BREAKING NEWS: NSH & PIT blast the silence

[KapG]

Its a good deal for NSH for sure, but I think you guys are failing realizing how SICK Mikko Koviu is at H2H

You do have a point there.

I still like it for Nashville though.

[Scott]

Its a good deal for NSH for sure, but I think you guys are failing realizing how SICK Mikko Koviu is at H2H

You do have a point there.

I still like it for Nashville though.

You have an offer for me yet?

[Nick]

and has a Conn Smythe.

Seriously, referencing the awards chosen by the hockey writers is one of the weakest arguments IMO, on over half the awards every year they seem to pick the wrong guy. Malkin was the best player in one series (it did indeed happen to be the finals vs the wings), but to say he's a playoff performer, or what drove that team to win is evidence to me that the writers didn't watch the games. Drives me nutz. They use different logic every year, no consistent criteria, insanely split voting... just not a valid point at all IMO. Malkin is an elite, top top top end offensive player - who is moody, lacks consistent compete level, laughable in his own zone, one of the worst face-off men in the league, selfish penalties and a spezza-esq on his give-aways. If he happens to be trying 100% at the right time, sure can be a nice teammate though. I 100% agree he sucks to play against, because he can beat you so badly. However he seems to beat himself a similar amount.

Just to be clear. I said I'd pick Malkin. However I do believe there are teams that would benefit more for Koivu then they would Malkin.

I wish I was on my laptop instead of my office computer Shiv, would quote the chat history...

[MSP4LYFE]

Also, anyone with Gaborik and Malkin on their team at the same time will NEVER ever win the BBKL championship.

I wouldn't say NEVER, if both player have career years (or close to it) there is an opportunity to build around them, but it is a very difficult, and unlikely feat to accomplish.

[MSP4LYFE]

and has a Conn Smythe.

Seriously, referencing the awards chosen by the hockey writers is one of the weakest arguments IMO, on over half the awards every year they seem to pick the wrong guy. Malkin was the best player in one series (it did indeed happen to be the finals vs the wings), but to say he's a playoff performer, or what drove that team to win is proof to me that the writers didn't watch the games. Drives me nutz. They use different logic every year, no consistent criteria, insanely split voting... just not a valid point at all IMO. Malkin is an elite, top top top end offensive player - who is moody, lacks consistent compete level, laughable in his own zone, one of the worst face-off men in the league, selfish penalties and a spezza-esq on his give-aways. If he happens to be trying 100% at the right time, sure can be a nice teammates though.

I wish I was on my laptop instead of my office computer Shiv, would quote the chat history...

Does anyone other than Nick believe Malkin didn't deserve the Conn Smythe that year? I've had this conversation with him several times, and failed to reach a consensus, so I would like to hear everyone else's opinion.

[MSP4LYFE]

Also, Malkin was far and away the best player in the Canes series Nick, there isn't even an argument against it in my mind.

[Shep]

and has a Conn Smythe.

Seriously, referencing the awards chosen by the hockey writers is one of the weakest arguments IMO, on over half the awards every year they seem to pick the wrong guy. Malkin was the best player in one series (it did indeed happen to be the finals vs the wings), but to say he's a playoff performer, or what drove that team to win is evidence to me that the writers didn't watch the games. Drives me nutz. They use different logic every year, no consistent criteria, insanely split voting... just not a valid point at all IMO. Malkin is an elite, top top top end offensive player - who is moody, lacks consistent compete level, laughable in his own zone, one of the worst face-off men in the league, selfish penalties and a spezza-esq on his give-aways. If he happens to be trying 100% at the right time, sure can be a nice teammate though. I 100% agree he sucks to play against, because he can beat you so badly. However he seems to beat himself a similar amount.

Just to be clear. I said I'd pick Malkin. However I do believe there are teams that would benefit more for Koivu then they would Malkin.

I wish I was on my laptop instead of my office computer Shiv, would quote the chat history...

Yeah well I watched the Stanley Cup Finals and he was the best player on the ice. He was the best player in the playoffs. He deserved it.

If you want to talk about a Conn Smythe underserved, let's talk about Toews last year..

*awaits the madness

[kyuss]

and has a Conn Smythe.

Seriously, referencing the awards chosen by the hockey writers is one of the weakest arguments IMO, on over half the awards every year they seem to pick the wrong guy. Malkin was the best player in one series (it did indeed happen to be the finals vs the wings), but to say he's a playoff performer, or what drove that team to win is proof to me that the writers didn't watch the games. Drives me nutz. They use different logic every year, no consistent criteria, insanely split voting... just not a valid point at all IMO. Malkin is an elite, top top top end offensive player - who is moody, lacks consistent compete level, laughable in his own zone, one of the worst face-off men in the league, selfish penalties and a spezza-esq on his give-aways. If he happens to be trying 100% at the right time, sure can be a nice teammates though.

I wish I was on my laptop instead of my office computer Shiv, would quote the chat history...

Does anyone other than Nick believe Malkin didn't deserve the Conn Smythe that year? I've had this conversation with him several times, and failed to reach a consensus, so I would like to hear everyone else's opinion.

many Crosby's fanboys are with Nick on that one, no doubts

[Nick]

And note, the cup is a team award, yet the conn smythe goes to a player on that team 99% of the time (all but 3?) Most years the voting is still between 4 or 5 players and splits very narrowly (I recall reading that last summer, a writer had evidence/#) .


