Wrong Award/All Star choices

[norrisnick]

Yes, having 3 shutouts in the Stanley Cup final should be a stronger factor in voting rather than 3 shutouts vs an offensively-starved team like Minnesota.

What type of team do you think Anaheim was? In the first two rounds Minny scored more than half a goal per game higher than Anaheim.

 

[Saint Patty 33]

NBA and Baseball MVP is just who was best in the championship round. Not who was great leading up to that round. Baseball has the LCS MVP too (Which I think is dumb. Why is there an MVP for a 2nd round? But whatever).

Seems Hockey is more focused on the entire postseason.

I think that explains why Giguere won in 03. Otherwise, he doesn't win it at all. Brodeur or Niedermayer do.

Giving a playoff MVP award to someone who was ordinary in the Finals and didn't win has always seemed foolish to me... especially given Brodeur's incredible performance.

What type of team do you think Anaheim was? In the first two rounds Minny scored more than half a goal per game higher than Anaheim.

Not sure how you don't call a team that scores 1 goal in a series "offensively starved".

 

[Victorias]

Giving a playoff MVP award to someone who was ordinary in the Finals and didn't win has always seemed foolish to me... especially given Brodeur's incredible performance.


Not sure how you don't call a team that scores 1 goal in a series "offensively starved".

You’re missing the point - both the Wild and the Ducks were “offensively starved”. But you know who wasn’t? The Red Wings (#1 in NHL in goals) and the Stars (#6). And Giguere was dominant against both teams.

Brodeur’s finals performance was also not that special, considering how bad the Ducks were offensively and how good the Devils were defensively. To stick with your comparison, Brodeur had a .925 SP vs the Ducks while Giguere had a .992 SP vs the Wild.

 

[Saint Patty 33]

View attachment 734837

The Ducks were just as bad offensively as the Wild. And the Devils were much better defensively than the Ducks.

You’re missing the point - both the Wild and the Ducks were “offensively starved”. But you know who wasn’t? The Red Wings (#1 in NHL in goals) and the Stars (#6). And Giguere was dominant against both teams.

Brodeur’s finals performance was also not that special, considering how bad the Ducks were offensively and how good the Devils were defensively. To stick with your comparison, Brodeur had a .925 SP vs the Ducks while Giguere had a .992 SP vs the Wild.

You keep trying to sell me on Giguere's performance pre-Cup final when I fully acknowledged this during my first post.

You can't argue numbers and than dismiss Brodeur having 7 Shutouts including 3 in the Finals simply because he played on a good team.

Again, a Conn Smythe winner should have a better SP than 910 in the Cup final especially if his team doesn't win.

 

[Brodeur]

2003 Conn Smythe
Giguere's performance during the first three rounds was incredible but he was pretty ordinary in the Stanley Cup final, while his opponent (Brodeur) recorded 3 Shutouts in the Finals including Game 7.

I didn't mind Giguere getting the Conn Smythe, he carried the Ducks through the first three rounds. The other problem is that the Devils didn't have an obvious candidate. I'd actually argue for Scott Niedermayer over Brodeur, but Nieds just quietly did his thing and didn't have a particular "moment" that put him in the forefront.

Anaheim came out flat after an 11 day layoff between the WCF and SCF, so they didn't generate much in Games 1/2. Not to totally disregard Marty's play, but the Ducks only mustered 16 shots in Games 1 and 2 against the Devils. Marty having that stickhandling gaffe in Game 3 probably didn't help. Maybe if the Devils had won Game 4 (0-0 going into OT), that would have helped his case.

 

[Victorias]

You keep trying to sell me on Giguere's performance pre-Cup final when I fully acknowledged this during my first post.

You can't argue numbers and than dismiss Brodeur having 7 Shutouts including 3 in the Finals simply because he played on a good team.

Again, a Conn Smythe winner should have a better SP than 910 in the Cup final especially if his team doesn't win.

I didn’t say anything about Giguere’s first 3 rounds until you brought up Minnesota. If you want to talk about Minnesota being bad offensively, then you should acknowledge the Ducks were JUST AS BAD offensively. That Ducks team that Brodeur shut out three times; it’s no different than shutting out the Wild 3 times.

It’s simple: better defense + low scoring environment + low scoring opponents = more shutouts.

