Players that should have Won the Conn Smythe?

[bobholly39]

I know this would never happen because he only played three rounds, but I thought Karlsson deserved it in 2017. No one was anywhere close to as valuable to his team as Karlsson was to the Sens that year. They were a bounce away from making it to the Final and I don't see anyone on the Preds outside Rinne winning it over him regardless of who won the Cup. I also just want the hilarious visual of a guy in a suit accepting the Conn Smythe as the two teams in the Final stand there and watch.

That would and should never happen imo.

Even if McDavid gets 55 points in 20 game through 3 rounds next playoffs, I still wouldn't want him to win it if he didn't make the finals. It goes against the purpose, playoffs are about winning, and I think you shuold make the finals to win that trophy.

I agree that the visual would have been funny though

 

[JackSlater]

I think that if the voters had a time machine and knew that Crosby would be the best choice in 2017, that they would have then given Kessel the CS for 2016.

Probably. The voters clearly love a good narrative and factor that into their voting, and given how things played out having Malkin, Kessel, and Crosby win the three Pittsburgh Conn Smythes from this era would probably be the best narrative while also best reflecting what happened. Couture was probably the best and most valuable player in 2016 though.

 

[HF007]

It’s crazy that kuch doesn't have one after back to back 30 point playoffs, maybe if they win a third?

 

[tabness]

Don't forget the most overlooked legit Hall of Famer of the modern era, Larry Murphy.

There's no record of Conn Smythe voting from back then, is there? It would be interesting to see how close Yzerman was to winning the Smythe in 2002. I thought he was going to win it (not to say Lidstrom wasn't a great choice).

You can sometimes find voting information in newspapers for things like the Conn Smythe.

Hasek was runner up, looks like Yzerman was third given that he was generally listed first among the others receiving votes (Fedorov, Hull).

I'd have given it to Yzerman or Fedorov myself personally, but all understandable choices.

 

[daver]

Kessel in 2016

Kessel "could" have won the Conn Smythe just as easily as Crosby did. Both were marginally but pretty clearly above of a few other players on a what was very much a team effort, in stark contrast to the Pens 2009 win.

"Should" seems to be something that is not backed up with particularly strong arguments other than Crosby was gifted it by the media. Kessel's 22 points and 3 point lead on Crosby was hardly anything to write home about. His two linemates on the HBK line were just as, if not more effective, than him at ES. His line was used almost exclusively in an offensive role to take advantage of the other team's 3rd line/2nd or 3rd d-pairings. He was better than Crosby in one series of the four , against the Caps, while Crosby's 2-way play throughout and timely scoring in Rounds 3 and 4 propelled him ahead.

It can be argued just as easily that Crosby's 2-way was overlooked by some; that some picked Kessel over Crosby solely on point totals.

 

[daver]

Probably. The voters clearly love a good narrative and factor that into their voting, and given how things played out having Malkin, Kessel, and Crosby win the three Pittsburgh Conn Smythes from this era would probably be the best narrative while also best reflecting what happened. Couture was probably the best and most valuable player in 2016 though.

Crosby winning two Conn Smythes is the best narrative considering he lead the playoffs in scoring in another Cup run and had 15 goals (tied for era best) and 31 points in their other Cup run. It is fitting that the best playoff playoff performer of his era should be the only player with multiple Conn Smythes.

Kudos to Kessel for being an effective player in both Cup wins, but Crosby was more effective.

 

[JackSlater]

Crosby winning two Conn Smythes is the best narrative considering he lead the playoffs in scoring in another Cup run and had 15 goals (tied for era best) and 31 points in their other Cup run. It is fitting that the best playoff playoff performer of his era should be the only player with multiple Conn Smythes.

Kudos to Kessel for being an effective player in both Cup wins, but Crosby was more effective.

Yes daver, I do believe that you believe Crosby winning both Conn Smythes is the best narrative and result. Never doubted it in fact.

 

[daver]

Yes daver, I do believe that you believe Crosby winning both Conn Smythes is the best narrative and result. Never doubted it in fact.

Funny enough, I never even mentioned how Crosby carried his team the in the regular season before their 2016 and 2017 wins with two Hart nominations and a Rocket.

