The Hockey PDOcast - Episode 154: The Crossover Episode

Episode Date: March 23, 2017

Greg Wyshynski joins the show to discuss the voting process, the pros and cons of full transparency, and the favourites for all of the major individual awards themselves. Here’s a quick rundown of the topics covered here: 3:00 Voting transparency 6:45 The Selke 9:30 Wingers getting consideration for the Selke 15:45 The Jack Adams 19:15 The Norris 25:20 The Calder 31:30 The Vezina 34:30 The Hart Sponsoring today’s show is SeatGeek, which is making it easier than ever before to buy and sell sports and concert tickets. They’re giving our listeners a $20 rebate off of their first purchase. All you have to do is download the free SeatGeek app and enter the promo code PDO to get started. Every episode of the podcast is available on iTunes, Soundcloud, Google Play, and Stitcher. Make sure to subscribe to the show so that you don’t miss out on any new episodes as they’re released. All ratings and reviews are also greatly appreciated. Thanks for listening! See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices If you'd like to gain access to the two extra shows we're doing each week this season, you can subscribe to our Patreon page here: www.patreon.com/thehockeypdocast/membership If you'd like to participate in the conversation and join the community we're building over on Discord, you can do so by signing up for the Hockey PDOcast's server here: https://discord.gg/a2QGRpJc84 The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rogers Media Inc. or any affiliate.

Are you ready for the most ridiculous internet sports show you have ever seen? Welcome to React, home of the most outrageous and hilarious videos the web has to offer. So join me, Rocky Theos, and my co-host, Raiders Pro Bowl Defensive Inn, Max Crosby, as we invite your favorite athletes, celebrities, influencers, entertainers in for an episode of games, laughs, and, of course, the funniest reactions to the wildest web clips out there. Catch React on YouTube, and that is React, R-E-A-X-X. Don't miss it. This podcast episode is brought to you by Coors Light.

These days, everything is go, go, go. It's non-stop hustle all the time. Work, friends, family. Expect you to be on 24-7? Well, sometimes you just need to reach for a Coors Light because it's made to chill. Coors Light is cold-loggered, cold-filtered, and cold-packaged. It's as crisp and refreshing as the Colorado Rockies. It is literally made to chill.

Coors Light is the one I choose when I need to unwind. So when you want to hit reset, reach for the beer that's made to chill. Get Coors Light and the new look delivered straight to your door with Drisley or Instacart. Celebrate responsibly. Coors Brewing Company, Golden Colorado. Regressing to the mean since 2015, it's the Hockey PEDEOCast with your host, Dmitri Filipovich. Welcome to the Hockey Pediocast.

My name is Dimitri Filipovich. and sitting right across from me. And how would you describe this, Greg? It's a little cubicle. It's a nook inside of a studio. Yes. Inside of a larger facility. It is definitely something in which things are happening in.

There's work going on behind us. We're in the, where we record Puck Soup in Manhattan at the Yahoo headquarters, the rumbling and mumbling you hear in the background is them breaking down a shoot. Because we actually, for those who don't know, Our studio is in a corner of the actual video studio where, like, they built it for basically Adrian Wojianowski because he's, like, important. So they said, here's a big, big room for your important things. And we'll find here's a corner we're not using. And you can have that for your dramatically less important things.

Yes. Yeah. I still think, though, I mean, I was telling you when I got in here, the entire ordeal, just to get into this. place in the first place kind of made it feel like a big deal. So I mean, I feel like, I feel like, you know, we might not be being recognized here back here in this little nook, but I feel like just getting here in the first place is a good start. We have to understand that in the tech industry, which Yahoo is in, protecting your secrets is paramount. So, I mean, it's weird because this is, the New York office definitely has programmers and stuff. But by and large, it's like

the video facility. We have a couple sports people. The news, It's much more of a content-producing office, I think, than anything that happens in Santa Monica or Sunnyvale, which is where the other two offices are here in the States. But still, yeah, like, you have to really go through the ringer. I mean, part of it, I think, is dog and pony. Like, when we have, like, real celebrities like yourself. Yes. And Rain Wilson from the office was here, apparently today. The two of us generally get lumped together.

You do, yes. This is true. You were both fans of beats and afraid of bears. And we're both from the Pacific Northwest, so... This is true. We have to kind of make it appears, though, that we are, you know, a very big deal. So, you know, not metal detectors necessarily, but at least some people that you have to look at face to face and say that I'm here for distinct purpose. Yes.

And the purpose that we're here for is to have a discussion about the awards wedding, I think. Oh. Hardcore hockey talk. Yes, hardcore hockey talk. So you have a vote. I don't yet. Now, why don't you? Have you talked to somebody about that? Craig Custin's, friend of the podcast.

