Conn Smythe Winners - Tiers (1980-Present)

[Staniowski]

It was very interesting to look back and see how contemporary opinion of the eighties Conn Smythe winners was compared to what they've sort of been remembered as much later at least on this board:

Potvin really didn't get much love for any Conn Smythes during the Isles dynasty
Goring 1981 was a firm choice and underscored by the North Stars
Gretzky 1984 wasn't really even in the running but Kevin Lowe certainly was
Fuhr generally got a lot of love in the Oilers dynasty
Roy 1986 probably the biggest dissonance with an opposing player and his own coach kinda questioning/caveating it
Vernon 1989 got a lot of love and had a real good chance

Maybe with Roy, it's a bit of his future performances especially in 1993 solidifying his reputation. I think it would be interesting to see what would have happened if Vernon won in 1989 or if the Flames won in 1986 where he was a frontrunner, maybe his 1997 win wouldn't be questioned like it is today.

Yes, the legend of Roy '86 has grown so much that you would think his performance dominated the team. It didn't. The Habs defensive forwards -especially Carbonneau, McPhee and Skrudland - were the key to the team's success. And their defensemen were great too. Roy actually had it pretty easy.

 

[Staniowski]

It was very interesting to look back and see how contemporary opinion of the eighties Conn Smythe winners was compared to what they've sort of been remembered as much later at least on this board:

Potvin really didn't get much love for any Conn Smythes during the Isles dynasty
Goring 1981 was a firm choice and underscored by the North Stars
Gretzky 1984 wasn't really even in the running but Kevin Lowe certainly was
Fuhr generally got a lot of love in the Oilers dynasty
Roy 1986 probably the biggest dissonance with an opposing player and his own coach kinda questioning/caveating it
Vernon 1989 got a lot of love and had a real good chance

Maybe with Roy, it's a bit of his future performances especially in 1993 solidifying his reputation. I think it would be interesting to see what would have happened if Vernon won in 1989 or if the Flames won in 1986 where he was a frontrunner, maybe his 1997 win wouldn't be questioned like it is today.

At the time, I thought Gretzky would win the Conn Smythe in '84 (I thought Messier deserved it); and I thought Vernon might win it in '89 (I thought MacInnis clearly deserved it).

Fuhr was quite a big star in the '80s (although overshadowed by some teammates), I think his reputation has declined somewhat.

Potvin declined through the dynasty years (although he was still very good).

I'm still surprised, though, about Lowe in '84.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Roy 1986 probably the biggest dissonance with an opposing player and his own coach kinda questioning/caveating it

can you say more about this? before my time

 

[tabness]

can you say more about this? before my time

Sure, so I went to look up Conn Smythe voting records in old papers to see how much I could find. In doing that, I spent a bit more time looking for the general talk of players aside from just who was where in the voting (especially since some years had nothing much on voting itself).

Where can I find voting records for the Conn Smythe Trophy?

Hockey Reference has voting records for the other awards, but I'm not finding anything for the Smythe. Are historic ballots available anywhere to take a look at?

forums.hfboards.com

1986:

A good year for Conn Smythe talk and info being available. Lemieux was second in the voting. Roy in 1986 has this reputation of being such an obvious win, but at least at the time, it seemed to be closer. It seems that while Roy and Vernon were the slight frontrunners during the finals, the sentiment was "no one has a lock on the Conn Smythe" as a Montreal Gazette headline read after game 4. Carbonneau, Green, Naslund, McPhee mentioned for the Canadiens and Risebrough, McDonald, Mullen, Reinhart, and MacInnis for the Flames.

 

[Staniowski]

can you say more about this? before my time

Sure, so I went to look up Conn Smythe voting records in old papers to see how much I could find. In doing that, I spent a bit more time looking for the general talk of players aside from just who was where in the voting (especially since some years had nothing much on voting itself).

Where can I find voting records for the Conn Smythe Trophy?

Hockey Reference has voting records for the other awards, but I'm not finding anything for the Smythe. Are historic ballots available anywhere to take a look at?

forums.hfboards.com

1986:

A good year for Conn Smythe talk and info being available. Lemieux was second in the voting. Roy in 1986 has this reputation of being such an obvious win, but at least at the time, it seemed to be closer. It seems that while Roy and Vernon were the slight frontrunners during the finals, the sentiment was "no one has a lock on the Conn Smythe" as a Montreal Gazette headline read after game 4. Carbonneau, Green, Naslund, McPhee mentioned for the Canadiens and Risebrough, McDonald, Mullen, Reinhart, and MacInnis for the Flames.

Patrick Roy '86 has the biggest gap between reputation and reality of any Conn Smythe winner. The reputation is that this was one of the best goalie performances of all-time and that he was the main reason Montreal won the Cup. The reality is he didn't even deserve to win the Conn Smythe, it was one of the weakest Smythe wins of the 1980s, and the forwards and defensemen made things relatively easy for him.

I'll say again, for anybody watching the '86 playoffs for the first time, watch the Habs three great defensive forwards - Carbonneau, McPhee, Skrudland. They are what other teams couldn't match. The Carbonneau and Skrudland lines became the team's top two lines and they controlled play when they were on the ice, and they also scored many big goals.

The mid-'80s was a transition period in the NHL, moving from little defense to a lot more defense. That's why the Oilers lost, and that's why the Habs won.

