Voter Fatigue Awards

[Breakfast of Champs]

Gretzky won the hart that year bc of the amazing turnaround by LA

It is true he made a large impact in LA, but lemieux didnt exactly have the greatest supporting cast either, and had 84 points more than the 2nd highest scorer on his team, while gretz only had 18 more than the 2nd highest scorer on his team. And I mean gretzky only took the kings from 30 wins to 42. It pretty good but its not like he took them to 50 wins or anything. Lemieux never got as much appreciation because his teams rise to the top wasnt as sudden, but he was still at that time carrying a bad team into the playoffs (where he was more successful than gretzky I might add). In all, I feel gretzky had an amazing season, but lemieux had 85 goals and 199 pts, and that deserves a hart.

 

[Dangler99*]

How can you not win the Hart while scoring 199 points while being a part of 57.3% of your teams goals. Which is an NHL RECORD. He set the record for what the Hart is supposed to be about.

 

[Breakfast of Champs]

How can you not win the Hart while scoring 199 points while being a part of 57.3% of your teams goals. Which is an NHL RECORD. He set the record for what the Hart is supposed to be about.

never thought about it that way but thats an amazing statistic, lol gotta love gretzky biased voters

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

How can you not win the Hart while scoring 199 points while being a part of 57.3% of your teams goals. Which is an NHL RECORD. He set the record for what the Hart is supposed to be about.

The Hart is supposed to be about offensive performance with no regard to defence? News to me. He didn't lead his team to a division title. Montreal and Calgary were so much better than everyone else that year that Joe Mullen and Chris Chelios should have been battling for the trophy.

 

[blogofmike]

How can you not win the Hart while scoring 199 points while being a part of 57.3% of your teams goals. Which is an NHL RECORD. He set the record for what the Hart is supposed to be about.

If points % determined the Hart, Gretzky wins the 1997-98 Hart Trophy. In fact, since 88-89 Gretzky scored on 9 of his team's 11 goals against Calgary, he should get the Smythe.

Then again I don't value points% as much as you. It just seems to reward top players who happen to have bad second and third lines. When they were on the ice Gretzky had a point on 78.9% of his team's goals and Lemieux had a point on 78.3% of his team's goals. Neither appears much more valuable to their team's top unit when they are on the ice. In fact, Lemieux's linemates narrowly outperformed Gretzky's.

Gretzky was the most visible reason for the Kings going from 18th out of 21 to 3rd out of 21, the Kings faced a clearly harder schedule (going by SOS on HR and being in the Smythe in general), and Wayne still put up 168 points despite seeing around 100 fewer powerplays than Lemieux did. At even strength Lemieux outscored Gretzky, but the margin was 102-100.

Both guys were on the PP a lot. Lemieux was on-ice for 92.44% of his team's PPG, Gretzky for 87.80%. As a share of their PPGF totals, Gretzky scored on 73.6% and Lemieux scored on 71.8% of PPG they were on-ice for.

Giving Gretzky the 1989 Hart made sense. It certainly made more sense than giving Mario the 1986 Pearson, where Gretzky outscored Lemieux by 74 points despite the Oilers receiving a league-low 295 PPO to the Pens league-high 425, and Gretzky succeeding in the more difficult task of getting points on >50% of a good team's goals.

 

[Wings4Life]

Sometimes, it seems, the voters for an award are tired of the recognition (whether through awards themselves or through the media in general) given to certain players and vote for someone who they may not honestly consider most deserving but would rather give recognition to.

Some awards that may have been from "voter fatigue"...

Yzerman's 1989 Lindsay/Pearson (Gretzky or Lemieux)
Chara's 2009 Norris (Lidstrom)
Sedin's 2010 Hart (Crosby or Ovechkin)

What other possible such awards have there been?

Vernon's Conn Smythe 1997 (Fedorov)

Although that might have been due to the lingering anti-Russian bias at the time (and the general pro-Canadian bias associated with the Smythe as well).

Brendan Shannahan's quote from the same season: "If (Konstantinov) was from (small town in BC), he'd have won the Norris already."

 

[Big Phil]

Hasek not winning the Hart in '99 or the Vezina in '96 or '00.

That Hart in 1999 was all Jagr. The dominance he performed that year is the best we've seen from a forward since Mario in 1996. If I remember correctly it really wasn't an issue as to who would get the MVP

Hasek in 1996 had a down year as did a lot of other goalie for some weird reason. I always thought Fuhr would be a fine choice for the Vezina that year. Not sure what you mean in 2000 though. This was an injury riddled season for him and he only played 35 games and was openly thinking about retirement.

Sometimes, it seems, the voters for an award are tired of the recognition (whether through awards themselves or through the media in general) given to certain players and vote for someone who they may not honestly consider most deserving but would rather give recognition to.

Some awards that may have been from "voter fatigue"...

Yzerman's 1989 Lindsay/Pearson (Gretzky or Lemieux)
Chara's 2009 Norris (Lidstrom)
Sedin's 2010 Hart (Crosby or Ovechkin)

What other possible such awards have there been?

If anything had Lidstrom have gotten the 2009 Norris it would have been based on name only. Chara was a beast that year. Green scored 31 goals which is unheard of in today's game (or practically any era) and hadn't been done since 1993. Green was a very scary offensive guy that year.

 

[Big Phil]

Brendan Shannahan's quote from the same season: "If (Konstantinov) was from (small town in BC), he'd have won the Norris already."

I respect Shanny but if this is 1997 we are talking about then what's up with that? Is Shanahan saying he had a better season in 1997 than Leetch?