I'm becoming Vancouver's member of the pro hockey writers. You're becoming a part of their contingent. Which allows me to vote, I think. He has to do some tests to make sure I haven't offended too many people, and I think I passed. Are you excited to have a vote? Yeah. And I mean, this is a good, we can have this discussion. Like, right now you're not going to definitively say who you're going to vote for because that's not how this works.

But, like, you're a pretty transparent guy. and after the fact you let people know how you voted. Like I think that, do you think we should have full transparency for this stuff? Because I don't really see the reason why we wouldn't. So being in the meetings and hearing the people argue for not having transparency, I get what they're saying. What's that main argument? The main argument is that when you start releasing your votes, you open yourself up to pressures and

uncomfortable situations with the teams you cover. Now, there's another argument, which is the stupid one, which is that I don't want fans yelling at me. Well, if that's the case, then be better with your votes. And they'll find a way to yell at you regardless. They yell at you all the time. Like, why should

this be, this is just another thing to get yelled at about. Yes, it's part of the job. It's a stupid argument. But the other argument's interesting because, you know, this is a, this is, the The gray area in the media voting for these awards is that there is a financial component to them for these players. There's bonuses attached to them. There's money in being a heart trophy winner.

Yep. You know, and things of that nature. So there is sort of that hazy, weird morality question of whether we should have a vote anyway. And so within that context is if I'm a voter and I'm a beat writer, you know, what pressures are there coming from? from the team coming from the players that I cover to cast my vote a certain way. Right. Now, you know, does that mean, like, if you're an Ottawa writer, right? How in the hell do you not cast your vote for Eric Carlson?

Right. He's the franchise. He's the guy. You have to cover him. You know where the owner stands on the issue. You know where the GM stands on the issue. You know where the entire franchise stands on the issue. If you're an Ottawa writer and your ballot gets published and you have Brent Burns and

then someone. Yes. And then Carlson. Yeah. Like, you will be ostracized. Or you will be, the fear is you'll be ostracized. Now, this isn't, this isn't like the Olympic question where I see valor on both sides of the argument.

I think that every vote should be transparent. We're journalists. Like, what we do needs to have sunshine and everything that we do outside of projecting sources. And this is a silly reason. These are silly reasons to not be transparent because, honestly, everything that we do is journalists, we should be able to defend. Yeah.

with facts. Right. And that includes these votes. I mean, I think you can generally tell like which, what local beat reporters did with their votes when you see like a random guy that no one else voted for pop up as like getting a third place vote. And like for the Selkie or something, you're just like what? Yeah. Like last year when I wrote a piece on, you know, true journalist that I am, a history of Sidney Crosby

hitting people's crotches or getting hit in the crotch this morning on Fuck Daddy. And I went back and look. and he received the same number of votes for the Lady Bing as John Tavares. John Tavares is like a rice cracker. He is a devoid of personality player who is the opposite of nasty. He would be a Lady Bing guy, in my opinion, no matter what. Sidney Crosby is not. Sidney Crosby does not strike you as the most gentlemanly player, but you know.

Which is what makes him great, too. Right, which is what makes him great. But he's like, you know, at the same time, it's like, you know where those votes are coming from. You know, it's Pittsburgh. Yes. Okay, well, let's get into some of these discussions because we were talking before we went on. I feel like pretty much all of them, at least important ones, are very up in the air. They are.

Let's start with the Selki. This is always a fascinating award because for years, it's basically been, you know, Kopitar and Bergeron, and then you kind of flip a coin or personal preference. And I feel like this is the year where, you know, as good as Bergeron's, 5-15 numbers still are in terms of shot share and all the stuff that you like to see from him. It feels like he's not necessarily a slam dunk for this award, and there's going to be some interesting guys that we haven't really considered in the past. I guess maybe Orion Kessler is in the discussion, and he's kind of been a guy that's been

there maybe in years past. But I don't know, like, where are you leaning, or are there any sort of dark horse picks for you that people should be paying attention to more at this point? Well, in looking back of my mid-season picks, I had Kessler, so I think he'll definitely be a finalist, and I think he's most likely deserving of that. I had Barkoff, but I'm wondering if the injury and the man games lost since the midpoint might damage that. But he's one of these guys that, like, I've been advertising him for years as sort of like Tave Self. Yeah.

And because he spells his first name in an odd way, he'll probably never get that respect. Yes. But I think that he's sort of a fascinating two-way player. I would say, though, that Bergeron... See, the problem with Bergeron is this. It's sort of like the Nick Lidsstrom problem, right? Like a down year for Nick Lidstrom is still one of the greatest years for a defenseman. Right.

Right. So a down year for Patrice Bergeron is what? Is it a bad year for a forward? Is it a bad year by Patrice Bergeron standards? And do you judge this award based on previous work, or do you judge it, based on the season. I think ideally you'd like to base it on the season because that's what the awards for, but it's kind of tough.