Roy played well but he wasn't the main reason the Habs won the Cup.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Here are a few contemporary accounts of Roy's performance. All of the newspaper articles from the spring of 1986 indicated that Roy was playing very well, and most suggest he was the Conn Smythe frontrunner. Several articles indicate that he got lots of help from the Habs' strong defense. (Note - the quotes are arranged chronologically).

From the Montreal Gazette (May 6, 1986) - partway through conference finals

From the Leader-Post, Regina (May 6, 1986)

From the Ottawa Citizen (May 7, 1986)

From the Montreal Gazette (May 10, 1986)- heading to SC final

From the Leader Post, Regina (May 14, 1986)

From the Windsor Star (May 16, 1986)

NOTE - this article is from a preview of the Stanley Cup finals. It's quite long, but the author indicates that Montreal has "deep and star-studded" defense, and that "Carbonneau alone [is] worth [the] edge" when comparing checking lines.

From the Record-Journal, Meriden, Connecticut (May 16, 1986)

NOTE - I can't copy this text easily, but the article also says that Larry Robinson "would have to be considered a candidate [for the Conn Smythe] this year if not for the play of Roy".

From the Montreal Gazette (May 20, 1986)

From The Vancouver Sun (May 20th, 1986)

From the St. Joseph Gazette (May 23, 1986)

From the Daily News, Bowling Green, Kentucky (May 26, 1986) - after SC victory

From the Ottawa Citizen (May 26, 1986)

From the Windsor Star (May 26, 1986)

 

[Staniowski]

Are these articles supposed to be an argument in favour of Patrick Roy? Most of the way through the Stanley Cup Finals (with two games remaining), there are 12 players listed (or implied) as candidates to win the Conn Smythe....

Roy
Lemieux
Carbonneau
Naslund
McPhee
Green
Vernon
Reinhart
MacInnis
Mullen
McDonald
Risebrough

How can Roy be dominating the '86 playoffs if the Conn Smythe is wide open?

There is no question that Roy played well, and there is no question that he actually won the Conn Smythe.

The question is, did he deserve it? Newspaper articles don't answer this question.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I was trying to share a balanced summary of what the newspapers were saying in May 1986. Those comments ranged from "Roy was brilliant" to "Roy was good but was helped by great defense". The comments that held the most weight for me were from Beliveau and Gainey, which were unreservedly positive.

I couldn't find a single quote that named any other Hab as a better choice for the Conn Symthe. (Maybe a cynic would suggest that I found such a quote, and chose not to post it - but as far as I can tell, such a quote doesn't exist). The closest we get is the Montreal Gazette article from May 20th which clearly states that Roy is the favourite (along with Mike Vernon) for the Smythe, but acknowledges that several other players "could win it with a strong playoff finish". I don't think that's different than any other year, where by the end of the conference finals, there might be 1-2 favourites, but it's hard to lock up the trophy with a full series yet to play. (Maybe Gretzky in 1985 and Giguere in 2003?)

 

[Voight]

Patrick Roy '86 has the biggest gap between reputation and reality of any Conn Smythe winner. The reputation is that this was one of the best goalie performances of all-time and that he was the main reason Montreal won the Cup. The reality is he didn't even deserve to win the Conn Smythe, it was one of the weakest Smythe wins of the 1980s, and the forwards and defensemen made things relatively easy for him.

I'll say again, for anybody watching the '86 playoffs for the first time, watch the Habs three great defensive forwards - Carbonneau, McPhee, Skrudland. They are what other teams couldn't match. The Carbonneau and Skrudland lines became the team's top two lines and they controlled play when they were on the ice, and they also scored many big goals.

The mid-'80s was a transition period in the NHL, moving from little defense to a lot more defense. That's why the Oilers lost, and that's why the Habs won.

Roy played well but he wasn't the main reason the Habs won the Cup.

Nope. That would be Crosby '16.

 

[rmartin65]

Nope. That would be Crosby '16.

It always amuses me when I see Chicago fans complain about a player having an overinflated reputation when, you know, Toews...

But on the other hand, yeah, Crosby's win in 2016 was poor. I would have given it to a couple other players (Kessel and Letang come to mind) instead; this felt like a career achievement award the moment it was announced.

 

[Victorias]

People could also just watch Patrick Roy 1986 and come to their own conclusions. It’s not like it was 100 years ago:



Statistically, he looks like the clear winner. The team SP was .873 in the RS (.875 for Roy) and he was at .923 for the playoffs. Seems like a pretty great run, even factoring in team defense.

 

[jigglysquishy]

The Smythe is probably the trophy where raw counting is the least accurate way to view things. Honestly, @Hockey Outsider 's matrix does a good job so that x=/=x.

Roy had 4 runs where he could have reasonably won the Smythe (1986, 1993, 1996, 2001), but only one of those was so elite that no one else could be argued for it (1993). 1986 is his next best run.

Joe Sakic could have very easily won both 1996 and 2001. Patrick Roy could have easily won both 1996 and 2001. Neither would have been historically odd votes, even if nothing on the ice changed.

Roy gets a lot of reputation from 3 Conn Smythes, but he could have easily been a 2 time winner without actually him doing anything different.

Conversely, Gretzky could have won 4 Conn Smythes without actually doing anything different. Hell, Gretzky could have won in 1983 (10 points ahead any Islander, tied for Potvin for +- lead) and we wouldn't view it as the worst Smythe ever.

