Epic Calder Race 2024-25

[FerrisRox]

Wolf has a legitimate shot at the Calder and I'd argue he should be in MVP conversations as well.

Wolf has no shot at the Calder and is a long shot to even be one of the three nominees.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Ekblad definitely was a less than worthy winner, but I think him winning it had less to do with age and more to do with 1OA hype.

But I think age may have hurt Bunting in 2022. Dude had 63 points with a +27 and lost to Seider, a 50 point dman who was -9 with 23 mins TOI.

A few years later, Bedard's 61 point -44 season beat out Faber's 47 point season, where he was only -1 and played 25 mins a night.

I think Bedard benefited from the same hype that got Ekblad the Calder, but I do think age can make a difference among voters as well, just to a lesser extent.

Regardless, Hutson will be up against a similar 1OA hype disadvantage. He's emerged as the front runner for me, but he's still fighting an uphill battle vs draft hype. I think if the roles were reversed, and Hutson was the 18 year-old first overall pick, he'd be the overwhelming favorite among writers.

yup, I agree the 1OA hype is a very real thing and will work in favor of Celebrini. Ultimately the calder race is a fun thing to watch and I'm happy to have a player on the Habs in the race but while having "my guy" win it would be nice its really not that important. In fact I always kind of snicker when the calder trophy is used to pump up a players career accomplishments.

IMO its one of the least meaningful "hockey" trophies along with Byng and Messier, which are in a different all together category than the hockey related ones like Masterton, Clancy, O'Ree, etc.

 

[Barrie22]

yup, I agree the 1OA hype is a very real thing and will work in favor of Celebrini. Ultimately the calder race is a fun thing to watch and I'm happy to have a player on the Habs in the race but while having "my guy" win it would be nice its really not that important. In fact I always kind of snicker when the calder trophy is used to pump up a players career accomplishments.

IMO its one of the least meaningful "hockey" trophies along with Byng and Messier, which are in a different all together category than the hockey related ones like Masterton, Clancy, O'Ree, etc.

Exactly calder is a nice start to a career, does not mean that they will even have the best career of that class. Ovechkin and crosby are proof of that.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

View attachment 960659

Tough to see any age adjusted winners on that list. If an 18 year old won the calder it was because they had the best rookie season. With the exception of Ekblad possibly.

Jeff Skinner's win was definitely age-adjusted. He slightly outproduced as a winger a center in Logan Couture who was older when Couture was miles better overall as a player.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Jeff Skinner's win was definitely age-adjusted. He slightly outproduced as a winger a center in Logan Couture who was older when Couture was miles better overall as a player.

Skinner had 7 more points...

 

[karltonian]

Not if you’re 26 or younger… Do you think people would care about Dustin Wolf being about to turn 24? Of course not.

Your example was literally false.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Skinner had 7 more points...

He did in three more games. Couture was playing the tougher position, helped get his team to the playoffs, and was significantly better defensively than Skinner was that year. He won because he was 18 and Couture was 21.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

He did in three more games. Couture was playing the tougher position, helped get his team to the playoffs, and was significantly better defensively than Skinner was that year. He won because he was 18 and Couture was 21.

The games played isn't really considered - Couture actually got 32 more minutes on the season. And the playoffs thing isn't really a factor either - the sharks were a perennial playoff team at the time.

Couture was 6th on the Sharks in scoring, Skinner was 2nd on the hurricanes. He outproduced Couture by a fair margin with less help in less minutes.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Your example was literally false.

He won the award at 30. So no, it wasn’t false. It demonstrated that the voters will take the best season even in an extreme case.

Yes, the rules changed but none of the candidates for the Calder this season are 30 years old…

If for example Dustin Wolf catches fire and leads the way, nobody is going to not vote for him because he’s 23 or 24… it doesn’t matter.

 

[Bond]

Wolf has no shot at the Calder and is a long shot to even be one of the three nominees.

I agree. He will only get top three if Michkov fades into the back half of the season. He won't beat out Hutson or Celebrini barring some insane play from his part (IE be top 3 in vezina voting).

 

[Essenege]

+3 in the past 20 games. And it has only been the past 5 games where he got into the + side, up to after the december 31st game he was a - player during this hot streak. After the december 20th game he was a -6.

Can we stop using +\-? It’s a stupid stats. Includes empty netters.

Use 5v5 differential instead. He’s 36-35, +1.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

The games played isn't really considered - Couture actually got 32 more minutes on the season. And the playoffs thing isn't really a factor either - the sharks were a perennial playoff team at the time.

Couture was 6th on the Sharks in scoring, Skinner was 2nd on the hurricanes. He outproduced Couture by a fair margin with less help in less minutes.

None of that is really considered. Couture got those minutes because he was the better player. Skinner got the production he did because he saw 100 more power play minutes than Couture. He saw that because he was on a worse team than Couture but the better player that season was absolutely Logan Couture. The reason Skinner won was because he was 18 and Couture was 21.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

None of that is really considered. Couture got those minutes because he was the better player. Skinner got the production he did because he saw 100 more power play minutes than Couture. He saw that because he was on a worse team than Couture but the better player that season was absolutely Logan Couture. The reason Skinner won was because he was 18 and Couture was 21.

Show me an example of a forward winning the Calder while being outscored by 7 points. I can't recall any Calder winning forwards who didn't lead rookies in scoring -Drury in 98/99 over his teammate Hejduk?

Crosby was an 18 year old center while Ovechkin was 20 y/o winger. Crosby had 102 points, Ovechkin had 106. Guess who won the Calder.

