This is the time of year when people start to debate the NHL Awards. While I find the debates interesting, it has always irked me that they are decided by journalists. This is because most journalists follow one team. I don't get to vote - obviously - but I watch more games by Phoenix and Toronto than any other teams and thus I am probably somewhat bias towards their players.
While voting is supposedly segregated so that there are an equal number of eastern and western writers who vote, it is impossible to know for sure because the members are shrouded in secrecy and there is zero accountability for votes. Certainly the awards seem to have an eastern bias, and that is doubly weird since the Western Conference has been much better for at least several years.
One reason I don't believe journalists should vote for awards is because I know how I myself view the NHL. Even if I could separate my personal opinions, which isn't really that hard, the fact that I have seen Oliver Ekman-Larsson play over sixty times this year, compared to say, ten or fifteen times for Drew Doughty, makes the whole business of deciding who is the best impracticable. This means that like 99% of people who talk about hockey, I have to base far too much of my opinion on highlights, reputation and statistics.
And really, if we are realistic, this is a terrible way to decide awards or argue over who is the best. Hockey is a fast game and cannot be 100% statistically quantified. Their are too many plays that are necessary to win that don't show up in the box scores. People, especially non-experts (and I don't claim to be one) are far too concerned about points, irrelevancies like plus minus, reputation, and the main problem (I think) they undervalue goals, failing to account for the fact that there are twice as many assists handed out.
What this leads to is:
1) Ridiculous arguments between fans about who is the best. I am guilty of this myself at times, but it really is dumb. How can someone legitimately argue who is a better player between say Duncan Keith and Ekman-Larsson unless they have watched both players for an entire season? Sure Keith has more points, but his partner is a lot better than OEL's and so his team.
I know for a fact after having watched so many Toronto and Phoenix games this year that Dion Phaneuf is about 100% better than his reputation suggests and that Keith Yandle is 500% better without the puck than people think. But what I don't know is similar surprises about other players on other teams.
2) Ridiculous awards choices. As noted, the NHL Awards are selected by journalists. Specifically the Professional Hockey Writer's Association. There are - according to Wikipedia - 180 members and they include such hockey "experts" as Steve Simmons, Greg Wyshynski, Satan and Damien Cox. And those are the guys you can reasonably trust. Search the internet for members and you find several examples of guys with votes who haven't filed a hockey article in several years and many who don't seem to know a ton about hockey.
This collection of voters makes so many hilarious errors, like giving the Norris Trophy to PK Subban and voting Ovechkin as a first team allstar at two different positions, that it's a wonder they don't include Sarah Palin as a voting member.
I could go on all day about the bias in choosing the voters from people who write or have written for major publications, the fact that many people who have votes are - to be frank - idiots, or the fact that voting Ovechkin to two different positions discredits every single award they've ever given out, but that stuff is pretty obvious to anyone who cares. The point here isn't that the Writers Association should be better, it's that it shouldn't vote at all.
In my opinion, the NHL should have a group of scouts, ex-writers, ex-players, ex-coaches etc. who's only job is to vote for awards. The NHL should create this group and fly them around the league to watch games all year long. Then at the end of the year, they should meet like a jury and debate their choices before casting their ballots. The awards would then be less biased towards star players, Eastern Conference players, and less based on reputation and points.
If they did this - and for a billion dollar league, it's not like they can't afford it- the awards would more accurately reflect what they are supposed to, and most of all, guys who play for teams like Nashville and Phoenix would actually have a chance to win.
After that, all they would have to do is hire someone to host and appear on their awards show that isn't irrelevant by twenty-years. Remember when Def Leppard was on? IN 2008???
-----
Full credit to the Coyote for last night's game. Yeah, they lost, but they went head to head against the best team in hockey for two periods, coming out on top 2-1.
So they couldn't hold on in the third. The Bruins are crazy good and there is no shame in losing to them.
In the last two weeks, the only losses the Coyotes have had are against the team who has now won 12 straight.
It was a good game. Only a couple lucky redirects prevented the Coyotes from being victorious and while a loss is a loss, it's hard to get too upset about this one.
One note about the game: Oliver Ekman-Larsson scored one of the best goals of the year. It was awesome. Do yourself a favor and make sure you check out this end to end rush on the highlights today.
Next up, the Coyotes play the Rangers tomorrow and Pittsburgh Tuesday. Should be fun.
Thanks for reading,
Twitter:Coyotes1234