Is Crosby a worse playoff performer if Letang wins in 2016? Is Kucherov better if he wins in 2021? Is Richard viewed even better if the Smythe is created in 1940 and he is a 3 time winner?

The on-ice results matter more than the binary trophy result. Otherwise we get into a weird situation where Crosby 2016>Crosby 2008 or Crosby 2009, when anyone watching the games could clearly tell you Crosby 2008 and 2009 were far better runs.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Yes, the legend of Roy '86 has grown so much that you would think his performance dominated the team. It didn't. The Habs defensive forwards -especially Carbonneau, McPhee and Skrudland - were the key to the team's success. And their defensemen were great too. Roy actually had it pretty easy.

Agreed. 93 should be getting much more love than 86 for Roy. Not taking away from him, but like you said the 86 team was stacked defensively. Gainey, Robinson, Chelios, Carbonneau, McPhee

 

[Voight]

Agreed. 93 should be getting much more love than 86 for Roy. Not taking away from him, but like you said the 86 team was stacked defensively. Gainey, Robinson, Chelios, Carbonneau, McPhee

That 93 team was somewhat weak in general - sure they had some good players but the only HHOF'ers from that team are Roy, Carbonneau (far from a shoo-in and its extremely debatable if he should even have been inducted) & a past his prime Denis Savard.

They did have 4 guys score 80+, however all four of them had career years in 1993.

 

[JackSlater]

Are these articles supposed to be an argument in favour of Patrick Roy?

Obviously they are.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

But on the other hand, yeah, Crosby's win in 2016 was poor. I would have given it to a couple other players (Kessel and Letang come to mind) instead; this felt like a career achievement award the moment it was announced.

my guess is if the back to back cup runs had been reversed and 2017 came first, he wouldn’t have won the 2016 one.

but it felt to me like they were in a rush to get him one in case it was the only shot he was going to get

 

[MadLuke]

Under 2 GAA in the playoffs in the 80s must have been seen as quite special, for 10 playoff games or more outside 86 Roy no one did it in the 80s and the only one to get close was 89 Roy.

The question is, did he deserve it? Newspaper articles don't answer this question.

Who clearly deserved it more, with so many skating candidate going to the goaltender seem natural. It is not like they can give it to Carbonneau extraordinary line.

 

[JackSlater]

my guess is if the back to back cup runs had been reversed and 2017 came first, he wouldn’t have won the 2016 one.

but it felt to me like they were in a rush to get him one in case it was the only shot he was going to get

If the seasons were reversed I have little doubt that Kessel wins the latter one, and I say that thinking that Crosby actually did deserve it over Kessel. As with Crosby and Ovechkin, if McDavid's team wins a Cup after this much of his legacy is established he's winning the Conn Smythe pretty much regardless.

 

[Saint Patty 33]

The following is my attempt to categorize the Conn Smythe winners since 1980 (the start of the four-round era). I'm using four tiers, which can roughly be categorized as Godlike; strong victory; solid victory; and undeserving. There's still a range within each tier, but when I tried to divide it into five categories, it felt too complicated. Remember that the third tier represents deserving, worthy winners (it's not an insult for anybody to be in that category). Players are presented chronologically within each tier.

In assessing the trophy recipients, I'm taking two aspects into account. The first is trying to objectively assess the level of performance (ie how well did they play). The second is trying to assess the relative level of performance (ie did someone else have an even better playoff run that year).

(Full disclosure - I'm stealing the premise from another thread (link), but I think a 4,000 word post should get its own thread).

Tier 1

• Gretzky (1985). This is the highest-scoring playoff run of all-time. Yes, it was in a high-scoring era, but nobody aside from Lemieux and one of Gretzky's teammates has come within ten points of this. Beyond the raw numbers, what stands out is Gretzky's remarkable consistency. He was only held scoreless in two of eighteen games (Edmonton lost both games, which shows his importance to the team). He also had a killer instinct. In the the four games where Edmonton could eliminate their opponent (which they did each time), he scored a total of 17 points (with at least two in each match).
• Roy (1986). Montreal wasn't quite as bad in the regular season as some people have suggested, but that doesn't detract from Roy's brilliant performance. He posted numbers that would get him Conn Smythe attention today, at the height of the Air Hockey Era. Roy's consistency - a factor that we see again and against throughout his playoff career - is already evident here. He never had two bad games in a row. Based on adjusted save percentage (see Goalies: Adjusted Playoff Save Percentage), Roy posted the second-best performance from any Smythe-winning netminder.
• Grezky (1988). The ultimate display of consistency. Gretzky was held off the scoresheet just once in 19 contests. After an unspectacular start (by his high standards), Gretzky scored 26 points in the last 10 games against Detroit (the team that allowed the fewest regular season goals against in their conference) and Boston (3rd fewest in their conference). Gretzky scored 13 points in the Stanley Cup finals alone - yet another record that he solely possesses.
• Lemieux (1991). Lemieux became the only player other than Gretzky to scored 40+ points in a single postseason. Visually, this might be the most impressive playoff run of all-time. Le Magnifique truly looked like a man playing against boys. He got better as the playoffs progressed (scoring a ludicrous 26 points over the final 10 games). Pittsburgh lost the only game he missed. Barasso was excellent this spring, and in many other years he would have gotten serious Smythe consideration, but not against peak Lemieux.
• Roy (1993). Remember before when I said that Roy's 1986 campaign had the second highest (era-adjusted) save percentage among all Smythe-winning goalies? Roy was runner-up to himself - this season ranks first all-time in that regard. Everyone knows that this was the spring where Roy had ten straight overtime victories. To me, that's not even the most impressive part. This was perhaps the most consistent display of elite goaltending in playoff history (at least dating back to 1980 - hard to compare this to, say, Sawchuk in 1952). Roy had, by my count, just two games where he let a victory slip away, or his team won in spite of him. Other than that, he was unfailingly great, all the way through. Fun fact - Roy posted these amazing numbers while facing four of the top six teams in regular season goals for.
• Giguere (2003). The greatest performance through three rounds in NHL playoff history. I've never seen a single player carry a team the way that Giguere did. Look at their roster - Keith Carney, Ruslan Salei and Niclas Havelid averaged 25+ minutes per game, while their sole star, Paul Kariya, scored just 12 points in 21 games. Giguere helped his team sweep Detroit (the defending Stanley Cup champions, second in the conference) in the first round by stopping 96.5% of the shots he faced. After shutting down Dallas (the conference champions) in the next round, he embarrassed Minnesota by holding them to a single goal in a four-game sweep (stopping all but one of the 123 shots faced). It's true that Giguere was merely average in the Stanley Cup finals - and yes, I know that's the most important series - but he accomplished enough that he deserves a spot in the top tier. Scott Niedermayer (who would go on to win a weak Smythe in a few more years) was the top candidate for the Devils, but he was a very distant second.

