Does the Art Ross change your Hart ballot for the 'Big 3'?

[KevinRedkey]

Assuming McD, Mac and Kuch stay super close to each other till the end of the season - does your personal Hart ballot change at all, based on who wins the Art Ross?

Or is your mind kinda already made up (assuming nothing drastic changes of course).

Curious how much the last 10 or so games matters to people...

Click to read more...

 

[Empoleon8771]

Should be McDavid after how much the Oilers rebounded from the horrible start IMO.

I don't think the Art Ross would change it that much if they're all within like 3 or 4 points.

 

[Regal]

Should be McDavid after how much the Oilers rebounded from the horrible start IMO.

I don't think the Art Ross would change it that much if they're all within like 3 or 4 points.

I just don’t get that mentality. Sure he was playing hurt but he was part of the horrible start. Not that he doesn’t have a case anyway, but the whole season production/record should be what matters not the comeback.


As for the question, I don’t think it changes much if they’re all within a couple points. Someone takes the lead by 8-10 or so it probably gets harder to justify the others.

 

[Dust]

Given how close all three are pending someone going supernova here in the last 10 games, it really shouldn't matter in the Hart voting who wins the Art Ross. It might give a little boost for Mackinnon given he hasn't won a major award before, but I think he's the front runner for the Hart right now regardless.

 

[JackSlater]

If it comes down to a point or two the Art Ross winner is just trivia and shouldn't make a difference. All three have a very solid case at the moment.

 

[AhosDatsyukian]

After McDavid's slow start and injury along with the team's slow start and subsequent re-emergence, if McDavid wins the Art Ross I give him the Hart. But I think there's a 99% chance MacKinnon gets it regardless of how the rest of the year plays out.

 

[North Cole]

I just don’t get that mentality. Sure he was playing hurt but he was part of the horrible start. Not that he doesn’t have a case anyway, but the whole season production/record should be what matters not the comeback.


As for the question, I don’t think it changes much if they’re all within a couple points. Someone takes the lead by 8-10 or so it probably gets harder to justify the others.

That's the point though. He was part of the horrible start, and then when he had 2ppg for 60 games the team came back from being dead. They were 30th in the league and under a mountain of teams just to see the WC spots, at the time they fired their coach after being blown up by the 32nd team...

 

[Regal]

That's the point though. He was part of the horrible start, and then when he had 2ppg for 60 games the team came back from being dead. They were 30th in the league and under a mountain of teams just to see the WC spots, at the time they fired their coach after being blown up by the 32nd team...

But it’s a bad argument imo. Why should he get extra credit for being great for 60 games and ignore the bad games? Both of those periods are part of his season. It’s a nice narrative, but it doesn’t make him more valuable in an absolute sense than if he and the Oilers had the same production/record but were more consistent over the season, or if the bad start games instead happened in the middle of the year.

 

[North Cole]

But it’s a bad argument imo. Why should he get extra credit for being great for 60 games and ignore the bad games? Both of those periods are part of his season. It’s a nice narrative, but it doesn’t make him more valuable in an absolute sense than if he and the Oilers had the same production/record but were more consistent over the season, or if the bad start games instead happened in the middle of the year.

Kucherovs argument is that his team, which was a bubble team not a month ago, would he sinking down to meet the titanic without him. So I assume kucherov was also part of the issue and his team should have been better or something?

Mackinnons argument is what exactly? His team will likely finish in the same spot as the Oilers? And he has somewhat similar but more balanced production?

Or the more popular and even worse narrative that he got jobbed 5 years ago? Maybe the hart should go to the guy that is about to join Lemieux and Gretzky in assist levels. Not like anyone cares about Mack's goalscoring when Matthews is about to go past 65.

 

[cupface52]

I just don’t get that mentality. Sure he was playing hurt but he was part of the horrible start. Not that he doesn’t have a case anyway, but the whole season production/record should be what matters not the comeback.


As for the question, I don’t think it changes much if they’re all within a couple points. Someone takes the lead by 8-10 or so it probably gets harder to justify the others.

If McDavid plays poorly, the entire team plays poorly. If McDavid is playing well, the entire team plays well. While for example, if Mack plays poorly for a stretch of games, and Colorado is able to keep winning it would be fair to say McDavid is more valuable to his team. The Hart is awarded "to the player adjudged to be the most valuable to his team."

Though I think Mack wins it regardless(assuming Art Ross is super close) because it was basically a coin flip in '18, and now that it's close again, they'll give it to him. I also don't think media will want to give it to Kucherov for unspecified reasons unless he's the runaway favorite, which he isn't.

 

[Regal]

Kucherovs argument is that his team, which was a bubble team not a month ago, would he sinking down to meet the titanic without him. So I assume kucherov was also part of the issue and his team should have been better or something?

Mackinnons argument is what exactly? His team will likely finish in the same spot as the Oilers? And he has somewhat similar but more balanced production?

Or the more popular and even worse narrative that he got jobbed 5 years ago? Maybe the hart should go to the guy that is about to join Lemieux and Gretzky in assist levels. Not like anyone cares about Mack's goalscoring when Matthews is about to go past 65.

