Selanne's final major NHL trophy.

[Seanconn*]

Will the Masterdon be his last major individual award? The Lindsay could very well be attainable, but I think he'd have to hit at least 85 points, and win over the affections of the players... but considering this could ACTUALLY be his last season this time... I think Teemu deserves one more award considering all the HOF type milestones he's hit this and last season, at a rapid as heck pace for a 39-40 year old!

I think he should have a fair shot at the Lady Bing this season if he manages to produce the 82 points he is on track for.

If any mod thinks this belongs in the NHL talk board, please move if necessary, thanks!

Click to read more...

 

[Kyle McMahon]

There's absolutely no chance of him winning the Lindsay. You seriously think he's arguably the best player in the NHL?

 

[KristoLeblanc*]

Rocket Richard - 1993-1998-1999
NHL First All-Star Team - 1993-1997
NHL Second All-Star Team - 1998 and 1999
Calder Trophy 1993

1 Stanley Cup
2006 Best Olympic Foward
All Time Leader Olympic points
Two times Olympic Scoring leader 1998 and 2006

Over 600 goals and 1250pts.

Masterton or not, I think nobody will care. Selanne is an all time great in NHL and International Hockey.

 

[Seanconn*]

There's absolutely no chance of him winning the Lindsay. You seriously think he's arguably the best player in the NHL?

Mark Messier wasn't the best player in the NHL in 91/92 and he won it. Messier is a Canadian though, so that helps

okay so maybe Selanne would have to score 90 points and the Art Ross Winner would have to score only 110 for it to be even slightly possible, but its definitely not impossible if he continues to have multi point games. He's been a huge part in Anaheim's success this year.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Mark Messier wasn't the best player in the NHL in 91/92 and he won it. Messier is a Canadian though, so that helps

okay so maybe Selanne would have to score 90 points and the Art Ross Winner would have to score only 110 for it to be even slightly possible, but its definitely not impossible if he continues to have multi point games. He's been a huge part in Anaheim's success this year.

Messier also won the Hart trophy in 1992 in one of the biggest landslides ever...

 

[kmad]

From Anaheim, Jonas Hiller and Corey Perry both have a better shot at the Lindsay than Selanne...

 

[tony d]

Selanne's a great player. What he's doing at 40 is amazing, still he is not going to win the Ted Lindsay award this year.

 

[The Saw Is the Law]

Conn Smythe Trophy winner 2011

How about Lady Byng Memorial Trophy?

 

[Dark Shadows]

Mark Messier wasn't the best player in the NHL in 91/92 and he won it. Messier is a Canadian though, so that helps

okay so maybe Selanne would have to score 90 points and the Art Ross Winner would have to score only 110 for it to be even slightly possible, but its definitely not impossible if he continues to have multi point games. He's been a huge part in Anaheim's success this year.

He wasn't? That's news to me.

Dare I ask who in your opinion who you think deserved the Hart and Lindsay in 91-92?

The Rangers went from 5 years of average to below average play and no playoff success, to a Presidents Trophy winner and the most playoff success in 5 years. Messier was THE biggest reason for that.

The crucible, heart and soul and drive that pushed and willed that team to success. Excellent play on both ends of the ice and leadership by example. Who knows how well that team would have done that year had he not been playing injured and missing games in the second round.

He was recognized for this by winning the hart in a landslide, the Lindsay and top honors for centers. None of this had anything to do with his nationality. There was not a single Hart/Lindsay worthy candidate outside of Roenick.

 

[Slapshooter]

Selanne might be the 4th best player all time for 40 year olds, but there is no trophies for such things. Lindsay Trophy is simply out of his reach.

Because of this season, Selanne might get his HOF position a bit earlier, who knows, but I don't see him winning or deserving anymore official major trophies. Lady Byng maybe, but I don't consider it a major one (and who the hell wants a trophy named like that anyway).

Mark Messier wasn't the best player in the NHL in 91/92 and he won it. Messier is a Canadian though, so that helps

Messier had hardly any competition in 1991-92, so IMO the issue is not worth of an off topic debate.

 

[Merya]

Because of this season, Selanne might get his HOF position a bit earlier

You mean at least a year later since he continued to play I'm sure. Selänne has been a first ballot lock since winning the cup.

 

[canucks4ever]

If a forward in today's era was tied for 5th in scoring, they would have no chance at winning the hart. Mark Messier's harts were a product of the era. In 1992 Patrick Roy leade the league in save% by a decent margin, gretzky still outpointed messier by 14 points, even if gretzky want at his best anymore and poor defensively, he still outscored messier, voters just got sick and tired of him. Messier's hart was clearly a product of the era.

