S65 VHL Award Show Discussion Thread

[Dil 1,760]

Ramble away people.

[Gustav 6,407]

First

[eaglesfan036 4,602]

Will Gritty win Least Valuable Player?

[Beaviss 4,957]

Beau will win 2way and @Beketovwill hate it.

[omgitshim 901]

Is it time?

[DollarAndADream 3,356]

[omgitshim 901]

23 minutes ago, Beaviss said:

Beau will win 2way and @Beketovwill hate it.

 

I don't see it. More likely it'll be Thompson or Ironside.

[xsjack 132]

When is this getting started 

[BOOM 8,745]

If following off-season schedule, about July 1st.

[hedgehog337 3,483]

Kallis vs Sterling

 

tough shit

[Enorama 2,038]

Some interesting discussions this year imo  all I'm gonna say about that

[Beketov 9,025]

8 hours ago, Beaviss said:

Beau will win 2way and @Beketovwill hate it.

Would be the least deserving award win ever is all I’m saying.

[Dil 1,760]

VHL Award Show

Begins @ 10:15 am PST

(1:15pm EST)

[Beketov 9,025]

Good fight Louth but glad to take home back to back Boulet’s. It’s not that you had a bad year @Beaviss, in many ways you had a better year than me. However the Boulet has always used hits as an important number and you didn’t have enough of them. Pick some up for next season and give me a challenge eh

[Peace 1,532]

As much as I like seeing Davos represented in the award ceremony with Dahlberg's win, how did Svoboda not get most improved after his rookie season with the Dynamo last season? I feel like - sometimes - the award committee doesn't do their research and vote on popularity or production alone. It's really disappointing to see someone like Svoboda go from 20 points to 71 in a 72 game schedule. 

In hindsight... 

Dahlberg went from 36 to 105, which is remarkable, as Dahlberg and Peace were extremely effective for Davos. 

But...

105/36 = 2.91

71/20 = 3.55

Not only was Svoboda's season much greater in individual improvement compared to Dahlberg's when comparing rookie season versus one another, he also finished with respectable stats away from mere points this season as well. 51 hits, 43 shots blocked, nearly 300 shots. The only way I see Dahlberg over Svoboda here is if the two hundred extra hits are counted, maybe plus/minus, but at this point I feel like that's an excuse to dismiss Svoboda's improvement between rookie season and sophomore season. Stop voting for high point totals and do some digging first, but that's just how I'd run things I guess.

I end with a few words.

What the fuck. 

What the actual fuck. 

/ end grumpy man rant

Edited May 4, 2019 by Peace

[DollarAndADream 3,356]

3 hours ago, Peace said:

As much as I like seeing Davos represented in the award ceremony with Dahlberg's win, how did Svoboda not get most improved after his rookie season with the Dynamo last season? I feel like - sometimes - the award committee doesn't do their research and vote on popularity or production alone. It's really disappointing to see someone like Svoboda go from 20 points to 71 in a 72 game schedule. 

In hindsight... 

Dahlberg went from 36 to 105, which is remarkable, as Dahlberg and Peace were extremely effective for Davos. 

But...

105/36 = 2.91

71/20 = 3.55

Not only was Svoboda's season much greater in individual improvement compared to Dahlberg's when comparing rookie season versus one another, he also finished with respectable stats away from mere points this season as well. 51 hits, 43 shots blocked, nearly 300 shots. The only way I see Dahlberg over Svoboda here is if the two hundred extra hits are counted, maybe plus/minus, but at this point I feel like that's an excuse to dismiss Svoboda's improvement between rookie season and sophomore season. Stop voting for high point totals and do some digging first, but that's just how I'd run things I guess.

I end with a few words.

What the fuck. 

What the actual fuck. 

/ end grumpy man rant

Dahlberg went from bottom liner to a superstar.

 

Svoboda went from bottom liner to a great player.

 

Going up over 100 points from 36 is a bigger improvement, IMO.

 

20 points and 36 points, nobody's going to debate who's better. They're both low totals. 105 to 71? Everyone knows who's the better player there.

[Peace 1,532]

27 minutes ago, DollarAndADream said:

Dahlberg went from bottom liner to a superstar.

 

Svoboda went from bottom liner to a great player.

 

Going up over 100 points from 36 is a bigger improvement, IMO.

 

20 points and 36 points, nobody's going to debate who's better. They're both low totals. 105 to 71? Everyone knows who's the better player there.