Tier 2

• Trottier (1980). A dominant (and underrated) performance for the Islanders centre, who was a physical two-way force. In addition to leading the playoffs in goals (tied) and points (decisively), he was on the ice for just 13 even-strength goals against in 21 games in a high-scoring era. He also played on the Islanders' penalty kill. The only strike against him is he was scoreless in three of the four games in the first round (though, I suppose, if you're going to a struggle in any one round, better for it to be the first).
• MacInnis (1989). Everyone remembers MacInnis for his devastating slapshot, which is a shame, because it overshadows what an intelligent, complete defenseman he was. The second best hockey player from Nova Scotia easily led the playoffs in scoring, while being on the ice for only 11 even-strength goals against in 22 games (in a high-scoring era). MacInnis is the only player other than Gretzky to score more than 20 powerplay points in a single playoff run. There were a lot of strong performers both on the Flames and Canadiens, but Chopper was definitely the most deserving.
• Lemieux (1992). On a per-game basis, Lemieux was even better than in 1991. He scored at least two points in nearly three-quarters of his games - a stunning accomplishment. But two strikes keep this out of the top tier. First, he missed six games, and Pittsburgh did well (going 4-2) when Lemieux was out. Second, exactly half of Lemieux's points came in the first round against the overmatched Capitals, so his performance beyond the first round was (comparatively) less impressive.
• Leetch (1994). The first non-Canadian to win the Conn Smythe trophy. Leetch was one of only a small handful of defensemen to ever lead the postseason in scoring. This run wasn't notable just for his offense though; Leetch played perhaps the best defensive hockey of his career and was a strong presence at even-strength, on the powerplay, and on the penalty kill. No player has ever been on the ice for more goals for in a single playoff run. Everyone remembers Messier's guaranteed victory, but it was actually Leetch who decisively led the SCF in scoring.
• Sakic (1996). After having the best regular season of his career (which he later surpassed in 2001), Sakic had a historic playoff run. His 18 goals are the 3rd highest single-season total (and, adjusted for era, is also probably hovering around the top five). He also has the 2nd highest scoring total of the "lockout era" (from 1996 onwards). Despite not yet being recognized as a two-way force, Sakic was only on the ice for 13 even-strength goals against in 22 games. He scored two of his all-time record eight overtime goals this spring. The only argument against Sakic is he was underwhelming in the anticlamactic finale against Florida (scoreless in two of the four games).
• Roy (2001). Although the least impressive of his three Smythes, this was still an excellent playoff run. Roy was surprisingly mediocre in the first round against Vancouver (but Colorado swept them anyway), but was stellar from there. What stands out is how his level of play rose during the biggest games. In game 7 against Los Angeles in round 2, he stopped 25 of 26 shots. In games 6 and 7 against New Jersey in the Stanley Cup final (when a loss would end their season), Roy stopped 49 out of 50 shots. The only argument against Roy was that Sakic was just as deserving of the trophy (especially for his work over the last two rounds, where he scored 17 points in 12 games against two of the league's best defensive teams).
• Zetterberg (2008). I'll admit that I didn't fully appreciate this performance at the time but, looking back a decade later, I firmly believe that this is in the second tier. His offensive stats are good enough - Zetterberg tied for the playoff lead in both goals and points. After a slow start against Nashville, he was excellent from round two onwards (he scored at a 118 point pace per 82 games from rounds two through four). But his defensive performance is what pushes him to the second tier. He was on the ice for just 7 even-strength goals against in 22 games, while also being a key contributor to the Red Wings' penalty kill. Zetterberg also slowed Crosby down (he was held to 1.00 PPG in the finals after scoring 1.50 PPG in the first three rounds).
• Malkin (2009). A brilliant offensive performance by the frustratingly inconsistent Russian centre. Malkin has the highest-scoring playoff run from the lockout era (1995 onwards) and, adjusted for era, is within striking distance of peak Gretzky and Lemieux. Although his production decreased in the Stanley Cup finals (relative to the previous three rounds), he still led that series in scoring. The only argument against him is Crosby had a case for the Smythe as well (Crosby was five points behind, but generally faced tougher opposition, and was on the ice for significantly fewer goals against).
• Thomas (2011). Thomas was outstanding for Boston this spring. Although it's true that he played behind a strong, disciplined team, Thomas deserves credit for his high level of play. Although the first few games against Montreal in round 1 were shaky, he was exceptional after that (94.5% save percentage from game 5 of the first round onwards). He stopped 95 of 98 shots in three game seven victories (including a shutout in game seven of the Stanley Cup finals). Two of his losses in the Stanley Cup finals came after he allowed 2 goals on a combined 59 shots. Still, both Chara and Bergeron deserved serious Smythe consideration.
• Quick (2012). The Kings steamrolled their opponents this year, losing just four times en route to the Stanley Cup. Quick was remarkably consistent, posting between a 93.9% and 95.9% save percentage in all four series. Quick helped shut the door completely (the Kings were 9-0 when leading after two periods). Still, Kopitar (tied for the lead in scoring, and ridiculously low ES goals against) was worthy of the trophy, and Doughthy wasn't far behind.
• Keith (2015). My first impression was this was the strongest playoff performance of the 2010's. Keith played an enormous amount of ice time (over 31 minutes per game), and was only a few points behind the playoff scoring lead. But he was on the ice for quite a few more goals against than I recalled. I still think he's in the second tier, but probably farther down than I first expected.

