MV Perry

by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on May 6, 2011 5:31 AM PDT in The Cup & Other Awards

ARTHUR:
A month ago, Greg Wyshynski listed five reasons Corey Perry would not be receiving the Puck Daddy scribe's vote for the Hart. Amongst the quintet of complaints was the number of minor penalties that the Anaheim forward took on the way to his 104 PIM total.

It would be simplistic to counter that argument by noting that Corey Perry draws a large number of penalties for the Ducks (though at 1.2 per 60 minutes, he does). Instead, I would simply build on that counter argument and point out that 1/4 of Perry's 2-minute infractions are Roughing minors.

By simply pointing to his minor penalties, you seem to imply that Perry is some flat footed forward with a propensity for hurting his team with a Hook every time he can't keep up with his check. In reality, Perry is a forward who plays the game in the trenches (whether or not he's actually stationed in the trenches at the time). He hits you first, and he hits you back.

Are 10 Roughing minors a good thing? A positive? Well, no. Neither are his two Charging penalties and his one Boarding call. But if Perry is truly effective playing the game on the edge, then maybe the decision to vote for him should be based on more than visiting the Ducks' Penalties stat page of NHL.com and sorting by 'Minors.'

And that's why I feel Perry's consideration for the Ted Lindsay Award is so much more important than his nomination for the Hart. He may have a history of minor penalties, front of the net exchanges like the video above, runs at goaltenders and a pretty inexcusable suspension, but the Players' Association MVP could be the one place where your rap sheet isn't determinative of your value. After all, Alex Ovechkin took home his third consecutive MVP despite multiple suspensions and a couple of knee on knee hits that escaped suspension.

So, maybe it's actually more meaningful to be called valuable and effective by the players that actually play against you and have some firsthand knowledge of how valuable and effective you are. Mind blowing concept, I know.

Tweet Comment 12 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Well, good morning to you, too

maybe it’s actually more meaningful to be called valuable and effective by the players that actually play against you and have some firsthand knowledge of how valuable and effective you are. Mind blowing concept, I know.

Also mind-blowing: Understanding that the Ted Lindsay Award is not a “players’ MVP” award but rather the award for “most outstanding player.” It’s a de facto player of the year award, with the words “value” and “MVP” not appearing once here:

http://www.nhlpa.com/About-Us/Ted-Lindsay-Award/

And pointing to his penalties isn’t inferring that he’s “some flat footed forward with a propensity for hurting his team with a Hook every time he can’t keep up with his check.” I said nothing of his defense within that context; only that 104 PIMs are rather high for such a “valuable” player. But I agree that he draws his share, too, and should have noted that.

by Wyshynski on May 6, 2011 6:19 AM PDT reply actions

Haha, I’m going to say that this was worth it, just because you had to join the site to say it. :)

I hope nothing in there hides the fact that it’s a sour grapes editorial on a guy who won’t win either award. But, beyond that, when people don’t watch Ducks games, and you say something like, ‘Dude takes a lot of minors,’ it’s misleading, whether you meant it that way or not.

Chen did his breakdown of ‘cheating’ penalties versus ‘dirty’ penalties before the season ended and Perry’s 10 Roughings, 2 Chargings and 1 Boarding put him amongst the dirty leaders. He was NOT amongst the cheating leaders i.e. goalie interference, hooking, holding, etc. Not every Minor is created equal.

As for the Ted Lindsay Award, again, it’s a sour grapes editorial; I had to come to a circular close for effect. I doubt the word “effective” appears in any award guideline anywhere, but if Ovechkin’s suspensions and his knee on knee targeting wasn’t relevant to them in their voting, then that would be the outer limit of my point there.

Anaheim Calling

by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on May 6, 2011 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions

Why you haf to be mad?

I got a fever and the only prescription is more cowbell

by Natesaduck on May 6, 2011 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions

Perry: “I learned it from you Rob….I learned it from YOU!” sobs

"My, my, here's one for the (no) neck. Don't relax, 'cause you're next for the check!"

by DonBorvio on May 6, 2011 2:12 PM PDT reply actions

That video makes me miss #27 :[

I got a fever and the only prescription is more cowbell

by Natesaduck on May 6, 2011 3:58 PM PDT reply actions

Did Scott Niedermayer regularly spear dudes in the nuts? I know he was active with the stick around the ankles and sometimes near the crotch, but I don’t know about spearing dudes in the nuts.

by Daniel AC on May 6, 2011 7:25 PM PDT up reply actions

No, he was in the video at the end. Aside from that Worrel incident, I think Scotty was the cleanest player of his era

I got a fever and the only prescription is more cowbell

by Natesaduck on May 6, 2011 11:04 PM PDT reply actions

Reply fail

I got a fever and the only prescription is more cowbell

by Natesaduck on May 6, 2011 11:04 PM PDT up reply actions

This thing with Perry has really turned me off to the clean v. dirty player discussion. All players throw elbows, and give the occasional face wash. I know some guys do it more than others, but I feel it’s turned into this giant ad hominem fallacy we use both for and against players.

by Daniel AC on May 7, 2011 8:35 AM PDT up reply actions

I can see that

Although I’m not really sure how a face wash is considered dirty.

I got a fever and the only prescription is more cowbell

by Natesaduck on May 7, 2011 4:15 PM PDT up reply actions

Hart vs Lindsay

There is certainly some added merit to being recognized as “outstanding” by one’s peers. It should also be noted however, that usually the players don’t get to see many games that they aren’t playing in and as such are more familiar with players in their division and conference.

That can be a good and bad thing in that it cancels out the dreaded “east coast bias” but at the same time there is an element of reputation/word of mouth in the players’ selections when it comes to guys they haven’t seen in a while. Thus steven stamkos’ nomination for the lindsay despite his drop off in the second half of the season.

by Chris D-5 on May 7, 2011 9:08 AM PDT via mobile reply actions

I really wasn’t intending to call Wyshynski out specifically, but in giving us a peek into his due diligence as a voter, I have to wonder how many writers will just look up the number of Minors Perry has taken, without inquiring into the nature of those minors or how many penalties he’s drawn.

Is the inference that every minor hurts his team? He’s bringing a guy to the box with him on coincidental Roughings, and that’s even assuming that there is no positive value to Perry playing the game on the edge and taking some of those penalties (drawing some in reverse being the most tangible value).

The players may not be doing a "MOST VALUABLE" calculus, but honestly, it doesn’t sound like the writers are doing very much of one either. And at least the players get to gameplan for these guys once in a while; they get professional coaches going over strengths and weaknesses of the opposition.

Anaheim Calling

by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on May 8, 2011 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions