Calder Trophy Race: Johnny Gaudreau v Filip Forsberg & Ekblad too

[V]

If Stone is the leader in points and the Sens make the playoffs it'll be as close to 50/50 as it can be. If either of those don't happen, though, Gaudreau should win it pretty easily.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

All four will be nominated, for sure. The "Finalists" are just the top three vote getters. I imagine that all 4 will recieve votes, along with others.

Previous years only three players are nominated. (I believe)

(When the nomination are announced, only the top three will be shown)

[AC]

Last year the following 1st place votes were made:
Mackinnon 130
Palat 5
Johnson 0
Krug 1
Trouba 1

In 2012-2013, Conacher got 4 and Schultz got 2 first place votes. Embarrassing.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by jemjey

Was getting into a heated debate with sens fans about this last night.

Their arguments for Stone:

More ES points (as if that makes a difference)

My arguments for Johnny:

NHL all star
2-time rookie of the month
Plays best in the biggest games
Has had a bigger impact for longer

Tell them Stone played 25 NHL games BEFORE this season including 3 years of pro hockey

[AC]

Originally Posted by flambers

Previous years only three players are nominated. (I believe)

Nope the voters can vote for whoever, and they give out 1st-5th place votes.

In 2013 Killorn, Drew Shore, and Irwin tied for 19th in Calder voting with 1 5th place vote each.

[looooob]

Originally Posted by AC

Last year the following 1st place votes were made:
Mackinnon 130
Palat 5
Johnson 0
Krug 1
Trouba 1

In 2012-2013, Conacher got 4 and Schultz got 2 first place votes. Embarrassing.

Monahan 8th..what a difference a year makes!

[Gaudfather]

Calder is awarded to ""to the player selected as the most proficient in his first year of competition in the National Hockey League (NHL)."

Proficient means:
adjective

competent or skilled in doing or using something. "I was proficient at my job"

synonyms: skilled, skillful, expert, experienced, accomplished, competent, masterly, adept, adroit, deft, dexterous, able, professional, consummate, complete, master;

I think Johnny's got this.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

The "finalists" are simply the top three in votes getting invited to the ceremony. No one gets nominated to attend.

Calder Memorial Trophy
The Calder Memorial Trophy is an annual award given to the player selected as the most proficient in his first year of competition in the National Hockey League. The winner is selected in a poll of the Professional Hockey Writers' Association at the end of the regular season and each individual voter ranks their top five candidates on a 10-7-5-3-1 points system. Three finalists are named and the trophy is awarded at the NHL Awards ceremony after the playoffs.

Once the voting is completed, an announcement will be made. It will show three names associated to the Calder Trophy.

Simply saying one of Forsberg, Stone and Gaudreau won't make the top three.

As Ekbald in my view will be in the top three.

[burnitdown]

Originally Posted by jemjey

Was getting into a heated debate with sens fans about this last night.

Their arguments for Stone:

More ES points (as if that makes a difference)

My arguments for Johnny:

NHL all star
2-time rookie of the month
Plays best in the biggest games
Has had a bigger impact for longer

Just to play devil's advocate, Stone is also playing huge down the stretch (you can argue even more so than Johnny) as he wasn't even close to leading the rookie scoring race until he went on fire when it mattered most. So what will the writers weigh more heavily? Steady and consistent output throughout the whole season or coming up huge when it matters most?

And the NHL all-star appearance is pretty meaningless as he was only chosen because he was part of the young guns event and was there for the weekend. I don't see the writers putting much stock in that as it's not like he was actually the next most deserving player to be named to the team.

[BChockeyJunkie]

After 10 games

JG 4pts
MS 6pts +2pts

After 20 games

JG 14pts +6pts
MS 10pts

After 35 games

JG 27pts +6pts
MS 17pts

after 50 games

JG 38pts
MS 30pts +2pts

after 65 games

JG 48pts
MS 45pts +5pts

After 80 games

JG 64pts
MS 62pts +1pt

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by jemjey

Was getting into a heated debate with sens fans about this last night.

Their arguments for Stone:

More ES points (as if that makes a difference)

My arguments for Johnny:

NHL all star
2-time rookie of the month
Plays best in the biggest games
Has had a bigger impact for longer

This is really homerish and I hope you had better arguments than that.

