Hockey MVP?
JeffJ99
Posts: 91
in Sports Talk
Who should be the NHL MVP this season? It has been an exciting return for hockey, hasn't it? I love the shootouts. The Flyers were my preseason pick, largely because of the acquistion of Forsberg. Anyway, I think I'd go with Jagr as MVP. But there's other good candidates. Any thoughts?
Jeff
Jeff
0
Comments
<< <i>Thornton or Jagr will win the award. >>
I'll say Jagr, but either of those guys would be a good choice. I'm guessing Kiprusoff will get the nod over Heatley as the other finalist.
<< <i>
<< <i>Thornton or Jagr will win the award. >>
I'll say Jagr, but either of those guys would be a good choice. I'm guessing Kiprusoff will get the nod over Heatley as the other finalist. >>
Good point-- I completely forgot about Thornton. I did consider Kiprusoff, but didn't mention him for the reason you mentioned.
Around here there is a bunch of talk about Zubov deserving to be a Norris candidate (not necessarily winning it); does he ever get talked about outside Dallas? The man is truly amazing.
<< <i>I think Kiprusoff should get it; but I think Thornton will get it.
Around here there is a bunch of talk about Zubov deserving to be a Norris candidate (not necessarily winning it); does he ever get talked about outside Dallas? The man is truly amazing. >>
Speaking for the Detroit contingent, Zubov doesn't get much press here. Of course, the Winged Wheel boasts a pretty fine defensemen of their own.... But no matter. The Zubov issue aside, you'll be laughing last when Dallas beats Detroit in the West Finals.
How much support do you think Ovechkin will get? I know the Caps had a poor year, but he certainly didn't.
Eyebone
Zubov has been so good for so long, I think people forget about him. Lidstrom's name probably carries more weight around voting time. The finalists should be chosen from Lidstrom, Zubov, Niedermeyer, Pronger and Redden. Zubov does lead all defensemen in even strength points.
Website
Mark Mulder rookies
Chipper Jones rookies
Orlando Cabrera rookies
Lawrence Taylor
Sam Huff
Lavar Arrington
NY Giants
NY Yankees
NJ Nets
NJ Devils
1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Looking for Topps rookies as well.
References:
GregM13
VintageJeff
<< <i>Kiprusoff deserves it, Thorton will get it. >>
No wonder the Bruins fired their GM!!
1960 Armour Coins
Greg Maddux Basic
Greg Maddux Master
All Time 49ers
Jay
Of the top 16 teams in goals scored, 14 are in the playoffs with only Atlanta and Vancouver missing. That leaves two spots for lower scoring teams.
Brodeur dragged the 22nd ranked goal-scoring Devils up to a five seed.
Kiprusoff lugged the 27th ranked (ahead of only St. Louis, Chicago and Columbus) goal-scoring Flames to a 3-seed and a division title. It is not obvious because Kiprusoff is so good every night, but the Flames are an AWFUL hockey team, worse than Columbus.
<< <i>I think it will be a toss up between Thornton and Jagr. I think a better question would be who will win the Vezna for top goalie. You have Kipper, Brodeur, Vokoun all with awesome years. Should be a close race, and it may come down to which goalie does better in the playoffs >>
Vokoun over Legace? Quit trying to push your Predators agenda fool
BTW, How's it going Chris? Been a while, my friend. Maybe we'll get a Wings/Preds showdown. Keep your fingers crossed. Later...
Zack
<< <i>Thornton has the advantage of being traded midseason so that the voters can actually see his impact. But where do you suppose Calgary would be without Kiprusoff?
Of the top 16 teams in goals scored, 14 are in the playoffs with only Atlanta and Vancouver missing. That leaves two spots for lower scoring teams.
Brodeur dragged the 22nd ranked goal-scoring Devils up to a five seed.
Kiprusoff lugged the 27th ranked (ahead of only St. Louis, Chicago and Columbus) goal-scoring Flames to a 3-seed and a division title. It is not obvious because Kiprusoff is so good every night, but the Flames are an AWFUL hockey team, worse than Columbus. >>
Uh, no-- the Flames are not as bad as Columbus.
Unlike with baseball you have to account for the style of play in hockey. Sutter is not Mark Crawford; he's not going to have his defensemen jumping up in the play, and leaving his own zone exposed to odd man rushes if there's a turnover. Take Phaneuf out of the equation and you have 1 Calgary defenseman with more than 5 goals. That's a product of the system, not an indictment of the Flames' blueliners.
Kiprusoff and Brodeur are both fantastic goalies, but they have been helped by team philosophies that stress conservative play in the offensive and neutral zones. Just as the Pistons defensive stats are 'padded', in effect, by the fact that they don't take stupid shots on offense and leave themselves susceptible to fast breaks, the Flames' GAA is aided by the style of play that Sutter demands.
