Kane may not have blown away the competition pts wise but he was clutch.
I think Crawford is over rated and excels by being on a phenom of a possession and offensive juggernaut

I honestly thought Seabrook was their best player, even though he didn't put big pts he was a rock all playoffs

Kane may not have blown away the competition pts wise but he was clutch.
I think Crawford is over rated and excels by being on a phenom of a possession and offensive juggernaut

I honestly thought Seabrook was their best player, even though he didn't put big pts he was a rock all playoffs
- Danformo

I agree with this. Dude was their best player when all's said and done.

Kane may not have blown away the competition pts wise but he was clutch.
I think Crawford is over rated and excels by being on a phenom of a possession and offensive juggernaut

I honestly thought Seabrook was their best player, even though he didn't put big pts he was a rock all playoffs
- Danformo

This guy was clutch:

Throughout the whole playoffs, Crawford definitely should have won the Smythe. Bickell would have been another great choice for it also. Kane was pretty consistent through the playoffs though, in the Wild series he may not of scored at all, but 5 of his 10 assists were during that series.

Kane had the most points for the team during the playoffs (G:9 A:10) and with that being said, Craw had a .932 SV% through the playoffs and Bickell was second on the team in points with 17 (G:9 A:8). It could have gone either way, and many other players had chances at it too as JJ listed.

Throughout the whole playoffs, Crawford definitely should have won the Smythe. Bickell would have been another great choice for it also. Kane was pretty consistent through the playoffs though, in the Wild series he may not of scored at all, but 5 of his 10 assists were during that series.

Kane had the most points for the team during the playoffs (G:9 A:10) and with that being said, Craw had a .932 SV% through the playoffs and Bickell was second on the team in points with 17 (G:9 A:8). It could have gone either way, and many other players had chances at it too as JJ listed.

As with any great Cup run the Blackhawks had at least 3-4 people that were worthy of the Smythe. If we're talking about the player who has consistently the best through all 4 rounds I'd have to say it was Crawford.

I agree that Bickell was great, he had amazing series against LA and Minnesota. He was good against Detroit and while his goal in game 6 against Boston was historic his output in this series didn't match the others. Was Bickell more worthy than Kane, yes. Was Bickell more worthy than Crawford, it was close but I'd say no.

I'd rank my choices for the Smythe trophy would be Crawford, Bickell, Sharp, Kane and Keith.

I'm not going to get bent out of shape about who won the Conn Smythe, the Blackhawks won the Stanley Cup and that's all that matters.
- DarthKane

What was so tough about the Conn Symthe this year was that there were so many great performances, no one individual stood out head and shoulders above the others.

For me, it could have been any of Crawford, Bickell, Kane, Sharp, and Keith. Probably a toss-up between Bickell and Crawford, but personally I think Keith's contributions, the minutes he eats up playing against the best the opposition has to offer, is worthy of more credit than he probably gets.

I'd flip a coin between Bickell and Crawford, but if Kane says at the rally Crawford is their MVP, that's good enough for me.

What was so tough about the Conn Symthe this year was that there were so many great performances, no one individual stood out head and shoulders above the others.

For me, it could have been any of Crawford, Bickell, Kane, Sharp, and Keith. Probably a toss-up between Bickell and Crawford, but personally I think Keith's contributions, the minutes he eats up playing against the best the opposition has to offer, is worthy of more credit than he probably gets.

I'd flip a coin between Bickell and Crawford, but if Kane says at the rally Crawford is their MVP, that's good enough for me.
- MartiniMan

Keith's contributions to this Cup win have been understated for sure. This was as close to 2010 as Keith has been since then. His PPG may have been down slightly (0.77 to 0.60) but part of that is because the other dman were better this season and the minutes could be spread around more evenly. Keith made several amazing plays that lead to goals but he didn't get a point.

In 2010 I didn't mind seeing Toews get it...He had a huge point streak during the playoffs,13 games from what I remember,and was his usual self on D,he slowed down a bit in the finals,I thought I remember reading he injured his knee or something,maybe I'm wrong...But anyways,he was 2nd I think in points,and I had no problem with him getting it,that said Buff could have won it,and Duncan Keith probably deserved it most imo...And I think he should have won it this year too...He had nice numbers,and plus he was playing the other teams top line most of the time,and it isn't a coincidence that Seabrook played much better after being reunited with Keith..But D men don't get the love the superstar scorers do

Teravainen looking good

In 2010 I didn't mind seeing Toews get it...He had a huge point streak during the playoffs,13 games from what I remember,and was his usual self on D,he slowed down a bit in the finals,I thought I remember reading he injured his knee or something,maybe I'm wrong...But anyways,he was 2nd I think in points,and I had no problem with him getting it,that said Buff could have won it,and Duncan Keith probably deserved it most imo...And I think he should have won it this year too...He had nice numbers,and plus he was playing the other teams top line most of the time,and it isn't a coincidence that Seabrook played much better after being reunited with Keith..But D men don't get the love the superstar scorers do

Teravainen looking good
- captainserious

In 2010, Keith was the best player in the SCF for sure. Buff was instrumental in swinging that series back in Chicago's favor by going after Pronger, but Keith was just dominant that entire series.

