Calder Trophy Finalists

[Jets4Life]

Aaron Ekblad, Florida (set franchise record for goals, assists, points, and led the team in +/-).
Johnny Gaudreau, Calgary (tied for lead in rookie scoring, and led rookies in time on ice).
Mark Stone, Ottawa (tied for lead in rookie scoring, led rookies in +/-)

My vote: Johnny Hockey

[Caged Great]

It will be highway robbery if Gaudreau doesn't win. He was one of the top players in the NHL even though he was a rookie. Stone was invisible in the first half, Ekblad in the second.

[SHOGUN]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

It will be highway robbery if Gaudreau doesn't win. He was one of the top players in the NHL even though he was a rookie. Stone was invisible in the first half, Ekblad in the second.

I wouldn't say it would be a highway robbery if Gaudreau didn't win. All three candidates deserve the award equally. I would give Gaudreau the edge just based on how well he adapted this year from playing in college straight into the NHL. Given his stature and size makes even more impressive.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

I'm biased as hell, but Gaudreau takes it by a nose over Ekblad, simply because he helped his team get into the playoffs and Ekblad's Panthers fell just short.

[codynw]

Yea, this poll won't be biased at all.

[1qqaaz]

We are a shameless fan-base, aren't we...

I just hope Stone doesn't win. A rookie can't be the best when they are invisible for half a season. He's also older and played several games in the previous season. Not that these things necessarily matter.

[smiggy77]

TBH it's a toss up this year. It is so tough to knock on the merits of any of those players.

Ekblad as an 18 year old playing top line minutes and put up the numbers he did, which is rare.

Johnny, well we know what Johnny has accomplished, especially right out of college and with his stature.

Stone really was one of the main reasons Ottawa made the playoffs, especially when voting was conducted at the end of the season and that was the biggest highlight on the last day.

Personally I don't want to see Stone get it because of him being invisible for the first half of the season, that would be a piss off, while Johnny and Ekblad were pretty consistent year round.

[slybomb]

Things that should not be considered:
Johnny's size
Ekblad's age
Stone's previous season

I absolutely lose faith in the system when I see these things put into the equation. It should be the best rookie performance of the season, period.

Ekblad was a pillar on defense for Florida but they ultimately came up short.
Stone was a support player, albeit a damn good one, that stepped up for the playoff push.
Johnny was a dynamic catalyst on one of the best top lines in the game and helped a predicted bottom feeder to the playoffs.

These are some excellent performances by these fine rookies, but it has to come down to Ekblad and Johnny considering their importance to their respective teams. Personally I would give Johnny the edge just because he put the team on his back in a few games and single handedly won it for us.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by slybomb

Things that should not be considered:
Johnny's size
Ekblad's age
Stone's previous season

I absolutely lose faith in the system when I see these things put into the equation. It should be the best rookie performance of the season, period.

Ekblad was a pillar on defense for Florida but they ultimately came up short.
Stone was a support player, albeit a damn good one, that stepped up for the playoff push.
Johnny was a dynamic catalyst on one of the best top lines in the game and helped a predicted bottom feeder to the playoffs.

These are some excellent performances by these fine rookies, but it has to come down to Ekblad and Johnny considering their importance to their respective teams. Personally I would give Johnny the edge just because he put the team on his back in a few games and single handedly won it for us.

Those things are obviously not considered as to whether the player is eligible for the award or not. But why can't they be considered when deciding how impressive a rookie's season is? Why is Ekblad's position a factor everyone seems to accept but some have a problem with factoring in his age? Or factoring Stone's many games of NHL experience (spanning 3 seasons) before this season?

Yes, it's the best performance over the season. But "best" is subjective and many factors are taken into account.

I would vote Johnny, but I suspect Ekblad will win. And Stone wasn't exactly "invisible" over the first half. He had a pretty good first half as a matter of fact. And he made a huge push at the time when voters vote.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Are we voting on who we think should win or on who is likely to win? I know it says "who should win?" but that can be taken a couple different ways.

[EldrickOnIce]

^ we are just voting for Gaudreau

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

We are a shameless fan-base, aren't we...

I just hope Stone doesn't win. A rookie can't be the best when they are invisible for half a season. He's also older and played several games in the previous season. Not that these things necessarily matter.

He actually made his NHL debut in the 2011-2012 playoffs.

I know that he is still technically a rookie and qualifies for the award just as much as any other rookie, but I agree that it is less impressive when an older player that has been paying pro for a few seasons has a good "rookie" season in the NHL.

Stone is a fantastic player though I do think he is going to sustain this for a while. It just took him longer to work on things.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Does anyone know if the real vote has already occurred, and the finalists are simply the top 3, or whether the top 3 are announced, and then a vote? I think Johnny should have an excellent chance, but Ekblad looked really good in the world championships.

[GreenLantern]

Aaron Ekblad, Florida 10
Mark Stone, Ottawa 1

[RyZ]

Voted Gaudreau but have a feeling he wont win. Probably Ekblad gets it.

[GranteedEV]

Okay, these finalists are like asking yourself: Chris Pronger 2.0, Patrick Kane 2.0 or Marian Hossa 2.0.

It's like "well damn, that's a hell of a rookie class", and poor Filip Forsberg and John Kingberg didn't even make the cut!

[Arsenal14]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

Does anyone know if the real vote has already occurred, and the finalists are simply the top 3, or whether the top 3 are announced, and then a vote? I think Johnny should have an excellent chance, but Ekblad looked really good in the world championships.

The real vote is done. The announced finalists are just the top 3 from the voting (I believe each voter chose their top 5 and there is a point system based on where each voter ranks the player). Playoffs and World Championships have no impact on the voting as it was done at the end of the regular season.

[Erick Estrada]

I think Stone finishes 3rd but is sounds like a lot of voters in the Canadian media voted for Ekblad. The US media will likely be the deciding factor and I hope they vote for the American seeing the Canadian media is voting for the Canadian. One thing I didn't understand was the Forseburg didn't get in because he tapered off in the 2nd half of the season but so did Ekblad and of all the candidates he factored the least into team success seeing the Panthers missed the playoffs. Not the end of the world if Ekblad wins as he had a solid season for a rookie defender.

[CroFlames]

I think Johnny wins it for two reasons.

He was a key factor in getting his team to the playoffs.

He is so damn dynamic on the ice compared to the other 2 finalists.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Arsenal14

The real vote is done. The announced finalists are just the top 3 from the voting (I believe each voter chose their top 5 and there is a point system based on where each voter ranks the player). Playoffs and World Championships have no impact on the voting as it was done at the end of the regular season.

They really should change the "finalist" reference (also the use of "nominee" which I see from time to time) - it confuses a lot of people and also enrages folks who figure their choice got "snubbed" when in reality they may have received lots of votes - just not enough to crack the top 3. Just say the top 3 Calder candidates are X, Y and Z.