I dont think anyone is really claiming Kucherov deserves to be MVP because he hit 100 assists. The argument is based on how bad everyone else on TB was for 3/4 of the season.luckily the MVP is not synonymous with the rarest stat line
I dont think anyone is really claiming Kucherov deserves to be MVP because he hit 100 assists. The argument is based on how bad everyone else on TB was for 3/4 of the season.luckily the MVP is not synonymous with the rarest stat line
and the avs were good?I dont think anyone is really claiming Kucherov deserves to be MVP because he hit 100 assists. The argument is based on how bad everyone else on TB was for 3/4 of the season.
Wait, I'm confused... so now something that is less rarer can actually be of equal value to something that is more more rarer? And yes 100 assists is more "rarer" than 150 points - The total number of players and times both milestones have been reached is not identical.Its actually not more rare than 150 points. Roughly equal. You're proving my point.
Ok, now how many of those guys's total points was Kucherov involved on?and the avs were good?
Tampa has 5 guys with 75+ pts. Colorado has 3 players with more than 57. Neither one is running away with the "weaker support" narrative either. Its close
I think you're confusing my argument with someone else's. You claimed the number was arbitrary. I'm arguing against that. It's an important number because so few players have done it -- literally the best players of all time + Kucherov.Wait, I'm confused... so now something that is less rarer can actually be of equal value to something that is more more rarer? And yes 100 assists is more "rarer" than 150 points - The total number of players and times both milestones have been reached is not identical.
A lot? Hence why Kucherov (like I've said many times) has a great case for the Hart.Ok, now how many of those guys's total points was Kucherov involved on?
I think you're confusing my argument with someone else's. You claimed the number was arbitrary. I'm arguing against that. It's an important number because so few players have done it -- literally the best players of all time + Kucherov.
I believe there are a lot of good arguments for MacKinnon to win the Hart. I just think there are more for Kucherov.
I dont think so. I mean, we can deconstruct any statistic until it becomes arbitrary. 100 assists is only arbitrary when comparing it to very similar achievements.A lot? Hence why Kucherov (like I've said many times) has a great case for the Hart.
MacKinnon also has a great case for the hart.
2 of the best seasons in recent memory coinciding - it will likely and should be a very close race. Whoever wins was well deserving.
I question whether you understand what arbitrary means...
Nobody is saying 100 assists isn't amazing or isn't important or isn't rare. But it IS arbitrary regardless
Hart Trophy: Who has better claim?
Nikita Kucherov:
- Art Ross Trophy
- 100 Assists. First ever winger to do it. Previous record was 87.
- 54 Points clear of closest teammate
- 1'st in PPG
Nathan Mackinnon:
- 2'd in Art Ross Trophy
- 3'd in PPG
- +34
- 35 Points more than the closest teammate
Connor McDavid:
- 100 Assists
- 3'd in Art Ross Trophy
- 2'd in PPG
- +35
- 26 Points more than the closest teammate
You literally do not understand what the word arbitrary means...I dont think so. I mean, we can deconstruct any statistic until it becomes arbitrary. 100 assists is only arbitrary when comparing it to very similar achievements.
Players can be carried to great seasons by teammates. I think 100 assists is a big threshold and incredibly difficult to do, thus why so few players have done it.
It's a significant milestone no doubt, I'm not disputing that. I'm only pointing out that the rarity card is being overplayed. The number of 100 assist and 150 point players and seasons is close, but that doesn't change the fact that 100 assists has happened a little less often and yet we all understand that a 100 assist season is not better than a 150 point season(when the 100 assist player has less than 150 points and vice versa). This means there's other important factors to consider - primarily goal totals.I think you're confusing my argument with someone else's. You claimed the number was arbitrary. I'm arguing against that. It's an important number because so few players have done it -- literally the best players of all time + Kucherov.
Five players in the nhl history have did it. Mackinnon isn't one of them. Mackinnon didn't break a record help by the best player at his position that stood for over 25 years. I am just saying Kucherov scored more points with less games played, he produced against top 10 talent better, he broke two historial records which put him in the HOF, had larger point gap to his closet team mate, plays in a better conference if you use average points that doesn't have all four of the absolute worst teams in the nhl, but he probably won't win because he is a russian .You literally do not understand what the word arbitrary means...