Couture lost the Calder because he got outscored by Skinner, simple as that.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Sucks for Emil Heinman. Hit by a car and out for a month. Currently 7th in points and 3rd in goals for rookies. He's been a wonderful surprise.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Show me an example of a forward winning the Calder while being outscored by 7 points. I can't recall any Calder winning forwards who didn't lead rookies in scoring.

Crosby was an 18 year old center while Ovechkin was 20 y/o winger. Crosby had 102 points, Ovechkin had 106. Guess who won the Calder.

Couture lost the Calder because he got outscored by Skinner, simple as that.

What does that matter? The award is most proficient not the highest point scorer even if that's how they've decided to award it. A 7 point difference with three extra games from a winger on a non-playoff team is not always more proficient than a center with more goals on a winning team. The only substantial difference between the two was their age at the time. While it has been a while that the league has made an exception for a forward winning without being the scoring leader, it has happened. And it should've happened a couple times since then but sometimes the people voting these go for lazy narratives and support. Biases do happen at that level all the time. Couture lost the Calder because Skinner had more points and was three years older than him. It's not one or the other.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

What does that matter? The award is most proficient not the highest point scorer even if that's how they've decided to award it. A 7 point difference with three extra games from a winger on a non-playoff team is not always more proficient than a center with more goals on a winning team. The only substantial difference between the two was their age at the time.

The substantial difference that the voters saw was 7 points. They don't care about playoff team or games played.

While it has been a while that the league has made an exception for a forward winning without being the scoring leader, it has happened. And it should've happened a couple times since then but sometimes the people voting these go for lazy narratives and support.

I'm not having a debate about who should have won, I am telling you that voters look at points over almost everything else - from what I've seen, no forward in history that has lost the rookie scoring race by 7+ points and still won the Calder.

Biases do happen at that level all the time. Couture lost the Calder because Skinner had more points and was three years older than him. It's not one or the other.

Skinner having 7 more points was all that was needed to beat out Couture. Even if Skinner was 21 he would have won the Calder.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

The substantial difference that the voters saw was 7 points. They don't care about playoff team or games played.

I'm not having a debate about who should have won, I am telling you that voters look at points over almost everything else - from what I've seen, no forward in history that has lost the rookie scoring race by 7+ points and still won the Calder.

Skinner having 7 more points was all that was needed to beat out Couture. Even if Skinner was 21 he would have won the Calder.

Yet voters let Drury win being 3rd in rookie scoring behind the rookie scoring leader by 4 points. That line of thinking isn't entirely consistent. They play their favorites and use whatever helps them make the argument. Points is certainly the easy one. It doesn't mean that age doesn't play a factor in some years. Depends on what the narrative going around that year is.

 

[5 14 6 1]

My top3 is Hutson Celebrini Wolf

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Yet voters let Drury win being 3rd in rookie scoring behind the rookie scoring leader by 4 points. That line of thinking isn't entirely consistent. They play their favorites and use whatever helps them make the argument. Points is certainly the easy one. It doesn't mean that age doesn't play a factor in some years. Depends on what the narrative going around that year is.

It is far and above the most consistent indicator available, and its not even remotely close. A 7 point gap is unprecedented - there's no need to manufacture a separate factor when the scoring gap is so large.

It's flat out false to say Skinner won because of his age. This is just copium from a biased observer.

 

[karltonian]

He won the award at 30. So no, it wasn’t false. It demonstrated that the voters will take the best season even in an extreme case.

Yes, the rules changed but none of the candidates for the Calder this season are 30 years old…

If for example Dustin Wolf catches fire and leads the way, nobody is going to not vote for him because he’s 23 or 24… it doesn’t matter.

You literally gave an example that proves age does matter because they changed the entire rules to make age matter, based specifically on your example case.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

It is far and above the most consistent indicator available, and its not even remotely close. A 7 point gap is unprecedented - there's no need to manufacture a separate factor when the scoring gap is so large.

It's flat out false to say Skinner won because of his age. This is just copium from a biased observer.

It's not unprecedented. Bure won in '92 as the 3rd leading forward in rookie scoring behind Tony Amonte by 9 points.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

It's not unprecedented. Bure won in '92 as the 3rd leading forward in rookie scoring behind Tony Amonte by 9 points.

Okay, you have to go back 33 years ago. And Bure didn't win it because he was younger.

Your argument simply holds no water. Again, its just an excuse from a biased observer.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

You literally gave an example that proves age does matter because they changed the entire rules to make age matter, based specifically on your example case.

If any of these players were 30 years old, you'd have a point. But they aren't.

I gave you an extreme example that showed where a 30 year old won the award. Age didn't factor into the voting at all, they voted for Makarov.

So sure, if you're 26 or older you can't win. That's not the case with any of these guys.

Age isn't going to be a factor.

 

[karltonian]

If any of these players were 30 years old, you'd have a point. But they aren't.

I gave you an extreme example that showed where a 30 year old won the award. Age didn't factor into the voting at all, they voted for Makarov.

So sure, if you're 26 or older you can't win. That's not the case with any of these guys.

Age isn't going to be a factor.

You literally cited the case that made age literally matter. You picked the one that caused us to know, explicitly and without any question or argument, that age does matter. Literally in the rules. Literally.

 

[Lunatik]

Exactly.

Forwards tend to win it over blueliners so that would favour Celebrini. Age? Nah.

It’s a fun race. I’m looking forward to following it in the second half. So many good performances this year.

Claiming age doesn't matter is a false narrative, it may not for some voters, but for some it absolutely does. Even if it's as small as using age as a tie breaker.