Skip to content

Poll: Who will win the 2012 Hart Trophy?

Apr 27, 2012, 12:21 PM EDT

Perry with Hart Getty Images

Earlier today, the three 2012 Hart Trophy finalists were announced by the NHL.

Evgeni Malkin, Pittsburgh Penguins

—-Led the NHL with 109 points and stepped up while Sidney Crosby was recovering from a concussion.

Steven Stamkos, Tampa Bay Lightning

—-Led the NHL with 60 goals, becoming the first player to reach the 60-goal mark since Alex Ovechkin in 2007-08.

Henrik Lundqvist, New York Rangers

—-Started 62 games, won 39 of them, tied with Mike Smith for top save percentage (.930) of goalies with 50-plus starts, and very handsome.

Now it’s your turn to play the role of Professional Hockey Writers’ Association (minus the mustard stain on your tie) and vote on the winner.

  1. charlutes - Apr 27, 2012 at 12:32 PM

    Best player in the NHL is Claude Giroux that’s who’d get my vote.

    • napoleonblownapart6887 - Apr 27, 2012 at 12:54 PM

      Not this season he wasn’t.

    • crosberries - Apr 27, 2012 at 2:18 PM

      Good job watching your home team this year

    • jpelle82 - Apr 27, 2012 at 2:19 PM

      not even close but everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

    • tcclark - Apr 27, 2012 at 3:25 PM

      I definitely agree. It’s ridiculous that he didn’t even get a nomination. When did the Hart trophy become the Art Ross? Malkin scored 16 more points than Giroux, but Giroux did a lot more than 16 points worth of additional things for his team.

      Really if you look at their numbers, the only thing the Malkin has up on Giroux are the goals scored.

      Giroux 65
      Malkin 59

      Face-off Percentage
      Giroux 53.7%
      Malkin 47.5

      Takeaways and Giveaways
      Giroux 50 tka – 44 gva
      Malkin 52 tka – 73 gva

      Giroux 70
      Malkin 29

      Giroux 29
      Malkin 70

      Giroux even blocked a couple more shots and scored more points on the powerplay. Malkin was only a +7 better in +/- despite the fact that Giroux was often sent out against the other teams best offensive line. and the defense isn’t even comparable

      Shorthanded ice time
      Giroux 172:26
      Malkin 3:05

      So Giroux is by far a much better defensive player and better at practically every other facet of the game. Malkin is better at scoring goals at even strength and has a slightly higher +/-. Why is Malkin going to win this again?

      Malkin kept the Penguins afloat after they lost Crosby. Giroux kept the Flyers afloat after they lost Carter, Richards, and Leino. Crosby is great, but he’s not better than all three of those players combined.

      Malkin led a team of veterens to fourth place. Giroux led a team of rookies to 5th place.

      Malkin’s team had a goalie that had his best statistical year. Giroux’s team had a goalie who was often criticized and benched throughout the season because he was having his worst statistical year.

      Malkin’s team was relatively healthy all year besides the loss of their captain and future hall of famer. Giroux’s team was hit hard with injuries all year not including the loss of their captain and future hall of famer.

      Giroux was much more valuable to his team than Malkin was. Giroux raised the play of everyone around him and kept the team together when everything was going wrong. He led a group of 8 rookies and several other young players to the third best record in the east. Malkin’s team is full of veterans. Veterans who’ve won a stanley cup before. The job Giroux did with the Flyers is worth so much more than the 16 extra points that Malkin had.

      • pajabroni - Apr 27, 2012 at 3:52 PM

        I feel bad because you wasted so much time researching and writing that. I bet you have calluses on your jerk-off hand.

        Aside from that, I hope everyone notes how biased this response is.

        If the penguins would have won that playoff series, you would not have come out of your mom’s basement to write something like this. The only entitlement you have to this claim is the fact your home team won in the playoffs.

        Thank you for arguing about defensive stats…but this is NOT the Selke.

        Giroux didn’t even make the ballot, there is no chance he is a better pick than Malkin.

        Grow up, Peter Pan.

      • tcclark - Apr 27, 2012 at 4:28 PM

        woah. the personal attacks were kinda funny, but don’t tell someone to grow up after you make a 9th grade-level dirty joke. Do you realize how ridiculous you sound?

        Also when did i write anything about the playoffs? This is a regular season award and Giroux deserves a nomination for what he did during the regular season. I think him finishing the season 3rd in the NHL in points gives me a little bit of entitlement for this claim. The other 2 guys got nominated and Giroux does more for his team tan either of them.

