Why the Ted Lindsay award should be the NHL's MVP of record

The Hart Memorial trophy has long held the crown as the NHL’s premier MVP award, but a growing conversation suggests it’s time for a shift. The Ted Lindsay award, voted on by players, recognizes the league’s most outstanding player without qualifiers tied to team success. This distinction could elevate it above the Hart, which focuses on the player most valuable to their team.[1]

In the 2025-26 season, with stars like Connor McDavid, Nikita Kucherov and Nathan MacKinnon dominating the points race, the debate feels timely. Rookies like Macklin Celebrini are also making cases that highlight the awards’ differences. Both trophies deserve respect, but prioritizing the Lindsay could better honor pure excellence.

Definitions and their impact

The Hart trophy goes to the player “judged to be the most valuable to his team,” a team-centric criterion that can favor carry jobs on weaker squads. Taylor Hall won it in 2017-18 for dragging the New Jersey Devils into the playoffs, despite not being the league’s top talent overall. This narrative-driven approach often rewards context over raw skill.

In contrast, the Ted Lindsay award simply honors the “most outstanding player,” as voted by peers. No need to prove outsized team impact—just dominate the ice. Connor McDavid exemplifies this: widely seen as the best player alive, his Oilers’ success aligns perfectly, but the award sidesteps debates about team dependency.

These definitions diverge in key moments. A superstar on a powerhouse might lose Hart if another elevates a contender, yet claim Lindsay for peer-recognized brilliance. Historical overlaps exist—23 players, including Nathan MacKinnon in 2024, have swept both—but splits like Hall’s Hart underscore the gap.

For 2025-26, Celebrini’s Sharks-leading 110 points (42 goals) dwarf Will Smith’s 56 by 54 points through 79 games, tying for the 16th-largest scoring gap in NHL history.[1] He’s the only teen on that list. If San Jose sneaks into playoffs, Hart chatter could surge, but Lindsay voters might eye McDavid’s 133 points instead.

This framework invites richer discussions. Awards should spark debate, and Lindsay’s straightforwardness cuts through narratives, focusing on what players witness nightly.

Who votes and why it matters

Hart voting rests with the Professional Hockey Writers’ Association (PHWA), a media panel that watches extensively but from afar. Broadcasters and writers bring valuable analysis, yet they lack the on-ice intimacy of competitors.

The Ted Lindsay award, however, comes from NHLPA members—active players. They face opponents shift-to-shift, gauge subtle impacts like backchecking or faceoff wins. Peers’ votes carry authenticity; an award from those who grind alongside you holds deeper weight.

Media voting mirrors other sports MVPs, ensuring consistency, but players’ perspectives add a layer media can’t match. Studies of peer-voted awards in other leagues show tighter races among elites, reducing outliers.

In 2025-26, with McDavid (133 points in 80 games), Kucherov (128 in 74) and MacKinnon (126 in 78) leading scorers—all on playoff teams—player votes might cluster differently than writers chasing stories.[2]

Ultimately, players’ collective insight trumps observation. Elevating Lindsay respects those who define the game.

A history of prestige and inertia

The Hart trophy boasts deep roots, awarded since 1924 with legends like Wayne Gretzky (9 wins) etched in lore. Its century-plus tradition cements status, appearing high on the NHL awards page.[3]

The Ted Lindsay, renamed in 2010 from Lester B. Pearson award, dates to 1971—47 years behind. Still, it honors icons: recent winners include Nikita Kucherov (2025, Tampa Bay), Nathan MacKinnon (2024, Colorado) and Connor McDavid (2023, Edmonton).[4] Full list here.

Inertia preserves Hart’s top spot, but parity grows. McDavid’s multiple Lindsay nods (2023, 2021) rival Hart hauls, signaling shifting perceptions.

Psychological barriers linger—reframing 100 years takes time—but player-voted consistency builds momentum. As NHL evolves, so should award hierarchies.

Young stars like Celebrini accelerate change. His historic gap could mirror past carry-jobs, but Lindsay’s lens might prioritize established elites.

Trophy design and cultural appeal

Hart’s design evokes an oversized Olympic torch, grandiose and iconic. It symbolizes league pinnacle, drawing eyes at ceremonies.

Lindsay features Hall of Famer Ted Lindsay himself—poignant nod to labor battles and skill. Less flashy, but rooted in player heritage.

Visuals influence prestige; Hart’s sheen aids dominance. Yet substance trumps style—Lindsay’s peer backing outshines aesthetics.

In broadcasts, both shine, but Hart’s history amplifies. Shifting paradigms requires cultural buy-in, starting with visuals.

Fan engagement could bridge gaps, like custom engravings or player stories.

Current season spotlights the debate

Macklin Celebrini’s 2025-26 explosion—110 points, massive lead—tests Hart’s team-value clause. Sharks’ potential playoff push might qualify him, unlike pure talent races.

Matthew Schaefer’s Islanders role echoes this: value to team vs. league-best? McDavid, Kucherov, MacKinnon—all Presidents’ Trophy or playoff locks—dominate scoring.

Awards watch ranks them atop Hart ballots too, but Lindsay might split hairs finer.[2]

Celebrini’s teen milestone adds narrative, yet peers know daily grind.

This season pivots perceptions, urging reevaluation.

Looking toward the 2025-26 verdict

McDavid’s five-point outburst vs. Sharks on April 8 underscores his edge. Kucherov’s efficiency (128 in 74) and MacKinnon’s late surge (five points last five) keep races tight.

Players vote Lindsay post-season; Hart follows PHWA. Overlaps likely, but splits possible.

Elevating Lindsay reshapes MVP discourse, honoring peers’ eyes. Hart endures, but Lindsay as record-holder fits modern NHL—player-driven, excellence-focused.

As playoffs loom, watch how narratives form. True MVP? Peers will tell.