I'm pretty sure the voting is gonna end up looking like this.
3-Smith In regards to Smith-He has been more or less pretty amazing down the stretch and before the all star break. I honestly believe there isn't much competition between him and guys like Howard or Rinne who have been a little above average this season compared to Smith who led his team to a Pacific Division Title, and in my opinion, is having the best feel good, out-of-nowhere type year that trumps every one else, including St. Louis, NYR, Stamkos, etc..
Gotta give it to the guy.
Edit: Consequently, that could also benefit Lundqvist having mixed votes between Quick/Smith, where as I can picture the majority of the East voting for Lundqvist.
Pretty much this. I think Mike Smith has done A LOT in the final few weeks to raise his stock with the Western Conference GMs. He should get a decent portion of the vote, he has been that good this year.
Also, I wont argue stats, they're identical, you have to look at this from an intangible factor and the fact that the award itself is given to the player deemed "the best at his position." So, if we say stats are a wash (which they are)..
- One plays in a division with 4 100+ teams and ended up being the goalie on the team with the best record in the conference.
- One has maintained a high level of play for the better part of 6 years, but has consistently lost out to players such as: Kiprusoff, Brodeur, Thomas and Miller.
- One has had an extraordinary season and led his team to the playoffs from the brink of elimination.
Say these out loud, 2/3 favor one player in particular, that being Lundqvist. I normally wouldn't recommend this for most, but the "Cowherd Test" works perfectly here. Also to go back and reiterate on a prior point, if the award should be given to the best player at his position, who is the better player at the moment? Maybe it is a bit biased because it is taking seniority into account, but a majority of knowledgeable hockey people who have seen Quick and Lundqvist will say Hank and that is where I think the difference will come. It is slightly unfair, but when stats are that close, you have to look at outside factors like that.
This is also in no way bashing Quick in any way, he has improved drastically over the last 3 seasons to the point where he can be considered a "Top 10" goalie and even a "Franchise Goalie."
Am I the only one who knows it's obvious he'll win it? I mean sure if you think it thru too hard you may get yourself to think Quick should win it. But it's Lundqvist's this year, 100%, if you take everything into account (which GM's obviously know).
I'm with you. I didn't have a doubt the whole time until a few days ago when threads started popping up that Quick might overtake Lundqvist. And I'm pretty certain Hank will finally win it. It may be because of East coast bias, but on NHL network and on other sites, I have not heard the name Quick and Vezina in the same sentence as much as Lundqvist's.
Though a month ago I scoffed at the notion, no matter which way I look at it, if I'm being objective I can't not give it to Quick. The only thing Lundqvist has on Quick is winning the east. But carrying the lowest scoring team in the league on your back into the post season feels more impressive.
Do they vote for these awards before the post season starts and reveal it at the NHL awards? Or do they vote after the post season begins?
He can't show **** which is why he's on my ignore list. I suggest the rest of you do the same.
"Of course giving Sather cap space is like giving teenagers whiskey and car keys." - SBOB "Watching Sather build a team is like watching a blind man with no fingers trying to put together an elaborate puzzle." - Shadowtron
"Used to be only Twinkies and cockroaches could survive a nuke. I'd add Habs to that. I'm convinced the CH stands for Club du Hypocrisy." - Gee Wally
Pens fan chiming in..both have been great this year without a doubt, obviously..both have been instrumental to their teams success as well..maybe Quick more so but The King has been passed over for the Vezina a few times in the past..justifiably or not. I tend to agree with the senority argument. I think it's his award this year. He's a great goaltender.
If carrying a bad team on your back into the postseason is such a major factor in the award then why are we talking about this being Lundqvist's first real shot at one?
Originally Posted by Henriks Broadway Hat
Can someone please explain how a team scoring goals effects a goalie's ability to stop the puck?
The only real category it could help with is wins, which shouldn't even be considered when the vezina is being voted on. You could also argue though that a goalie on a team that scores a lot of goals plays under less pressure.
Latest I'm reading is Quick , Smith , Lundvist in that order with Eliot receiving consideration but too few games
Originally Posted by RL605
If this ends up being the actual order, I will Paypal you 10K.
Hahaha, I will hand deliver 10K and I live in Vancouver.
I'm not sure who the GMs will pick but their decision extends far beyond numbers and game performances. In that sense, to say Smith is a better option in goal than Henrik, is completely ridiculous. Ask 30 GMs who they would want to be their starting goalie, all 30 would pick Henrik over Smith.
J.Quick might steal it, who knows. It's going to be a tight race. A lot of it has to do with biases. It's that simple, GMs are only human and some humans can be extremely illogical at times.
It's like voting inception. each GM is going to be favouring 60/40 for one goalie or the other and in the end, the 30 votes are going to be favouring 60/40 or so for one goalie or the other.