        No this is not the Selke, but it is also not the Art Ross. The Guy with the most points shouldn’t always win the award. The guy who is most valuable for his team should be. Malkin deserves a nomination for what he did with Crosby out, but as I highlighted above, Giroux deserves it just as much, if not more. The other guy who deserves it is Jonathan Quick. Honestly Quick might deserve it more than anyone. He is the only reason the kings are in the playoffs. The ONLY reason. Malkin and Giroux can’t say that.

        the ballot is flawed. They almost always are.

        i felt like i did a pretty decent job, letting the numbers do the talking for me in my post. Am I a Flyers fan? Yes. But I am a Hockey Fan first and foremost. I’ve always stood up for the defensive side of Hockey and have argued Pavel Datsyuk’s Hart Trophy case for several years. Hockey has 2 sides. Offense and defense. The Art Ross is for Offense, the Selke is for defense. The Hart should take both into consideration.

      • tackledummy1505 - Apr 27, 2012 at 4:15 PM

        Don’t forget we’ve played all year without our Captain. Crosby didn’t miss the entire season. But hey who cares right lol

      • pajabroni - Apr 27, 2012 at 6:03 PM

        I never stated that you argued about the playoffs, I simply stated that you would not be making this claim had giroux lost in the playoffs to the penguins.

        You did not do a good job of letting the numbers “do the talking” because they were entirely biased. You argued defensive statistics. You stated Malkin’s team was relatively healthy all season…could you be more wrong? The Penguins had some of the most “man-games” lost in the NHL. You make opinionated statements and try to pass them as fact.

        Then the part that I find comical, is that you state points should not matter…because this is not the Art Ross. Okay, sure…but then why say this, “I think him finishing the season 3rd in the NHL in points gives me a little bit of entitlement for this claim”

        The ballot isn’t flawed. Your logic is.

      • tcclark - Apr 27, 2012 at 9:01 PM

        How can statistics be biased? I can understand if I only mentioned specific statistics, but tell me what i could’ve talked about aside from goals? I mentioned that Malkin scored more goals and had more points, but I also said that giroux had more assists, more powerplay points, less givaways, etc. Was I being biased when I mentioned Malkin’s better plus minus? I did give a reason to why he might have a higher +/-, but if i really wanted to be biased I could’ve left it off.

        Also when did I say the points shouldn’t matter? I said “The Guy with the most points shouldn’t always win the award.” Always. points are very important, but so are other facets of the game. I also said “The Art Ross is for Offense, the Selke is for defense. The Hart should take both into consideration” Both. Both points and defense. Points are a factor, but to go to my original point, Malkin’s 16 extra points aren’t worth more than the other things that Giroux does for the Flyers. Giroux’s defense is worth much more than 16 points.

        My logic isn’t flawed. Your reading ability is.

      • jpelle82 - Apr 28, 2012 at 9:59 AM

        since when does shorthanded ice time mean youre a better player? he had 44 blocked shots and malkin had 41. for all that shorthanded time you would think such a good “defensive player” like giroux supposedly is would have had a lot more blocks. 41% of giroux’s points were on the powerplay – thats the easiest way to get points in hockey. so how does that help your case? the penguins had more injuries and games lost to injury than any other team in the league. way more than the flyers. and the pens lost more impact guys than the flyers did in crosby, staal, letang alone. malkin played less games due to injury and still destroyed him in pts. the pp units were both 19.7% tied for 5th in the league so its not like one guy made a bigger difference than the other on the pp either, giroux just racked up a bunch of assists when goals matter.

      • tcclark - Apr 28, 2012 at 11:45 AM

        “Giroux just racked up a bunch of assists when goals matter.” Do you know how you earn an assist? Someone has to score a goal in order for you to get one. It doesn’t matter who scored it. So essentially, Giroux had a hand in 93 goals this year, and Malkin had a hand in 109. That’s how points work. A goal is a goal. the guy who assists on a goal is just as valuable as the guy who scores it because in most cases the guy who scores it doesn’t score without someone passing it to him.