I wouldn't blame any writer for taking that into consideration in their Conn Smythe voting; recognizing the player that was his team's clear MVP over those two seasons. Sure Malkin and Kessel both had solid showing in one of those years in the playoffs, Crosby was elite throughout.

 

[JackSlater]

Funny enough, I never even mentioned how Crosby carried his team the in the regular season before their 2016 and 2017 wins with two Hart nominations and a Rocket.

I wouldn't blame any writer for taking that into consideration in their Conn Smythe voting; recognizing the player that was his team's clear MVP over those two seasons. Sure Malkin and Kessel both had solid showing in one of those years in the playoffs, Crosby was elite throughout.

Some of them might factor things like that in. I do think that in 2016 they wanted it to be Crosby so that he didn't end up retiring without a Conn Smythe. I would guess that the same thing was a factor in 2018.

 

[daver]

Some of them might factor things like that in. I do think that in 2016 they wanted it to be Crosby so that he didn't end up retiring without a Conn Smythe. I would guess that the same thing was a factor in 2018.

Besides possible media bias, what is the argument for Kessel over Crosby though? Enough of an argument that "should" becomes obvious in Kessel's case.

 

[JackSlater]

Besides possible media bias, what is the argument for Kessel over Crosby though? Enough of an argument that "should" becomes obvious in Kessel's case.

I'd have given it to Couture. You have seen the argument for Kessel plenty of times already.

 

[The Panther]

It’s crazy that kuch doesn't have one after back to back 30 point playoffs, maybe if they win a third?

Nothing against Vasilevskiy, who was certainly deserving, but Kucherov now has 66 points (+21) in back-to-back playoffs (!) and no award to show for it. I almost wonder if there was some voter hesitation to go for him after the whole "Injured Reserve" / Cap-avoidance thing with him last season....

 

[GMR]

You can sometimes find voting information in newspapers for things like the Conn Smythe.

Hasek was runner up, looks like Yzerman was third given that he was generally listed first among the others receiving votes (Fedorov, Hull).

View attachment 463088

I'd have given it to Yzerman or Fedorov myself personally, but all understandable choices.

Thanks for that.

No way Hasek should have gotten more votes than Yzerman. What hurt Yzerman is his scoring dropped off big time after the first two rounds. Ironically, though, his health seemed to have improved over the playoffs. He was basically playing on one leg against Vancouver. I'm guessing the quality of opposing goaltending had something to do with that. Cloutier and Johnson in rounds 1/2, compared to Roy and Irbe in later rounds.

Lidstrom was a deserving winner. I'd have Hasek a distant 3rd.

 

[GMR]

Nothing against Vasilevskiy, who was certainly deserving, but Kucherov now has 66 points (+21) in back-to-back playoffs (!) and no award to show for it. I almost wonder if there was some voter hesitation to go for him after the whole "Injured Reserve" / Cap-avoidance thing with him last season....

I don't think so. Tampa just happened to have 3 to 4 strong candidates both years. They should give Kucherov either Crosby's Smythe in 2016 or Niedermayer's in 2007.

 

[sdf]

Aaron Gavey in 1999

 

[daver]

I don't think so. Tampa just happened to have 3 to 4 strong candidates both years. They should give Kucherov either Crosby's Smythe in 2016 or Niedermayer's in 2007.

Then give it back to Crosby for his 2009 performance.

 

[GMR]

Then give it back to Crosby for his 2009 performance.

You mean where he disappeared in the Finals?

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Besides possible media bias, what is the argument for Kessel over Crosby though? Enough of an argument that "should" becomes obvious in Kessel's case.

Kessel had more goals, points and a better +/-, for starters. He led the Penguins in points and goals in that run.

Kessel: 10-12-22, +5
Crosby: 6-13-19, -2

Kessel is the reason why they didn't get bounced in R2 against Washington with 6 points in the series vs Crosby and Malkin's combined 4 points.

In addition, Kessel did not have a bad series with series results of:

3-3-6
2-4-6
4-2-6
1-3-4

You also can't say "well Crosby had a monster Finals" as the reason, he and Kessel scored the same amount of points in it with Crosby having 0-4-4 to Kessel's 1-3-4.

