Enough with the Jack Adams trophy already! Fine, I give in. Let us call a spade a spade. The topic of last weeks discussion may have been a bit dull to distinguish itself among the areas of interests on my own hockey palette, no less yours. But if your still reading on I trust that it was somewhat stimulating. After all, even the smallest of itches ought to be scratched. So If you please, allow me to satisfy another itch.
Through the midpoint of the 2010/11 season debating who was this years best bet to win the Hart was an insult to fan that could be classified as anywhere semi-casual or upwards: it was obviously Sydney Crosby on the strength of his 24-game point scoring streak and the unbridgeable gap he was creating between himself and his nearest points per game competitor. Missing 13 games straight, and counting, as of today I am officially erasing his name from the ballet box.
So who should win? Before I answer this question, I will first say who should not win, and why. In my hometown there is talk that Ryan Kesler should win this years Hart trophy if he maintains his present form. I disagree. In fact, do to what I believe the award means, I say that no Vancouver Canuck should even enter into the discussion. Alternatively, I do think that Henrik Sedin was a deserving winner that year, Huh? Confused are you? Allow me to explain.
Most Valuable Player to his team. Last year Henrik stepped up when his brother got hurt and went on to lead the league in scoring. It was Daniel's (his brothers) absence that made Henrik's performance so crucial to the team. If Henrik also got hurt or simply had a sub-par season, the Canucks do not make the playoffs in my opinion; with his performance, turns out the Canuck got a division title.
This year I believe that the Canucks could have withstood an injury to either Henrik, Daniel, or Ryan Kelser and still have won their division. If thats my belief, how can I say that Kesler means more to his team - in relative terms - then (x) player means to his team. Simply put, I cannot say it while maintaining a straight face.
It pains me to say it, but this years darkhorse is Brad Richards, for an endless amount of reasons. For once, with him in the lineup the other centres get to play roles that fit them like a glove. Steve Ott, for what he brings to the game, is maybe the best #3 centre in the game, but would be a terrible #2. Likewise, I feel as though Mike Riberio flourishes as a #2 but is too diminutive to be a #1 centre. Moreover, Richards pure passing abilities allows maximum production out of his inexperienced wings. Instead of them needing to fight for open ice, he has the ability to place it on their blades through traffic. Lastly, he has a winning resume. His presence alone morphed the experts stance on the club from young, rebuilding club to team to watch out for.
I leave you with this. It was rumoured that the Vancouver Canucks could have gotten Brad Richards from Tampa Bay at the March 2008 trade deadline for Alex Edler and a high pick (If it was a first rounder that was the Cody Hodgson year). At the time, Vancouverites scoffed at the rumour, saying that Richards was washed up and not worth his salary figure or term. For me, even in hindsight this is an intriguing deal and - admittedly - one that I would still likely reject. But you may asking, "why would you not give this up for an MVP? Simple. If Brad Richards played on the Vancouver Canucks this year - instead of Edler and Hodgson - I would likely not even put him on my ballet for the MVP voting. The Canucks simply do not badly need him. The Stars badly do. Brad Richards, through 50 some-odd games, you are my darkhorse for season MVP.
Curt
Skate
A blog about hockey. A blog about stuff related to Hockey. A blog about the useless, inane, frivolous, addictive, obsession that is our passion: Hockey! We are Curt and Aaron and we bring you PuckPotpourri!
At first I was gonna laugh at whoever you were gonna say, then I read on and actually have to agree with you. You make a good point.
ReplyDeletePS: I bet you're feeling good about how the Leafs are playing right now you bastard. You and I both know it won't last.
The one problem with your argument (against Kesler not for Richards) is that it tends to minimize the following facts which are difficult to capture on paper:
ReplyDeleteFirst, one could easily argue that Kesler is the emotional leader of the best team in the NHL. His leadership is difficult to quantify in my opinion.
Second, Kesler is playing against the other teams best line and thus the fact that he produces both offensively and defensively at a high level is impressive. He is having to travel the full length of the ice, as he is a valuable defensive zone defender. Further, he is the Canucks best penalty killer.
Lastly, while the Canucks PP was good last year, it has gone to a different level when Kesler moved to the first unit. He has produced in every position with a variety of line mates.
Given that he is their only player who is counted on to produce in every situation, and the fact that he is the likely winner of the Selke trophy, and is a top pp and pentalty killing player, it can easily be argued that he is the clear MVP and most important player on the Canucks, the leagues best team. I think he warrants consideration. And while i like your choice of Richards, Kesler brings a set of skills that is maybe only rivalled by Mike Richards in Philly.