I can imagine that Game 6 was easier than the 2010 Game 6. Instead of giving up a late lead and having to go into OT, you're probably half counting them to lose Game 6 with a minute and a half to go, and you're preparing for OT when they take the lead. So you only have a 1-minute heart attack as opposed to a 2-hour one.
- jmatchett383

I remember already being resigned to a game seven and watching the seconds tick down. It was a much different surprise than in 2010. The "two in seventeen" came out of nowhere and were a very pleasant surprise.

There was just no way Bickell was going to win it. they would not let it happen.

Historically, only HHOF caliber players win the Conn Smythe, no matter what. I believe only 1 non-current player isn't in, and then you can probably count guys like Giggy and B. Richards, who are more Kane-caliber.

There was just no way Bickell was going to win it.
- Blackstrom2

There are a few guys (Claude Lemieux, Bill Ranford, Ron Hextall) that are non-stars...at least Lemieux isn't.

There are a few guys (Claude Lemieux, Bill Ranford, Ron Hextall) that are non-stars...at least Lemieux isn't.
- jmatchett383

Yeah, I don't know where I read/heard that, but I double checked myself and saw that it was wrong. Granted, the correct statement seems to have been players, not any non-current winner, and I think Lemiuex is the one.

I think these sorts of discussions underscore the relative meaninglessness of individual awards in team sports more than anything else.

Lots of valid points have been made here, and it all depends on which subjective approach one chooses to take. More than any other single player, I think everyone knows that without Toews the Hawks do not win the Cup, so you could argue that he should be the Conn Smythe winner before even analyzing or quantifying who contributed what.

Good arguments could be made for Crawford, Bickell, Hossa, Keith, Seabrook and even Bolland. I'm OK with Kane, but they may have well just picked a name out of a hat. It's a team game.

would of loved to see bicks get the smythe but still im fine with kane

Good discussion - but what it really points out is how silly it is to have the Conn Smythe go to the MVP of the entire playoffs. It wasn't hard to figure way back before expansion, but nowadays with 4 levels of playoffs, it's crazy.

One of these days, somebody, like an Ovechkin, is just going to have an amazing run of goals and assists, game winners, couple of hat tricks through 3 rounds and yet be eliminated in a conference finals game 7. So even without playing in the Finals he could conceivably (perhaps easily) get the Smythe.

Just give the Conn Smythe for the finals (media vote) and let the individual teams take a vote for playoff MVP (like they do for the season) and award it at the team celebration dinner. It'd mean more coming from their teammates.

First... start to finish.. I can't decide between Bicks and Crawford. I'll tilt it to Crawford for one reason. Hawks are one and done without him since he was the only one to appear in the Minnesota series. Without that, there's no rounds 2, 3, and 4. That said he was consistent throughout with a bad game here and there but I still think back to that first series. He was a rock through and through. Can't argue though against Bicks.
- golfbard

I think these sorts of discussions underscore the relative meaninglessness of individual awards in team sports more than anything else.

Lots of valid points have been made here, and it all depends on which subjective approach one chooses to take. More than any other single player, I think everyone knows that without Toews the Hawks do not win the Cup, so you could argue that he should be the Conn Smythe winner before even analyzing or quantifying who contributed what.

Good arguments could be made for Crawford, Bickell, Hossa, Keith, Seabrook and even Bolland. I'm OK with Kane, but they may have well just picked a name out of a hat. It's a team game.
- Tugboat

Sports are points driven, but I agree with your post. When Toews won the Conn Smythe in 2010 his +/- was -1. In the 2013 playoffs he had a +9. I realize hockey is true team sport, unless you play with Ovechkin, but I know Toews was huge defensively.

I know I'm going to catch hell for this, but...Patrice Bergeron?

Kane may not have blown away the competition pts wise but he was clutch.
I think Crawford is over rated and excels by being on a phenom of a possession and offensive juggernaut

I honestly thought Seabrook was their best player, even though he didn't put big pts he was a rock all playoffs
- Danformo

Other than the two OT goals, I thought Seabs was pretty bad the entire playoffs. He got better once Q put him back with Duncan, but still not very good.

Other than the two OT goals, I thought Seabs was pretty bad the entire playoffs. He got better once Q put him back with Duncan, but still not very good.
- GoBucky

Still looking for reasons why he kept having unforced blow-outs - falling with no apparent reason. He did that several times throughout the 4 series.

Still suspect an undisclosed injury there.

Still looking for reasons why he kept having unforced blow-outs - falling with no apparent reason. He did that several times throughout the 4 series.

Still suspect an undisclosed injury there.
- StLBravesFan

It's probably the gays. Always the gays.

I know I'm going to catch hell for this, but...Patrice Bergeron?
- jmatchett383

Bergeron had a good playoffs, but not MVP worthy. If you're looking at the Bruins then Rask or Krejci are legitimate options. If Boston won the Cup Rask would have won the Conn Smythe for sure.

It's rather that a member of the losing team with the Conn Smythe, and when they do it's usually a goalie.

It's probably the gays. Always the gays.
- jmatchett383

What?

Bergeron had a good playoffs, but not MVP worthy. If you're looking at the Bruins then Rask or Krejci are legitimate options. If Boston won the Cup Rask would have won the Conn Smythe for sure.

It's rather that a member of the losing team with the Conn Smythe, and when they do it's usually a goalie.
- DarthKane

I think 3 players have. 2 goalies (Hextall/Giguere) and 1 forward (Leach). I just think Bergeron is about as clutch as the come, and he was fantastic until he died in Game 5.