It's not 'who's better', it's 'most improved'.

Except Dahlberg was on Davos' top line the entire season as a rookie, while Svoboda was not, but the entire team performing miserably regardless doesn't excuse Dahlberg got far more minutes on average. 

Svoboda went from being on Davos' bottom lines to the top unit and making considerable progress as a result, and yes getting nearly quadruple the amount of points in the prior season is more improvement than a triple digit season. Obviously I'm the odd one out here, and I think it's a huge mistake awarding 'most improved', or any truly individual award to just sheer points alone.

Getting into the triple digits is impressive, and while I'm not upset Dahlberg won (and I even congratulated him) his season wasn't an improved in the end regardless of his point totals. 

Svoboda improved in nearly every area greater than Dahlberg did. I don't add plus/minus as it's generally a stat not indicative of personal improvement rather than a lines chemistry and ability.

This season / Last Season [Result]

Goals: 

Dahlberg: 45/23 [1.95]
Svoboda: 34/11 [3.09]

Assists: 

Dahlberg: 60/13 [4.61]
Svoboda: 37/9 [4.11] 

Points: 

Dahlberg: 105/36 [2.91]
Svoboda: 71/20 [3.55]

Shots: 

Dahlberg: 439/221 [1.98]
Svoboda: 294/128 [2.29]

Hits: 

Dahlberg: 237/152 [1.55]
Svoboda: 51/7 [7.28]

Shots blocked: 

Dahlberg: 42/29 [1.44] 
Svoboda: 43/21 [2.04] 

Do I need to continue? 

Svoboda had a better season in which he improved as a player over Dahlberg, despite having a lower point total, and all three (Dahlberg - Peace - Svoboda) benefited from being on each others line.

This is the 'most improved', not 'most impressive rebound'. 

Just my 0.02. 

Not that it matters anyway. 

 

Edited May 4, 2019 by Peace

[DollarAndADream 3,356]

4 minutes ago, Peace said:

Except Dahlberg was on Davos' top line the entire season as a rookie, while Svoboda was not, but the entire team performing miserably regardless doesn't excuse Dahlberg got far more minutes on average. 

Svoboda went from being on Davos' bottom lines to the top unit and making considerable progress as a result, and yes getting nearly quadruple the amount of points in the prior season is more improvement than a triple digit season. Obviously I'm the odd one out here, and I think it's a huge mistake awarding 'most improved', or any truly individual award to just sheer points alone.

Getting into the triple digits is impressive, and while I'm not upset Dahlberg won (and I even congratulated him) his season wasn't an improved in the end regardless of his point totals. 

Svoboda improved in nearly every area greater than Dahlberg did. I don't add plus/minus as it's generally a stat not indicative of personal improvement rather than a lines chemistry and ability.

Goals: 

Dahlberg: 45/23 [1.95 improvement]
Svoboda: 34/11 [3.09 improvement]

Assists: 

Dahlberg: 60/13 [4.61 improvement]
Svoboda: 37/9 [4.11 improvement] 

Points: 

Dahlberg: 105/36 [2.91 improvement]
Svoboda: 71/20 [3.55 improvement]

Shots: 

Dahlberg: 439/221 [1.98]
Svoboda: 294/128 [2.29]

Hits: 

Dahlberg: 237/152 [1.55]
Svoboda: 51/7 [7.28]

Shots blocked: 

Dahlberg: 42/29 [1.44] 
Svoboda: 43/21 [2.04] 

Do I need to continue? 

Svoboda had a better season in which he improved as a player over Dahlberg, despite having a lower point total, and all three (Dahlberg - Peace - Svoboda) benefited from being on each others line.

This is the 'most improved', not 'most impressive rebound'. 

FFS

 

 

I still vote Dahlberg.

 

Stop making this out to be some huge tragedy.

[Peace 1,532]

9 minutes ago, DollarAndADream said:

 

I still vote Dahlberg.

 

Stop making this out to be some huge tragedy.

Then you're not voting for who's improved the most, but rather most impressive rebound after a tough season. 

I'll regress, but that's an issue, and it's sad that awards for 'most improved' aren't actual for those who improve the most.  

Edited May 4, 2019 by Peace

[DollarAndADream 3,356]

16 minutes ago, Peace said:

Then you're not voting for who's improved the most, but rather most impressive rebound after a tough season. 

I'll regress, but that's an issue, and it's sad that awards for 'most improved' aren't actual for those who improve the most.  