Those lines definitely get blurred. They do. I mean, we'll get into this when we discuss the heart, but it's also very tough to separate his impact with Brad Marchand's impact. I agree. But I think for me the issue is that one of the biggest arguments about the NHL Awards voting is it should not be a career or lifetime achievement award.

And yet when you have a grade A player like Bergeron who, by any standard is having an insufficient year compared to his previous work. Right. That does get into that area of you're judging him based on a career standard versus a seasonal standard. And if you judge him by his seasonal standard, I mean, I haven't looked at the numbers that closely recently. Yeah. But, I mean, I remember last time I looked overall, they were still amongst the best in the league as far as defensive players. Yeah, I mean, whenever him and Roshana nice dies is pretty much just tilted in their favor, right?

But it's, I mean, we should get Uncle Jeff Merrick on this podcast right now for a quick soundbite because the next question is something he's very passionate about. But what would it take for you to vote for a winger in this award? Oh, I would vote for a winger in a millisecond. I've been ready. I would have to look back at my previous ballots, but I know that I've definitely put Hosa in the mix on some of them. Yes. You know, I, to me, it's one of these situations where it comes, this positional bias that we always see is true. in some cases with the awards

and untrue in others. The sell keep by no means should be a defensive centerman award at all. It's a defensive forward award, in which case if you're the best at what you do on the wing. And I say that my favorite reference is this. As a Devils fan, I watched Jay Pandolfo

and John Madden form one of the best defensive duo of the last couple decades, and their work that they used to do on guys like Yager was legendary, right? But you know, that's That's not a guy that was ever going to get consideration for a Selke because he was on the wing. And by the positional bias thing, of course, I mean like the idea that, you know, when we talk about the Calder, there's always this notion that it's harder to play center coming up.

Then some people say it's harder to play defense coming up. And everybody agrees it's easier just to play wing. See, that's an award where I think positional bias you can talk about a little bit and we'll probably talk about that when we get to the caller. But the Selke isn't the same sort of situation. I think it's a lazy fallback position because the laziest fallback position for someone voting for the Selke is looking at face off percentage. Yeah, I mean, I'm looking at last year's voting and Philip Forsberg was the first true winger on this list and he was 10th. And then Alex Dean was 15th. Like those are the only two guys that even sniffed any consideration.

You're like, it's, I don't know, it's tough. I think also something that I've heard of tossed out that I think we need to consider is like, I know Crosby's gotten some buzz for this in years past and he finished seventh last year and you wouldn't typically think of a guy like that who's also like leading the league and scoring as a defensive forward. But this case was made for Joel Thornton last year where it's like a good way to defend is to just always have the puck. So like a guy like Connor McDavid this year where you just see how much he has on his plate and how much he does. It's like he probably is one of the best defensive forwards in the league just because of everything that him being on the ice entails. always been fascinated by that argument because when I was living in D.C. and covering the

capitals, that was the argument that the smarter Caps fans like J.P. from Japer's Ring would make about Mike Green for the Norris. The argument for Mike Green when people were like, he's a terrible defenseman, I mean, he just wielded in his own zone all the time as well. Or he possesses the fuck

so much and score so often that maybe he's actually a better defender than you give him credit for. So it's funny how that's sort of turned over the years to where we now acknowledge that for forwards but it wasn't the same case for Green during his Norris candidacy. I think a guy like Sid and I think a guy like McDavid

are definitely in the mix. I think Sid obviously his defensive respect for his defensive game has grown over the years. But the one name to go back to the Capitals I think is kind of interesting because when you look at the big picture of these awards and how people vote for them, there is a certain gold watch

aspect to them of the totality of your career and and like you need like a certain baseline offensive production to even... Right. But also, it's also, who haven't we given love to? Yeah. Which is why spoiler warning, I think Burns is going on the Norris. Right. And I think Nick Baxter

is in that list now. Like, Backstrom's having a heart caliber year, but they'll never give him the heart. Right. Probably because of Holtby, but probably also because there's a contingency of the voters that think he's a product of Ovechkin, rightly or wrongly. Right. Wrongly this year. Yes. So the Selke then

becomes a way to reward that. And I think that Backstrom will I would predict that Baxter will be a finalist for the Selki because of that. That's interesting. I think that I did like a mid-season award show like this with Chris Johnston, and I didn't mention a guy like Miko Coybu at the time, and I got a lot of pushback from Wild Van,

so I wanted to just throw his name out there just to do our due diligence. I think he's going to be in the mix too. But I also think that you have to remember when the votes are tallied, and we haven't voted yet. We haven't cast a vote yet. Right. And when it comes to guys like Coyvoo and Dubnick and Brudrow, You have to look at the fortunes of the team

and how people are feeling of it's Again this is peeling back This is the smartest podcast about stats and hockey On the internet In the world maybe And I hate the fact that we're talking about feelings and stuff But that's the bottom line with these awards Right