Brodeur had a .925 in the finals, which is good. Hasek had a .940 the previous SCF along with 6 total shutouts and did not win the Smythe. I don’t think either was robbed - they were on great teams in a super low scoring environment.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

To (partly) quote myself from another thread:

Giguere might have had the greatest playoff run in NHL history through three rounds in 2003. He regressed in the finals, but he still gave his team four chances to win:

• Game 1 - stopped 27 of 29 shots (Ducks offense nonexistent, team was outshot 30-16)
• Game 3 - stopped 29 of 31 shots, overtime win
• Game 4 - stopped all 26 shots in a 1-0 overtime win
• Game 6 - stopped 26 of 28 shots

This is a team whose best scorer by far (Paul Kariya) was scoreless in five of the seven games, and who needed to play Ruslan Salei, Keith Carney and a past-his-prime Sandis Ozolinsh 24+ minutes a game.

If someone thinks the Smythe winner should only go to a player on the winning team (even though that isn't the criteria) - that's fine, they won't vote for Giguere. But he gave the Ducks a reasonable chance at four wins in the SC Finals (and had maybe the greatest first three rounds for a goalie back to 1980).

 

[Saint Patty 33]

I didn’t say anything about Giguere’s first 3 rounds until you brought up Minnesota. If you want to talk about Minnesota being bad offensively, then you should acknowledge the Ducks were JUST AS BAD offensively. That Ducks team that Brodeur shut out three times; it’s no different than shutting out the Wild 3 times.

It’s simple: better defense + low scoring environment + low scoring opponents = more shutouts.

Brodeur had a .925 in the finals, which is good. Hasek had a .940 the previous SCF along with 6 total shutouts and did not win the Smythe. I don’t think either was robbed - they were on great teams in a super low scoring environment.

So great players on great teams shouldn't be regarded as highly as great players on medicore teams?

Since 2003, I would say we have seen several individual performances that were close to Giguere's dominance. Even the following year, Miikka Kiprusoff was as great as any Cup-final losing goalie in hockey history. The Flames don't get out of the first round that year without MK, let alone within a goal of the Stanley Cup.

Carey Price two years ago was as dominant for 3 rounds as any goalie ever. Even Bobrovsky this year was unbeatable heading into the Finals.

To (partly) quote myself from another thread:

Giguere might have had the greatest playoff run in NHL history through three rounds in 2003. He regressed in the finals, but he still gave his team four chances to win:

• Game 1 - stopped 27 of 29 shots (Ducks offense nonexistent, team was outshot 30-16)
• Game 3 - stopped 29 of 31 shots, overtime win
• Game 4 - stopped all 26 shots in a 1-0 overtime win
• Game 6 - stopped 26 of 28 shots

This is a team whose best scorer by far (Paul Kariya) was scoreless in five of the seven games, and who needed to play Ruslan Salei, Keith Carney and a past-his-prime Sandis Ozolinsh 24+ minutes a game.

If someone thinks the Smythe winner should only go to a player on the winning team (even though that isn't the criteria) - that's fine, they won't vote for Giguere. But he gave the Ducks a reasonable chance at four wins in the SC Finals (and had maybe the greatest first three rounds for a goalie back to 1980).

If you're going to make this argument for Giguere, shouldn't you also make it for Kiprussoff, Price and Bobrovsky to name a few?

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

So great players on great teams shouldn't be regarded as highly as great players on medicore teams?

Since 2003, I would say we have seen several individual performances that were close to Giguere's dominance. Even the following year, Miikka Kiprusoff was as great as any Cup-final losing goalie in hockey history. The Flames don't get out of the first round that year without MK, let alone within a goal of the Stanley Cup.

Carey Price two years ago was as dominant for 3 rounds as any goalie ever. Even Bobrovsky this year was unbeatable heading into the Finals.


If you're going to make this argument for Giguere, shouldn't you also make it for Kiprussoff, Price and Bobrovsky to name a few?

Not really.

Price in the Finals had a .888/3.33 line

Bob in the Finals had a .844/4.25 line (and a .891/4.00 line against Boston)

 

[MadLuke]

If you're going to make this argument for Giguere, shouldn't you also make it for Kiprussoff, Price and Bobrovsky to name a few?

Some of those faltered in the final more than Giguere, he was .915 in the finals before game 7, price was .867 before the last game and it ended in 5, Bobrovsky had a .844 lost in 5.