Other things for Stone:
NHL leader in takeaways
Has significantly more PK time than Johnny
Significantly less PP time than Johnny

Stone also just came up huge against the Pens on Tuesday - tied the game with 2 mins left, then scored in OT in a do or die game.

If Johnny sits, and Stone get a multi-point game in the last game to clinch for the Sens, I think it's going to go down to the wire. I still think Johnny will win due to the hype train, but both are extremely deserving.

[jemjey]

Originally Posted by burnitdown

Just to play devil's advocate, Stone is also playing huge down the stretch (you can argue even more so than Johnny) as he wasn't even close to leading the rookie scoring race until he went on fire when it mattered most. So what will the writers weigh more heavily? Steady and consistent output throughout the whole season or coming up huge when it matters most?

And the NHL all-star appearance is pretty meaningless as he was only chosen because he was part of the young guns event and was there for the weekend. I don't see the writers putting much stock in that as it's not like he was actually the next most deserving player to be named to the team.

No doubt Stone has played clutch down the stretch. Not taking anything away from him. However I'd argue Johnny is not only steady and consistent, but also huge when it matters most. So really the choice is steady, consistent AND clutch (johnny) vs. Clutch (stone). Johnny has been playing just as, if not more of, an important role as Stone - but he's shown an ability to do it throughout the season.

I'd argue the all-star selection isn't meaningless. After all, like you said he was selected because he was already there for the weekend. Stone wasn't because he wasn't chosen as an "all-star" rookie. Illustrates the above point: Johnny's ability to be an impact player throughout the season. Also, tons of media exposure surely doesn't hurt his chances.

All that being said, Stone is a hell of a rookie and player. Credit to him for putting himself in the conversation. But coming from someone who has watched games from both players (opposed to the sens fans who clearly had never watched Johnny and were just looking at stats):

Johnny has been a larger impact, for a longer period, on a weaker team, and has achieved just as much/more team and individual success.

Johnny for Calder!!

[jemjey]

Originally Posted by Regorium

This is really homerish and I hope you had better arguments than that.

Other things for Stone:
NHL leader in takeaways
Has significantly more PK time than Johnny
Significantly less PP time than Johnny

Stone also just came up huge against the Pens on Tuesday - tied the game with 2 mins left, then scored in OT in a do or die game.

If Johnny sits, and Stone get a multi-point game in the last game to clinch for the Sens, I think it's going to go down to the wire. I still think Johnny will win due to the hype train, but both are extremely deserving.

You're right. My arguments are homerish (duh, this is a fan forum).

I fail to see how your arguments are unbiased. Is the Calder awarded to the best defensive rookie? Since it's not, why is Johnny's pp time suddenly a knock against him? Seems to me if the roles were reversed and Stone had more PP time you wouldn't view it the same way. Mildly interesting that NHL all-star and 2-time rookie of the month are weak, homerish arguments but cherry-picking stats is not? Of course Johnny has more PP time, he's an offensive dynamo - he'll never be a Pk specialist. Saying Stone should win because he kills more penalties is like saying Johnny should win because he has more shots.

[flambers]

I'm still not convinced the award won't goto Ekblad.

Plays between 18 to 20 minutes a game.

12 goals, 26 assists

Forwards may split the votes.. As Forsberg had the best start out of the three forwards but has finished slowly. Stone and Johnny have similiar stats. Could be argued either way.

[burnitdown]

Originally Posted by jemjey

No doubt Stone has played clutch down the stretch. Not taking anything away from him. However I'd argue Johnny is not only steady and consistent, but also huge when it matters most. So really the choice is steady, consistent AND clutch (johnny) vs. Clutch (stone). Johnny has been playing just as, if not more of, an important role as Stone - but he's shown an ability to do it throughout the season.

I'd argue the all-star selection isn't meaningless. After all, like you said he was selected because he was already there for the weekend. Stone wasn't because he wasn't chosen as an "all-star" rookie. Illustrates the above point: Johnny's ability to be an impact player throughout the season. Also, tons of media exposure surely doesn't hurt his chances.

All that being said, Stone is a hell of a rookie and player. Credit to him for putting himself in the conversation. But coming from someone who has watched games from both players (opposed to the sens fans who clearly had never watched Johnny and were just looking at stats):

Johnny has been a larger impact, for a longer period, on a weaker team, and has achieved just as much/more team and individual success.

Johnny for Calder!!

I agree that Johnny will likely win it...but I don't think it's a total lock. Stone has played unreal since the All-Star break and led the Sens to an improbable run of potentially making the playoffs.

