Mike Augello: Leafs split with Habs, Top 40 Prospects - #19

Did you guys win? Nevermind....you most likely lost because you're all losers

Did you guys win? Nevermind....you most likely lost because you're all losers
- LeftCoaster

(frank)in got us with this one.

Did you guys win? Nevermind....you most likely lost because you're all losers
- LeftCoaster

(frank)in got us with this one.
- Leafs43

he's clearly no pea brain

Gusev was fairly crap when the cats brought him on at the end of last season. He just doesnt appear to be NHL material

Did you guys win? Nevermind....you most likely lost because you're all losers
- LeftCoaster

See you guys in the playoffs,,,, well

(from last blog)

Random hockey thought on a Tuesday.

The Hart trophy should take into account cap hit (In a relatively small way).

Would make it a more interesting discussion.

- Leafs43

I do think that the Hart Trophy award is somewhat very flawed in that there seems to be an obsession with awarding players who put up a lot of points. That seems to go against the notion of what it means to be an MVP.

I'm not sure if I like adding the cap hit to the formula, but I would like to see a wider net cast to capture who truly is the "most valuable player" for their team.

It seems a bit curious that only one d-man has won the Hart (Pronger in 2000) in the past 50(ish) years. Hell, if you take Bobby Orr out of the equation (he won 3 in a row!) you have to go back to 1944 to find a D-man winner when *checks notes* Babe Pratt (a Leaf!) won it.

Why aren't more d-men considered for the award? Prolly cuz they don't score tons of points.

(from last blog)


I do think that the Hart Trophy award is somewhat very flawed in that there seems to be an obsession with awarding players who put up a lot of points. That seems to go against the notion of what it means to be an MVP.

I'm not sure if I like adding the cap hit to the formula, but I would like to see a wider net cast to capture who truly is the "most valuable player" for their team.

It seems a bit curious that only one d-man has won the Hart (Pronger in 2000) in the past 50(ish) years. Hell, if you take Bobby Orr out of the equation (he won 3 in a row!) you have to go back to 1944 to find a D-man winner when *checks notes* Babe Pratt (a Leaf!) won it.

Why aren't more d-men considered for the award? Prolly cuz they don't score tons of points.
- mjones242

Ya - I just think the award itself has become boring and predictable.

I could watch zero hockey games in a year and have a relatively good chance of picking the MVP winner using the scoring leaders.

Only real surprise in the last few years for me was Hall.

Ya - I just think the award itself has become boring and predictable.

I could watch zero hockey games in a year and have a relatively good chance of picking the MVP winner using the scoring leaders.

Only real surprise in the last few years for me was Hall.
- Leafs43

Who did you like that year, MacKinnon? I think either would've been fine with me, but you have a guy like Hall strong arm a team like NJ to the playoffs, that's usually a recipe for a Hart type season. It's either, guy has an unreal year and shoulders a presumed non-playoff team to the playoffs and wins or there are none of those and then it's usually tilter towards the highest scorers.

Who did you like that year, MacKinnon? I think either would've been fine with me, but you have a guy like Hall strong arm a team like NJ to the playoffs, that's usually a recipe for a Hart type season. It's either, guy has an unreal year and shoulders a presumed non-playoff team to the playoffs and wins or there are none of those and then it's usually tilter towards the highest scorers.
- RickJames77

I was fine with Hall as the winner.

I was just saying I wouldn't have predicted him using just the scoring leaders.

Normally you can take the top 5 scorers in the league, remove anyone who's team didn't make the playoffs.

If you lead the league in scoring, and your team made the playoffs (and you didn't win the award last year) there is a pretty good chance you win the MVP.

If the league leader's team didn't make the playoffs - I think point totals are suddenly discounted and everyone likes to look at the real definition of MVP and intangibles.

Ya - I just think the award itself has become boring and predictable.

I could watch zero hockey games in a year and have a relatively good chance of picking the MVP winner using the scoring leaders.

Only real surprise in the last few years for me was Hall.
- Leafs43

Any award that’s voted on by the writers is suspect. Having said that you could give it to McDavid every year for what he does for the Oilers. Without him they might be a lottery team.

Who did you like that year, MacKinnon? I think either would've been fine with me, but you have a guy like Hall strong arm a team like NJ to the playoffs, that's usually a recipe for a Hart type season. It's either, guy has an unreal year and shoulders a presumed non-playoff team to the playoffs and wins or there are none of those and then it's usually tilter towards the highest scorers.
- RickJames77

I think Mac was screwed. JMO

I think Mac was screwed. JMO
- bixll

I feel they were both deserving, Hall just ended up being so much better than everyone else on his team that he got the nod.

Mackinnon will get his trophy one day.

I feel they were both deserving, Hall just ended up being so much better than everyone else on his team that he got the nod.

Mackinnon will get his trophy one day.
- Scabeh

The media likes a good story. Being able to write about Chiarelli trading away a future Hart trophy winner was probably hard to resist.

Any award that’s voted on by the writers is suspect. Having said that you could give it to McDavid every year for what he does for the Oilers. Without him they might be a lottery team.
- shack67

I agree on this theory about the writer's voting.

McDavid surely has an annual case to win

Did you guys win? Nevermind....you most likely lost because you're all losers
- LeftCoaster

9

I feel they were both deserving, Hall just ended up being so much better than everyone else on his team that he got the nod.

