Ryan Wilson: Did Henrik Sedin Deserve the 2010 Hart Trophy? Did Henrik Sedin Deserve the 2010 Hart Trophy?

"Henrik Sedin should not have won the award. That isn't the same as saying Sedin didn't have a great year, it just means there were at least two players who were better."

But the Hart Trophy isn't awarded to the 'best' player. It's awarded to the most valuable player. Crosby and Ovechkin had better years. Sure. 'Value' is such a subjective thing though. I'm not sure you can write Hank off, especially given the Daniel injury.

EDIT - As an aside, I'm not saying that I'd give it to Henrik. Just that I think he deserves a little/lot more consideration, even though he wasn't the "best."

Good read!

As I suspected (but was too lazy to confirm), nice write up Gunner

Honestly, you could probably go either way with Ovi or Crosby there. You mentioned Crosby having the edge in QoC but I'd be curious to see what the QoT numbers were for both players that year (offensively speaking). I wonder if that would sway things in Ovi's favour.

These days there are crazy people savagely attacking other citizens with buckets of cold ice water, does it really amount to a hill of beans that some hockey player in the left coast of Canada won a piece of hardware.

These days there are crazy people savagely attacking other citizens with buckets of cold ice water, does it really amount to a hill of beans that some hockey player in the left coast of Canada won a piece of hardware.
- VANTEL

Ryan Wilson: Did Henrik Sedin Deserve the 2010 Hart Trophy?
Did Henrik Sedin Deserve the 2010 Hart Trophy?
- Ryan_Wilson

These days there are crazy people savagely attacking other citizens with buckets of cold ice water, does it really amount to a hill of beans that some hockey player in the left coast of Canada won a piece of hardware.
- VANTEL

exactly

A homer blog and a troll blog all in one. Come on man, you're better than this.
- Sandus

How is it either? He's been going through each of the past few years and doing the same thing. Using valid evidence to come to a conclusion is not being a homer. In this case I think it's pretty clear Crosby should've won it.

A homer blog and a troll blog all in one. Come on man, you're better than this.
- Sandus

Compelling argument, an effortless deconstruction of Ryan "The Original Sham" Wilson's self-interested ramblings.

"Henrik Sedin should not have won the award. That isn't the same as saying Sedin didn't have a great year, it just means there were at least two players who were better."

But the Hart Trophy isn't awarded to the 'best' player. It's awarded to the most valuable player. Crosby and Ovechkin had better years. Sure. 'Value' is such a subjective thing though. I'm not sure you can write Hank off, especially given the Daniel injury.

EDIT - As an aside, I'm not saying that I'd give it to Henrik. Just that I think he deserves a little/lot more consideration, even though he wasn't the "best."

Good read!
- Michael_Stuart

Being not-sarcastical for a moment, good point sir.

A homer blog and a troll blog all in one. Come on man, you're better than this.
- Sandus

If you've read all the blogs this week reviewing the Hart Trophy Winners (I suspect you haven't) this is the first time Ryan has suggested the voters didn't make the right choice, even when the other choices usually included a Penguin. Combine that with the fact that there's a lot of fact based statistical analysis here, and I have a hard time finding anything homerish or trollish.

How is it either? He's been going through each of the past few years and doing the same thing. Using valid evidence to come to a conclusion is not being a homer. In this case I think it's pretty clear Crosby should've won it.
- CaptCrankypants

If your using fenclose and qoc stats then yes. But as Michael said, the Hart is much more than stats. It's about the player who was most valuable to their team. Ryan gave two stats and then the points. What about the 40 other metrics in advanced statistics and the intangibles that only the eye test can measure? Value can't be determined by points and possession alone. Defense plays a major part here too as does TOI not too mention the other metrics out there. I'm not saying the decision was right but don't go off of three stats to propose the just VALUABLE player to their team.

If you've read all the blogs this week reviewing the Hart Trophy Winners (I suspect you haven't) this is the first time Ryan has suggested the voters didn't make the right choice, even when the other choices usually included a Penguin. Combine that with the fact that there's a lot of fact based statistical analysis here, and I have a hard time finding anything homerish or trollish.
- Emperor Filonius

Agreed. These are fun reads and don't show any trolling or homer signs.

Agreed. These are fun reads and don't show any trolling or homer signs.
- YzermanIsTheMan

homer

homer
- Cptmjl

I too , felt he was picking on the prettier Sedin

@dannypicard says teams in the mix for Hayes today are Colorado, Nashville, Boston, Pittsburgh, and NYR. We made the cut

Be prepared for angry, angry Canuck fans. They only have a couple of major awards and this blog discredits one of them.

I think this is known as the Dog Days of the hockey blog world.

FA has completed. Draft done. Rosters set. Most of the NHL world currently on pre-season vacations.

Defense plays a major part here too as does TOI not too mention the other metrics out there.
- YzermanIsTheMan

That might be the one saving grace that could be argued. But the counter point could be made that Crosby didn't have to play defense because he always had the puck.

If I close my eyes and imagine, I can hear crosby's whining voice narrating this blog.

Be prepared for angry, angry Canuck fans. They only have a couple of major awards and this blog discredits one of them.
- Ben37

And really, who on this earth doesn't covet a major award?

And really, who on this earth doesn't covet a major award?



- Emperor Filonius

well played sir

If I close my eyes and imagine, I can hear crosby's whining voice narrating this blog.
- Isles_since_6

typical flyers fan

I like these blogs.

You should look at other awards, like the Calder, Norris, etc.

As Michael said above, Hart is more than stats so it's difficult to definitively state that Sedin should not have won. If he hadn't been on the ice, I believe the team is much less successful vs. Crosby and Pittsburgh. My opinion anyway.

Hate the Canucks, but I think the Sedins are class acts so it was nice to see Hank get some hardware.

Well of course the Pitt blogger chooses Sid over Ovie

I believe Ovie's suspension hurt him in 2010. Technically he would have surpassed Henrik if he played those extra games.

However, despite my first comment, I agree that Sid was the MVP. He is just a better all-round player.

Unfortunately for Sid he had won it before and has some other great players around him. I agree that the voters may have just wanted a different winner. But usually everyone forgets about the west coast.

So why did Hank win it?

Daniels injury. I believe a 19 game span (without researching it, sry if wrong). He proved to be the "most valuable to his team." Henrik stepped his game up during that time and carried the Canucks. Thus, cementing his name on the Hart for 2010.

If they ever make a trophy for the "most valuable player" PERIOD. Well then, you can give it to Sid every year.