No matter how impressive or rare something is, does not mean it isn't arbitrary. Nobody is saying it isn't an amazing accomplishment - but the difference between 100 and 99 is no different than the difference between 99 and 98, or 66 and 67, or any other difference of 1. The point is that perfect round multiples of 10 look nice but they are inherently no different than any number. (actually on a percentage basis the difference between 100 and 99 would be lower than the others)
100 assists is cool and is super rare, but it - like all cutoffs , IS arbitrary. The fact you keep coming back to try to explain why its so valuable is pointless because we all understand what an accomplishment it is, albeit still arbitrary and not the end all be all
Look at our defense and goaltending this season. I'm sorry Kuch doesn't have Makar and Toews playing proper D in his teamYou just have washington and islanders in the playoffs lol.
Why cant kucherov get the lighting to be better than Nashville?
he didn't actually break any records though. I've never once heard anyone call "most pts by a RD or LD, or left handed C , etc. Kuch is a forward, yes he is a winger but most assists by a winger is not a major NHL record I am sorry.Five players in the nhl history have did it. Mackinnon isn't one of them. Mackinnon didn't break a record help by the best player at his position that stood for over 25 years. I am just saying Kucherov scored more points with less games played, he produced against top 10 talent better, he broke two historial records which put him in the HOF, had larger point gap to his closet team mate, plays in a better conference if you use average points that doesn't have all four of the absolute worst teams in the nhl, but he probably won't win because he is a russian .
Those arguments sold me on MacK deserving the Hart. Close this thread alreadyI think MacKinnon wins it and it's easy for any voter to come to that conclusion.
- 50+ goals
- +34 vs +8
- Didn't behave like a clown at the all star game
- Haven't won the Hart before, despite deserving it
- More likeable as a person
The all star game is a clown event and should have zero impact on league MVP. If it does then why do we not renamed the Hart Trophy to the John Scott MVP trophy. The 3 on 3 draft selection is a complete farse and waste of a time especially when you combine it with fan votes.I think MacKinnon wins it and it's easy for any voter to come to that conclusion.
- 50+ goals
- +34 vs +8
- Didn't behave like a clown at the all star game
- Haven't won the Hart before, despite deserving it
- More likeable as a person
I think the only guy on your list who put up real points without Kucherov's involvement was Hedman. Stamkos and Point certainly didnt this year. Stamkos was not good 5v5 when separated from Kucherov. Point was separated less often, and didn't do much either.Just my musing on the trophy
Auston Matthews
Yes Guy: Highest goal total in the history of the Richard trophy, 50+ even strength goals, won the award by a mile, I'd be curious if this is the largest margin in the history of the award compared to the runner up (people smarter than me let me know, I'm sure it will only be pointed out if I'm wrong to suggest but ignore it if I'm right)
No Guy: Doesn't have the assists to inflate his point total points. Two other guys achieved milestones of 100 point seasons. Good things don't happen to Leaf fans.
Connor McDavid
Yes Guy: After a slow start lapped the field and was the first to a 100 assist season. Every one is picking him as the favorite to win the Hart next season because he is the face of the league and there is no contender. It'll be criminal if he doesn't get nominated like it was criminal to give Hall the Hart over him in the past.
No Guy: Basically it's his award every year and his performance has to be out perform the narrative other players can create. Best player in the league to the point it's taken for granted.
Nikitai Kucherov
Yes Guy: Art Ross, lead players in points per game when facing top 10 in standing opponents, out performed his own teams by significant margin. 100+ assists speaks for itself
No Guy: 18 points on empty net, for all the talk of him 'being the most valuable player to his team' it's a bit rich when he gets to play with Point, Stamkos and Hedman, the narrative of him dragging a team into the playoff is suss.
Nate MacKinnon
Yes Guy: Best balanced production, unreal season, plays the visually impressive game, a beast on the puck
No Guy: In a season when other people hit milestones leaves a bit to be desired. The narrative of 'it's Nate's turn' works both for and against.
Sid Crosby
Yes Guy: Millennials like him a lot and apparently some people think that the Hart should go to their favorite player for not totally regressing at his age
No Guy: No one can sufficiently gas light his season with the Pens missing the playoffs.
Spin, he has a three of the best players in the game as a supporting cast and people act like he's a one man team. It's just a lie and we all know it.I think the only guy on your list who put up real points without Kucherov's involvement was Hedman. Stamkos and Point certainly didnt this year. Stamkos was not good 5v5 when separated from Kucherov. Point was separated less often, and didn't do much either.
As good as those players are, they weren't hooking up to make plays with anyone but Kucherov. Other years, yes, but this year the whole team came back from summer vacation around March.
Spin, he has a three of the best players in the game as a supporting cast and people act like he's a one man team. It's just a lie and we all know it.
Did he make Hyman a 50 goal guy?
And I'm fine with him winning the thing.