Since the all-star break, Stone is averaging over a point a game and sits 5th in points...out of ALL players. Not just rookies!

Again, if the Sens make the playoffs, you can't fault a writer for voting Stone over Gaudreau. They've both had incredible seasons and it wouldn't be an injustice if one won it over the other. Throw Ekblad into the mix and it'll be a total toss-up!

[slybomb]

Originally Posted by flambers

I'm still not convinced the award won't goto Ekblad.

Plays between 18 to 20 minutes a game.

12 goals, 26 assists

Forwards may split the votes.. As Forsberg had the best start out of the three forwards but has finished slowly. Stone and Johnny have similiar stats. Could be argued either way.

Fine, I am just glad you didn't mention that he was 18.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by jemjey

I fail to see how your arguments are unbiased. Is the Calder awarded to the best defensive rookie? Since it's not, why is Johnny's pp time suddenly a knock against him? Seems to me if the roles were reversed and Stone had more PP time you wouldn't view it the same way. Mildly interesting that NHL all-star and 2-time rookie of the month are weak, homerish arguments but cherry-picking ice time stats is not?

What a terrible post.

It's awarded to the best overall rookie, of which defense is a part. Mark Stone's PK prowess should definitely be factored in. In fact, I think Johnny should win, but this facet of Stone's game is probably important enough for me that even if Johnny beat him by 5 points I wouldn't have an issue if they picked Stone on the basis of all-around play.

PP time counts against a player because it's easier to put up points on the power play. This should be obvious. 50 even strength points is harder to accomplish than 50 power play points.

Being on the all star team is essentially meaningless for the purpose of determining who was better on the year. Guys can surge late, and also the All Star Game is basically just a sideshow anyway. Ice time stats are not "homerish" or "cherry picked", they're an important metric for evaluating the usefulness of a player.

All told, the vote splitting between Johnny, Forsberg and Stone is a good reason to expect Ekblad to win it, and I'm leaning that way even though I don't think Ekblad really deserves it (as good as he's been)

[jemjey]

Originally Posted by burnitdown

I agree that Johnny will likely win it...but I don't think it's a total lock. Stone has played unreal since the All-Star break and led the Sens to an improbable run of potentially making the playoffs.

Since the all-star break, Stone is averaging over a point a game and sits 5th in points...out of ALL players. Not just rookies!

Again, if the Sens make the playoffs, you can't fault a writer for voting Stone over Gaudreau. They've both had incredible seasons and it wouldn't be an injustice if one won it over the other. Throw Ekblad into the mix and it'll be a total toss-up!

Agreed. Lucky for us and Ottawa no matter who wins it we both have a heck of a player. Like I said, taking nothing away from Stone. Wouldn't be surprised or disappointed if he wins it. However (taking my homerism into account), I think Johnny wins it based on contribution/impact as a whole, across the entire season.

[jaikorven]

Originally Posted by jemjey

No doubt Stone has played clutch down the stretch. Not taking anything away from him. However I'd argue Johnny is not only steady and consistent, but also huge when it matters most. So really the choice is steady, consistent AND clutch (johnny) vs. Clutch (stone). Johnny has been playing just as, if not more of, an important role as Stone - but he's shown an ability to do it throughout the season.

I'd argue the all-star selection isn't meaningless. After all, like you said he was selected because he was already there for the weekend. Stone wasn't because he wasn't chosen as an "all-star" rookie. Illustrates the above point: Johnny's ability to be an impact player throughout the season. Also, tons of media exposure surely doesn't hurt his chances.

All that being said, Stone is a hell of a rookie and player. Credit to him for putting himself in the conversation. But coming from someone who has watched games from both players (opposed to the sens fans who clearly had never watched Johnny and were just looking at stats):

Johnny has been a larger impact, for a longer period, on a weaker team, and has achieved just as much/more team and individual success.

Johnny for Calder!!

Amen!!

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by flambers

I'm still not convinced the award won't goto Ekblad.

Plays between 18 to 20 minutes a game.

12 goals, 26 assists

Forwards may split the votes.. As Forsberg had the best start out of the three forwards but has finished slowly. Stone and Johnny have similiar stats. Could be argued either way.

Ekblad isn't even the best rookie defenceman, Klingberg has been better. The only thing keeping Ekblad in the conversation is his age, which shouldn't be a factor for Calder voting