Their arguments are that they’re having amazing seasons and are all super important to their teams. Narratives are stupid determinants for value. I don’t see anything in their situations that suggests the Hart shouldn’t go to the best player, whoever that’s determined to be. But that’s based on the entire season, not 60 games

 

[Regal]

If McDavid plays poorly, the entire team plays poorly. If McDavid is playing well, the entire team plays well. While for example, if Mack plays poorly for a stretch of games, and Colorado is able to keep winning it would be fair to say McDavid is more valuable to his team. The Hart is awarded "to the player adjudged to be the most valuable to his team."

Though I think Mack wins it regardless(assuming Art Ross is super close) because it was basically a coin flip in '18, and now that it's close again, they'll give it to him. I also don't think media will want to give it to Kucherov for unspecified reasons unless he's the runaway favorite, which he isn't.

I think a lot of people are overrating Colorado’s season outside of MacKinnon. They’ve been better recently but for a lot of the year they weren’t very good and under 50% in GF% without MacKinnon on the ice (this might still be the case but I haven’t checked recently). I also think McDavid’s value to the Oilers this year is inflated by how we’ve thought of them historically. The team having a poor start wasn’t just on McDavid. Everything went wrong and they were also getting PDOed. They’ve been one of the best possession teams in the year this year overall and again last I checked have been better without McDavid on the ice than Colorado without MacKinnon. Both players are similarly valuable to their teams and both players have had similarly good seasons overall. It’s splitting hairs at this point.


Edit:

Just checked and before tonight’s game, at 5v5 the Avs had a 49GF% (88GF 93GA) without MacK on the ice, and the Oilers were at 51GF% (84GF 80GA) without McDavid on the ice. Both players were at 61GF% with them on the ice. The Oilers also have a better record when McDavid is held to a point or fewer (17-13-2) then the Avs when MacKinnon is held to a point or fewer (14-16-2 after tonight). MacKinnon has been in on 46% of the Avs goals while McDavid has been in on 48% of the Oilers goals. These things are all very close in terms of how much value they’ve brought to their teams. I think the idea that McDavid is far more valuable to his team doesn’t hold true this year like it has in other years.

 

[Mez]

I think the narrative that its MacK's "turn" is set in stone...and narrative plays a large part in the Hart voting. Not that he isn't deserving, he has had a great year. IMO Kuch deserves it at this point...he has 45 more points than 2nd on his team...Mac and McD have 27 points over 2nd on their teams.

 

[eviohh26]

I think the narrative that its MacK's "turn" is set in stone...and narrative plays a large part in the Hart voting. Not that he isn't deserving, he has had a great year. IMO Kuch deserves it at this point...he has 45 more points than 2nd on his team...Mac and McD have 27 points over 2nd on their teams.

You are probably right.

 

[Goose]

Professional sports leagues live and die with their superstars. League is better off with McDavid winning it when it comes down to splitting hairs over who deserves it.

 

[Tofveve]

I think the Art Ross holds significant sway. It's a super tight race.

I'd still put Kucherov as the front runner, McDavid now as 2nd and Mack as 3rd. If McDavid goes on a tear and pulls away by like 5 to 10 pts that probably seals it for him. If Kucherov can keep it within a couple of points I think he takes it even if he's 2nd in the Art Ross. I think of the 3 Mack has to do the most to grab the Hart.

 

[Tofveve]

As an aside, I actually think Auston Matthews should at least be in the conversation though I concede falling out of the top 3. If anything he's underrated in the overall game and influence which should mark Hart candidates. Was talking about this with a buddy the other day (both not Leafs first fans) and we were in total agreement that whenever Matthews is on the ice he is absolutely a dominant threat continually. On par with the other big names if not maybe a millifraction off. It's the truth.

 

[Fledgemyhedge]

Should be kuch or mcdavid when considering definition of the award but “mackinnons turn” probably trumps that. All great seasons it is what it is.

 

[El Travo]

Should be kuch or mcdavid when considering definition of the award but “mackinnons turn” probably trumps that. All great seasons it is what it is.

The definition of the award is "most valuable player". MacKinnon is by far the most valuable player to to Avalanche this year, and it's not even close.

 

[Dave92]

The definition of the award is "most valuable player". MacKinnon is by far the most valuable player to to Avalanche this year, and it's not even close.

The Oilers are a slightly above average Junior B team without Mcdavid.

 

[Plastic Joseph]

Might come down to who plays better h2h in the 2 avs/oilers games

AR won’t matter unless it’s a big difference

 

[Video Nasty]

MacKinnon is by far the most valuable player to to Avalanche this year, and it's not even close.

McDavid is by far the most valuable player to the Oilers this year, and it’s not even close.

 

[Plastic Joseph]

If pts are a wash, having 20 more goals is better than 20 more assists

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

If pts are a wash, having 20 more goals is better than 20 more assists

It depends. Look at Jagr in 2006. Crosby in 2010. Hart voting definition changes year by year. I think Nate has it locked down as long as he can stay within 5-6 points of mcdavid or kuch.

 

[Fledgemyhedge]

The definition of the award is "most valuable player". MacKinnon is by far the most valuable player to to Avalanche this year, and it's not even close.

yeah but relative to kucherov and mcdavid?
Tampa without kuch and oilers without mcdavid are dumpster fires. Colorado without mackinnon is still a playoff team.