        If you’re really questioning Giroux’s defensive ability than you have obviously never watched him play. Defense is more than tangible statistics. Shorthanded Ice time doesn’t mean that you’re a good player, but it shows the trust that your coach has in your defensive ability. Malkin doesn’t have that trust. And don’t throw out that “he’s a star. he can, but they don’t want him to kill penalties” crap. Malkin is regarded around circles as an average at best defensive player. Most consider him down right bad. Giroux is a star player on a team full of good defensive forwards, and yet he’s still on the top pk unit. That is really the only tangible statistic I can show you for defensive ability because it’s all about a coaches trust.

        Blocked shots and takeaways are not good judges for defensive ability. Defensive players want to prevent the shot form happening, not wait for it to happen and then try to block it when it does. In many ways a block is a bail out. It’s like, “oops we let them take a shot, but it’s ok, we blocked it.” They’re good to have, but you’d rather the other team not take a shot at all.

        As for the injuries. Crosby Staal and Letang are the only guys you really missed all year. Kennedy missed some games, but they all missed large chunks of the season while the rest of your team was fairly healthy. Almost everyone in Philadelphia got hit with an injury at one time or another. Giroux had a concussion which could’ve lasted a while like Crosby’s. Schenn missed a ton of games with multiple injuries. JVR missed several games with multiple injures. Pronger missed more games than Crosby. Jagr had several minor injuries. Briere missed time. Mesaroz missed a large chunk of time. Grossman missed time. Those are all key players that missed significant time over the course of the year. There’s a reason so many rookies played this year.

      • jpelle82 - Apr 28, 2012 at 2:53 PM

        numbers dont lie. you must be retarded if you think takeaways and blocks dont matter. tell that to callahan and torterella. if you want to think that skating in circles on the pk, chasing the puck back and forth between the points is good defense then go ahead. you can think of this subjectively and make a case for anyone in the league being good defensively if you like them enough from your couch, wherever your bias comes from. im not saying malkin is a defensive wonder but the penguins also had the best pk in 10-11 with adams, cooke, dupuis, and staal so there is no reason to put him out there. sadly, the flyers have no other choice but to put their best overall players out there and hope for the best…which wasnt good at all (17th). and as far as the injuries go i can list crosby, staal, letang, malkin, martin, michalek, kennedy, asham, niskanen, lovejoy, engelland, orpik, neal, vitale, johnson…at one point the pens had their top 4 d men out. the penguins led the league in games lost to injury, the fact is no other team was hurt as much as the penguins.

  2. snoop0323 - Apr 27, 2012 at 2:14 PM

    Stamkos shouldn’t even be considered. No Playoffs=No MVP. I am a Rangers fan, and Lundqvist should win the Vezena, but the vote has to go to Malkin. Malkin leads the league in scoring and carried that team all season despite all their injuries.

    • tackledummy1505 - Apr 27, 2012 at 4:19 PM

      Does everyone forget 2 years ago, when the Penguins made the playoffs without Malkin and Crosby? I mean does the entire Penguin team get put up for the MVP award in that case lol. It’s a joke, this award is a joke. Would’ve I liked Giroux to win it? Yes. Do I think he should be the only one nominated? No. There have been complete players with great stats all over the league. This award has become an offensive stat anymore. Malkin doesn’t play defense, nor does he play anything that doesn’t involve scoring. This award use to go to players like Yzerman and such, now it goes to whoever excels on offensive. Thats awesome, but I thought there was awards already for goals and such?

  3. sjsharks66 - Apr 27, 2012 at 2:20 PM

    Should be Malkin. Not only did he get 109 points but he also made James Neal a 40 goal scorer. No doubt that stamkos is an amazing player though. Would love to have him on the sharks.

    • tcclark - Apr 27, 2012 at 3:47 PM

      Giroux made Hartnell a 37 goal scorer and actually played defense. I realize he’s not actually a finalist, but he should be

      • jpelle82 - Apr 28, 2012 at 10:02 AM

        malkin played defense too, in fact he had more takeaways than giroux and only 3 less blocked shots. giroux plays sh minutes and still had less takeaways and barely more bs than malkin, show me some eveidence please of how he is better defensively.

      • tcclark - Apr 28, 2012 at 11:57 AM

        Malkin hasn’t played defense since he’s been in the league. don’t throw these stupid statistics at me to say that he’s played defense. Takeaways are one of the dumbest statistics to throw out for defensive ability. Great defensive players get them, but terrible defensive players get them too. They’re like steals in basketball. It’s all about playing the passing lanes. Guys like Giroux play a man one on one and try to take the puck from him(good defense). Malkin sits in no man’s land and rushes the passing lane(terrible defense). It’s a good way to create turnovers, but it’s also a good way to leave a man uncovered. Allen Iverson led the league in steals in the NBA, but was always considered a liability on defense. That’s what Malkin is. He’s often out of position, he doesn’t defend a player well and he relys on his large body to block shots. There’s a reason Bylsma didn’t trust him on the PK even when you guys were getting blown up in the playoffs.

