Kyle McMahon
Registered User
- May 10, 2006
- 13,301
- 4,354
The issue is that, if we decide to change our view this year to what we believe is more correct, how many other years do we need to change? And on what basis?
Bourque for the 1990 Hart, anyone?
I've brought this up many times before when people have used awards voting as a pillar of their argument in some cases (or more often when they try to do the opposite and show they know better than the voters did at the time).
How often will either be the case? How can we even tell?
I mean I assume that in the O6 the writers were more able to see all the players, for example, but who knows?
You kind of end up having to take the awards as a decent indication of what transpired on the ice even with their obvious warts.
Bourque for 1990 Hart is a matter of opinion though, not a factual inaccuracy. Both he and Messier were eligible for the award. Messier beating him for the Norris Trophy would be the equivalent example here.