One mistake that people often make IMO is giving an inordinate amount of credit for a good team GAA to the goalie. There's a reason why big defensemen who can handle the forecheck and clear traffic from the front of the net make as much money as they do. Scott Stevens was never a 'finisher', per se, but he was one of the most dominant players in the NHL for years. Case in points: With the exceptions of Luongo and Roy you never hear about an excellent goalie who plays for a team that doesn't also stress team defense. Why? Because you could be the second coming of Terry Sawchuck, but if your team is stuffed with derensemen who went to the Sandis Ozolinsh School For Blueliners you're going to have a GAA over 3. The team needs the goalie, but the goalie also needs the team.
Also, let's not forget that Kiprusoff was an average goalie with San Jose, sporting around a 2.4 GAA and a save % around .90 over 40 games or so in his first three seasons. Now, suddenly, he goes to the Flames and becomes the best goalie in the leauge? Sure, he may have matured some, but this isn't baseball here-- goalie stats, unlike hitting stats, are not independant of a team's overall ability. The fact that his GAA has dropped by almost .5 since going to Calgary has to be at least partially attributed to the way the Flames play hockey.
<< <i>
<< <i>Thornton has the advantage of being traded midseason so that the voters can actually see his impact. But where do you suppose Calgary would be without Kiprusoff?
Of the top 16 teams in goals scored, 14 are in the playoffs with only Atlanta and Vancouver missing. That leaves two spots for lower scoring teams.
Brodeur dragged the 22nd ranked goal-scoring Devils up to a five seed.
Kiprusoff lugged the 27th ranked (ahead of only St. Louis, Chicago and Columbus) goal-scoring Flames to a 3-seed and a division title. It is not obvious because Kiprusoff is so good every night, but the Flames are an AWFUL hockey team, worse than Columbus. >>
Uh, no-- the Flames are not as bad as Columbus.
Unlike with baseball you have to account for the style of play in hockey. Sutter is not Mark Crawford; he's not going to have his defensemen jumping up in the play, and leaving his own zone exposed to odd man rushes if there's a turnover. Take Phaneuf out of the equation and you have 1 Calgary defenseman with more than 5 goals. That's a product of the system, not an indictment of the Flames' blueliners.
Kiprusoff and Brodeur are both fantastic goalies, but they have been helped by team philosophies that stress conservative play in the offensive and neutral zones. Just as the Pistons defensive stats are 'padded', in effect, by the fact that they don't take stupid shots on offense and leave themselves susceptible to fast breaks, the Flames' GAA is aided by the style of play that Sutter demands.
One mistake that people often make IMO is giving an inordinate amount of credit for a good team GAA to the goalie. There's a reason why big defensemen who can handle the forecheck and clear traffic from the front of the net make as much money as they do. Scott Stevens was never a 'finisher', per se, but he was one of the most dominant players in the NHL for years. Case in points: With the exceptions of Luongo and Roy you never hear about an excellent goalie who plays for a team that doesn't also stress team defense. Why? Because you could be the second coming of Terry Sawchuck, but if your team is stuffed with derensemen who went to the Sandis Ozolinsh School For Blueliners you're going to have a GAA over 3. The team needs the goalie, but the goalie also needs the team.
Also, let's not forget that Kiprusoff was an average goalie with San Jose, sporting around a 2.4 GAA and a save % around .90 over 40 games or so in his first three seasons. Now, suddenly, he goes to the Flames and becomes the best goalie in the leauge? Sure, he may have matured some, but this isn't baseball here-- goalie stats, unlike hitting stats, are not independant of a team's overall ability. The fact that his GAA has dropped by almost .5 since going to Calgary has to be at least partially attributed to the way the Flames play hockey. >>
And dont put Legace and Vokouns name in the same sentence. Thats like saying a Ford compares to a Ferrari.
Vokoun = Wins
Legace = Golf
Honestly.. with Vokoun out for the rest of the year... it will be a tough battle for the Preds to get anywhere in the playoffs. I hope Mason comes up big.
Later
Chris
<< <i>Uh, no-- the Flames are not as bad as Columbus. >>
A few clarifying comments:
1. I agree with most of what you posted, Calgary is more defensive-minded than most teams and that is part of the reason they score so few goals. I think it is an open question whether the chicken or the egg came first - I have watched Calgary play 20 or so games this year (I'm a junkie) and it is not at all obvious to me that even if Sutter told them to damn the torpedos go full speed ahead that Calgary could crack the top 20 in scoring. It's a team built on defense, yes, but it also appears to be a team incapable of scoring even it if tried so Sutter has little choice but to stress defense the way he does.