When are they cast? Who's doing what when? Where are their teams? How are we feeling about them? Yes. All that jive And when the wild are tumbling down the standings As they are The feelings are a change about guys like, I can't

speak about Dubnik, obviously, because we don't vote for it. And I can't speak about Budrow because we don't vote for that either. But I can't speak about a guy like Koev, and as the team tumbles down the standings, maybe he leaves your brain a little bit as far as his standing for the Selki. I think the recency bias is a real thing, and I can't shake this recent image in my mind

where, so we just had this discussion where Bergeron's having kind of a down year for his standards. And a trendy pick for this award has been Michael Backland for just everything he's done with Kacham. and Frolek and just kind of re-energizing the flames and really taking them to the playoffs now.

And the Bruins and the Flames played in Calgary, I think, like a week ago or so. And it was just one of those reminders of where everyone stands in the league's hierarchy because those two lines matched up and Bergeron and Mershawin just absolutely annihilated them. And it was like a classic, like, if you come into King, you best not miss moment where...

Well, it goes back to Ken Carlson when the Norris having gotten demolished and undressed by Austin using the first game of the season with all of Canada watching. He seems to have recovered in the last 70 games or so. All right, let's move on.

Do you want to talk about coaches here real quick? Yeah, sure. This award is so tricky because... No, it's not. It should be Babcock. If the Leif's make the playoffs, it should be Mike Babcock to win the award. He's taken a team with average goaltending,

with gigantic gaping holes in their lineup, with a team whose nucleus is a bunch of kids and he may perhaps let them to the playoffs and you know again I'll go gold watch here the fact that he's never won is a travesty in the two cases of the guys

who were leading this award at different points of the season one's fortune is completely tied to his goalie and Boudreau although you have to admit that there are obviously offensive effects for that team too and you can credit him for that. But there's no question that the Herculian leap in the standings is due to how Good Dubnik was this season. And then the other one, it's a combination of a great goaltender who may now be the favorite for the Vezna and a historically great power play for at least the first two to three months of the season.

And in Babcock's case, he's had neither. But he has coached a team that I think a lot of us thought would be perhaps back in the lottery into a playoff. off-seating and if they make the cut I think that he should win. Yeah. I mean along those lines though like a guy that never really gets as much love as he should just because maybe the players he has on his team but like I'm looking at the standings right now. I mean

Chicago's looking pretty good and I haven't seen anyone talking about the job Joe Cuomo's on it which is interesting considering he sort of has that similar argument too where at least you know they have the old guard there with Keith and Taze and Kane and Hose and stuff but like you know they're getting contributions from Ryan Hartman and Vinie

Heinestrosa and all these guys that are just coming from the HL and he's just pushing all the right buttons. But it's Phil Jackson disease. Yeah. You know, as long as you've got Jordan and Pippin, you know, what sort of, what level of respect are you going to get versus guys that do more with less?

I like the Babcock pick just purely, I know people are going to be obnoxious about it being a, you know, whenever Toronto gets any attention, it's, you know, the center of the hockey universe and people always freak out about that. But it's like, at least for once we're not going to have a coach that just has the highest PDO for the season. Or have a coach whose goalie is going to be a finalist for the Vesda.

I mean, I see the other thing too. Like, I respect what Torderella did with the Blue Jack. It's only because I think he did some really heavy lifting and changing their mindset and getting them to play hard early in the season. They've come back around and they're streaky now after being kind of meh for a few months. And I respect the hell out of Boudreau. I think Boudreau's top three coach in this league as far as what he's able to do with the team. Playoffs accepted.

But in both cases, they have a Vezina finalist. goaltender at the end of the day and Babcock doesn't. And that's an easy sell for me. Yeah. Okay. Cool. I'm glad we hash that out. Same thing with Trots, by the way. Yeah. It's so tough. I mean, obviously

he got love for it last year, but it's like you look at the roster and obviously like on the list of stuff that they do well, like Trots is going to be low just because of all the other stuff. But I mean, it's tough to argue with the job he's done. Just like I mean, obviously part of it is his GM giving

them the pieces to work with, but like there's such a well-oiled machine in terms of there's no holes in the lineup. And it'd be pretty, I mean, I guess when he's benching Nate Schmidt for Brooks Orpick, maybe I can pick some. Right. But like you said before, I mean, like, you, I respect the job. Quenville's done more than Trots this year because Quenville had to integrate really, really green players into his lineup in a way the trots didn't.