Tier 3

• Bossy (1982). During what was clearly his best season, Bossy decisively led the playoffs in goals after scoring 147 points in the regular season. He was particularly good in the Stanley Cup finals, where he scored seven goals in just four games (that ties him for the record with Beliveau in 1956 and Gretzky in 1985 - but they both required an extra game). The main strike against him his centre, Bryan Trottier, posted better numbers overall, and he also played on the penalty kill.
• Smith (1983). The Islanders were a remarkably deep team. This year, more than any other, was a victory by committee. The Islanders, as a whole, never faced any serious threats, never trailed in a series, and they even contained Gretzky in the Stanley Cup finals and swept the up-and-coming Oilers. Remarkably, six of the Islanders scored 20+ points that spring! Potvin probably deserved the Smythe (he scored over a point per game from the blueline, and his superb work in the Stanley Cup finals was key to containing Gretzky - who was held to just four assists in four games). Still, Smith was very solid (even though he usually didn't need to be), and this was probably the best of his performances during the Isles' Drive for Five.
• Messier (1984). I've got nothing against Messier. He was a strong performer this spring, similar to Trottier's 1980 run in terms of style and results. But I can't list him any higher than Tier 3, because, in my mind, Gretzky clearly deserved the Smythe. Yes, Messier was a vocal leader in the dressing room, he was a ferocious hitter, and he was better defensively, but the gap in their production is too large to ignore - especially since Gretzky put up his comical numbers while facing the opponents' top defensive players. Note that Messier was held scoreless in three of the five games in the Stanley Cup finals (including the decisive game five, where Gretzky score two and set up Linseman as well).
• Yzerman (1998). The previous spring cemented Yzerman's legacy (he had been Detroit's captain for 11 years at that point, and helped them win their first Stanley Cup since the Eisenhower administration). Still, this helped the centre, previously criticized as a choker, permanently erase any doubts about his leadership or ability to play under pressure. An obvious choice, Yzerman led the playoffs in scoring, and was on the ice for only 10 ES goals against in 22 games. A close call, but I'm leaving this in the third tier because he stumbled against Dallas (a major rival), and his goal-scoring was disappointing.
• Stevens (2000). Perhaps more than any player on this list, Stevens' impact is hard to quantify. Despite a minimal focus on offense (five of his eleven points came in the first round), the Devils captain was a superb defensive player, who used his size and strength to frustrate, intimidate and contain the opponents' top players. In the second round against Toronto, Stevens helped hold Sundin to a single assist in six games. Stevens was a ferocious hitter, and the goals against numbers support his defensive reputation (15 even-strength goals against in 23 games, despite heavy minutes against top opponents). Despite his reputation for being dirty, he took just three minor penalties that spring.
• Lidstrom (2002). The great Swedish defenseman played an enormous amount of ice time that spring (he averaged over 31 minutes per game - going back to 1999, when ice time was first officially tracked, only Pronger in 1999 averaged more ice time per game - minimum 500 minutes). His (fluke) goal against Vancouver in game 3 of the first round helped the Red Wings bounce back from a 2-0 series deficit. They didn't look back from there. Lidstrom was a balanced contributor, playing very well both offensively and defensively. Still, this was very much a victory by committee for the Red Wings, with Yzerman getting serious discussion for the Smythe, with some support for Fedorov, Hull and Hasek as well. (Forsberg was so good that there was even some talk that he might deserve it, despite being eliminated in the conference finals).
• Richards (2004). A lot of people cited Richards' seven game-winning goals as the reason for him winning the Smythe. That's a bad statistic; a few of those goals were clutch (including two overtime markers), but others weren't (there was a goal that made it 3-0 before Philadelphia mounted a comeback that fell short, and another goal scored four minutes into a game where Khabibulin recorded a shutout - not really game winners in a meaningful sense). Even if the reasoning is poor, the result was fine. Richards led the playoffs in scoring, was consistent round after round, and dominated Game 6 of the Stanley Cup finals to keep the Lightning's season alive.
• Crosby (2017). A much stronger Smythe than 2016 (which you'll see below). Heading into this spring, the biggest black mark on Crosby's playoff resume was poor scoring in the Stanley Cup finals (just 13 points in 19 games). Crosby stepped up and recorded 7 points in that series (it was his first time, in four attempts, leading the finals in scoring). He was consistent from round to round. Despite his plus/minus improving, Crosby's defensive performance wasn't any better compared to 2016 (but his even-strength scoring increased).
• Ovechkin (2018). An excellent goal-scoring performance (adjusted for era, his 15 goals likely ends up in the top ten all-time). He was on the ice for 21 powerplay goals for (tied with Sakic in 1996 for the most during the lockout era), and played some of the best defensive hockey of his career (faint praise, but positive nonetheless). The Russian winger was consistent from round to round, and slayed two demons - he finally escaped the second round, and also defeated the rival Penguins. Still, Evgeny Kuznetsov was more deserving of the trophy (better offensive numbers while being on the ice for a comparable number of goals against), as was Braden Holtby (a strong and consistent performance).