There is a different degree in how close the finals was to having the Smythe going to the loosing team that factor in.

Kiprusoft was great and lost in 7 so it would have made more sense but how much above Iginla was he ? The Smythe of the loosing team would probably need to be non brainer unanimous main guy of that losing team.

And Giguere first 3 round was probably a bit more special than those, despite the lost in the final he is still talked about for the greatest playoff run ever, not just the first 3 round):

Conn Smythe: Giguere (03) vs Roy (93)

Both Post-season performances are legendary but who had the better playoffs? J.S. Giguere Record: 15-6 GAA: 1.62 SvPct: .945 SO: 5 Feats: Carrying a 7th place team over the Wings and all the way to the finals. 217 minute SO streak. .958 SvPct in the Conference finals. Patrick Roy...

forums.hfboards.com

Top Four-Round Performances
(Error Rate vs. Expecation, 1975-2017)

1. Patrick Roy, 1993 (55.7% on 647 shots)
2. John Vanbiesbrouck, 1996 (58.8% on 735 shots)
3. John Davidson, 1979 (59.2% on 535 shots)
4. Jean-Sebastien Giguere, 2003 (59.3% on 697 shots)
5. Tuukka Rask, 2013 (59.4% on 761 shots)
6. Richard Brodeur, 1982 (60.4% on 594 shots)
7. Jonathan Quick, 2012 (60.4% on 538 shots)
8. Dominik Hasek, 1999 (60.7% on 587 shots)
9. Patrick Roy, 1986 (61.3% on 504 shots)
10. Patrick Roy, 2001 (62.6% on 622 shots

And when you look at the Duck roster that year, vs the roster of the Wings-Stars-Devils, considering Karyia health and play, Giguere being the mvp of his team was to an extreme level.

Carney-Salei-Havelid were the 3 ducks that played the most minutes, for the forward it was Rucchin and Rob Niedermwayer, Kariya had only 12 points, 40 years old Oates lead the teams with 13 points in 21 games.

Winning with that team while having to beat the DPE Wings-Stars-Devils in the same run would have been quite close to the biggest things a hockey player could have ever done, more impressive than 99 Hasek or 93 Roy, just imagine a center a la Lemieux-McDavid pulling it off....

When you factor who he did beat and what support he had for doing it, he seem in a really different position than all the listed. one thing that goes a bit against him, Brodeur was probably a clearer with more separation MVP for the cup winner than most of those other one, he was playing on one of the good team of all time, but you share the glory between Stevens-Rafalski-Niedermayer-Langenbrunner-Madden-Friense-Elias has a skater)

 

[Saint Patty 33]

Not really.

Price in the Finals had a .888/3.33 line

Bob in the Finals had a .844/4.25 line (and a .891/4.00 line against Boston)

But if the argument is made that the entire playoff is equally as valuable as the Stanley Cup final, why shouldn't Price or Bobrovsky get the Conn Smythe too?

 

[Victorias]

So great players on great teams shouldn't be regarded as highly as great players on medicore teams?

Since 2003, I would say we have seen several individual performances that were close to Giguere's dominance. Even the following year, Miikka Kiprusoff was as great as any Cup-final losing goalie in hockey history. The Flames don't get out of the first round that year without MK, let alone within a goal of the Stanley Cup.

Carey Price two years ago was as dominant for 3 rounds as any goalie ever. Even Bobrovsky this year was unbeatable heading into the Finals.


If you're going to make this argument for Giguere, shouldn't you also make it for Kiprussoff, Price and Bobrovsky to name a few?

You’re suggesting that Giguere and Brodeur were both equally great when Giguere was much better. Incredible performance on mediocre team > great performance on great team. Niedermayer was just as good/valuable as Brodeur, just like Lidstrom was just as good/valuable as Hasek in 02.

And as the other posters have shown, Giguere 03 was significantly better than Price, Bob, etc. Better through 3 rounds AND better in the final. Price and Bob completely fell apart in the SCF while Giguere did not. The Panthers and Habs lost in 5 games while the Ducks took it to 7. There is no comparison.

I think Giguere 03 is overrated because of the scoring environment, but Brodeur was not robbed by any means.

 

[Saint Patty 33]

You’re suggesting that Giguere and Brodeur were both equally great when Giguere was much better. Incredible performance on mediocre team > great performance on great team. Niedermayer was just as good/valuable as Brodeur, just like Lidstrom was just as good/valuable as Hasek in 02.

