Jump to content

Photo

MVP of Rounds 1 & 2


  • Please log in to reply
76 replies to this topic

#61 halfsharkalligatorhalfman

halfsharkalligatorhalfman

    General Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,820 posts

Posted 10 May 2012 - 11:34 AM

I had no problem with Giguere winning Conn Smythe at the time and don't today. If anything it's helped make 2003 more memorable for other fans since something unusual happened that postseason, which is a good thing.
  • 0
Devils Fan: 1994-2012
Sharks Fan: 2012-?
Posted Image

#62 caron14

caron14

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,427 posts

Posted 10 May 2012 - 12:40 PM

Round 1 we have to say Zajac

Round 2: Kovalchuk without a doubt, he was injured came back score clutch goals and have a clutch assist..


and i really dont give a damn about connsmythe i want lord stanley.... Ask giguere if he prefer 03 than 07
  • 0

#63 squishyx

squishyx

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,297 posts

Posted 10 May 2012 - 12:45 PM

I still don't have an issue with Giguere winning it. It be easier if there was a clear winner for the Devils, but there wasn't. Each round someone else led the charge. In round 1, Madden, Langs and Pando were great. In round 2, Elias and Gomez stepped up. Round 3, Friesen and Langs, and round 4, Friesen again. Throughout, Brodeur and Nieds were very good.

I have made this argument before, but Marty's seven shutouts, while a record, were not that impressive individually, but rather as a team unit. Three of the seven shutouts, he stopped 16 or less shots including game 1 and 2 of the Cup finals where the Ducks were held to 16 shots both games. And even the final game 7, though he made 24 shots, it was an extremely easy night of work for him. The Devils were simply ridiculous in front of him.

Giguere on the other hand, he had a bad finals. No question. But I think people are forgetting how insane he was for three rounds and how sh!tty the rest of the team was. Look at that roster past Paul Kariya, who didn't even have a good playoffs. When a 40-year-old Adam Oates is your best player... Even with an a bad finals he had better stats than Brodeur with a 1.62 GAA and .945 save percentage. Here are some highlights of his playoffs:

- Swept away the defending Stanley Cup Champions and an absolutely loaded Red Wings team
- Set an NHL record with 63 saves in a playoff debut.
- Set an NHL record OT shutout streak of 168 minutes and 27 seconds or almost 8 and a half periods. It kept going as he didn't let in a single overtime goal all playoffs.
- Held the Wild to 1 goal in the entire Conference Finals, an NHL record. 1 freaking goal.

No one is denying or forgetting that Giguire played a great first three rounds. The point is, he didn't lead his team to a cup and quite frankly all he earned the team was the 29th overall draft pick. This was Marty who was great in all 4 rounds vs a guy who was spectacular in the first 3, and then moderate in the 4th, when it counted the most. I don't understand how a player on the losing team can win this award, it does not go to the most impressive or best player in the playoffs; it goes to the player most valuable to their team which to me suggests it has to be someone on the winning side by default.

and i really dont give a damn about connsmythe i want lord stanley.... Ask giguere if he prefer 03 than 07

No one here would ever argue that the CS is more important then the cup. But at the end of the day we are fans who discuss things that happen in the hockey world so I think it's still a fair issue for us to discuss, albeit maybe outdated by this point.
  • 0

#64 Neb00rs

Neb00rs

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,401 posts

Posted 10 May 2012 - 03:02 PM

Re: Giguere

He was the MVP of three rounds. I didn't like the award going to a guy who wasn't particularly valuable in the tournament's most important round.

That said, Niedermayer and Marty split the vote on the Devils side. I remember Gulliti once posting that his vote went to Nieds, and as D731 said Marty was outstanding as well. In the end, the definition of "player most valuable to his team" must've come into play. I mean, when multiple players are most valuable (as Nieds, Marty, and to a lesser extent guys like Langs and Friesen that year) on one team, and there's one guy head and shoulders above the rest on the other team ... well ... dems da breaks.