Tier 4

• Goring (1981). This is the first in a long line of Conn Smythe selections that can only be described as puzzling. Goring performed admirably this spring, adding depth scoring and logging an enormous amount of ice time on the penalty kill. He also played well in the Stanley Cup finals (five goals and two assists in five games). But there's simply no justification in picking him over Mike Bossy (who outscored him by 15 points in 18 games - and led the finals in scoring) or Denis Potvin (who, in addition to scoring well over a point per game from the blueline, was on the ice for just 7 even-strength goals against in 18 games, and was only one point behind Goring in the finals).
• Hextall (1987). Continuing the trend from 1984, the voters seemed to be doing anything possible to avoid giving Gretzky the Smythe. No disrespect to Hextall - he put up fairly good numbers for the era, especially when you consider that seven of those games are against arguably the greatest offense in NHL history. But Gretzky was clearly the best player this spring, leading the postseason in scoring for the fourth time in five years. Hextall played very well in the finals, but even then, Gretzky scored twelve points in six games, so how much did he really slow him down? I'm guessing Hextall got a boost in the voting by virtue of being a rookie.
• Ranford (1990). Goalies seem to get the benefit of the doubt in many cases when there are many solid candidates, but no front-runner. This was the case in 1990, when the post-Gretzky Oilers surprisingly won Lord Stanley's mug. Ranford played well - he was probably the best netminder that spring - but he wasn't exceptional. It's my belief that a goalie really should be exceptional to win the Smythe. I would have gone with Messier (tied for the playoff scoring lead, with lots of intangibles) or perhaps two forwards who weren't too far behind - Kurri (who provided great defense) or Tikkanen (one of the most notorious pests in the sport's history).
• Lemieux (1995). The second most famous Lemieux to win a Conn Smythe was simply a bad pick. Tough and scrappy, Lemieux scored a lot of goals, but due to his relatively poor playmaking, he was only fourth on his own team in scoring. He was also on the ice for significantly more even-strength goals against than any of the teammates who outscored him. Martin Brodeur was outstanding that spring and even though he struggled in the conference finals against Philadelphia, he was clearly more deserving of the trophy.
• Vernon (1997). See my commentary on Ranford in 1990. Detroit cruised to the Cup, going 16-4, with a lot of important contributors, so the voters did the easy thing and picked the goalie. Vernon played well that spring, but he wasn't as good as his number suggested. Fedorov was clearly more deserving of the Smythe (Detroit's highest scoring player, while being on the ice for just 7 even-strength goals against in 20 games).
• Nieuwendyk (1999). The Stars centre got a lot of mileage out of the fact that he had six game-winning goals - but unlike Richards (2004), discussed above, his numbers were actually indicative of clutch scoring. Nieuwendyk had two overtime goals, and three more go-ahead goals in the last 11 minutes of third periods. That's the good news; the bad news is Nieuwendyk wasn't even the best centre on his team. Modano actually outscored him, and was trusted with more than six minutes of additional ice time per game, about half of which was on the penalty kill. Modano also decisively outscored Nieuwendyk in the Stanley Cup Finals. In addition, both goalies in the finals (Belfour and Hasek) were stellar and deserved serious consideration for the Smythe.
• Ward (2006). At the risk of repeating myself, see the commentary on Ranford in 1990 (or Vernon in 1997). Ward was very good this year, but a goalie should be more than very good to earn the Smythe. I would have given the trophy to Rod Brind'Amour (solid offense and excellent two-way play) or Eric Staal (strong offensive output, and stepped up in the SCF).
• Niedermayer (2007). There would be question marks about whoever won the trophy this year, as this was very much a team effort. The argument against Niedermayer is he pretty clearly wasn't the best defenseman on his team. Pronger was definitely better, but he also missed two games, and the Ducks won both, which led some to question how valuable he really was. (Anaheim scored 8 goals during the two games Pronger missed - and no, I don't think that him missing time somehow made them a better offensive team). Other candidates discussed included Giguere (very good, but there was no way he was getting another Smythe after 2003 unless he walked on water), Samuel Pahlsson (the Smythe is tough for a defensive forward to win unless you're Bob Gainey - and even then, his offense skyrocketed that spring), or Daniel Alfredsson (a strong run, but not good enough to deserve the Smythe in a losing cause). Niedermayer was very good, of course, but he's lucky Pronger got suspended twice.
• Toews (2010). At a first glance this looks fine - Toews led his team in scoring, was one point off the playoff lead, and has loads of intangibles. Here's the bad news - he was on the ice for a lot of even-strength goals against, and his offense dried up in the Stanley Cup finals (just three assists in six games). Kane, who had very similar numbers but was excellent in the finals, was more deserving.
• Kane (2013). A very low-scoring year; only five of the scoring leaders scored more than a point per game, and four of them were eliminated in the conference finals. Kane seems to have won the trophy by default (highest scorer on the team - and perhaps partly to make up for not getting the award in 2010). This is one of the few times where I think a goalie was shortchanged; Crawford played very well that spring, and was consistent from round to round.
• Williams (2014). I realize the writers sometimes try to pick a secondary player who stands out, but this wasn't a good selection. Williams wasn't even the Kings' best forward, as Anze Kopitar was clearly a bigger catalyst to the team, and entrusted with more ice time in all three situations. Kopitar (narrowly) outscored Williams, was better defensively at even-strength, and a significant contributor to the penalty kill. The argument in favour of Williams is clutch scoring, and I don't deny that; but Kopitar also played well at key moments (both scored 5 points during their three game seven victories; both had two points on overtime goals).
• Crosby (2016). If we're looking at the objective level of performance, this is probably the weakest showing on the list. Crosby scored at a level far below expectations (equivalent to 65 points over an 82 game season). His goal-scoring simply vanished, as he found the twine just three times over the last twenty games of the postseason. He only had four points in the Stanley Cup finals. People noted that he has the worst plus/minus of any Smythe winner; his ES goals against numbers aren't terrible though (the plus/minus is mostly a result of weak ES offense). This felt like a lifetime achievement award for Crosby. The only thing that keeps this from being the weakest Smythe of the past four decades is there wasn't a ton of competition for the award (still, I would have given the trophy to Kessel, who outscored Crosby, and was on the ice for significantly fewer goals against).

