Should a goalie win the Hart Trophy?

[doniceage]

Sidney Crosby, John Tavares and Alex Ovechkin have received most of the attention for this year’s Hart Trophy and each can make a strong case for MVP.

Crosby’s numbers separated him from the pack so much that even though he hasn’t played a game in April, he still leads the NHL in scoring. Tavares has been a goal-scoring machine on a team that has seen a large leap in offensive productivity and should make a surprise landing in the playoffs. And once Ovechkin settled in to coach Adam Oates’ system, he started to look like the Ovie of old and the Caps went on a tear around him.

But none of them are clear-cut favorites because each has some kind of a drawback to their nomination. Crosby has missed all of April and the Pens have gone 7-2 without him. Tavares – on pace for 35 assists over 82 games – would have the fewest helpers (pro-rated over a full season) for an MVP since Bobby Hull who won the prestigious trophy during the 1964-65 season, collecting 32 assists. Ovechkin was less than a point per game player for half of this short season and has basically made his case in his extraordinary final 23 games.

http://www.thehockeynews.com/article...daily_20130424

[RGM81]

To answer the question, yes.

Being "the best goalie in the NHL" and being "the player most valuable to his team" are not mutually exclusive ideas.

[policeradio556]

were you going to make a case for a goalie in particular? or just throwing the idea out there in general?

[30ranfordfan]

Absolutley one could, and should if they are the best choice.

Theodore (MON) was the last one to do it, I think? Hasek won a couple of them, if I recall.

Not sure that this would be the year though: Ovechkin (IMO) has it pretty much locked up.

[miscs75]

The one goalie that stands out to me to get any votes is Bobrovsky based on what he's done in net for Columbus. Another example is Nabokov with the Islanders.

[Fleury14]

Bobrovsky is a strong candidate for the Hart, but voters seems married to the idea of picking a player from a playoff team and CBJ are on the fence. But playing in the West this season is a massive disadvantage with no games between the 2 conferences and a higher percentage of voters being in the East (at least, I'm pretty sure that's correct, there's usually an East-bias in the awards).

Is Ovy really the favorite? He's dominated his division this year (16g in 18 games), but (at quick glance) he has 8 goals in 19 games against playoff teams; just wrecking poor competition.

[RGM81]

were you going to make a case for a goalie in particular? or just throwing the idea out there in general?

Are you asking myself or Don? Don just post the stories, and I just stated my opinion. Generally speaking, I see absolutely no reason why there should not be a goalie that can with both. If a goalie has absolutely stellar numbers that merit the Vezina, while also being critical to his team's success, he deserves consideration in both categories. No different than the best D-man being eligible to win the Norris and the Hart.

[policeradio556]

Are you asking myself or Don? Don just post the stories, and I just stated my opinion. Generally speaking, I see absolutely no reason why there should not be a goalie that can with both. If a goalie has absolutely stellar numbers that merit the Vezina, while also being critical to his team's success, he deserves consideration in both categories. No different than the best D-man being eligible to win the Norris and the Hart.

I was posing the question to both of you... I totally agree with a goalie being given more consideration for the award... I personally like Bobrovsky (I still cry at night because the Flyers got rid of him) Also think both goaltenders in Chicago deserve huge props (Especially Ray Emery)...

[RGM81]

In the Chicago situation, it's very difficult to make an argument for either goalie, because how do you say that Crawford is more instrumental to the team's success than Patrick Kane? How do you say that Emery is more valuable than Toews? That kind of thing.

That's why it bugs me to some extent when guys like Malkin or Sedin win the award, to use two recent examples. Unless they are clear cut the most valuable guy on their own team in any given campaign, how can they possibly be held up against a guy that is far and away more valuable to his team's fortunes? The year that Sedin won (2009-10) the Canucks were crazy in the stats department - Kesler had 75 points, Burrows had 35 goals, Ehrhoff was a +36, and in net Luongo had 40 wins and pretty good numbers across the board. Was Henrik the guy that stirred the drink, and really stepped up while Daniel was injured? Sure. But that was a powerhouse club that had everybody contributing, and some could have made the argument that Luongo should have been the team's candidate.

But I digress.

[Wickabee]

Am I the only one pulling for Tavares on this?