All right, let's do the, I guess, is the Norris next? Or do you want to do the Calder? Let's do the Norris does. Be quick. Like, I know that we're getting really excited about the Eric Carlson thing. But I hate to be the guy who points to Canada and says you called the shot, but I'm going to point to Canada and say you called this shot. They've been saying it's Burns as years since the beginning of the season.

Right. And Burns is Team Canada, and Burns has a funny beard, and he has a zoo full of animals. Right. And he's a real great quote. Yeah. I mean, Carlson is like an oversized lepracons. Carlson, by the way, is a great quote, too, but in a different way. There's no way Burns is losing this award.

This is going to be much like you don't give a pitcher, the MVP in baseball. baseball, this is you give the Norris to an MVP defenseman. This is all it is. And there's no way, I don't even know how there is any concern or consternation from Team Burns that he's not going to win this award. He won this award like three months ago. Yeah, it's been in the bank. Here's the thing that I know that people are going to raise questions with.

Went out, he gets a top three. No, after Connor McDavid ended his career the other night, it's not happening. isn't it weird to you a bit? I understand you just mentioned the Team Canada factor and just he's not thought of as just being a pure sort of skill guy playing that position. But for all the people that were questioning Carlson's legitimacy in this race last year,

no one's really raising those same questions with Burns. It's idiotic. They're doing the same thing. Like Burns is scoring more goals and doing it a different way, but there's still, I mean, he's just as big of a defensive of liability just in terms of like the glaring mistakes as Carlson is. And I don't think either guy is necessarily even a glaring. See, that's the issue though.

The issue is that he doesn't have the same level of scrutiny because of where he plays and because maybe people aren't looking for it. I mean, there's an entire cottage industry of people that look for Eric Carlson turnovers and Eric Carlson getting wheeled and Eric Carlson doing this and that. I mean, like it becomes, and I'll fully admit that I have one of those guys on my staff. like Josh Cooper is constantly looking as a as a as a as a as a as a shay wever mark. Yeah, he's a he's a he's a he's a he's a dude outy truther and he's yeah to crap all over uh eric also yeah so like I think part of it is that there isn't the same level of of of spotlight on the mistakes that Burns makes but he's going to win the award in a walk like it's it's not even a point of debate where I think it's it's preordained just like Dowdy was I guess the interesting thing is who's not that it matters but who is going to be the third finalist for this award. That's a good question.

What did I have at mid-season as I look back at it? Because I haven't done one of these award things in a bit. Headbin I had. And I think had been an interesting choice only because of, I mean, you talk about heavy lifting. Like, that guy said to do some real heavy lifting this year. Yeah. And he's 60 points. And he's another guy that, to me, has been sort of like waiting for his turn on this.

The Norris is very much like the Vesna in that sense. Like you have to kind of wait your turn until everybody wins that's supposed to win one. And then you get to win one too. Right. And so I think Hadbens sort of. bubbling there. I'd have no problem if he was the third finalist for it. Although there are probably other guys that are just as worthy.

I'm cool with any of these picks. I mean, at the start of the year, it really felt like this narrative train that is helping burns. It looked like Shoeuvre might get some of that. It was like at the start of the year when they started off undefeated and like goalies were just stopping everything behind him. So like he had like an on-ice percentage of like 980 or something.

It's like he's so good defensively. It's like, well, this goalie's stopping everything. Well, I mean, I probably felt the same way, but now my real fear is that the Canadians win the cup with him. My real fear as a P.K. Suban fan is that like not only, you know, not only, like, they win the cup the year after they trade PK with Weber and then Weber wins like the cons mic. And then people start connecting the dots. Well, it's just like, how do you, how do you, how do you untie that knot, right?

Yeah, that's a lot of mental gymnastics. But did you, uh, did you listen to P.K. on, uh, on Bill Simmons's podcast? I did. He was great. Such a good speaker. He's, he's really, he's a really good salesman, well, for himself. but also for the game. I mean, he brings it to you on a human level. You know, he's a guy that, unfortunately, I think,

has maybe become a little polished over the years as far as his... You're right. I mean, like, you think back to when him and Marchand had real heat and what that sounded like. When he talks now, I mean, he's very much brand PK. I'm not saying that's a bad thing. I think it's good for the sport to have that kind of guy. Yep.

