This is something I’ve touched upon in the past, but having just scanned the comments section and seen the ongoing debate about why certain players get stars and other players don’t, I thought I’d refresh everyone’s memory on the process.
The basics: at home games the Rangers writers—myself included—are asked to vote on the three stars of the game. I’d love to tell you that it’s an arduous process, involving pages of research, review of game tape, and a background check on a player’s charitable donations.
Instead it merely involves us being handed a sheet at the start of the third period, and then being asked for it back a little more than a halfway through. As many of you know, it is the rare Rangers game that is not hanging in the balance at that point, so usually I at least am too engrossed in the action to give it much thought. In other words, it is a decidedly flawed system.
My votes the other night were for Jagr, Shanahan, and I believe Chris Drury since all of those players had multiple points. Should I have voted for Nigel Dawes? Maybe, maybe not. He did score a goal and drew an important penalty late. But the other part to consider is his goal was somewhat negated when Vincent Lecavalier scored his. Either way, the reasoning I just gave now is about three times the amount of thought I gave when I actually voted.
As for conspiracy theories about certain players being pumped up while others are suppressed, a part of me wishes that were true. At least then I wouldn’t have to think at all. Sadly, though, that’s not the case.
More from practice….