 

[Seanconn*]

So in the 91/92 season you guys literally think Messier was the best player ever, just because he turned stuff around for the Rangers??? it's not like the won the cup or anything...

Messier: 79 games 35 goals 72 assists 107 points.

players I think were better.


Mario 64 games 44goals 87 assists 131 points

Hull 73 games 70 goals 39 assists 109 points

Mario and Hull both deserved the Pearson more than Messier did that season.

Unlike the Hart which is the player who is Most valuable to their team.... The Ted Lindsay award is for : "most outstanding player"

so i guess while his hart was somewhat justifiable... his pearson just flat out was not... should have went to Mario, or at least Brtt Hull, who basically had the same stats as Messier just switch their goals and assists totals around... goals should matter WAY more for this type of award, just like they do for the art ross if players are tied.

I agree Selanne has a very small chance at winning it this year, and would just have to go on fire to have a chance... but there's been seasons in the past where he definitely should have won it in place of the player selected... and even years when he probably should have won the Hart too!

so what do you guys think. shot at the Lady Bing or what?

 

[Hardyvan123]

He wasn't? That's news to me.

Dare I ask who in your opinion who you think deserved the Hart and Lindsay in 91-92?

The Rangers went from 5 years of average to below average play and no playoff success, to a Presidents Trophy winner and the most playoff success in 5 years. Messier was THE biggest reason for that.

The crucible, heart and soul and drive that pushed and willed that team to success. Excellent play on both ends of the ice and leadership by example. Who knows how well that team would have done that year had he not been playing injured and missing games in the second round.

He was recognized for this by winning the hart in a landslide, the Lindsay and top honors for centers. None of this had anything to do with his nationality. There was not a single Hart/Lindsay worthy candidate outside of Roenick.

Mess had a great year but Leetch stepped up a lot as a 23 year old and in some other threads you will hear that Mario was the best player in the world in 92.

I'm not arguing the selection just the landslide part of it. Pretty sure that if Mario had played in 70 instead of jut 64 games that he might have won it.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

So in the 91/92 season you guys literally think Messier was the best player ever, just because he turned stuff around for the Rangers??? it's not like the won the cup or anything...

Messier: 79 games 35 goals 72 assists 107 points.

players I think were better.


Mario 64 games 44goals 87 assists 131 points

Hull 73 games 70 goals 39 assists 109 points

Mario and Hull both deserved the Pearson more than Messier did that season.

Unlike the Hart which is the player who is Most valuable to their team.... The Ted Lindsay award is for : "most outstanding player"

so i guess while his hart was somewhat justifiable... his pearson just flat out was not... should have went to Mario, or at least Brtt Hull, who basically had the same stats as Messier just switch their goals and assists totals around... goals should matter WAY more for this type of award, just like they do for the art ross if players are tied.

I agree Selanne has a very small chance at winning it this year, and would just have to go on fire to have a chance... but there's been seasons in the past where he definitely should have won it in place of the player selected... and even years when he probably should have won the Hart too!

so what do you guys think. shot at the Lady Bing or what?

No, there haven't been. Selanne has never been the best player in the NHL.

DS points out all the reasons why Messier was the clear-cut Hart/Pearson winner in 1992, not mentioning goals or assists once, and all you can come back with is the extremely tired "personal stat recital", as Trottier once put it.

Selanne is most definitely going to the Hall of Fame, but the romanticizing of his career lately on these boards has grown tiresome.

 

[jepjepjoo]

No, there haven't been. Selanne has never been the best player in the NHL.

DS points out all the reasons why Messier was the clear-cut Hart/Pearson winner in 1992, not mentioning goals or assists once, and all you can come back with is the extremely tired "personal stat recital", as Trottier once put it.

Selanne is most definitely going to the Hall of Fame, but the romanticizing of his career lately on these boards has grown tiresome.

From 96 to 99 he was pretty damn close.

 

[Seanconn*]

No, there haven't been. Selanne has never been the best player in the NHL.

DS points out all the reasons why Messier was the clear-cut Hart/Pearson winner in 1992, not mentioning goals or assists once, and all you can come back with is the extremely tired "personal stat recital", as Trottier once put it.

