Are hockey scribes conspiring against Flyers?

[thepolishkid88]

My CSNPhilly.com colleague, Tim Panaccio, turned me on to the N.H.W.A.P.F. two years ago, but I refused to believe the organization actually existed.

He brought the N.H.W.A.P.F. to my attention after defenseman Chris Pronger was shunned for the Norris Trophy as the league’s top defenseman in 2009-10. Not that Pronger necessarily deserved to win the Norris (the award went to Chicago’s Duncan Keith), but he should have been recognized and named as one of three finalists after enjoying one of his finest seasons ever.

Pronger finished top-five in scoring among D-men and was outstanding defensively, but as it has been known to do, the N.H.W.A.P.F. simply reserved its top three votes for the three players who finished 1-2-3 in scoring (see this year’s Calder trophy as well), and Pronger finished a distant fifth in Norris voting.

After Peter Laviolette failed to make the list of finalists for the Jack Adams Award Monday, and now that the Flyers have been completely shut out of the NHL’s postseason awards, perhaps I should investigate into the actual existence into the N.H.W.A.P.F -- the National Hockey Writers Against the Philadelphia Flyers -- which is simply an extension of the P.H.W.A. (Professional Hockey Writers Association).

Just how many members comprise the N.H.W.A.P.F., I’m not quite sure. However, this group of secretive scribes has not only excluded Laviolette as an Adams finalist in the past few weeks, but also Claude Giroux as a finalist for the Hart Trophy as MVP and Matt Read as one three finalists for the Calder Trophy. It’s also not out of the realm that this little-known group also paid off a number of NHL general managers who dissed Paul Holmgren as a G.M. of the Year candidate.

As for the Adams Trophy, one of Laviolette’s greatest attributes is getting the most out of his rookies and young players without crippling their psyche. He’ll criticize and even scold the rookies if he needs to, but won’t do it in front of veterans to avoid dressing room humiliation. It’s not a quality that St. Louis’s Ken Hitchcock necessarily possesses, but Hitchcock should and will win the Adams Trophy as the league’s best coach for the remarkable turnaround in St. Louis.

However, Laviolette should not be completely dismissed for the work he did here in 2011-12. Let’s recap: Laviolette watched his team undergo a facelift with the trades of Mike Richards and Jeff Carter. He lost his captain and best defenseman, Pronger, less than two months into the season. He entrusted an 18-year-old rookie to center a defensive checking line, while utilizing more rookies than any other team in the NHL, and he still won the same number of games this season as he did last.

So Laviolette didn’t engineer a remarkable single-season turnaround like Hitchcock, or John Tortorella, whose Rangers made a 16-point improvement, or that of first-year coach Paul McLean, who guided the Senators to an 18-point turnaround. If improvement is a sticking point with the P.H.W.A. when it comes to the Jack Adams Trophy, then why wasn’t John Stevens recognized for his impressive 37-point jump from 2006-07 to 2007-08? Instead, the three finalists were Washington’s Bruce Boudreau (winner), Detroit’s Mike Babcock (ho-hum, another 50 wins), and Montreal’s Guy Carbonneau (who led Montreal to their first 100-point season in 15 years).

First it was Read. Then it was Holmgren and Giroux. Now it’s Laviolette. All disregarded as finalists. The conspiracy theorists are stirring and now after two years, Panaccio has made me a believer that the NHL’s Illuminati actually exists.

http://www.csnphilly.com/hockey-phil...006&feedID=695

Haha what a JOKE!

[RetardedChimp]

It's called jealousy.

[acdcrocksno1]

Originally Posted by thepolishkid88

http://www.csnphilly.com/hockey-phil...006&feedID=695

Haha what a JOKE!

I'm not sure if thats actually a serious article or not but shunning Matt Read, Claude Giroux and Paul Holmgren for awards made me pretty angry. Lavi for Jack Adams you could argue him in for a candidate spot but not as the winnert Hitchcock has that one sealed up.

Although it wouldnt surprise me if there was such an association and if there was where would the NHL stand on its members deciding who wins its individual awards?

[thepolishkid88]

Originally Posted by acdcrocksno1

I'm not sure if thats actually a serious article or not but shunning Matt Read, Claude Giroux and Paul Holmgren for awards made me pretty angry. Lavi for Jack Adams you could argue him in for a candidate spot but not as the winnert Hitchcock has that one sealed up.

Although it wouldnt surprise me if there was such an association and if there was where would the NHL stand on its members deciding who wins its individual awards?

There is one Penguin up for an award this year after a lot of players had tremendous years. I could honestly say I can care less about any individual award, at the end of the day the only trophy anyone should care about is the Stanley Cup. Every other award means ****, unless your the Panthers or Sens who exceeded expectations.

[hockey doc]

Individual awards are nice for the person who receives them, congrats to that person and put it on your mantle and enjoy it for life. There is only one award in the NHL that is actually worth anything, a team award, that big silver thing.

[fcm]

Originally Posted by RetardedChimp

It's called jealousy.