2. I purposefully said "Columbus" and not "St. Louis" or "Chicago" or a few others, because Columbus is not that bad a team. Their record this year was pathetic, but injuries destroyed them early on. They were 5-18 through Thanksgiving and 9-3-1 down the stretch. Perhaps I should have said Vancouver or Los Angeles instead and it wouldn't have seemed like such an insult. It seems obvious to me that if Calgary and Vancouver had switched goalies this year that Vancouver would have won the division easily, and Calgary would have missed the playoffs, maybe even fallen below Minnesota. Just an impression since there is no way to know, but it's a strong impression.
3. Another chicken/egg problem is that I thought Kiprusoff's GAA was unfairly high when he was on San Jose; that team simply forgets to play defense sometimes. So I agree that Kiprusoff did not suddenly get that much better when he changed teams, but I still think you are attributing too much of the difference to Calgary's style of play and not enough to Kiprusoff. He was one of the best goalies in the league when he was on San Jose, but nobody (except Calgary) seemed to notice.
4. No doubt that my thoughts are biased somewhat by watching the Flames and Stars play this year. Kiprusoff handed us our only shutout of the year and when I say Kiprusoff did it I mean Kiprusoff did it without a bit of help from anyone - at times it even seemed like the rest of the Flames were actually working against him. The Stars got 39 shots on goal and at least half a dozen would have gotten by most goalies.
5. When Kiprusoff broke Turco's GAA record in part by sitting out the final game of the season he was among my 10 most-hated players in the league. That incident still irritates me when I think about it. Which is all just to say that I am not a "fan" of Kiprusoff - I just appreciate watching him play. If you don't think he is the best goalie in the league (with the possible exception of Brodeur), then you and I are watching a different game.
<< <i>
<< <i>Uh, no-- the Flames are not as bad as Columbus. >>
A few clarifying comments:
1. I agree with most of what you posted, Calgary is more defensive-minded than most teams and that is part of the reason they score so few goals. I think it is an open question whether the chicken or the egg came first - I have watched Calgary play 20 or so games this year (I'm a junkie) and it is not at all obvious to me that even if Sutter told them to damn the torpedos go full speed ahead that Calgary could crack the top 20 in scoring. It's a team built on defense, yes, but it also appears to be a team incapable of scoring even it if tried so Sutter has little choice but to stress defense the way he does.
2. I purposefully said "Columbus" and not "St. Louis" or "Chicago" or a few others, because Columbus is not that bad a team. Their record this year was pathetic, but injuries destroyed them early on. They were 5-18 through Thanksgiving and 9-3-1 down the stretch. Perhaps I should have said Vancouver or Los Angeles instead and it wouldn't have seemed like such an insult. It seems obvious to me that if Calgary and Vancouver had switched goalies this year that Vancouver would have won the division easily, and Calgary would have missed the playoffs, maybe even fallen below Minnesota. Just an impression since there is no way to know, but it's a strong impression.
3. Another chicken/egg problem is that I thought Kiprusoff's GAA was unfairly high when he was on San Jose; that team simply forgets to play defense sometimes. So I agree that Kiprusoff did not suddenly get that much better when he changed teams, but I still think you are attributing too much of the difference to Calgary's style of play and not enough to Kiprusoff. He was one of the best goalies in the league when he was on San Jose, but nobody (except Calgary) seemed to notice.
4. No doubt that my thoughts are biased somewhat by watching the Flames and Stars play this year. Kiprusoff handed us our only shutout of the year and when I say Kiprusoff did it I mean Kiprusoff did it without a bit of help from anyone - at times it even seemed like the rest of the Flames were actually working against him. The Stars got 39 shots on goal and at least half a dozen would have gotten by most goalies.
5. When Kiprusoff broke Turco's GAA record in part by sitting out the final game of the season he was among my 10 most-hated players in the league. That incident still irritates me when I think about it. Which is all just to say that I am not a "fan" of Kiprusoff - I just appreciate watching him play. If you don't think he is the best goalie in the league (with the possible exception of Brodeur), then you and I are watching a different game. >>
Well, sure-- who else would you take besides Kiprusoff or Brodeur? Turco? Luongo maybe? There aren't many others to choose from. Still, I maintain that Kiprusoff is overrated. Yes, he's an incredible goalie, but he's not the second coming of Patrick Roy. He and Nabakov's stats were almost identical when they were at San Jose, and there was no way to know he would enjoy the kind of success he has enjoyed thus far in Calgary. And again, you can't ignore the impact that the team philosophy plays on a goalie's stats. Look at Manny Fernandez; he plays for a defense first coach (Lemaire), and he had a .919 save %. Kiprusoff had a .923 save %, so while Kiprusoff's number are better we're talking about .004 of a point; not exactly a huge margin.
