Hart: Here’s What Explains the Strange Vote for Gabriel Landeskog

Félix Forget
Hart: Here’s What Explains the Strange Vote for Gabriel Landeskog
Credit: Capture d'écran/Twitter

Over the past few days, the Professional Hockey Writers Association has released the ballots of all the journalists who participated in the voting for individual awards. This has made it possible to see which players each journalist selected for each trophy.

The case of Nick Suzuki and the Selke Trophy, for example, has been a hot topic of conversation in Montreal.

That said, regarding the Hart Trophy, there was a lot of talk about Suzuki's first-place vote… but there was also a fifth-place vote cast for Gabriel Landeskog. After all, he had recorded only 14 goals and 35 points in 60 games.

And the journalist who cast the vote, Meghan Angley, published an article explaining her reasoning. The journalist, who covers the Avalanche, outlined the various reasons behind her choice: the Avalanche's record with and without Landeskog, his advanced statistics, and his leadership.

And in her view, these were all factors that warranted a fifth-place vote.

Angley explains that the Avalanche posted a 45-7-8 record with Landeskog, which is significantly better than their 10-9-3 record without their captain. Landeskog also helped revitalize all of the team's lines when they were struggling (advanced statistics clearly demonstrate this), and the Swede's leadership was recognized with the Mark Messier Trophy.

In short, she explains that Landeskog was something of a jack-of-all-trades and the driving force behind what was the league's best team. It's as simple as that.

Angley points out that there's a difference between the Hart Trophy (Most Valuable Player) and the Art Ross Trophy (highest-scoring player), and that this was a factor in her decision. This explains why players like Macklin Celebrini, Nick Suzuki, and David Pastrnak aren't among her top five for the Hart Trophy.

Obviously, this is a vote that's causing a stir, given that it goes (very) against the consensus and the typical profile we usually see. That said, we have to at least give him credit for justifying his choice with sound arguments.

You can disagree with them (respectfully), of course. But having a variety of opinions is also part of the beauty of the process.


In a Nutshell

– Zachary Fucale speaks highly of Alexander Zharovsky.

– Interesting.

– A name to watch this summer.

facebook icon Share twitter icon Tweet linkedin icon Share
Copied!