[News] Ekblad wins Calder. Gaudreau finishes 3rd

[getbak]

Ekblad better be buying Johnny's drinks tonight (he's also the less likely of the two to get ID'ed).

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

I fail to see how this lights a fire under Johnny's arse.

To me it shows he worked his balls off, was a key cog in a team that the experts said had no business finishing above 27th yet was fighting for home ice on the last day of the regular season. He was on the ice during important minutes be it up a goal protecting the lead, down a goal needing to tie (not to mention on countless occasions scoring that much needed goal).

If you want to say "oh an 18 year old defencemen on a team that misses the playoffs is soooo rare" then so is a 4 foot 8 forward who battles in the corners and walks away with a goal.

THEN to have Stone as 2nd? What in the sweet hell?

If Hartley lost the Jack Adams I would have been sad, but not mad. This makes me mad.

I wholeheartedly believe in giving credit where credit is due. This is spitting in the face where credit is due. Third in voting. Wow. Just wow.

No point in getting all upset as Ekblad and Stone had solid seasons and you can make a case for both. At the end of the day it's just the opinion of hockey writers and it's not like a lot of them are the brightest bulbs in the NHL.

[codynw]

Originally Posted by getbak

Ekblad better be buying Johnny's drinks tonight (he's also the less likely of the two to get ID'ed).

Yea, the dude looks like he's 25.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by codynw

Yea, the dude looks like he's 25.

Actually if you put Stone, Ekblad, and Johnny side by side you would think Johnny was the 18 year old and the other two guys in their mid-20's.

[Komskies]

Watch Johnny put up 85 points next season and Stone put up 30.

[Komskies]

Originally Posted by codynw

Yea, the dude looks like he's 25.

He looks like Brent Burns with teeth.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by jg13

His age is supposed to have as much to do with the award as Johnnys size.

And I think Johnny's size should have something to do with it. Hiw impressive are and how you got there are part of the award in my opinion.

[Armchair Quarterback]

Who is Ekblad

[KipperFaNaTic]

If Hartley wasn't up for the Jack Adams, would Gaudreau have gotten more votes? Perhaps subconsciously, some writers didn't give Gaudreau a first place vote as they had already given a first place vote to Hartley. Perhaps they subconsciously didn't feel like giving the Flames 2 prestigious awards; spread the wealth so to say.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

47 first place votes for Stone? Was the pool of writers all from the Ottawa area or something? There were 47 writers who thought he deserved the award outright??? Something smells fishy there.

Also, as much as it's stupid that Gaudreau wasn't at least 2nd, the voting among the top 3 is pretty close overall. What I find ludicrous is seeing how far back Forsberg was in the voting (over 500 points). That man was downright dominant for most of the season, and just because he cooled off down the stretch, the doesn't get any more than 15 combined 1st or 2nd place votes. The recency factor in the NHL drives me crazy.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by KipperFaNaTic

If Hartley wasn't up for the Jack Adams, would Gaudreau have gotten more votes? Perhaps subconsciously, some writers didn't give Gaudreau a first place vote as they had already given a first place vote to Hartley. Perhaps they subconsciously didn't feel like giving the Flames 2 prestigious awards; spread the wealth so to say.

If Gaudreau wasn't up for the Calder it's likely the Flames wouldn't have been a playoff team and thus Hartley doesn't sniff the Adams.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by Cali Flames Fan

That man was downright dominant for most of the season, and just because he cooled off down the stretch, the doesn't get any more than 15 combined 1st or 2nd place votes. The recency factor in the NHL drives me crazy.

There's a good chance that's why Stone finished 2nd ahead of Johnny. He played well and got hot down the stretch. And conversely why Doughty didn't win the Norris, his team cooled right off at the end of the year.

I wonder what would have happened if Johnny suited up for that last game against the Jets and racked up a bunch of points in a meaningless game for both teams. He would have won the rookie scoring title. Would that have pushed him up to 2nd, or higher?

[tvp2003]

This was posted in the main thread:

Originally Posted by getbak

If my math is correct, Johnny was actually on more ballots (157) than Stone (155) and Ekblad (153), and didn't receive any 5th place votes.

The fact that at least 4 voters (possibly more; not sure how many there were in total) left Ekblad off the ballot entirely just goes to show the voting system is flawed. Boo-urns to Eastern bias, voting politics, and general stupidity...

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by Cali Flames Fan

47 first place votes for Stone? Was the pool of writers all from the Ottawa area or something? There were 47 writers who thought he deserved the award outright??? Something smells fishy there.