And as the other posters have shown, Giguere 03 was significantly better than Price, Bob, etc. Better through 3 rounds AND better in the final. Price and Bob completely fell apart in the SCF while Giguere did not. The Panthers and Habs lost in 5 games while the Ducks took it to 7. There is no comparison.

I think Giguere 03 is overrated because of the scoring environment, but Brodeur was not robbed by any means.

You've acknowledged that Giguere Finals performance was subpar especially for someone who won playoff MVP. So you've based your entire argument around his performance in the first three rounds, so why is the point of Price and to a lesser extent Bobrovsky so egregious?

I'd argue the 03 Ducks were a much better team than the 21 Canadiens and the 21 Lightning were certainly a better opponent than the 03 Devils.

 

[Victorias]

You've acknowledged that Giguere Finals performance was subpar especially for someone who won playoff MVP. So you've based your entire argument around his performance in the first three rounds, so why is the point of Price and to a lesser extent Bobrovsky so egregious?

I'd argue the 03 Ducks were a much better team than the 21 Canadiens and the 21 Lightning were certainly a better opponent than the 03 Devils.

Dude, you’re just ignoring what everyone is posting.

For the last time, Giguere through 3 rounds was WAY better than Bob and Price. He was ***ALSO*** WAY better in the final: Giguere was average in the final but Price and Bob literally cost their teams games. JS gave the Ducks a chance to win in the final while Price and Bob did NOT.

So, no, I’m NOT just including the first three rounds. If Giguere had been as bad as Price or Bob in the final and the Ducks had lost in 5 games, he would NOT have won the Smythe.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

If you're going to make this argument for Giguere, shouldn't you also make it for Kiprussoff, Price and Bobrovsky to name a few?

Save percentage isn't perfect, but to get the conversation going:

Goalie	First 3 rds	SC finals
Giguere 2003	96.0%​	91.0%​
Kiprusoff 2004	93.0%​	92.4%​
Price 2021	93.4%​	88.8%​
Bobrovsky 2023	93.5%​	84.4%​

Price and Bobrovsky both had a sub 89% save percentage in the finals. That would have been a good result for the early 1980's. Not a very good result for the early 2020's. And not close to Giguere's 91%.

Kipper was probably a bit better than Giguere in the SC Finals (but a 1.4% difference in save percentage over a sample size of seven games is essentially meaningless). So why am I saying that Giguere deserved the Smythe, and not Kiprusoff? Three reasons:

1. Giguere was absolutely, without question, the most valuable player on the 2003 Ducks. Kiprusoff was probably the most valuable player on the 2004 Flames, but a reasonable case could be made for Iginla. In order for a player to win on a losing team, he should be the obvious team MVP.

2. Giguere was much better through three rounds. Kiprussof was at 93% through three rounds (which is very good, but not historic). Giguere was at 96%, which is probably one of the top two or three performances going back to 1980 (the start of the four round era).

3. The 2003 Devils didn't have a clear frontrunner. Brodeur and Niedermayer presumably split votes. The 2004 Lightning had a strong winner in Brad Richards. (Stat watching 20 years later, someone can suggest that St. Louis or Khabibulin were in the running, but it was obvious at the time that Richards was the clear MVP for Tampa Bay).

In summary - Price and Bobrovsky are bad comparisons because they were worse than Giguere through three rounds, and much worse in the SCF. Kipper was better in the finals, but he was well behind through three rounds, he wasn't clearly the Flames' MVP, and there was a strong Conn Smythe candidate (which wasn't the case the year before).

 

[bobholly39]

I feel like when you watched all the game, Crosby winning was not a surprise at all, not a clear stand out, not a surprise either.

in 2016:

Crosby: 6G, 11A, 17P, +8, 19:50 minute by game, 54% faceoff win
Kessel: 7G, 8A, 15P, +7, 17:09 minute by game
Malkin: 3G, 10A, 13P, +3, 16:19 minute by game, 42% faceoff win
Letang: 3G, 10A, 13P, +13, 27:56 minute by game
Murray: .943% save percentage, 24 GA in those 15W, only 2 time above 2goal, twice only 3 in 40 shot against effort.