Selanne is most definitely going to the Hall of Fame, but the romanticizing of his career lately on these boards has grown tiresome.

pfffffffffffft. typical Canadian bias. 92/93 I think he would have won the Pearson had Lemieux not had such an amazing season under extraordinary circumstances. Mario's 92/93 season is up there with Gretzky's 200+ seasons. But Selanne still led the league in goals, and did it as a rookie! then the next season he had a serious injury and was limited to 51 games, not all at 100%. then next season lockout... next full season Selanne has after his rookie season is a 108 point season, which proves his rookie season was in no way a fluke. from 92-99 Selanne was a top 2 winger in the NHL, with season's where he was definitely a better player than Jagr, and more important to his team than Lemieux. If you take Hasek out of the equation, I think it would be hard to deprive Selanne of at least the Pearson between 95-99, he was the best player on the Jets/Ducks and the main reason both teams had such great success... Kariya too, but to me Selanne was the more important player in that duo, which was by far the best duo in the NHL once Lemieux was once again plagued by health problems.




If Selannes leads the Duck's to win the division title, and have a 90 point season, its definitely comparable to Messier's 91/92 season. Getz sure hasn't been the captain we've needed him to be, but nevertheless, I'm kind of glad Teemu isn't the captain, as if he doesn't have a big enough target on his head any time a puck gets loose.

 

[seventieslord]

You've got to be kidding me.... the Lindsay award, seriously?

He has a good shot at the Byng.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

pfffffffffffft. typical Canadian bias. 92/93 I think he would have won the Pearson had Lemieux not had such an amazing season under extraordinary circumstances. Mario's 92/93 season is up there with Gretzky's 200+ seasons. But Selanne still led the league in goals, and did it as a rookie! then the next season he had a serious injury and was limited to 51 games, not all at 100%. then next season lockout... next full season Selanne has after his rookie season is a 108 point season, which proves his rookie season was in no way a fluke. from 92-99 Selanne was a top 2 winger in the NHL, with season's where he was definitely a better player than Jagr, and more important to his team than Lemieux. If you take Hasek out of the equation, I think it would be hard to deprive Selanne of at least the Pearson between 95-99, he was the best player on the Jets/Ducks and the main reason both teams had such great success... Kariya too, but to me Selanne was the more important player in that duo, which was by far the best duo in the NHL once Lemieux was once again plagued by health problems.




If Selannes leads the Duck's to win the division title, and have a 90 point season, its definitely comparable to Messier's 91/92 season. Getz sure hasn't been the captain we've needed him to be, but nevertheless, I'm kind of glad Teemu isn't the captain, as if he doesn't have a big enough target on his head any time a puck gets loose.

If only all the players better than Selanne hadn't played those years, he would have won the Pearson!

Seriously, Selanne was a great player. But at no point in time during his prime years was he better than Jagr or Hasek. Nobody who was actually watching the game during those years would suggest otherwise.

 

[Poignant Discussion*]

So in the 91/92 season you guys literally think Messier was the best player ever, just because he turned stuff around for the Rangers??? it's not like the won the cup or anything...

Messier: 79 games 35 goals 72 assists 107 points.

players I think were better.


Mario 64 games 44goals 87 assists 131 points

Hull 73 games 70 goals 39 assists 109 points

Mario and Hull both deserved the Pearson more than Messier did that season.

Unlike the Hart which is the player who is Most valuable to their team.... The Ted Lindsay award is for : "most outstanding player"

so i guess while his hart was somewhat justifiable... his pearson just flat out was not... should have went to Mario, or at least Brtt Hull, who basically had the same stats as Messier just switch their goals and assists totals around... goals should matter WAY more for this type of award, just like they do for the art ross if players are tied.

I agree Selanne has a very small chance at winning it this year, and would just have to go on fire to have a chance... but there's been seasons in the past where he definitely should have won it in place of the player selected... and even years when he probably should have won the Hart too!

so what do you guys think. shot at the Lady Bing or what?

Were you alive then?

Why all the shots at Messier these days? Pretty sad to prop up one of your players by demeaning an all time great.

Pathetic actually

 

[blogofmike]

If a forward in today's era was tied for 5th in scoring, they would have no chance at winning the hart. Mark Messier's harts were a product of the era. In 1992 Patrick Roy leade the league in save% by a decent margin, gretzky still outpointed messier by 14 points, even if gretzky want at his best anymore and poor defensively, he still outscored messier, voters just got sick and tired of him. Messier's hart was clearly a product of the era.

Messier's competition wasn't as strong as it could have been, but he did have just as good a case as Gretzky, Lemieux and Roy did.

