brick-wall here because you've already stated it's a non-starter unless we isolate defensive acumen in a vacuum. Which doesn't actually exist in hockey, but never mind that...

some people here just hate offense, don't take it personally.

On a more important note - why did you change your avatar? You had one of the most recognizable ones around here...this one just doesn't pack the same punch =/

 

[ESH]

The modern example of a Langway-type of player (not in style) winning over an offensive player might have been 2012 if Shea Weber had won it. In 2011 and 2012 he lost by the slimmest of margins for the Norris. But in 2012 he had 49 points to Karlsson's 78, who was the winner. I thought Karlsson hadn't quite rounded his game up to what he has now and figured Weber would win the Norris. Weber was the better all around defenseman and 30 points wasn't going to change my mind. He was a lot like how Langway was to the Caps, the way he was with Nashville. A team with little support, not taken too seriously and who everyone knew Weber was the life support and core of that team. Langway was like that in Washington. If Weber won in 2012 you might look back in 30 years and wonder how a guy won it with 49 points vs. Karlsson, a HHOFer.

But everyone at that time wouldn't have been surprised. So I guess it is a bit like that with the Langway vs. Coffey/Bourque/Potvin thing, but I guess the Langway argument has a bigger offensive gap.

I’m not sure Weber vs Karlsson is a great example. A better comparison would be if Marc-Edouard Vlasic had won the Norris over Karlsson.

 

[The Panther]

some people here just hate offense, don't take it personally.

On a more important note - why did you change your avatar? You had one of the most recognizable ones around here...this one just doesn't pack the same punch =/

Thanks for noticing....? I actually was trying to change the avatar to Maurice Richard, but when doing so I saw this photo (which is on my blog) and just decided to use it.

 

[ImporterExporter]

some people here just hate offense, don't take it personally.

On a more important note - why did you change your avatar? You had one of the most recognizable ones around here...this one just doesn't pack the same punch =/

This is such a childish response. Something that I'd expect from my 7 year old son.

I don't "hate" offense. Suggesting that is such a lazy retort/assertion.

I "hate" players who completely ignore the primary responsibility of their position. There are fantastic offensive defensemen across hockey history who weren't ghosts in their own end, relatively speaking. And Coffey spent his entire career surrounded by players better than him. Offensively, defensively, doesn't matter.

I've personally watched Coffey doing circles ABOVE the blueline waiting on breakouts. His numbers are inflated. Put Bobby Orr on the mid 80's Oilers and he'd have scored 50+ goals and pushed 200 points in a season. Zero doubt in my mind.