Also, as much as it's stupid that Gaudreau wasn't at least 2nd, the voting among the top 3 is pretty close overall. What I find ludicrous is seeing how far back Forsberg was in the voting (over 500 points). That man was downright dominant for most of the season, and just because he cooled off down the stretch, the doesn't get any more than 15 combined 1st or 2nd place votes. The recency factor in the NHL drives me crazy.

I don't get why people hate Stone or something.

Stone had the same amount of points as Gaudreau. Plays on the PK, lead the entire NHL in takeaways (as garbage of a stat as that is).

He (along with Hammond) carried the Sens into the playoffs, as much as Gaudreau pushed us over the top.

If Gaudreau wasn't on the Flames, I would vote Stone 8 times out of 10. From a completely unbiased perspective, Stone was better than Gaudreau in every possible metric except for "hype" and "star power".

There is no conspiracy here.

[N-E-B]

Originally Posted by Regorium

I don't get why people hate Stone or something.

Stone had the same amount of points as Gaudreau. Plays on the PK, lead the entire NHL in takeaways (as garbage of a stat as that is).

He (along with Hammond) carried the Sens into the playoffs, as much as Gaudreau pushed us over the top.

If Gaudreau wasn't on the Flames, I would vote Stone 8 times out of 10. From a completely unbiased perspective, Stone was better than Gaudreau in every possible metric except for "hype" and "star power".

There is no conspiracy here.

Words cannot describe how much I completely disagree with this statement.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Regorium

From a completely unbiased perspective, Stone was better than Gaudreau in every possible metric except for "hype" and "star power".

Yea, that's absolute garbage.

The number one thing Gaudreau had going for him is that he made EVERYONE around him better.

The amount of players who had career seasons because of Gaudreau's play speaks for itself. That was far and away the biggest intangible he brought to to the table, and what's going to make him a superstar moving forward.

What a ridiculously poor statement.

[Dion]

Ekblad winning doesn't bother me. It's the fact that Johnny finished third that has me ticked off.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Regorium

Stone was better than Gaudreau in every possible metric except for "hype" and "star power".

The thing is, "star power" is what held Gaudreau back. His absolute worst stretch in the season came right after teams treated him like a superstar post-all star game. Stone wasn't even IN the all star game because he flew under the radar all year. When we were gameplanning for the Sens in MARCH, many of us assumed Hoffman was the Sens' best rookie. Think about that for a second.

Gaudreau was better than Stone in October, November, December, and March.

Stone was better than Gaudreau in January, February and the handful of games in April (of which Johnny got to sit one out)

So for four months of the season Gaudreau was better.
For two and a half months of the season Stone was better.

Yet Stone had the better "rookie season".

I just find that silly. It's like saying Jamie Benn had a better season than John Tavares.

[Street Pharmacist]

I thought Johnny should've won, but it was a close race. I think most people outside of Ottawa would think that Johnny has the brighter future, but Stone did have an outstanding year. The difference in voting between the 2nd and 3rd place was minute, and Ekblad had a very compelling reason to win. As much as the Eastern bias is real, with fans of any western team there's also a western bias. How many people here saw more than 3 or 4 Ottawa games? When you watch 82 games of Johnny and 4 games of Stone, you're gonna be pulling for Johnny.

If it's me, here's how I see it:

Johnny is the most electrifying, and exciting. He made jaw dropping plays and made his linemates better. Jooris doesn't score 5 goals all season of Johnny isn't feeding him.

Ekblad had the more impressive season of the three, as he was 2 points shy of trying Bobby Orr's record for points by an 18 year old defenseman. Hard not to vote for the first overall pick who comes in and plays the hardest position that takes the most experience and ends up putting up top pairing numbers and playing top 4 minutes.

Stone put up impressive numbers. More of player who was almost power forward who went to dirty areas, and has an elite shot he scored more goals than any other rookie. When Ottawa needed a strong push to help them make a Cinderella push to the playoffs, Stone almost carried the team on his back. He put up incredible numbers when the pressure was on, and that's the likely reason he ended up second.


I could make a sound logical argument to an impartial judge for any one of the three. In fact 4, if Forsberg doesn't turn into a ghost when things in Nashville went south.

[JohnnyT]

Here's how I look at it, Ekblad had the 18 rookie, dman, eastern conference team and a solid season going for him. Stone had the strong final push "propelling his team to the playoffs." Gaudreau did every thing and more that they did and was even a part of one of the best lines in hockey, however he didn't have a "strong finish" because it was only slightly better than the rest of the season and had the disadvantage of playing in the west and have of the writers were asleep while he was playing.