During the playoff offensive zone face off start:
Kessel: 70%
Malkin: 73%
Crosby: 57%
Letang: 52%

------
Kessel's deployment was quite easier during those playoffs and Crosby had a little bit more points while playing significantly more hockey the games the Penguins won creating a stronger impression.

Crosby line was facing ice time wise more often: Vlasic/Braun, Niskanen/Alzner, Hedman/Callahan, Staal/Klein
Kessel line was Martin-Burns, Killorn-Garrison, Niskanen-Carlson, Fast-Skjey

Crosby line faced the most frequently foward they faced were Pavelski-thornton-Donskoi, Backstrom-Ovechkin-Oshie, Kreider-Zuccarello-Stepan, Callahan-Filppula-Kucherov
Kessel line faced the most frequently foward they faced were Couture-Tierney-Ward, Williams-Kuznetsov-Johansson, Fast-Staal-Hayes, Killon-Kucherov-Drouin

Argument for being close and a coin flip can be made but that does not make any option a bad one, Letang was excellent playing 28 minutes a night without great support at that position, Murray was .923 probably helped Crosby a bit that glut at the top give it to the face of the team.

This is far from the voting group putting Hasek 8th in Vezina with Jim Carry winning with Chris Osgood the runner up, which seem to have been putting way to much values on win's GAA and shutout that were still very popular stats at the time.

Crosby was a fine winner for the conn smythe in 2016.

Maybe some people think winning team/not winning team makes no difference would rather give it to Couture - fine. But if you're chosing a winner from Pittsburgh, Crosby was a good choice. Was he unanimous? No - but it doesn't mean he wasn't a worthy winner.

There are many years where the Conn Smythe winner isn't unanimous - but not being unanimous isn't the same as being a bad winner.

Crosby has so many haters (and also, so many passionate fans) that anything about him always gets blown up to 1000 degrees. But the 2016 smythe isn't a problem and never really was.

 

[Voight]

Justin Williams 2014 Conn Smythe / Mr Game 7 lifetime achievement award.

Doughty should've won it that year, tho Kopitar/Carter/Gaborik would have also been strong picks.

 

[Peat]

2016 Smythe

Clearly the voters wanted to get Crosby a Smythe. It looks worse with the repeat Cup in 2017. If those 2 wins happened in the other order, Crosby has 1 Smythe not 2. 2016 was robbed from Kessel who led them in playoff goals and points. And both scored 4 in the Finals so it's not like that argument exists.

Thing is that if you want to lean on counting stats heavily to see who was the best player, Kessel was the third best player on his line so how on earth can you vote for him?

I'm with everyone who says it was very tight with no standout.

(For what it's worth - I think the player who's most under-valued by the results above is Kris Letang. He played the best hockey of his career that spring. Bonino scored some big goals, but I thought the top four was pretty clearly, in some order, Crosby, Letang, Kessel and Murray).

My man. I always Letang was judged harshly.

I don't think it would have been super wrong to give it to Bonino either. Very impressive run, and very important on the PK.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I don't see how Stevens, Niedermayer or Langenbrunner were more valuable to that team than Brodeur.

I understand the "definition" of the award but it seems people were more focused on what Giguere did in the first three rounds as opposed to his average performance when it mattered most. I know Brodeur had his hiccups in the Finals but 3 Shutouts?

The first two games in Jersey were shutouts and any goalie in the league could have had those two.

Ducks put up 32 shots total, 16 in each game.

 

[Michael Farkas]

They were 32 grade A chances. Brodeur robbed them on each and every occasion.

I can paint with broad brush strokes in a specious way too...

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

there are opinions and there are facts. here are a few that i know factually were wrong:

2002: bill guerin was the first team all-star RW (41 goals, 66 pts, boston had its best season in a long time, finishing first in the east and second in the league behind only the ringeriest of all detroit teams). meanwhile, bertuzzi finished third in scoring (85 pts) and in the second half absolutely destroyed the league, going 26 goals, 60 pts in the least 40 games. what makes this fact and not opinion? bertuzzi finished third in LW voting, behind shanahan and his own linemate naslund; he also finished sixth in RW voting, which of course was his actual position.