Or the one time Konstantinov was a 2nd team all-star in 1996 did he really think that he was better than Chelios and Bourque?

 

[JackSlater]

Vernon's Conn Smythe 1997 (Fedorov)

Although that might have been due to the lingering anti-Russian bias at the time (and the general pro-Canadian bias associated with the Smythe as well).

Brendan Shannahan's quote from the same season: "If (Konstantinov) was from (small town in BC), he'd have won the Norris already."

I would say Fedorov losing had more to do with the latter as opposed to the voter fatigue. I doubt that Fedorov's Hart and Selke from three years earlier and his Selke from the year prior had anything to do with his getting robbed of the Smythe.

Regarding Shanahan's quote, I don't know what it has to do with voter fatigue since Konstantinov never received any awards, but he would not have been a deserving Norris winner in either of his really great years.

 

[Epsilon]

Shanahan's quote is just typical teammate-speak. It's a cute line but it doesn't hold up under objective scrutiny.

 

[Wings4Life]

I respect Shanny but if this is 1997 we are talking about then what's up with that? Is Shanahan saying he had a better season in 1997 than Leetch?

Or the one time Konstantinov was a 2nd team all-star in 1996 did he really think that he was better than Chelios and Bourque?

I think Shannahan is objecting to the fact that at this time, voters are biased against Russian players when it comes to award voting in general, rather than one particular Norris winner (Leetch, Chelios, etc) being undeserving.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Fedorov, makorov, and bure's early regular season hardware shows that their was no boas against Russians in regular season awards. It was in the playoffs that the 'soft euro who doesn't care about the cup' line was spouted.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

What about Nabokov stealing the First Team AS from Brodeur in 2008 while brodeur won the Vezina? Statistically, it should have probably been brodeur's least controversial vezina, but it's the only one he didn't get the first team AS for.

 

[SidGenoMario]

How about that one season where Lemieux, Gretz and Yzerman all had 155+ points? I remember there was a lot of comical fatigue there (in a way). One guy won the scoring title and didn't end up on either postseason all-star team, and one guy won either the Hart or Pearson and also didn't end up on the postseason all-star teams.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Mario won the art Ross and was a first team all star in 89. Gretzky was 2nd in scoring, a second team all star, but won the hart. Yzerman was third in scoring, but won the Pearson.

Yzerman's Pearson was definitely due to voter fatigue, but then the Pearson often has wacky results.

 

[Derick*]

What about Nabokov stealing the First Team AS from Brodeur in 2008 while brodeur won the Vezina? Statistically, it should have probably been brodeur's least controversial vezina, but it's the only one he didn't get the first team AS for.

That wasn't voter fatigue so much as the fact that Nabokov had a healthy lead in wins.

I agree, Brodeur should have won both the Vezina and the PSA (or at least, he deserved them more than Nabokov) but I don't think Nabby won the PSA because they were tired of Brodeur.

 

[Derick*]

I don't remember Crosby sucking without Malkin last year. I just remember malkin sucking period. I saw it as crosby finishing a couple of points behind sedin, while scoring far more goals, while playing a far more complete game, and leading his team to a similar level of success with less help from his teammates.

The racking up points against the islanders is an interesting factor that I had forgotten about.

I do agree w you about ovechkin though. He got his dumbass suspended twice and his team didn't miss a beat.

In addition to it being a small sample, they played, like, four games against Florida over that span.

Crosby may have deserved it the most but there's an argument for Ovechkin and he definitely deseved it more than Sedin.

That Hart basically confirmed to me the media clowns that vote on these awards have no idea what they're doing.

- Three more points

versus

- Better defensively
- More goals
- More primary assists
- Inferior linemates
- Hardering opposing lines and defensive pairings
- More defensive zone starts
- Fewer offensive zone starts

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

That wasn't voter fatigue so much as the fact that Nabokov had a healthy lead in wins.

I agree, Brodeur should have won both the Vezina and the PSA (or at least, he deserved them more than Nabokov) but I don't think Nabby won the PSA because they were tired of Brodeur.

Nabokov had 46 wins, brodeur 44, and 3rd place kiprusoff had 39. That's hardly a 'healthy lead.'

Based on the stats voters usually look at, brodeur would have easily won if it weren't for fatigue IMO. His vezinas in 2003 and 2004 actually do look questionable by some standards after the fact, but they were basically landslides in comparison.

 

[Derick*]

You're probably right then.

I remember being excited about him possibly breaking the record for wins in a season before he lost the second last game to Dallas, so I assumed it was the hype around that.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Right, I definitely remember the hype that he could break the wins record too, set by brodeur the previous year.
On a side note, I'm actually surprised it hasn't been broken yet. It seems that coming out of the lockout with the shootout, it was constantly in danger, but nobody has really come close the last couple of seasons.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

In addition to it being a small sample, they played, like, four games against Florida over that span.

Crosby may have deserved it the most but there's an argument for Ovechkin and he definitely deseved it more than Sedin.

That Hart basically confirmed to me the media clowns that vote on these awards have no idea what they're doing.

- Three more points

versus

- Better defensively
- More goals
- More primary assists
- Inferior linemates
- Hardering opposing lines and defensive pairings
- More defensive zone starts
- Fewer offensive zone starts

i think what really helped henrik was all of vancouver's come-from-behind wins in the third period last season. not only did he and daniel score like crazy and regularly make the highlights with amazing plays, they also seemed really clutch.

because the canucks have been so dominant this year, they haven't had the thrilling comebacks, which ironically will probably hurt daniel's chances at back to back sedin harts.