I'm sorry that I value points and goals over other things. I also looked at the other stats. Points and goals win you games, and a guy going over 100 points in a season I think is a better improvement than a guy being in the 70s. I think 70 to 100 is hard to just ignore those 30 points.

 

I can't speak for the other people who voted. I could be wrong, and if I'm wrong then that's fine.

 

You act like it's total bullshit that it was voted for Dahlberg, but at the same time you say you're okay with it and congratulated him.

 

You should join the Awards Committee next season. They could use your insight. I won't be in there next season.

[Peace 1,532]

4 minutes ago, DollarAndADream said:

I'm sorry that I value points and goals over other things. I also looked at the other stats. Points and goals win you games, and a guy going over 100 points in a season I think is a better improvement than a guy being in the 70s. I think 70 to 100 is hard to just ignore those 30 points.

 

I can't speak for the other people who voted. I could be wrong, and if I'm wrong then that's fine.

 

You act like it's total bullshit that it was voted for Dahlberg, but at the same time you say you're okay with it and congratulated him.

 

You should join the Awards Committee next season. They could use your insight. I won't be in there next season.

Honestly I'm fine with the selection, and while I am upset (as you can read), I'm not demanding Svoboda be named the winner in replacement of Dahlberg.

What I am saying - and the point I'm trying to push across - is it makes no sense that Dahlberg won the trophy for something literally defined as 'most improved', not 'most impressive', and that's where I am having difficulties accepting this specific award. It's frustrating that Svoboda (who's also a teammate) didn't win the award when he's clearly the most improved player as an individual despite goals and points, his season in comparison displays a more improved player, while Dahlberg had a season that was much more impressive. 

Obviously you're not the only person thinking the same way as yourself. 

To clarify I'm not upset Dahlberg won the trophy, I'm upset that a trophy titled 'most improved' isn't what it should be, and that is frustrating. Rename the trophy to 'best sophomore' because that's what it turned out to be. 

I'd have a heart attack debating with the award committee, so I should probably stay clear of that. 

 

[DollarAndADream 3,356]

41 minutes ago, Peace said:

Honestly I'm fine with the selection, and while I am upset (as you can read), I'm not demanding Svoboda be named the winner in replacement of Dahlberg.

What I am saying - and the point I'm trying to push across - is it makes no sense that Dahlberg won the trophy for something literally defined as 'most improved', not 'most impressive', and that's where I am having difficulties accepting this specific award. It's frustrating that Svoboda (who's also a teammate) didn't win the award when he's clearly the most improved player as an individual despite goals and points, his season in comparison displays a more improved player, while Dahlberg had a season that was much more impressive. 

Obviously you're not the only person thinking the same way as yourself. 

To clarify I'm not upset Dahlberg won the trophy, I'm upset that a trophy titled 'most improved' isn't what it should be, and that is frustrating. Rename the trophy to 'best sophomore' because that's what it turned out to be. 

I'd have a heart attack debating with the award committee, so I should probably stay clear of that. 

 

I can appreciate how involved and passionate you are about the awards here right now, but I also think it's a little odd how you can backlash against the vote, while at the same time not wanting to be involved yourself.

[omgitshim 901]

4 hours ago, Peace said:

It's not 'who's better', it's 'most improved'.

Except Dahlberg was on Davos' top line the entire season as a rookie, while Svoboda was not, but the entire team performing miserably regardless doesn't excuse Dahlberg got far more minutes on average. 

Svoboda went from being on Davos' bottom lines to the top unit and making considerable progress as a result, and yes getting nearly quadruple the amount of points in the prior season is more improvement than a triple digit season. Obviously I'm the odd one out here, and I think it's a huge mistake awarding 'most improved', or any truly individual award to just sheer points alone.

Getting into the triple digits is impressive, and while I'm not upset Dahlberg won (and I even congratulated him) his season wasn't an improved in the end regardless of his point totals. 

Svoboda improved in nearly every area greater than Dahlberg did. I don't add plus/minus as it's generally a stat not indicative of personal improvement rather than a lines chemistry and ability.

This season / Last Season [Result]

Goals: 

Dahlberg: 45/23 [1.95]
Svoboda: 34/11 [3.09]

Assists: 

Dahlberg: 60/13 [4.61]
Svoboda: 37/9 [4.11] 

Points: 

Dahlberg: 105/36 [2.91]
Svoboda: 71/20 [3.55]

Shots: 

Dahlberg: 439/221 [1.98]
Svoboda: 294/128 [2.29]

Hits: 

Dahlberg: 237/152 [1.55]
Svoboda: 51/7 [7.28]

Shots blocked: 

Dahlberg: 42/29 [1.44] 
Svoboda: 43/21 [2.04] 

Do I need to continue? 