Just to be clear, when referencing the awards, you are going off the opinions of the following individuals:
Kevin Allen, USA Today (PHWA president)
Bruce Arthur, National Post
Larry Brooks, New York Post
Scott Burnside, ESPN
Ken Campbell, The Hockey News
Damien Cox, Toronto Star
Craig Custance, The Sporting News
Adrian Dater, Denver Post
Eric Duhatschek, The Globe and Mail
Helene Elliott, Los Angeles Times
Michael Farber, Sports Illustrated
Red Fisher, Montreal Gazette
Elliotte Friedman, Hockey Night in Canada
Tony Gallagher, Vancouver Province
Bruce Garrioch, Ottawa Sun
Pierre Lebrun, ESPN
Bob McKenzie, TSN
James Mirtle, The Globe and Mail
David Shoalts, The Globe and Mail
Steve Simmons, Toronto Sun
Michael Russo, The Star Tribune
Greg Wyshynski, Yahoo! Sports
Mike Zeisberger, Toronto Sun


Laughable really.

[Shep]

Yeah but I watched the series. There was nobody even close to deserving it over Malkin.

You thinking otherwise is what's laughable.

[Nick]

Alright... so Toews who was dominant in the 2 previous series, but seriously got owned in the final series wins the Conn Smythe, and Malkin who was dominant in round 1 and the finals, but alternated between invisible and costly in the middle series wins the award. If you think Toews earned it one year the criteria/logic/value is very different from the Malkin year. To be clear, I thought Pronger earned it last year, and don't overly disagree with the Malkin year, I simply see it as a year where the team won, Crosby, MAF, Gonchar, & Malkin were all utterly dominant at different points. Zetty and Hossa also deserved mention IMO, and that's why or I guess supported by an insanely close ballot.


These awards go to guys that are polite to the press, and are on the winning team. If your a guy that doesn't have time for the media BS, are rough (taboo in the media since the lockout) or aren't a young (or seriously older) popular player to write a piece about you don't have a hope. Not calling some conspiracy theory here... I kinda thought this was pretty obvious stuff.

[Nick]

Yeah but I watched the series. There was nobody even close to deserving it over Malkin.

You thinking otherwise is what's laughable.

Holy shit... is it the MVP of the series award? My mistake.


And note, I have not said that i'm against the Malkin vote, he owned 2/4 series. I myself would have given it to Sidney most likely, great in round 1, straight up brilliant in 2 & 3, solid but injured for the finals. I believe that was more steps towards winning the cup then Malkin's excellent first series, brutal middle 2, and strongest player in the finals (though he didn't exactly mirror in that series what Sid did in the previous 2). But that doesn't change how I view referencing the award, " The opinion of the hockey writers is X"... and we all read their stuff, so consistently full of shit, yet you remove their names from it and suddenly it's somehow more credible.

[MSP4LYFE]

LOL, we've completely derailed this thread.

[MSP4LYFE]

Yeah but I watched the series. There was nobody even close to deserving it over Malkin.

You thinking otherwise is what's laughable.

Holy shit... is it the MVP of the series award? My mistake.


And note, I have not said that i'm against the Malkin vote, he owned 2/4 series. But that doesn't change how I view referencing the award.

No, but you argued that (in your opinion) Mikko Koivu could take a team farther in the playoffs, despite the fact that Malkin has a Conn Smythe trophy to his name, and well over a ppg in his playoff career, compared to Mikko who has been absolutely brutal in his post season career (albeit a short sample size).

[Nick]

LOL, we've completely derailed this thread.

Anton, gif time buddy.

[Shep]

Yeah but I watched the series. There was nobody even close to deserving it over Malkin.

You thinking otherwise is what's laughable.

Holy shit... is it the MVP of the series award? My mistake.


And note, I have not said that i'm against the Malkin vote, he owned 2/4 series. I myself would have given it to Sidney most likely, great in round 1, straight up brilliant in 2 & 3, solid but injured for the finals. But that doesn't change how I view referencing the award, " The opinion of the hockey writers is X"... and we all read their stuff, so consistently full of shit, yet you remove their names from it and suddenly it's somehow more credible.

Fine. I don't care how you view the award. If i didn't feel Malkin deserved the award anyways, I wouldn't have used reference to it.

Malkin is way better than Koivu in real life. Anybody that would build a team around Koivu over Malkin is insane. Malkin has dominated the league in the regular season and has played great in the playoffs. But I'll take a player that is a little inconsistent that is a threat to hit 100pts every single season.

[Nick]

No, but you argued that (in your opinion) Mikko Koivu could take a team farther in the playoffs, despite the fact that Malkin has a Conn Smythe trophy to his name, and well over a ppg in his playoff career, compared to Mikko who has been absolutely brutal in his post season career (albeit a short sample size).

Some teams, not any or every team.


Mikko was fantastic in his most recent playoff experience IIRC, (loading stats page now) yep.. 4goals 5pts in a 6 game losing cause to the eventual stanley cup winning ducks (IIRC). Who shut down every top line they faced.

[MSP4LYFE]

I agree with Shep, though I am going to step back from the viewpoint that it is a "sure thing", I recall saying the same thing about Phaneuf v. Weber, and look how that turned out...

[MSP4LYFE]

No, but you argued that (in your opinion) Mikko Koivu could take a team farther in the playoffs, despite the fact that Malkin has a Conn Smythe trophy to his name, and well over a ppg in his playoff career, compared to Mikko who has been absolutely brutal in his post season career (albeit a short sample size).

Some teams, not any or every team.


Mikko was fantastic in his most recent playoff experience IIRC, (loading stats page now) yep.. 4goals 5pts in a 6 game losing cause to the eventual stanley cup winning ducks (IIRC). Who shut down every top line they faced.

Check out the other series totals...Still, you make a valid point, he has at least been decent, and perhaps more than decent on the whole. Nowhere near what Malkin has accomplished though.

I also don't care to debate specific team fits, because frankly I don't know who would fit better on a different team or system.

[Shep]

I love Koivu.

We'll agree to disagree because I don't really feel like debating this anymore.

Solid deal for the league.