But I think that the brash... say whatever comes to mind guy probably we won't see him again until he retires and signs with Sportsnet. Yeah. Well, I mean, I still like the way you don't really hear hockey players speak much just how obviously Samoa was tongue-in-cheek when he was saying like they should go to the NFL

schedule and just have his 16 games. But I mean, he definitely like, he wasn't joking around when he said that 82 games is way too many on the body and it's like you don't really hear players talk might like that much. Yeah, but at the same time though like he, like I hit him with a question under the All-Star game that I really wanted to have a discussion with him about, but he kind of just

kind of turning into ho ho ho kind of thing which was okay you're the biggest advocate for the players marketing themselves and the NHL doesn't market you guys as individuals

and yet the players association is the reason we don't have a fantasy draft and the players association is the reason we don't have the goofy funny hat prop comedy competition in the All Star Game

more that you were really good at so what's that about and then he turned it into kind of like a soft shoot it a little bit and to me it's like he could be a little bit more of that level of

Advocate or that level of truth spitter But I know he's not going to be Because he just signed with a major agency Yeah And some of it is just like Hockey culture is so stupid It is Like it just beats players down

Like it's not surprising to me That after having been in the league For however many years Like he's probably learned The hard But why should he give a crap about that He's in Nashville now That's the thing

Like he could be that guy now in Nashville No one's gonna say boo about it I mean Lobelet might Yeah I don't know I think people still generally Like though But let's just hope

that Weber doesn't get a finalist vote. Oh, my God. Okay, let's do the Calder. So we teased it with the positional factor here. And I do, you know, sometimes that can be overblown. But I think that in this case, maybe more so than the position, it's sort of what comes with it,

where like you watch, see the players that Matthews has played with her most of the year. And with all due respect to Zach Hyman, who I actually like as a player, he's probably more of a bottom six grinder type who kills penalties and is kind of feisty and occasionally has like five big games a year rather than a guy who should be playing with your superstar

whereas Linae's bounced around playing with Mark Schifley and Nikolai Eelers and even like Matthew Perrault who can get him the puck and that's definitely a factor. What this comes down to for me is how you felt about last year because if you cast a vote for Panarin last year then you should have no problem casting a vote for Linae

because Panarin played with Kane. And the argument you could make for Panarin last year was, well, he gave Kane one of his best offensive seasons of his career, and he's a pretty damn good player. And in Shifley's case, Lina gave Shifley the best offensive season of his career. Now, you could say that's Shifley coming into his own, or you could say he has an all-world player now on his line. Probably a little bit of both.

Yeah, exactly. So to me, you can't make the line-made argument if you cast a vote for Panarin last year, And I think Panarans vote gives you a little bit of comfort in voting for Line A if you wanted to. Yes. I don't think there's a wrong answer. I think you have to make more nuanced arguments for Matthews than you do for Linae. Because at the end of the day, there's a very good chance that he's going to be leading in goals and points. And to me, you just point to those things and say, the guy who leads in goals and points is the guy who wins the caller.

Right. But in Matthew's case, you can make a strong case, but you have to dig a little deeper. And that's what makes the vote really interesting. Well, kind of along the lines of that nuance and also the discussion we had with Panera and Brisbane, David, last year, it's also. And the lining also wins points per game, too. Yes. I think it's the methodology of the award, though. It's like, what are we, how are we awarding?

Are we awarding it just purely who had the best season in this year, which I guess it is. It's the rookie of the year. Or are you looking like long-term, who's going to have the better career where it's like, you don't want to be the 80. I know, you don't want to award best new artists to a band that's only going to put out one more album.

You don't want to be the guy that was all in on Barrett Jackman for Calder the year he wanted. It seems silly in hindsight. I agree. But that's another reason I don't think there's a wrong answer here. I think they're both going to have amazing careers. Yes. I think the real nuance in the award is when you talk about the best rookie,

how much of that is based on the numbers, and then how much of that is based. based on the impact. Because if it's impact, then you might even put Werencki ahead of Lione and put maybe Matthews first. It's a fascinating debate, and it's been fun to have all year. It's gotten quite nasty, I think, because I think people, anytime the argument becomes Toronto-centric, then it becomes kind of nuclear. Well, I mean, we learned this with Carlson Dowdy last year.

Two players cannot both be good at the same time. Right. If one guy's good, the other guy must suck. Exactly. If I had to cast my vote today, I would probably cast it for lining, only because, you know, if he wins goals and points and points per game, and I cast my vote for Panarin last year over McDavid, but that was more of a work history thing. Like, I can't in good conscience not vote for the guy. Well, it's fascinating to me how, you know, they're both having amazing offensive seasons. in scoring a lot of goals, but it's like, so Matthews is off the charts in terms of, you know,

like shot attempts and scoring chances. And, like, he's just a shot volume monster. And that's the type of thing where if you look at that for his career, that's a very good sign that he's going to score a lot of goals in the years to come. Whereas Line A obviously shoots a lot, too, but he's much more of, like, an Alya Kovalchuk sniper type where he's, like, he's shooting nearly 20% for the year. And I think he probably- That was the other thing, too. the sustainability of his shooting

percentage. I'm like, okay, but what if he is Kovych? What if he is Ovatnik? Maybe this is just going to be... I understand the worry about this, maybe he's starting strong and then settling into whatever he's going to end up being, but maybe it's just going to be high. Right,

but even if he isn't this type of a prolific shooter, like, this award is describing what's already happened and he's already banked that efficiency. Yeah, I don't know you're saying. It's not predictive. Yeah. So it doesn't really matter if he shoots 12% next year. It's like he shot 20% this year and he scored those goals. You can't, that's not, no, that's why it's the sort of, how do you, how do you parse out Matt Murray in this award?