Svoboda had a better season in which he improved as a player over Dahlberg, despite having a lower point total, and all three (Dahlberg - Peace - Svoboda) benefited from being on each others line.

This is the 'most improved', not 'most impressive rebound'. 

Just my 0.02. 

Not that it matters anyway. 

 

 

The fallacy in your logic is that you're comparing solely on a proportional level. Taking your numbers on an absolute level:

 

Goals: 

Dahlberg: 45/23 (+22)
Svoboda: 34/11 (+23)

Assists: 

Dahlberg: 60/13 (+47)
Svoboda: 37/9 (+28)

Points: 

Dahlberg: 105/36 (+69)
Svoboda: 71/20 (+51)

Shots: 

Dahlberg: 439/221 (+218)
Svoboda: 294/128 (+166)

Hits: 

Dahlberg: 237/152 (+85)
Svoboda: 51/7 (+44)

Shots blocked: 

Dahlberg: 42/29 (+13)
Svoboda: 43/21 (+22)

 

 

Svoboda gets the edge in shots blocked, goals are basically a wash, but Dahlberg sweeps everything else there. Svoboda improved a lot don't get me wrong, but on a sheer numbers output, Dahlberg improved more imo. Both are going to be key pieces for Davos for a long time.

 

Incidentally, if you want to stick with the purely proportional argument, Joey Boucher had better improvement ratios than Svoboda did.
 

[Peace 1,532]

1 hour ago, omgitshim said:

 

The fallacy in your logic is that you're comparing solely on a proportional level. Taking your numbers on an absolute level:

 

Goals: 

Dahlberg: 45/23 (+22)
Svoboda: 34/11 (+23)

Assists: 

Dahlberg: 60/13 (+47)
Svoboda: 37/9 (+28)

Points: 

Dahlberg: 105/36 (+69)
Svoboda: 71/20 (+51)

Shots: 

Dahlberg: 439/221 (+218)
Svoboda: 294/128 (+166)

Hits: 

Dahlberg: 237/152 (+85)
Svoboda: 51/7 (+44)

Shots blocked: 

Dahlberg: 42/29 (+13)
Svoboda: 43/21 (+22)

 

 

Svoboda gets the edge in shots blocked, goals are basically a wash, but Dahlberg sweeps everything else there. Svoboda improved a lot don't get me wrong, but on a sheer numbers output, Dahlberg improved more imo. Both are going to be key pieces for Davos for a long time.

 

Incidentally, if you want to stick with the purely proportional argument, Joey Boucher had better improvement ratios than Svoboda did.
 

 

Then Joey Boucher wins it. I absolutely think it should be proportional to a player’s previous season as it is an award given to who improved the most and since everyone plays 72 games, time on ice should be measured too, and then factored into the equation on who improved the most. 

Edited May 5, 2019 by Peace

[Beketov 9,025]

11 hours ago, Peace said:

 

Then Joey Boucher wins it. I absolutely think it should be proportional to a player’s previous season as it is an award given to who improved the most and since everyone plays 72 games, time on ice should be measured too, and then factored into the equation on who improved the most. 

Proportional is important to a point but it will always favour players with lower overall totals. Someone who has 20 points could score 40 and they got 100% better but that’s not as big of an improvement as someone going from 50 to 100 which is also a 100% improvement. Take your argument on hits for example. Svoboda’s jump is insane proportionally, over a 700% improvement. But that’s only because he was so low with 7 hits. His total, 51, isn’t actually that impressive. Both need to be considered, we can’t just look at proportional improvement and say “yup, this guy is better. He still did worse but he was shittier before.”

 

There’s also an argument to be made for the fact that breaking the 100 point barrier, for example, is harder than breaking the 1 PPG barrier. Svoboda has a case, I don’t deny it. However Dahlberg’s jumps are kinda more impressive; at least in the opinion of the award committee.

 

Ultimately it’s “most improved” but it’s still one of the subjective awards because people still need good seasons. We can’t just say “this guy went from 1 point to 10 so that’s 1000% better, he wins.” You still need to have a good season and ultimately Svoboda’s season was more average. He went from terrible to average, his competition went from bad to great.