Kiprusoff's save percentage during the season when he faced more than 30 shots in a game was .929 which is a full 10 points higher than when he had 29 shots or less. At least based on those numbers he was excellent when he got more work. I really do not think that in the Western Conference play-offs there is another goalie who is nearly as good as him. I would take him over Brodeur.
I know very few will agree with this statement but Roy gets way too much credit. Most people easily rank him #1 from this era but he has had plenty moments of weakness. Yes, Roy was unbelievable when the Habs won the Cup in 93 and very very good when they won in 86 and when his Avs teams won. However, in all the years he won the Cup his teams only had one real upset and that was in 96 when they beat the Wings. Even in 93 when they finished third in their division with 102 points they were the home team in every round but the first. Check out his record in 7th games. How many series did he steal when his teams were the underdogs? Andy Moog, used to routinely outgoaltend him during Hab-Bruin series in the late 80's early 90's. Of course, the legendary Mike Vernon has seriously outgoaltended him twice, once with Calgary and once with Detroit.
As for Kipper, no doubt some of his success is a function of Calgary's style of play, but only a very small handful of goalies in the league could do as well behind that team.
Thornton will win it..
<< <i>GO WINGS!!!! >>
GO OILERS!
I am a lifelong Habs fan and was 12 years old when the Habs won the Cup in 86--to me, Roy was everything, he was really incredible not so much in the finals where the Habs dominated, but against the Rangers in the Wales Conference finals.
The year after, against the Flyers, he totally dropped the ball, but still, I loved him because he was the saviour of my team that drafted Doug Wickenheiser instead of taking Denis Savard in 1980. So I didn't blame Roy for the loss, remember too that the Flyers had wonder-fluke in goal that year, Ron Hextall, who took the Flyers all the way to game 7 against the Oilers until Glenn Anderson scored on a slapper with not much time left in the third.
Then you've got the next season, when the Habs, who beat the Bruins something like 36 years in a row in the playoffs (this isn't a joke, it was over 30 years since the Habs had lost to the Bruins in the playoffs, both of course being original 6 teams). He was plain awful against them that year, but we also lost Richer early which killed us anyway.
The next season I have to admit he was brutal against the Flames in the final--it seemed like every night Roy would find a way to lose the game, and to give up the game winning goal to 40 year old Lanny McDonald was just heartbreaking. Sorry Roy, but you screwed us again.
Now this isn't to say that if we had somebody else starting (like Hayward), we would have even gotten to the finals but to lose the Cup on home ice, brutal Roy, brutal.
This is when my opinion of Roy started to drastically change because I started to think. All throughout the 1980's there were basically 3 teams that liked to play a more defensive game (read the trap), Washington, Philly and the Habs. Of course the Devils mastered this 10 years later but that's another story. I don't have the stats in front of me, but I believe there were a few years when Roy would have something like a 2.80 GAA and no more than 1 or 2 others would be below 3 in the entire league--the Habs built their entire team around him but that didn't mean he was the best--if Fuhr had played for the Habs instead of the Oil how would his career stats look? Or how about getting Moog at that time (we got him way past his prime). Then you've got to think about all the All-Star games where he was totally brutal--I remember when they would have the breakaways at the end of the skills competition and I would pray they wouldn't have Roy on last because I knew if he was last and it was a close game the Wales Conference was dead. How about the 87 Canada Cup--I know he was young, but he went to try-outs and was cut early--why didn't he make the 91 team?
The next few years were bad for the Habs, if they met Boston, they were almost certainly gonners although Roy did manage to beat them once or twice (can't quite recall). But the worst was 93--I watched every game from start to finish, even the late starts in LA, and I can tell you that Roy certainly wasn't the reason we won the Cup that year, we just had the right mix. He was good, don't get me wrong, but besides maybe a game or 2 against the Nords in the first round he was average, and honestly he didn't play that well in my opinion in Game 3 and 4 in LA where in both games the Habs had a 2 goal lead and Roy found a way to let those leads slip (although we won both in OT).
A few seasons later Roy, and all of us Habs fans, could see the writing on the wall. We traded Chelios basically for nothing, we didn't have enough scoring, and the defense was simply not good. He wanted out. He never said anything, but he played like crap and Roy, being a big-time historian of the game knew his stats were in jeopardy (this is my opinion, but looking back I haven't changed my mind about it).
So he got his wish, went to Colorado where I feel he played better, but was NEVER in Hasek's league, NEVER, which in my mind makes me wonder why he gets such attention? Hopefully Brodeur will pass all of his marks and we can stop talking about Roy.
Which reminds me, the last goal he gave up in the NHL was in the playoffs in overtime against the Minnesota Wild--he barely moved. Go back and watch it, good for a chuckle.
Long live HUET!!!
Jay