Crosby, Ovechkin and Tavares are Hart Finalists

[Deebo]

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=422850

 

[Bullfrog]

Based on the trophy criteria, I'd go with Tavares, Ovechkin, Crosby.

If the criteria changed to "most outstanding performance" I think the nod has to go Crosby. One of the most dominant performances in a long time.

 

[Peter D.]

I'd really like to see Tavares win it.

Although this would be a no-brainer had Crosby not missed a quarter of the season.  Still might not be, but I believe Tavares carrying the Isles to the post-season when many gave them no chance should warrant serious consideration.

 

[Kin]

Tavares has an easier to sell narrative but I really don't see how the choice could be anyone but Crosby. He scored as many points as Ovechkin and more than Tavares despite playing in 75% of the season. In addition he's probably the player of the three that adds the most to his team off the scoresheet.

 

[Omallley]

Tavares has an easier to sell narrative but I really don't see how the choice could be anyone but Crosby. He scored as many points as Ovechkin and more than Tavares despite playing in 75% of the season. In addition he's probably the player of the three that adds the most to his team off the scoresheet.

Granted - the Pens fared quite well without Crosby in the lineup. When Ovechkin struggled, so did the Caps.

 

[Bates]

But how did Kunitz do with and without Crosby?  They should make the MVP award a little simpler, best player in the league.  And Crosby is by far the Most Valuable player FOR the NHL!!!  How can we really penalize a player for being on a good team?  Almost every player on the Pens has become a better player because Crosby is on their team.  Should we also deduce that Anderson and Karlsson aren't great as Sens played well without them?

 

[Kin]

Granted - the Pens fared quite well without Crosby in the lineup. When Ovechkin struggled, so did the Caps.

Those are two entirely separate things though. When Crosby was hurt the Penguins gave his ice time to other good players in the line-up who were able to produce. When Ovechkin struggled, that was 20+ minutes a night, including a good chunk of their PP time, where Ovechkin wasn't just not producing, his presence on the ice meant nobody could produce in his place.

That doesn't help Ovechkin's case in my eyes.

 

[Kin]

If the criteria changed to "most outstanding performance" I think the nod has to go Crosby.

They should make the MVP award a little simpler, best player in the league.

You know, people say things like this and I never really understand them. Like "valuable" is some nebulous term but "Best" or "Most Outstanding" have rock-solid definitions that everyone would agree on.

People would have the same arguments, they'd just be over what it means to "stand-out" as opposed to what exactly value means.

 

[Rebel_1812]

I'd go with Tavares. If there other 2 were on the Isles they wouldn't have made the playoffs.

 

[Bates]

Nik my reply that you quoted was in reference to how valuable Crosby is to the league in $$$.  He is still by a large margin the face of the nhl.

 

[Bullfrog]

If the criteria changed to "most outstanding performance" I think the nod has to go Crosby.

And Crosby is by far the Most Valuable player FOR the NHL!!! 

You know, people say things like this and I never really understand them. Like "valuable" is some nebulous term but "Best" or "Most Outstanding" have rock-solid definitions that everyone would agree on.

People would have the same arguments, they'd just be over what it means to "stand-out" as opposed to what exactly value means.

Possibly, but I think you'd have less arguments against Crosby's performance being the most outstanding compared to who was most valuable to his team.

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

The first time all 3 nominees were #1 overall draft picks, no...?

 

[Kin]

Nik my reply that you quoted was in reference to how valuable Crosby is to the league in $$$.  He is still by a large margin the face of the nhl.

My bad. I'd meant to quote your previous sentence. Fixed it now.

 

[Kin]

Possibly, but I think you'd have less arguments against Crosby's performance being the most outstanding compared to who was most valuable to his team.

But that basically assumes that people aren't just going to make up their own interpretations of what it means to be outstanding which is exactly what they do for most valuable. Right now the argument is that Crosby's contributions to the Penguins are somehow lessened because Malkin is there too, that the value Crosby provides shouldn't be seen as a sum total but as a percentage in a pie-chart where all of the Penguins contributions are accounted for and his percentage in the pie-chart is smaller than Tavares. Similarly, they decide that what Stamkos or St. Louis did had essentially no value because their teams didn't make the playoffs and so the Lightning didn't even have a pie-chart because 33% of nothing is still nothing.

But both of those interpretations can just as easily be turned around with the word outstanding. "How can Crosby be the most outstanding? Tavares stood out compared to his teammates much more than Crosby did" or "How could Stamkos be the most outstanding when nobody paid attention to the Lightning after the middle of March? He didn't stand out to anyone."

Either you think the most valuable hockey player is the guy who played hockey the best and that value really just represents the act of playing hockey well regardless of circumstances or you have an entirely different concept of value. In that case the semantics aren't really going to matter.

 

[Jalili]

Tavares has an easier to sell narrative but I really don't see how the choice could be anyone but Crosby. He scored as many points as Ovechkin and more than Tavares despite playing in 75% of the season. In addition he's probably the player of the three that adds the most to his team off the scoresheet.

Agreed.

Crosby should be MVP.

Tavares will get his chance another year.