So led the team in points and goals, had no bad series and didnt get outplayed in the Finals by Crosby. What again was Crosby's case over Kessel besides the "he needs to have one" narrative in the media?

2017 I have no problem with Crosby winning the Smythe, but he didn't deserve it in 2016

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

then and now, i rep for letang for that conn smythe

 

[Davenport]

Can I assume that no one has suggested that a mistake was made in 1971? Unlike - seemingly - everyone else, I never did and still do not attribute that Cup victory to the heroics of Ken Dryden. Goaltending was the story in the first round, but not his goaltending, the goaltending of the Bruins. Against Minnesota and Chicago goaltending was not the decisive factor.

Had I had a vote in 1971, I would have voted for the gentleman who put up these numbers:

Round one - against the Bruins - in seven games, he scored seven goals and added three assists for 10 points.
Round two - against the Stars - in six games, he scored three goals and added six assists for nine points
Final round - against the Hawks - in seven games, he scored four goals and added four assists for eight points.

Frank Mahovlich finished with 14 goals, 13 assists and 27 points in 20 playoff games.

 

[The Panther]

Can I assume that no one has suggested that a mistake was made in 1971? Unlike - seemingly - everyone else, I never did and still do not attribute that Cup victory to the heroics of Ken Dryden. Goaltending was the story in the first round, but not his goaltending, the goaltending of the Bruins. Against Minnesota and Chicago goaltending was not the decisive factor.

Had I had a vote in 1971, I would have voted for the gentleman who put up these numbers:

Round one - against the Bruins - in seven games, he scored seven goals and added three assists for 10 points.
Round two - against the Stars - in six games, he scored three goals and added six assists for nine points
Final round - against the Hawks - in seven games, he scored four goals and added four assists for eight points.

Frank Mahovlich finished with 14 goals, 13 assists and 27 points in 20 playoff games.

Interesting. A quick look shows me that Mahovlich was a modest +2 in those playoffs, compared to +14 for Cournoyer or +13 for Beliveau -- it's quite a difference over only 20 games. As most of big-Frank's goals were at even strength, it would appear he wasn't doing that well in the match-ups with whomever he played against. Was he on the wing with Henri Richard?

 

[JackSlater]

Interesting. A quick look shows me that Mahovlich was a modest +2 in those playoffs, compared to +14 for Cournoyer or +13 for Beliveau -- it's quite a difference over only 20 games. As most of big-Frank's goals were at even strength, it would appear he wasn't doing that well in the match-ups with whomever he played against. Was he on the wing with Henri Richard?

Mahovlich had a lot of points with Richard and Lemaire in those playoffs, which makes me curious about who was playing RW.

 

[Davenport]

Interesting. A quick look shows me that Mahovlich was a modest +2 in those playoffs, compared to +14 for Cournoyer or +13 for Beliveau -- it's quite a difference over only 20 games. As most of big-Frank's goals were at even strength, it would appear he wasn't doing that well in the match-ups with whomever he played against. Was he on the wing with Henri Richard?

The Big "M" must of had a policy of not skating in to his own end - except for faceoffs - to conserve his energy for offense. Shifts were long in those days. If Frank wasn't impressive without the puck, that could be a big reason why he had problems with Punch Imlach in Toronto.

 

[Giotrapani91]

Denis Potvin in one of the Islander Cup years. Probably 1981, where he had 25 points in 18 GP and a +18, and they gave it to Butch Goring.

Edit: Missed @The Macho King post a few above.

My Best-Carey

He was good in 83 as well 8 goals 12 assists, 20 points

 

[Giotrapani91]

Mahovlich had a lot of points with Richard and Lemaire in those playoffs, which makes me curious about who was playing RW.

Lemaire had 9 goals 10 assists 19 points and could’ve very well had won it, I think Dryden’s best year was either 76 or 77 depending how you look at it. Had Dryden won it in 76 I don’t think Montreal or Philly fans would’ve minded but leach had 19 goals a playoff record that still stands 5 assists 24 points, 77 & 79 you could argue lafleur & Dryden swapping trophies.