Again - this IS why Giguere wins it.
  • 0

gallery_47_36_882.png of No One
Proud to be King of the Kovalnuts (Est. June 2010 by MantaRay)


#65 squishyx

squishyx

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,297 posts

Posted 10 May 2012 - 03:09 PM

Again - this IS why Giguere wins it.

So valuable that his team didn't win the cup :rolleyes:

I have to admit though I think it's funny that the "pro/anti giggy deserves the CS" boils down to the different way people interpret "Most valuable to his team".
  • 0

#66 Neb00rs

Neb00rs

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,401 posts

Posted 10 May 2012 - 03:38 PM

So valuable that his team didn't win the cup :rolleyes:


Well, that's the point of it really. See by your logic NO player that doesn't win the Cup can win the Conn Smythe. It's the "most valuable player to his team in the entire playoffs." Giggy was the reason the Ducks got to game 7 of the SCF. They might not have won either but he sure as hell got them within 60 minutes of it. It proves the point that Nieds was close to Marty in the voting. There were many players that carried the Devils - no one really that much more valuable than another - kind of the Devs philosophy. On the Ducks it was Giguere who carried them. He wins the award.
  • 0

gallery_47_36_882.png of No One
Proud to be King of the Kovalnuts (Est. June 2010 by MantaRay)


#67 Devils731

Devils731

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,505 posts

Posted 10 May 2012 - 03:42 PM

Well, that's the point of it really. See by your logic NO player that doesn't win the Cup can win the Conn Smythe. It's the "most valuable player to his team in the entire playoffs." Giggy was the reason the Ducks got to game 7 of the SCF. They might not have won either but he sure as hell got them within 60 minutes of it. It proves the point that Nieds was close to Marty in the voting. There were many players that carried the Devils - no one really that much more valuable than another - kind of the Devs philosophy. On the Ducks it was Giguere who carried them. He wins the award.


By that logic, losing teams should feature a Conn Smythe winner pretty frequently, since the winning team is probably going to feature more players that are good. Instead, it's only happened twice since the 70's and both times for a goalie, and in this case it went to a goalie who may not even played as well as the other goalie.
  • 0
Your unconditional rejection of violence makes you smugly think of yourselves as noble, as enlightened, but in reality it is nothing less than abject moral capitulation to evil. Unconditional rejection of self-defense, because you think its a supposed surrender to violence, leaves you no resort but begging for mercy or offering appeasement.

-Terry Goodkind


Sex Panther cologne -- 50 percent of the time, it works every time.

-Anchorman

The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The second best time is now.

-Anonymous

Keeper of Section 212-213's wayward step

#68 maxpower

maxpower

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,428 posts

Posted 10 May 2012 - 03:56 PM

If they are to win, get ready, it will happen again. Two teams with dominant goalies against a team where 4-5-6 players will get votes
  • 0

#69 Neb00rs

Neb00rs

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,401 posts

Posted 10 May 2012 - 04:25 PM

By that logic, losing teams should feature a Conn Smythe winner pretty frequently, since the winning team is probably going to feature more players that are good. Instead, it's only happened twice since the 70's and both times for a goalie, and in this case it went to a goalie who may not even played as well as the other goalie.


I didn't imply that at all - your logic is faulty. I clearly stated many times in this thread that Anaheim specifically had a player who was extra spectacular throughout the playoffs in my mind. Giguere, I believe had a playoffs for the ages IMO and took the Ducks to game 7 and if he shouldn't win the Conn Smythe because he didn't win the Cup then no one could.
  • 0

gallery_47_36_882.png of No One
Proud to be King of the Kovalnuts (Est. June 2010 by MantaRay)


#70 Devils731

Devils731

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,505 posts

Posted 10 May 2012 - 04:40 PM

I didn't imply that at all - your logic is faulty. I clearly stated many times in this thread that Anaheim specifically had a player who was extra spectacular throughout the playoffs in my mind. Giguere, I believe had a playoffs for the ages IMO and took the Ducks to game 7 and if he shouldn't win the Conn Smythe because he didn't win the Cup then no one could.


