Jump to content

Did Crosby deserve the Conn Smythe?


JagerMeister

Did he deserve the Conn Smythe?  

22 members have voted

  1. 1. Did he deserve the Conn Smythe?

    • No, Kessel should have won
    • No, Murray should have won
    • No, someone from SJS should have won
    • He was the rightful winner!


Recommended Posts

IMO, this would have been a decent year for a Smythe winner had the Sharks prevailed. But since that wasn't what occured, history has showcased that the probability of the Conn Smythe winner being a SJS is incredibly slim. So we were left with relatively weak candidates, with the declared winner being Sidney Crosby. Do you think he deserved it?

 

 

 

 

My personal opinion, no. He was defensively competent and among the top offensive contributors on his team. But you can't deny his stats are pedestrian for a Conn Smythe winner.

 

Kessel was their best offensive producer, with a noticeable improvement in defensive responsibility. But again, still somewhat mediocre for a Conn Smythe winner.

 

I think the winner should have been Murray, he was extremely consistent throughout their entire postseason run (excluding a rare sub par game or two) and definitely was the best player on multiple occasions. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Giving Kessel a trophy with a giant maple leaf and a miniature Maple Leaf Gardens on it would have been interesting. Although he may have suffered negative flashbacks and pissed all over it as a result. Perhaps the league was worried about the safety of the trophy.  :56ce53d1d6689_IDunnoSmiley:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, JagerMeister said:

IMO, this would have been a decent year for a Smythe winner had the Sharks prevailed. But since that wasn't what occured, history has showcased that the probability of the Conn Smythe winner being a SJS is incredibly slim. So we were left with relatively weak candidates, with the declared winner being Sidney Crosby. Do you think he deserved it?

 

 

 

 

My personal opinion, no. He was defensively competent and among the top offensive contributors on his team. But you can't deny his stats are pedestrian for a Conn Smythe winner.

 

Kessel was their best offensive producer, with a noticeable improvement in defensive responsibility. But again, still somewhat mediocre for a Conn Smythe winner.

 

I think the winner should have been Murray, he was extremely consistent throughout their entire postseason run (excluding a rare sub par game or two) and definitely was the best player on multiple occasions. 

 

 

 

Sorry but anyone who objectively watched the playoffs unfold cannot possibly think Murray should have won the Conn Smythe.  It's a great story that a rookie was able to do what he did but he got noticeably (not significantly but noticeably) worse as the playoffs progressed. Butterflies? Wore out? Who cares. He "stole" one game for the Pens and that was Game 3 against the Capitals.  He gave up several "weak" goals especially against the Lightning and Sharks. Couture's goal in Game 6. Donskoi's game winner in OT in Game 3. Ward's 3rd period goal in Game 3.  That's just 3 off the top of my head in the SCF alone.  For a goalie to deserve the Conn Smythe he has to be standing on his head stealing games left and right.  If SJ had won it's Jones hands down. THAT is Conn Smythe material.  I don't want to take away from Murray. He showed a lot of resolve. He usually came up big when he had to. But that does not make one worthy of the Conn Smythe.  Brian Dumoulin was  "extremely consistent", too. Give him the Conn Smythe. :)

 

Put it this way - the Pens win the Cup with Fleury in net. And no one would be clamoring for the Flower to win the Conn Smythe had he put up the same numbers as Murray.

 

If you want to see what a netminder needs to do to win the Conn Smythe just look at the past winners and compare Murray in  2016...

 

2015 - Matt Murray - 2.08 GAA and .923 SV%

2012 - Jonathan Quick - 1.41 GAA and .946 SV%

2011 - Tim Thomas - 1.98 and .940

2006 - Cam Ward - 2.15 and .920

2003 - J.S. Giggy - 1.62 and .945

2001 - Patrick Roy - 1.70 and .934

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@B21

Had the Pens lost, Murray could rightly be called Leaky and may have been run out of town with or without a rail.  

I think you and I are on the same page regarding his performance.  He "Chris Osgooded" and he Osgooded well.

 

I think Sid deserves the Conn Smythe because there were no standout performers ....everyone played well top to bottom. He should also get some credit for buying into Sullivan's ideas if 87 isn't making sandwiches with what coach is putting down, it doesn't go well see: Johnston, Mike.

