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

[jemjey]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

What a terrible post.

Well, you're an advanced stats guy, so who cares what you think xD.

Thanks for the explanation. Without your enlightened post, I could never have guessed it would be easier to score 5 on 4 than 5 on 5... You're saying 4 is less than 5??? What a fantastic contribution.

So you're saying Stone's PK prowess should be factored in, but Johnny's PP prowess shouldn't? Like you said, it's about overall game. Seems to me power plays are just as much a part of the game as penalty killing (Why, it's almost as if for every power play, there's a penalty kill - perhaps you could explain?). The fact you think PP time is a negative is foolish. Your statement that it's harder to score 50 points ES than 50 on the PP illustrates your reliance on stats. What if they scored those 50 PPP on 100 Powerplays? I'd argue that's a hell of a lot harder than scoring 50 in 75 games. You think coaches and GMs think Kane isn't as good because it's "easier" to score on the PP? Terrible. Johnny earned his spot on the powerplay by being able to produce consistently and efficiently, and that's a good thing. Pp specialists are just as valued, if not more so, than Pk specialists, you'd know that if you actually watched hockey instead of looking at stats... xP

What I'm saying is not that Stone's defensive ability is meaningless, but that it IS NOT of more value than Johnny' offensive ability. Like I said, it goes to the best rookie, not the best defensive rookie, so defensive ability is just as valuable as offensive ability, not more. Saying johnny deserves it less because he plays more PP is, frankly, dim. Your argument contradicts itself.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

I'd be shocked if Gaudreau, Forsberg and Stone weren't the three nominees. As good as Ekblad has been in a 2nd pairing role at a young age, these are three legitimate 1st line forwards who were each instrumental in helping their teams into the playoffs (assuming Ottawa makes it). Ekblad might not get more than a handful of 1st and 2nd place votes, I could easily see him finishing 4th or 5th in voting with Klingberg in the mix. No slight to him, the forwards have been just that good, best rookie year since 05/06.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by jemjey

Thanks for the explanation. Without your enlightened post, I could never have guessed it would be easier to score 5 on 4 than 5 on 5... You're saying 4 is less than 5??? What a fantastic contribution.

So you're saying Stone's PK prowess should be factored in, but Johnny's PP prowess shouldn't? Like you said, it's about overall game. Seems to me power plays are just as much a part of the game as penalty killing (Why, it's almost as if for every power play, there's a penalty kill - perhaps you could explain?).

What I'm saying is not that Stone's defensive ability is meaningless, but that it IS NOT of more value than Johnny' offensive ability. Like I said, it goes to the best rookie, not the best defensive rookie, so defensive ability is just as (not more) valuable as offensive ability. Saying johnny deserves it less because he plays more PP is, frankly, dim.

The problem is that Stone has 62 points, and Johnny has 64.

Your post is 100% correct IF Johnny has 64 points, and Stone had like 40 points, and we're trying to argue that PK time and defensive ability makes up for the fact that there's a 20+ point gap. But we're not. Stone has matched Johnny's offensive ability completely (depending on the last game), and has objectively better defensive statistics - like PK time.

Again, I'm doing this for the sake of argument. I think Johnny should win - but I think it's a lot closer than you're envisioning.

[JJ1532]

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?

They should fall back on the award criteria for help: Best Rookie SEASON. Key word, season. Not, best rookie final 20-30 games, best season. I would argue that Johnnys consistency since game 6 should be valued a touch more than Stone heating up since the AS break.

End of the day, you can make a case for all 4 main candidates to win this. Forsberg was the best forward up until February time, Johnny has probably been the most consistent, Stone has been the most clutch, especially in the last 20 games, Ekblad has stood out so much because of his age.

The thing with Ekblad though is that people are putting so much stock in his age. But then why not value Johnnys lack of size as just as impressive? Why not value Stone heating up when it matters? Why not value Forsberg being the best forward on his team since day 1? Each candidate for me has 1 standout feature which could see them win the award.

Does Ekblad not making the play offs effect peoples thinking? As in, the other 3 having more opportunity to further their case for the award with strong play off series whilst he watches at home? Not saying Florida missing is his fault, but if Johnny has a great series against Vancouver and maybe helps us win a series, that could swing peoples thinking, same with Stone and Forsberg in fairness.

If Johnny doesn't win it, I can see why either Stone or Ekblad might win it instead. Some might agree, but I think you can make a case for either of those 2 over him. We might disagree with it as Flames fans, but there is a case.

[jemjey]

Originally Posted by Regorium

The problem is that Stone has 62 points, and Johnny has 64.

Your post is 100% correct IF Johnny has 64 points, and Stone had like 40 points, and we're trying to argue that PK time and defensive ability makes up for the fact that there's a 20+ point gap. But we're not. Stone has matched Johnny's offensive ability completely (depending on the last game), and has objectively better defensive statistics - like PK time.

Again, I'm doing this for the sake of argument. I think Johnny should win - but I think it's a lot closer than you're envisioning.

I think you guys are missing out on how much I've been praising Stone. I think it will be extremely close. Especially if Ottawa makes the playoffs.

I understand the argument, however I think the objective stats that support Stone being better defensively are the takeaway numbers, as opposed to the PK time. We have a lot of great two way players, I'm sure Bob would have no problem putting Johnny on the PK but the fact we have guys like backlund, stajan, and bouma means we can give him more ice in other areas - like the PP.

I'm just saying that: yes, Stone is better defensively. But johnny is no defensive liability. And its not like you need to be killing penalties to make clutch defensive plays (like last night's empty net play). In the end both are 200-foot players - one slightly better defensively, one slightly better offensively. Who's the better overall player? That's the question. For me, Stone's defensive edge and Johnny's offensive edge cancel each other out, with Johnny winning out based on consistent year-long contribution. I can see why you are making the argument for Stone.

