Is the Pearson a more prestigious trophy than the Hart?

Discussion in 'The History of Hockey' started by Warm Cookies, Jun 17, 2007.

View Users: View Users
  1. Warm Cookies

    Warm Cookies Brennan Izza Gangsta

    Joined:
    May 28, 2006
    Messages:
    61,629
    Likes Received:
    4,493
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Though the Hart Trophy has the added clout of an extended history behind it, it seems to me that the Pearson is really the greater award.

    Not only is it by definition the trophy awarded to "the best player in the league" rather than "the most valuable to his team" (which could work in favour of players on lesser squads) but it's also judged by a player's peers rather than the media, which should conceivably mean more.

    Just curious as to what you all think.
     
  2. PensBeerGeek

    PensBeerGeek Registered User

    Joined:
    May 1, 2007
    Messages:
    1,029
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Ph.D. student/GTA
    Location:
    Washington, PA
    You're probably correct about the value to the players, but notice that during the awards ceremony, the Pearson was given first in the show and the Hart was given last, so the perception probably stands that the Hart is the greater award.
     
  3. Bear of Bad News

    Bear of Bad News HFBoards Escape Goat

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    Messages:
    6,079
    Likes Received:
    1,356
    Trophy Points:
    139
    Location:
    Windsor
    Define "prestige".

    Under a standard definition, since everyone talks about the Hart, and no one talks about the Pearson, the answer is obvious.
     
  4. Stonefly

    Stonefly Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    84
    Agreed. The perception is that the Hart is more prestigious. To me though, an award that come from your peers holds more meaning.
     
  5. pappyline

    pappyline Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,441
    Likes Received:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    101
    Location:
    Mass/formerly Ont
    To me the Hart is more prestigous. It has a long history & For most of its history was given to the MVP whos was not always the most skilled player. THis was cheapened somewhat in the 80's when Gretzy got 8 in a row but in recent years it has reverted back to its intended purpose.
     
  6. Stonefly

    Stonefly Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    84
    Historically the Hart favours the Art Ross winner or those close to it. It's meaning seems to be lost.

    The Hart and Art Ross have been given out the same year 58 times(1947-48 to 2005-06 not including 2004-05 strike year)

    In that time, the Art Ross winner was also the Hart Winner 29 times. If you consider Gretzky in 79-80, who won the Hart and tied Dionne for the Art Ross(Dionne got the award for more goals) that means 30 of 58 or 51% of the time the Hart Trophy goes to the leagues leading scorer.

    Another 20 times the Hart Winner was in the top 6 in scoring. So 50 of 58 times (86%) the Hart goes to a player fighting for the Art Ross.
     
  7. pappyline

    pappyline Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,441
    Likes Received:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    101
    Location:
    Mass/formerly Ont
    I think it is logical the the Art Ross winner would win quite a few Harts But Gretzy's 8 in a row really skews it, If a forward is going to win Being in the top 5 seems appropriate. Forwards like Clarke, Nighbour,Morenz, joliat, richard.O'Connor, abel,Schmidt,Howe, beliveau, kennedy, Bathgate, all won in years that they did not win the Art Ross.
     
  8. Warm Cookies

    Warm Cookies Brennan Izza Gangsta

    Joined:
    May 28, 2006
    Messages:
    61,629
    Likes Received:
    4,493
    Trophy Points:
    186
    There's no question that the Hart has been the more prestigious award amongst fans, but I'm not sure it's that way amongst the players.

    I suppose I should change the thread to "which should be the more prestigious award".

    I agree with willus, that an award coming from one's peers holds more meaning.

    I don't know if Gretzky skewed it. I'd have a pretty hard time finding a more valuable player than Gretz for most of the seasons he won it. Another factor to consider is that he generally outscored his competitors by such a large margin that it would be extraordinarily difficult not to pick him.

    Generally speaking, for those you mentioned, either the scoring races were very close, or kind of close but with the gap overcome by great defense on the winner's part (a la Beliveau and Clarke). When Gretz was winning his Harts, most often no one was anywhere near him in scoring, and those that were next in line didn't have the sort of defensive game that could overcome such a yawning offensive chasm.
     
  9. Corto

    Corto Faceless Man

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2005
    Messages:
    14,974
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    154
    Location:
    Braavos
    Don't know how the players see it, but the Hart definitely gets more press and is more important to fans.

    If I played in the NHL though, I'd definitely care more about the Paerson award.
     
  10. Big Phil

    Big Phil Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2003
    Messages:
    27,334
    Likes Received:
    485
    Trophy Points:
    169
    Jagr has won the Hart only once but the Pearson three times. To me the award is pretty much even. I mean on one hand you have guys that play with you that vote you in which is an honour. But then you have a ton of writers and fans of the game voting you for the Hart.
     
  11. Psycho Papa Joe

    Psycho Papa Joe Porkchop Hoser

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    23,349
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Forensic Accountant
    Location:
    Cesspool, Ontario
    Home Page:
    I've always found that the Pearson has tended to be skewed to forwards. My guess is that this is due to there being more forwards voting for the award than d-men or goalies, and players tend to vote more for their own. Only one d-man has won it, Orr, and he only won it once. Two goalies have won the award.
     
  12. LapierreSports

    LapierreSports Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2007
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Montreal
    Does every player vote for the Pearson award ? or is just a random collection of votes from a minority of the players ?
     
  13. The refs love me

    The refs love me Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,031
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Bleh, misread the question. The Hart is technially viewed as the "important" one of the two, but that's probably because it's a media voted trophy, pumped by the media as the trophy. If I was a player, the Pearson would mean more to me. Being held in high regard by your peers is more important than being held in high regard by some sports writers.
     
  14. arrbez

    arrbez bad chi

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2004
    Messages:
    13,278
    Likes Received:
    168
    Trophy Points:
    141
    Location:
    Toronto
    It's basically the same with the Hart as well.

    If Bobby Orr was anywhere near as good as people say he was, he would have more than 2 Harts. If there was no such thing as the Norris Trophy, I'd wager he'd have about 6 of them.
     
  15. Epsilon

    Epsilon #basta

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2002
    Messages:
    74,341
    Likes Received:
    35,802
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Location:
    South Cackalacky
    Is it? No.

    Should it be? Yes.
     

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"