You said Marty didn't win because he split votes with Nieds and I think that's a silly reason to lose. The winning team will almost always have a better complement of players than the losing team. By how you want to judge it the best player on the losing team should often win the award, we know that they don't.

A player should have to dominate everyone in the whole playoffs to win on the losing team. Marty was just as dominant as Giguere was in the playoffs, so no reason for it to passed to the losing team.

Edited by Devils731, 10 May 2012 - 04:40 PM.

  • 0
Your unconditional rejection of violence makes you smugly think of yourselves as noble, as enlightened, but in reality it is nothing less than abject moral capitulation to evil. Unconditional rejection of self-defense, because you think its a supposed surrender to violence, leaves you no resort but begging for mercy or offering appeasement.

-Terry Goodkind


Sex Panther cologne -- 50 percent of the time, it works every time.

-Anchorman

The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The second best time is now.

-Anonymous

Keeper of Section 212-213's wayward step

#71 Neb00rs

Neb00rs

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,401 posts

Posted 10 May 2012 - 04:48 PM

You said Marty didn't win because he split votes with Nieds and I think that's a silly reason to lose. The winning team will almost always have a better complement of players than the losing team. By how you want to judge it the best player on the losing team should often win the award, we know that they don't.

A player should have to dominate everyone in the whole playoffs to win on the losing team. Marty was just as dominant as Giguere was in the playoffs, so no reason for it to passed to the losing team.

i.e. when it comes down to it that's what gave it to Giguere in the end. Pointing out that "we know they don't" doesn't contradict what I've said. I clearly stated that they should have given it to Marty even though Giguere deserved it. I said that I even booed at the game but in retrospect I have no problem with them giving it to GIggy.

Marty may have been dominant statistically but Giguere was more valuable to his team and in this case carried his team in a way that is extremely rare.




  • 0

gallery_47_36_882.png of No One
Proud to be King of the Kovalnuts (Est. June 2010 by MantaRay)


#72 squishyx

squishyx

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,297 posts

Posted 10 May 2012 - 04:51 PM

Well, that's the point of it really. See by your logic NO player that doesn't win the Cup can win the Conn Smythe. It's the "most valuable player to his team in the entire playoffs." Giggy was the reason the Ducks got to game 7 of the SCF. They might not have won either but he sure as hell got them within 60 minutes of it. It proves the point that Nieds was close to Marty in the voting. There were many players that carried the Devils - no one really that much more valuable than another - kind of the Devs philosophy. On the Ducks it was Giguere who carried them. He wins the award.

The word is "most" not "any" value to his team. Yes I do think there is an argument to be made that even a 3rd liner who contributes maybe 6 points over a playoff run would have been more deserving the Giggy because at the end of the day his contribution helped the team win the cup, Giggy didn't. Now I am not suggesting the 3rd liner was "most" valuable to his team, there are most likely a host of other more valuable players to the cup winner, but compared to anyone on the losing side I would say yes.

Just because lots of Devils could have deserved the award doesn't mean the the standout from the losing team should win it, it just means they should have picked from the Devils who deserved it.
  • 0

#73 squishyx

squishyx

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,297 posts

Posted 10 May 2012 - 04:57 PM

I didn't imply that at all - your logic is faulty. I clearly stated many times in this thread that Anaheim specifically had a player who was extra spectacular throughout the playoffs in my mind. Giguere, I believe had a playoffs for the ages IMO and took the Ducks to game 7 and if he shouldn't win the Conn Smythe because he didn't win the Cup then no one could.

But you are sperating "playoffs for the ages" (which I think is an overstatement) with "value".

I would much rather have 1 stanley cup victory in 100 years then 100 consecutive conference finals appearances with an amazing goalie (and no cup wins). Sure there is something to be said for making the conference finals, and Giggy had a great playoffs overall, but that pales in comparisson to winning the cup, the cup is everything.