 

I think Sidney has finally figured out that he is the big boy in the room and he needs to act accordingly, I am glad to see the maturity from him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mojo1917 said:

@B21

Had the Pens lost, Murray could rightly be called Leaky and may have been run out of town with or without a rail.  

I think you and I are on the same page regarding his performance.  He "Chris Osgooded" and he Osgooded well.

 

I think Sid deserves the Conn Smythe because there were no standout performers ....everyone played well top to bottom. He should also get some credit for buying into Sullivan's ideas if 87 isn't making sandwiches with what coach is putting down, it doesn't go well see: Johnston, Mike.

 

I think Sidney has finally figured out that he is the big boy in the room and he needs to act accordingly, I am glad to see the maturity from him.

 

Great point!  I'm not even saying is should have been Crosby.  I would have gone Kessel.

 

I don't think the Pens won in spite of Murray but the certainly didn't win because of Murray.

 

I'll go back to my Super Bowl MVP comparison.  If you have a lot of really good choices but no great choices - pick the QB.  In hockey? Pick the captain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, B21 said:

 

Sorry but anyone who objectively watched the playoffs unfold cannot possibly think Murray should have won the Conn Smythe.  It's a great story that a rookie was able to do what he did but he got noticeably (not significantly but noticeably) worse as the playoffs progressed. Butterflies? Wore out? Who cares. He "stole" one game for the Pens and that was Game 3 against the Capitals.  He gave up several "weak" goals especially against the Lightning and Sharks. Couture's goal in Game 6. Donskoi's game winner in OT in Game 3. Ward's 3rd period goal in Game 3.  That's just 3 off the top of my head in the SCF alone.  For a goalie to deserve the Conn Smythe he has to be standing on his head stealing games left and right.  If SJ had won it's Jones hands down. THAT is Conn Smythe material.  I don't want to take away from Murray. He showed a lot of resolve. He usually came up big when he had to. But that does not make one worthy of the Conn Smythe.  Brian Dumoulin was  "extremely consistent", too. Give him the Conn Smythe. :)

 

Put it this way - the Pens win the Cup with Fleury in net. And no one would be clamoring for the Flower to win the Conn Smythe had he put up the same numbers as Murray.

 

If you want to see what a netminder needs to do to win the Conn Smythe just look at the past winners and compare Murray in  2016...

 

2015 - Matt Murray - 2.08 GAA and .923 SV%

2012 - Jonathan Quick - 1.41 GAA and .946 SV%

2011 - Tim Thomas - 1.98 and .940

2006 - Cam Ward - 2.15 and .920

2003 - J.S. Giggy - 1.62 and .945

2001 - Patrick Roy - 1.70 and .934

 

fair enough

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was listening to Tocchet on the radio a bit today.  He pointed out some interesting things to point out Sid's contribution to the team.  i.e. Sid taking a beating from Joe Thornton all series, slashes, cross checks, punches to the head... And doing nothing until Game 6.  Tocchet said that was huge in that it sent a message to both teams. When Sid slashed Thornton at the opening face off, it told Thornton he didn't forget, and told both teams this would be the last chance to get a little revenge.  Meaning end of series.  Tocchet loved it. And he said every man on the bench noticed it and was inspired by it.  

 

I I guess there are things like that that we fans read into, such as that one, but maybe don't always appreciate just how large an impact they can have.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally thought Crosby was a horrible selection, but not because of his performance in the Finals. If the trophy were to be awarded to the Finals MVP, I'd have no gripe, but that's not the case; it's for the entirety of the playoffs. There were too many occasions during the playoffs as a whole that he was a non-factor, and based on that, I don't believe his win is justifiable. I would have voted for Murray, though I would have had no gripe with Kessel. Frankly, Crosby would have been down my list a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, ScottM said:

I personally thought Crosby was a horrible selection, but not because of his performance in the Finals. If the trophy were to be awarded to the Finals MVP, I'd have no gripe, but that's not the case; it's for the entirety of the playoffs. There were too many occasions during the playoffs as a whole that he was a non-factor, and based on that, I don't believe his win is justifiable. I would have voted for Murray, though I would have had no gripe with Kessel. Frankly, Crosby would have been down my list a bit.

It's arguable if he was even a top 3 skater on his team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JagerMeister said:

It's arguable if he was even a top 3 skater on his team.

 

I'm guessing Kessel and Bonino are two that you're referring to. Who else? Letang?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...