2011: ryan kesler wins the selke off the back of his career 41 goal season, after finishing third and second the previous two years. now kesler was a fantastic defensive player and imo could have won either the 2009 or 2010 selke and i wouldn't have complained. but in 2011, the whole reason he hit 41 goals is because in the offseason vancouver added the actual best defensive forward of the 2011 season, manny malhotra. malhotra became the #1 pk option and defensive zone option, freeing kesler to move up to the first PP unit with the sedins (sidenote: adding manny also freed up burrows, who only had two SH pts all year, vs leading the league the year before; jannik hansen emerged as a legit player that year and he was usually manny's PK partner). and yes manny missed the last ten games of the season, but at the time he left the lineup, vancouver had the #1 PK in the league (which they lost off of one sloppy edmonton game where they let in two PP goals) and the fewest goals allowed in the league (which they maintained).

as ever, the moral of the story is you can't count on awards voters to actually have watched the west coast games.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Crosby was a fine winner for the conn smythe in 2016.

Maybe some people think winning team/not winning team makes no difference would rather give it to Couture - fine. But if you're chosing a winner from Pittsburgh, Crosby was a good choice. Was he unanimous? No - but it doesn't mean he wasn't a worthy winner.

There are many years where the Conn Smythe winner isn't unanimous - but not being unanimous isn't the same as being a bad winner.

Crosby has so many haters (and also, so many passionate fans) that anything about him always gets blown up to 1000 degrees. But the 2016 smythe isn't a problem and never really was.

The problem was the reasoning behind the choice, and many on here pointing out this sudden “defensive game” rep that Crosby was given. He was also not anything stellar offensively going into the finals.

These are the numbers after the conference finals

Kessel: 18-9-9-18 +4
Crosby: 18-6-9-15 -2
Malkin: 17-4-11-15 +6
Bonino: 18-3-12-15 +7
Hagelin: 18-5-7-12 +6

You can call it “hate” all you want, it was still one of the weakest smythes in history. Guys like Murray, Kessel, and even Letang were more deserving imo.

 

[Michael Farkas]

If Kessel won, it would also be a weak win...

 

[bobholly39]

The problem was the reasoning behind the choice, and many on here pointing out this sudden “defensive game” rep that Crosby was given. He was also not anything stellar offensively going into the finals.

These are the numbers after the conference finals

Kessel: 18-9-9-18 +4
Crosby: 18-6-9-15 -2
Malkin: 17-4-11-15 +6
Bonino: 18-3-12-15 +7
Hagelin: 18-5-7-12 +6

You can call it “hate” all you want, it was still one of the weakest smythes in history. Guys like Murray, Kessel, and even Letang were more deserving imo.

It's a weak smythe if you compare performances of smythe winners in other years. Yes. Nobody has ever bragged about how Crosby's 2016 smythe is one of the best ones ever. But it's not weak within the year - any of those 4 names, Crosby/Letang/Murray/Kessel would have been a deserving winner, but they chose Crosby.

Yes - Crosby gets a lot of haters. Nobody talks about Patrick Kane winning the smythe in 2013 with 19 points in 23 games. Some of his teammates could easily have won over him too. Is it a weak smythe? Yes. Was he the unanimous right winner? No. Is it as much fun to talk about Patrick Kane than Sidney Crosby? Never.

 

[GreatGonzo]

It's a weak smythe if you compare performances of smythe winners in other years. Yes. Nobody has ever bragged about how Crosby's 2016 smythe is one of the best ones ever. But it's not weak within the year - any of those 4 names, Crosby/Letang/Murray/Kessel would have been a deserving winner, but they chose Crosby.

Yes - Crosby gets a lot of haters. Nobody talks about Patrick Kane winning the smythe in 2013 with 19 points in 23 games. Some of his teammates could easily have won over him too. Is it a weak smythe? Yes. Was he the unanimous right winner? No. Is it as much fun to talk about Patrick Kane than Sidney Crosby? Never.

I understand that the 2016 Pens as a unit had plenty of stand out players. But that’s not to say Crosby wasn’t given it due to his reputation as a first line center and captain. He under performed imo, and not just for a guy of his talent. He struggled to produce offensively while not being anything special defensively, but he still won it regardless.

Well Kanes 19 points did lead the Hawks in scoring. There are differences, but with what your saying, Kanes smythe could have easily gone to Keith or Crawford, so in some ways it is similar to Crosbys when considering how many others were potential winners.

Also, I’ve never seen Kane be called a generational talent or put up 30+ points in a playoff season. There are expectations with Crosby and like I said before, he underperformed dramatically for a guy of his caliber.