It's a deep sigh of consternation. Like he's right there after Werenski, I think. I'd have a tough time. He's big of a fan eyes on his game and how as good as he's been, it's tough saying that he's had a bigger impact than these guys. Even though like, Flurry really fell off and Murray's numbers are good, I don't think the penguins would have just fell off the table if, you're Mark Andreo Flurry started 60 games for them this year. I think they still would have scored enough goals. I think it would have fallen off the table of Antony Emmy did or someone like that. I think Murray has had an – I think Murray is obviously penalized because he won the cup,

meaning without question. But I also think that the legit argument against him is if you look back at the goalies that have won, he doesn't have the work – he doesn't have the work history of a Steve Mason. Yeah. He doesn't have that work rate. And without that work rate, I don't think a goal he can – well – When it's all said and done, he will have started

less than 50 games this season. And I don't think that's enough. Yeah, I agree with you. Unless you come on halfway through the season and like save the season. Yeah. Well, not with this class where there's at least two or three guys

that would win it pretty much every year. Okay, we got two more here. Let's bang through these rapid fire. Vezna? I think it's Dubnick and Bobrovsky and Holphe. You don't think he's going to, you don't think Dubnick's going to be hurt by the...

No, no, no. I'm saying those are three. In not alphabetical order, in the order that came to my brain. Okay. And I think Bob Rossi's going to win. I think he's pushed through, and I think he ends up getting credit for what the Blue Jackets have done this season, especially if they finish first in the division.

Yeah. Yeah, and it's been cool because he obviously had that amazing season and then injuries. sort of seem to derail him for a bit there. I'm always a fan of when a guy can stay healthy and do what he does best. He's a remarkably good goalie, and anything that makes Philly feel slightly bad in life more than they do is always a good thing in my eyes.

Yeah. But I think, I don't know. What do you think? Do you think, do you think Nick holds on? No, I mean, he's really, I mean, he still has a 927 percentage. Like, he's still really, really good, and all these guys have similar workloads. I think the name that you didn't bring up that warrants a discussion. is Cam Talbot. No, I think so too, especially.

They start like 70 plus games. 70 plus games and the number of high danger chance, Shotsky faces. I mean, like, without question, he deserves to be there. I just, I look at it logically and I say to myself, okay, you know Holtby is going to be there because he's got the numbers and he'll get credit because the capitals are good and New Ovechkin's not been great. So it's obviously Holtby. That's the way that it's never Nickbacks. Remember who is voting for this? It's the GMs. I think Bob will get it too, only because, you know, I think he's there. And I wonder now, you know, the thing is, is that you need enough Western Conference GMs to put Talbot over along with Dubnick.

And I don't know. Yeah. It could be. I would have no issue if Talbot got into the top three, but who does he supplant? That's the real issue. Realistically, you know two of those guys are definites, Bobrovsky and Dubnick. and you assume Holti gets him too based on the numbers.

Yeah, it's tough to argue with it. I think those four guys are sort of in a class of their own notes. I mean, God, Talbot's great. Yeah, amazing. I mean, it's made that management look smarter than they really are. So do you think that

are you in the camp that Camtabot has been Edmonton's most valuable player? No, I'm McLeague, okay, thank you. That was a test. It's a prosperous. Let's get into the MVP.

I love the The temporary application of value to a goaltender in certain situations, but not others, is a fascinating thing in awards voting, isn't it? It's amazing. This guy's great. Look how good his team is. Look how good his goal he is. And now it's either something you completely ignore or it's the reason you shouldn't vote for a guy. It's insane.

It really is. It really is. So who are your finalists for The Heart? Because I think there's four guys that are all up there, and one of them is obviously going to get cut from those three. Now, here's the thing. I have a very strict criteria for the heart, which is that you've got to be in it to win it.

As I look back on my mid-season awards, I do have a candidate that I wish was there, but I don't think he's going to get there, which was Jeff Carter, who was the king's offense. Insane, yeah, everything. So if they had made the cut, I think he would have been my top three along with McDavid and Sid. As it stands now, I think you go, McDavid, David, one, Sid, two, Marshan, three.

Yeah, I mean, for a while there felt like Burns was getting some traction as a legitimate number one candidate or definitely to be a finalist and Marchand's recent run has, I guess, kind of just bumped him from that. Yeah, and I know there's going to be some backlash because of the Corey Perry thing, like the recency bias candidate. Yeah. But he's just been great. And I also think that the recency bias backlash will be tempered by the, you know, we just discovered Brad Marchand's a good player and a little scumbag thing that's happened in the last two years

especially at the World Cup man being at the World Cup and covering the World Cup and just seeing like the clouds lift from the eyes of people who are like, wait a second, you're not just a little pesty mosquito, you're a hockey player? You can play with Sid? It was pretty remarkable to watch.