Phew, I feel like I've said the same thing four different ways. In the end we're all entitled to our opinions, and that's all these are.

[BChockeyJunkie]

Ekblad will not win....

6pts in the final 25 Games which helped his team not make the playoffs

My problem with the whole stone thing is.... I didn't watch Stone play all year, but I would put my first born on the line to beg that Gaudreau could have easily had 80+ points if others around him happened to finish at a higher rate. No knock on any of JG's linemates thoughout the year but if you watched the games you saw it. Mutiple scoring chance a game that didn't result in a point.

I know... I know.... that happens to everyone... Yes, maybe it does but not at the same rate as Gaudreau. It's all the small things that add up. The vision, the passing, the IQ, the flare, the AWE factor, the fact that he is Quarterbacking the PP as a rookie, his play in the corners, the backchecking, the heart, the name..... its everything a Calder should be. Not hating on Stone at all, but he isn't as talented as JG and he didnt have a better season than JG.....

[edn88]

I think Stone is going to get serious consideration due to Eastern bias. It doesn't matter though, we know how special Johnny is (and frankly if he wins the Calder, it probably costs us more in the long run from a salary perspective).

[V]

I don't buy eastern bias in this case. If there's an eastern bias it favours JG.

[northcrunk]

I'm amazed what a reaction Gaudreau gets when he gets the puck. Gives me the chills.

[JohnnySkittles]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

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

I keep seeing this. What makes Klingberg better? What facts are you using to back this up?

[Red Menace]

Duha and Mirtle's award picks:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...ticle23877078/

[AC]

Originally Posted by JohnnySkittles

I keep seeing this. What makes Klingberg better? What facts are you using to back this up?

Klingberg has 39 points in 64 games, Ekblad has 38 in 80.
Klingberg and Ekblad also have almost identical TOI (2 seconds apart).

Seems pretty close, but Klingberg's 0.61 PPG to Ekblad's 0.48 is the only major difference from what I can tell.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by AC

Klingberg has 39 points in 64 games, Ekblad has 38 in 80.
Klingberg and Ekblad also have almost identical TOI (2 seconds apart).

Seems pretty close, but Klingberg's 0.61 PPG to Ekblad's 0.48 is the only major difference from what I can tell.

Zone starts / QoC was the other major difference.

[Red Menace]

The only reason to vote Ekblad ahead of Klingberg is his age....and if you are doing that, then you are voting on the wrong criteria....should be their play on the ice, not their birth certificate.
Johnny is going to win this....

[Mr.Coffee]

yeah, tough to see how Gaudreau does not win this award in my mind.

[burnitdown]

Originally Posted by BChockeyJunkie

My problem with the whole stone thing is.... I didn't watch Stone play all year, but I would put my first born on the line to beg that Gaudreau could have easily had 80+ points if others around him happened to finish at a higher rate. No knock on any of JG's linemates thoughout the year but if you watched the games you saw it. Mutiple scoring chance a game that didn't result in a point.

I know... I know.... that happens to everyone... Yes, maybe it does but not at the same rate as Gaudreau. It's all the small things that add up. The vision, the passing, the IQ, the flare, the AWE factor, the fact that he is Quarterbacking the PP as a rookie, his play in the corners, the backchecking, the heart, the name..... its everything a Calder should be. Not hating on Stone at all, but he isn't as talented as JG and he didnt have a better season than JG.....

You're right - every player goes through the season just missing out on multiple point opportunities. Johnny had two 30+ goal scorers on his line. I think the quality of his linemates is the last thing we can complain about.

As for the rest, you already mentioned you've never seen Stone play so what makes you think Sens fans don't think he's electric, has great vision, heart, flare, backbone of their PK, lead their revival to playoffs (?), etc.?

[GreenLantern2814]

It's an award. If all else is equal, you give the award based on style points. Johnny has more style points than the others. All these kids are having great years. Near as I can tell, the only one that makes 20,000 people collectively inhale whenever he touches the puck is Gaudreau.

I know that's not a great argument, but it's the truth.

[The Yen Man]

There's going to be a lot of butthurt Sens fans when Johnny Hockey wins.

[BChockeyJunkie]

Originally Posted by burnitdown

You're right - every player goes through the season just missing out on multiple point opportunities. Johnny had two 30+ goal scorers on his line. I think the quality of his linemates is the last thing we can complain about.

As for the rest, you already mentioned you've never seen Stone play so what makes you think Sens fans don't think he's electric, has great vision, heart, flare, backbone of their PK, lead their revival to playoffs (?), etc.?

I'm not complaining about his lineman, you are reading into this wrong. JG is by far the best playmaker on the team. He has been part of the development of a scoring chance more times than any other flames.... so Many its not even close. I can't imagine there are too many ppl in the NHL, not rookies.... whole league that developed more scoring changes than Johnny.


And you are right, I havn't seen many Stones games, maybe 10ish.... But if the only thing Sens fans can say is that he plays a good 2 way forward.... then he isn't the Calder... There is a list 20 things deep that Johnny outdoes Stone.

And the Sens Fans can feel that way about their player, but thats the difference.... All 30 teams feel those things about Johnny, not just Calgary. Not all 30 teams feel the same way about Stone as the Sens fans

[Imported_Aussie]

There is not much to separate the front runners, but for me, it will come down to Gaudreau, Stone, Ekblad. Ekblad and Gaudreau have name recognition, Stone has a fast finish (which will stick in voter's minds). I think Gaudreau takes it, but it is a closer year than anyone could have predicted:
Gaudreau
Stone
Forsberg
Klingberg
Ekblad
Hoffman

Even a couple of good 1B goalies (Jake Allen, Hutchinson)