Mackinnon will get his trophy one day.
- Scabeh

Sid has only won it 3 times, I believe. 2, I am mistaken.. Imagine.. 2

Sid has only won it 3 times, I believe.
- bixll

Overrated bum amiright?

Overrated bum amiright?
- Scabeh

I figure.. Will never win anything..

(from last blog)


I do think that the Hart Trophy award is somewhat very flawed in that there seems to be an obsession with awarding players who put up a lot of points. That seems to go against the notion of what it means to be an MVP.

I'm not sure if I like adding the cap hit to the formula, but I would like to see a wider net cast to capture who truly is the "most valuable player" for their team.

It seems a bit curious that only one d-man has won the Hart (Pronger in 2000) in the past 50(ish) years. Hell, if you take Bobby Orr out of the equation (he won 3 in a row!) you have to go back to 1944 to find a D-man winner when *checks notes* Babe Pratt (a Leaf!) won it.

Why aren't more d-men considered for the award? Prolly cuz they don't score tons of points.
- mjones242

Continuing the last blog theme. I do enjoy debating you but I find it annoying when you’re dishonest in your responses. I never suggested Richie doesn’t deserve to be in the top 6. I didn’t make any comment on making the top 6 you did in suggesting that he likely won’t leave it soon. My only comments were that I thought the other two new players vying for spots outplayed him in their first preseason games.

It’s only an online hockey site but discussions are more enjoyable when we respond to each other’s actual positions not positions that are more fun to slam.

I have no idea what the lines will look like and you can quote me.

I agree on this theory about the writer's voting.

McDavid surely has an annual case to win
- Aaron85

McDavid is certainly the most explosive offensive player in the league by a wide margin but I'm not sure if that should fit the spirit of the award.

But then again, by what metrics are the voters using to gauge who is the MVP? Frankly, I doubt there's any true consideration beyond "Player X got a lot of points and if you remove them from the team they probably miss the playoffs".

I just find it absurd that in the last 70 years we've had two d-men with the award with one of them being arguably the greatest hockey player ever who also managed to be perennially in the Art Ross race (he won 2 of those!).

Why didn't Lidstrom get a nod? How about Chara? Or Hedman?

Voters should have to write a short essay providing some analysis to back up their vote. It'll never happy - I mean, who wants to put actual critical thought into these things, right?

We could also look at the Norris and Selke awards (etc) as subjectively flawed. Ehh... I'm getting myself all worked up about nothing. Subjective based awards are dumb. 😒

Continuing the last blog theme. I do enjoy debating you but I find it annoying when you’re dishonest in your responses. I never suggested Richie doesn’t deserve to be in the top 6. I didn’t make any comment on making the top 6 you did in suggesting that he likely won’t leave it soon. My only comments were that I thought the other two new players vying for spots outplayed him in their first preseason games.

It’s only an online hockey site but discussions are more enjoyable when we respond to each other’s actual positions not positions that are more fun to slam.

I have no idea what the lines will look like and you can quote me.
- Canada Cup

I'm being dishonest in my responses? That seems like quite a charge!

Perhaps what you actually mean is that I may have misconstrued or exaggerated your context? Which would be certainly a more charitable read but, at least per exaggeration, is largely (or at least, consciously) unintentional.

Frankly, I think the knock(s) against Ritchie based on one exhibition game where he was being centered by (frank)ing Adam Brooks is unfair. No one seemed to give a poop that Kerfoot looked uninspired and lost in his preseason debut. But hey, new shiny toys need to be instantly graded, right?

Look, I'm not inside your head so I have to infer certain narratives based on the limited content that you've provided in your responses. If I'm off-base in my replies to you than you can further articulate and course correct the conversation so that I can do less inferring.

We have some ideas about what the lines may look like but, ultimately, it's super unclear after 1 or 2 games played by any of these players.

Certainly, the Leafs LW situation is super thin so a guy like Ritchie - despite a potentially slow start - will get ample opportunities to prove his quality (or lack thereof).

(lastly, I do appreciate our debates and your responses to me... it says a lot that you bother)

I'm being dishonest in my responses? That seems like quite a charge!

Perhaps what you actually mean is that I may have misconstrued or exaggerated your context? Which would be certainly a more charitable read but, at least per exaggeration, is largely (or at least, consciously) unintentional.

Frankly, I think the knock(s) against Ritchie based on one exhibition game where he was being centered by (frank)ing Adam Brooks is unfair. No one seemed to give a poop that Kerfoot looked uninspired and lost in his preseason debut. But hey, new shiny toys need to be instantly graded, right?

Look, I'm not inside your head so I have to infer certain narratives based on the limited content that you've provided in your responses. If I'm off-base in my replies to you than you can further articulate and course correct the conversation so that I can do less inferring.

We have some ideas about what the lines may look like but, ultimately, it's super unclear after 1 or 2 games played by any of these players.

Certainly, the Leafs LW situation is super thin so a guy like Ritchie - despite a potentially slow start - will get ample opportunities to prove his quality (or lack thereof).

(lastly, I do appreciate our debates and your responses to me... it says a lot that you bother)
- mjones242

So what you're seeing is that we need a Leafs' Leftwing Leaderboard!

Ritchie
Kerfoot
Bunting
Mikheyev
Engvall
Gusev
Simmonds (natural RW)
Kase (I think he's always played RW, but I may be mistaken)

See you guys in the playoffs,,,, well
- bixll

not likely with Mr. Jim Benning driving our bus