So I think that was sort of the canary in the coal mine as far as like if he had a great season, he was going to get something worthy of. of a heart nomination. It wins. Like I said, I think Burns gets the Norris as the defenseman MVP. I think Marchand gets invited to the party with McDavid and Sid. But I will, I will, if McDavid wins a scoring title,

and it's not guaranteed that he does. I think it comes down, listen, I think that McDavid deserves the heart no matter what. Yeah. But I think that the voting will come down to whoever wins the art, Ross. I think McDavid should win this award, and here's why. No matter what, right? No matter what, because with this award we struggle. Because Edmonton is dog shit and the penguins won the Cubs.

That's part of it, for sure. I think that we struggle with this award where it's like, is it most valuable or most outstanding? And it's like it's a very subjective award. But that's the biggest problem with the award is that there is a most outstanding award and the players vote for it. Yes. But I think that McDavid is both the most valuable to his team. if you look at what happens when he's on the ice verse off of it and what he's done for them. And I think he's the most outstanding.

Like if someone from some foreign country came here and never watched hockey before and they were like, I can only watch one player or one game, you would tell them to watch Connor McDavid play. I assume you mean like Sudan because most foreign countries do have hockey. A place that has no access to hockey. Let's say an alien. An alien came down Earth one day and he's going back home tomorrow. Now, the existence of Villiers-Bridge-Galov, I think, puts that in. question, too, my friend. Yeah, I agree. And he's got the numbers argument and he's got the

eye test argument and he's also got one other thing that's very important when it comes to heart voting, which is, you know, sometimes the voting comes down to two things with these hockey writers who admittedly, as I've established in this podcast, are usually idiots when it comes to their reasoning. And that's not a, you know, it's not a good portion of them, but it's a good, significant a percentage of the minority of them. Yeah. They either like to make stars or establish the legacy

of existing stars. Right. So in McDavid's case and in Sid's case, you have two competing ideologies there. We're either going to put another feather in the cap in the year of Sid or we're going to give Connor his first of many. Right.

And I think at the end of the day, they'll give Connor his first of many. This rewriting of history with what's happened with the Oilers this year has been a really remarkable subplot to me, where you have this contingent of people that are kind of like going out of their way to do anything other than give McDavid his do here,

where it's like the Edmonton model, what Peter Shirelli's done for them, bringing in Adam Larson, getting Camtabut. It's like, yeah, Camtabut has been amazing. We just said he's probably like the fourth best goalie this season. And definitely their D is more reliable than it's been the past. But without McDavid, like, McDavid is the Edmonton model. model, right? It's like without him, none of this matters.

And I know that the other argument they make along with the Talbot one that you made before, or acknowledged before you to make it before, you acknowledged it before. The other argument is the dry sidal one. It's like, well, look with dry sidal stone. I mean, he's got help. It's not as if he's

skating with Zach Hyman. It's not as he's skating with making Patrick a Maroon a 30-gold score. But the Peng, if you take out Stephen Stamco's in his 17 game season, the Penguin have for players that have 60 plus games on the year,

the top two players in points per game, and they don't play on the same line. So, if we're making the Who's Got Help argument, I mean, Sid's got help. Yes, no, he has quite a bit of help. I mean, listen, like, for the people that say that's Cam Talbot and it's

the Blue Line, like, I've seen what a Cam Talba like performance in that and Adam Larson on the blue line gets you, and I mean, you're pretty familiar with that. It's not a lot of winning. For the record, I've been very happy Taylor Hall. He's on a very bad team. I think he's done his best. He's a pleasure. He's amazing. That Goal, that Forsburg-esque goal he scored. I mean... And good on both sides of the ice. And as of right now, not a problem in the locker room. Yes.

There's bigger fish to fry there. Um, Greg, thanks for, thanks for taking the time to chat, man. Well, thank you for having me back. We're about to hop on your podcast. Now, this is some serious brand synergy we've got going on. It's great brand synergy. I imagine the conversation that we have on Puck Soup will be a little bit different and by that and mean dumber. Well that's all Lozo though Do you know that boy that guy As much as Merrick brings up my smarts

Nozo brings it right down Merrick Marik likes to talk about like Dickie Dunn Lozo likes to talk about another Dickie and that's the difference That's a good way to end the show On that note Yeah

The Hockey PDOCast with Dmitri Philipovich Follow on Twitter at Dim Philipovic and on SoundCloud at SoundCloud.com slash HockeyPedocast.