I do agree that Giguere's performance during the first three rounds has to rank amongst the all the time great pre-Cup final runs.. but his performance vs New Jersey was nothing special and his team didn't win the series either.

I'd even go so far as to suggest he shouldn't have even won the Conn Smythe that year. Martin Brodeur set a record for the most Shutouts during a playoff year including 3 in the Finals. Three Shutouts in the Stanley Cup final, including Game 7, would be more than enough to win any other year.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Also, that 2003 West Final was the lowest point in hockey since at least 1985 (including Bertuzzi). Both teams played same way. The Wild had a guy. The Ducks had two guys. So they won. They just dumped bags of sand on the rink for as long as the clock allowed it. Manny Fernandez had like a 1.33/.950 or something in the series and didn't win a game.

I mean, sure, he got the shutouts. No denying it. The one goal that he gave up, wasn't on him even - it was a deflection. But, it's overstated how impressive that was relative to the stat line it produced...

First two rounds, sure, that was legit. Unsportsmanlike, but legit enough. He was bad against NJ. And he was a tarp against a feckless Minnesota team.

 

[wetcoast]

The Smythe is probably the trophy where raw counting is the least accurate way to view things. Honestly, @Hockey Outsider 's matrix does a good job so that x=/=x.

Roy had 4 runs where he could have reasonably won the Smythe (1986, 1993, 1996, 2001), but only one of those was so elite that no one else could be argued for it (1993). 1986 is his next best run.

Joe Sakic could have very easily won both 1996 and 2001. Patrick Roy could have easily won both 1996 and 2001. Neither would have been historically odd votes, even if nothing on the ice changed.

Roy gets a lot of reputation from 3 Conn Smythes, but he could have easily been a 2 time winner without actually him doing anything different.

Conversely, Gretzky could have won 4 Conn Smythes without actually doing anything different. Hell, Gretzky could have won in 1983 (10 points ahead any Islander, tied for Potvin for +- lead) and we wouldn't view it as the worst Smythe ever.

Is Crosby a worse playoff performer if Letang wins in 2016? Is Kucherov better if he wins in 2021? Is Richard viewed even better if the Smythe is created in 1940 and he is a 3 time winner?

The on-ice results matter more than the binary trophy result. Otherwise we get into a weird situation where Crosby 2016>Crosby 2008 or Crosby 2009, when anyone watching the games could clearly tell you Crosby 2008 and 2009 were far better runs.

Agree with this and came here to ponder even if it is outside of the thread topic exactly how good was the Smythe Keon won in 67?

Also as a side note the Leafs won the SC that year defeating 4-2 then the Habs 4-2 in the finals while having a GF/GA ratio of 35-30

Does anyone have a record of "strongest margins" in the 2 round NHL and then the 4 round playoffs?

I'm sure Montreal has 3 of the highest ones in the 3 round format since the first 3 years the Blues got there because of the east west weird alignment and the league was very unbalanced.

I'm also very interested to see how the 3 dynasty teams did in the 70-80s Habs, NYI, Oilers.

 

[Victorias]

Agree with this and came here to ponder even if it is outside of the thread topic exactly how good was the Smythe Keon won in 67?