If you want to argue that Giggy was very valuable in ensuring his team finished 29th in the draft order fine, but no one will ever convince me that he was the most valuable player to a team, there are plenty of people who won the cup who were much more valuable.

Edited by squishyx, 10 May 2012 - 04:58 PM.

  • 0

#74 Neb00rs

Neb00rs

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,401 posts

Posted 10 May 2012 - 05:03 PM

The word is "most" not "any" value to his team. Yes I do think there is an argument to be made that even a 3rd liner who contributes maybe 6 points over a playoff run would have been more deserving the Giggy because at the end of the day his contribution helped the team win the cup, Giggy didn't. Now I am not suggesting the 3rd liner was "most" valuable to his team, there are most likely a host of other more valuable players to the cup winner, but compared to anyone on the losing side I would say yes.

Just because lots of Devils could have deserved the award doesn't mean the the standout from the losing team should win it, it just means they should have picked from the Devils who deserved it.


As I said in a previous post to 731 I am not suggesting that the best standout form the loser should win. I said quite clearly that Giguere was most valuable to his team AND had a playoffs for the ages IMO. And having seen every Ducks game that year - I can honestly say thats probably a pretty common feeling.
  • 0

gallery_47_36_882.png of No One
Proud to be King of the Kovalnuts (Est. June 2010 by MantaRay)


#75 Neb00rs

Neb00rs

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,401 posts

Posted 10 May 2012 - 05:05 PM

I would much rather have 1 stanley cup victory in 100 years then 100 consecutive conference finals appearances with an amazing goalie (and no cup wins). Sure there is something to be said for making the conference finals, and Giggy had a great playoffs overall, but that pales in comparisson to winning the cup, the cup is everything.

If you want to argue that Giggy was very valuable in ensuring his team finished 29th in the draft order fine, but no one will ever convince me that he was the most valuable player to a team, there are plenty of people who won the cup who were much more valuable.


Again - I agree with your statement about the Cup but it has nothing to do with the Conn Smythe unless you are saying that the winning team should always have the Conn Smythe winner - which is a fair argument.
  • 0

gallery_47_36_882.png of No One
Proud to be King of the Kovalnuts (Est. June 2010 by MantaRay)


#76 squishyx

squishyx

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,297 posts

Posted 11 May 2012 - 08:27 AM

Again - I agree with your statement about the Cup but it has nothing to do with the Conn Smythe unless you are saying that the winning team should always have the Conn Smythe winner - which is a fair argument.

Not explicitly, in so far as we should redefine it, what I am saying is the current definition implies it implicitly. It's already there, the award's definition is not given to "the most outstanding player" or "the best player" or "the player who had a playoffs for the ages", it's most valuable to the team. Who is more valuable to a team the guy who got you to the finals and lost or the guy who got you to the finals and won?
  • 0

#77 Neb00rs

Neb00rs

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,401 posts

Posted 11 May 2012 - 11:51 AM

Not explicitly, in so far as we should redefine it, what I am saying is the current definition implies it implicitly. It's already there, the award's definition is not given to "the most outstanding player" or "the best player" or "the player who had a playoffs for the ages", it's most valuable to the team. Who is more valuable to a team the guy who got you to the finals and lost or the guy who got you to the finals and won?


With your phrasing obviously the answer is the guy who "got you to the finals and won." But that's a disingenuous way to put it because it implies that Marty was the sole carrier of this team and won the Cup for them. Giguere had more value to his team in that he was much more the reason the Ducks went anywhere than anyone else on the team. Of course when its a guy from the losing team, you really have to weigh it and if the Ducks got swept in the finals you probably couldn't argue giving it to Giguere. But the fact that he was much more a carrying individual on his team than Marty and that he got them withing a win of the Cup makes him a better for the Smythe.
  • 0

gallery_47_36_882.png of No One
Proud to be King of the Kovalnuts (Est. June 2010 by MantaRay)





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users