Gretzky was slowing down as he had suffered the '91 back injury, but held off on the surgery. 121 points and leading the league in assists on a otherwise horrid Kings team was very good, but Gretzky also had his first negative +/- year and the Kings posted an average record with 84 pts, down from 102 the previous year.

Lemieux played in 64 games rather than 26. The defending Cup Champions lost a point in the standings despite Lemieux playing 38 more games. It appeared that they could win without him. After the Hart votes were cast, the Pens beat the Presidents Trophy-winning Rangers in a series where they won three games without Lemieux.

Roy's lead in save percentage was .004 and his defenders did a much better job of keeping his shots against lower than CuJo's Blues did. Roy earned his Vezina, but hardly stood out by the amount that a goalie needs to to win a Hart/Pearson.

Messier had the standard NBA MVP argument: best player on the best team. NYR went from 85 pts to 105 pts. Messier's scoring was a level below Gretzky and Lemieux, but Messier also played solid defence and helped the NYR penalty kill go from bad (79.8%) to best in the NHL (84.8%).

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

You mean at least a year later since he continued to play I'm sure. Selänne has been a first ballot lock since winning the cup.

Agreed. Given how much the HHOF values having a Cup on the resume, I agree that winning it moved Selanne right from "borderline but probable HHOF" to "first ballot lock."

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

If a forward in today's era was tied for 5th in scoring, they would have no chance at winning the hart. Mark Messier's harts were a product of the era. In 1992 Patrick Roy leade the league in save% by a decent margin, gretzky still outpointed messier by 14 points, even if gretzky want at his best anymore and poor defensively, he still outscored messier, voters just got sick and tired of him. Messier's hart was clearly a product of the era.

Posted by someone who didn't watch Messier play.

It's not like the 1992 Hart vote was anything resembling a contest.

 

[canucks4ever]

Posted by someone who didn't watch Messier play.

It's not like the 1992 Hart vote was anything resembling a contest.

I saw messier play in person more times than you probably did considering that i had season tickets to cancuks games and i saw him play live in 94, how many times have u seen him play in person?

His mvp was one of the weakest ever.His MVP was a product of another player missing games, dont act like he dominated the league. From 1988-2001, the two worst mvp seasons are the ones that messier won. In that era goalies and defensemen were not going to win the hart, unless they did something crazy. Messier produced 'steve nash' caliber mvp seasons, his mvp was hardly the 'peyton manning/lebron james' type of mvp season.

 

[Seanconn*]

If only all the players better than Selanne hadn't played those years, he would have won the Pearson!

Seriously, Selanne was a great player. But at no point in time during his prime years was he better than Jagr or Hasek. Nobody who was actually watching the game during those years would suggest otherwise.

No, I don't agree. There were definitely seasons during Selanne's prime where he was better Jagr... and most definitely where he was better than Hasek! I still think dominik Hasek is number 1 all time when he is on, which is a lot.
Selanne should have won the Pearson in 97' , Hasek still would have had the Hart+ Vezina in 97... even in 1999 when Jagr won all three... had they not introduced the Rocket Richard trophy that year (which Selanne won) I think he would have probably won the pearson, considering who infrequently players win all three... Hart+Art Ross+ Pearson.

from 92/93-1999 who scored more goals than Selanne? ... no one, but all he has to show for it is the Rockey in 99'? I think it's complete crap Selanne only has a Calder + one Rocket Richard for how much he dominated the league in the 1990's.

Also, I think Selanne probably should have got at least the Pearson over Crosby in 2007. (by far leading scorer on a team 3 points away from the Presidents trophy, and eventual cup winner.. hell you could even argue for the Hart that season. (since playoffs aren't supposed to be taken into account, right) this is basically the argument used for why Messier won the Hart in 1992... except his team did win the Presidents trophy...

Regardless, Selanne's 2007 season is very comparable to the Pearson win / Hart win of Messier in 1992, where Messier was 24 points behind the Art Ross winner Mario (who in my opinion.. his 92' season getting 131 points in 64 games is way more impressive than Sid getting 120 in 79) except the only difference is that Selanne didn't even take one piece of hardware home.

I'm not trying to cut down Messier at all, he was a great player... but I think his "leadership" is a tad over-exaggerated... I can't argue that Selanne should have won the Art Ross because he never did... but he sure as hell could have at least won a single Hart, and especially a single Pearson.

yes, I was a live in 1992, but a very small child, stat's speak for themselves. If Mario can loose out on the Hart AND pearson that year, while completely outperforming Messier on the scoresheet... Selanne could have definitely had 1 Hart or Pearson over the years, especially in 2007.