Also as a side note the Leafs won the SC that year defeating 4-2 then the Habs 4-2 in the finals while having a GF/GA ratio of 35-30

Does anyone have a record of "strongest margins" in the 2 round NHL and then the 4 round playoffs?

I'm sure Montreal has 3 of the highest ones in the 3 round format since the first 3 years the Blues got there because of the east west weird alignment and the league was very unbalanced.

I'm also very interested to see how the 3 dynasty teams did in the 70-80s Habs, NYI, Oilers.

For the 2 round era it has to be the 1952 Wings: 24-5 (and 8-0).

In 1967 Keon won because of his two-way play. I don’t think it was surprising or controversial at all at the time, but by today’s standards I think Sawchuk or Pappin would win.

 

[LightningStorm]

Coming back to this thread since I like that the time period is in the 4 round era onward. In this timeframe, something I was thinking about was what were the best cup winning postseasons that didn't result in a Smythe? To avoid multiple players on the same team, the player had to have been the 2nd best that postseason (or best if I think they got it wrong). I was going to do top 5 for centers, wingers, defensemen, and goalies, but with how much more centers than wingers there were, I decided to combine them for top 10 forwards. Though for goalies I couldn't come up with 5. Here it is, in chronological order, with bold indicating a player I think should've won the Smythe.

Forwards
1981 Bossy*
1984 Gretzky
1987 Gretzky
1990 Messier
2001 Sakic
2009 Crosby
2010 Kane
2014 Kopitar
2018 Kuznetsov
2020 Point

HM: 1997 Fedorov, 2021 Kucherov

Defensemen
1981 Potvin*
1983 Potvin
1985 Coffey
2003 Niedermayer
2007 Pronger

HM: 2012 Doughty, 2016 Letang

Goalies
1995 Brodeur
1996 Roy
1999 Belfour
2013 Crawford

For goalies I'm less certain of my picks, as I didn't even come up with 5. I picked Crawford cause he was the only non Smythe winning goalie I had as a top 2 player in his postseason. Who would be some other goalies you guys would have?

*I know Bossy and Potvin are both included for 1981, but that's because I thought they both deserved it over Goring, the only Smythe winner who won it when there were 2 more deserving teammates.

 

[um]

Ovechkin (2018). An excellent goal-scoring performance (adjusted for era, his 15 goals likely ends up in the top ten all-time). He was on the ice for 21 powerplay goals for (tied with Sakic in 1996 for the most during the lockout era), and played some of the best defensive hockey of his career (faint praise, but positive nonetheless). The Russian winger was consistent from round to round, and slayed two demons - he finally escaped the second round, and also defeated the rival Penguins. Still, Evgeny Kuznetsov was more deserving of the trophy (better offensive numbers while being on the ice for a comparable number of goals against), as was Braden Holtby (a strong and consistent performance).

Strongly disagree with this.

Kuznetsov may have put up more points but he was inconsistent and a more one dimensional player. Kuznetsov looked great when the team was rolling, as in he'd put he'd put up 3-4 points in games where the Caps dominated. But in tight games Ovechkin was the main guy dragging the team to victory. It was like Marner leading the Leafs in playoff points last year, because he piled up points in blowout games.

I don't get the Holtby one. It was a pretty good playoff run, but never dominant and he wasn't stealing games. His earlier playoffs were far more impressive.

 

[LightningStorm]

Strongly disagree with this.

Kuznetsov may have put up more points but he was inconsistent and a more one dimensional player. Kuznetsov looked great when the team was rolling, as in he'd put he'd put up 3-4 points in games where the Caps dominated. But in tight games Ovechkin was the main guy dragging the team to victory. It was like Marner leading the Leafs in playoff points last year, because he piled up points in blowout games.

I don't get the Holtby one. It was a pretty good playoff run, but never dominant and he wasn't stealing games. His earlier playoffs were far more impressive.

As previously mentioned in this thread, 2018 is a 50/50 year, where I thought Ovechkin and Kuznetsov were 50/50. One thing someone once said here that I tend to agree with is if the Caps won it all in 2017 with Ovie winning the Smythe and the 2018 playoffs plays out the same, I think Kuznetsov gets it. This reminded me of something semi-related, of other Smythe's that might've been different had the voters known the outcomes of seasons in the immediate future.

If voters in 2016 knew how the 2017 playoffs would play out (or if you simply reverse the years those playoffs occur), Crosby doesn't win the Smythe from his 2016 performance. The voters knowing he'd win it the next season means they likely give it to someone else. I could see Letang, as him, Crosby, and Malkin have played the most games together as any trio (and their amount was high by 2016, despite not being the record yet), so I could see the voters wanting to have a story of all 3 of them winning a Smythe during their 3 cups won together. At the time Letang was my pick for the 2016 CS.

1981 is a similar story had the voters known the Islanders would win 4 cups in a row with Bossy and Smith winning the CS the next 2 seasons. Since Trottier won it the season before, I think they give Potvin the Smythe in 1981, then the Isles HHOF core 4 each has a Smythe.

I think this helps explain part of why Messier won in 1984. It was obvious that the Oilers were just starting a dynasty, so the voters definitely must've anticipated that Gretzky would have ample opportunity to win a Smythe in the near future. To say they were right is an understatement with Gretzky having in my opinion the greatest postseason of all time the very year.