        I can’t give you evidence for defense because defensive statistics aren’t always right. Defense is about positioning. You need to actually watch hockey in order to see it. It’s not something you can look up or read a box score to see. If you saw what Sean Couturier did to Malkin in the Playoffs you’d see good defense.

      • jpelle82 - Apr 28, 2012 at 3:13 PM

        if you watch any penguins games you will see malkin back-checking and breaking up plays in the neutral zone all game long. because of his size he looks slower than giroux but if you have ever played hockey, you would know how that can play tricks on the eye. cunterier played well but i saw nothing like that from giroux at all. in fact, laviolette put him out against the pens 3rd line the whole time….maybe he didnt trust him matching up against the pens top 2 lines. why would bylsma put malkin on a pk when he has adams, cooke, dupuis, and staal for it? those guys were the top unit 2 years ago and thats specifically the reason adams is even on the pens and why staal is in the talks for selke every year he is healthy. the flyers dont have specialists like that, thats why they went out and got talbot (definitely not for his goal scoring). no coach wants their superstar out there for the pk, some are just forced to put them out there hence giroux. i watch a lot of atlantic division games all year, in fact if the pens arent on i will make sure to watch ny or philly. giroux is as average as the pk he plays on.

      • tcclark - Apr 28, 2012 at 5:20 PM

        you’re ridiculous. Malkin is AWFUL defensively. That is why he’s not out there on the penalty kill. Your penalty kill was terrible in the playoffs and if they had this secret weapon sitting on the bench, Bylsma would’ve certainly put him out there. Malkin does not get into good position in his own zone. He plays around in the passing lane and hopes to get a takeaway.

        Giroux’s line was out there against your third line because Bylsma wanted Staal out there to try and stop Giroux you moron. When Lavy had the second choice, he sent Giroux’s line out against Crosby.

        Giroux’s not out there because he has to be. teams put their best defensive forwards out there. Bergeron, Richards, Kesler, Callahan, Datsyuk, Zetterberg, etc. They play the PK because they are very good at it, not because the Kings, Bruins, Canucks, Rangers, or Red Wings, don’t have any defensive specialists.

        The Flyers have Wellwood, Voracek, and Simmonds who could play on the PK but don’t. And yeah Giroux looked real average putting up 3 points on the PK against you guys in the playoffs. The Flyers PK was 17th because of the defense and Bryz. Not the Forwards

  4. nydaniel - Apr 27, 2012 at 2:31 PM

    Rangers fan here. I wouldn’t be unhappy with any of these winning it – Stamkos WAS the TBL this year, Malkin is…well, amazing, and Lundquist is the primary reason the Rangers finished as the #1 in the eastern conference. Because of the lack of making the playoffs for Stamkos it’s probably down to Malkin and Lundquist.
    That’s a very hard choice.

  5. jason9696 - Apr 27, 2012 at 2:34 PM

    “and very handsome” LOL Is Jason Brough light in his loafers?

  6. tackledummy1505 - Apr 27, 2012 at 4:13 PM

    Who cares, this award has no meaning anymore. It’s given out to the most offensive player in the league, not the best player in the league. So who cares.

  7. heyzeus143 - Apr 27, 2012 at 4:39 PM

    pens fan here – Malkin choked this year in round one, Crosby is quite obviously not 100% yet – next year hopefully , give the award to king henrik and yes I know it’s a regular season award

  8. jimbo802 - Apr 27, 2012 at 5:23 PM

    Fools at NBC. The Hart trophy isn’t for the best player in the league. It’s for the player of most value to his team.

    • sabatimus - Apr 27, 2012 at 9:57 PM

      Your vote would be…?

      • tcclark - Apr 28, 2012 at 11:58 AM

        Jonathan Quick or Claude Giroux…

  9. taytay099 - Apr 27, 2012 at 8:13 PM

    Malkin carried a very injured team.

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. P. Kessel (1560)
  2. P. Kane (1408)
  3. S. Matthias (1268)
  4. M. Zuccarello (1173)
  5. D. Carcillo (1143)