CallMeShaft
Elmo is a Nazi
- Apr 14, 2014
- 16,640
- 23,636
The Race for the Calder Trophy
- Thread starter CBJx614
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
- Status
- Dec 10, 2012
- 41,393
- 19,508
So it was just a gotcha moment then. You knew no one was calling him the 10th best rookie, yet you went ahead with that post anyway.
CallMeShaft
Elmo is a Nazi
- Apr 14, 2014
- 16,640
- 23,636
- Dec 10, 2012
- 41,393
- 19,508
Everyone knows advanced stats don't paint the whole picture, no one said otherwise.
From the guy who saw a stat and got so defensive about where his player was ranked on the one stat that he felt the need to clarify something no one actually claimed in an effort to discredit the entirety of the stat and article?
I'll keep that in mind for next time, thanks.
In any case, I was responding to a poster who asked why people keep saying Bedard's defensive game isn't good with support for why Bedard's defensive game isn't good. If you have any sources that claim it is good, maybe you can post them. Would be a welcome change if you actually posted something to support what you say for once. So far the only arguments I've seen from you in this thread are "any stat that doesn't have Bedard as a top 2 rookie are bad and shouldn't be considered" and "omg lol this guy thinks Bedard is a 2C"
- Apr 27, 2005
- 36,090
- 35,923
Because I have watched him play? He is very bad in his own zone, like most 18 year old centers.
CallMeShaft
Elmo is a Nazi
- Apr 14, 2014
- 16,640
- 23,636
Why did you even bother posting all that from The Athletic if you're only going to say people who respond to it negatively are being defensive? If you know those stats aren't indicative of anything, why post it?
This is like yesterday, when I got a million (slight hyperbole) responses just yesterday in this thread from mostly Wild fans, including yourself, for saying Bedard is a 1C, while you all tried to defend the stance that Faber should be top 10 in Norris voting.
Now I know this is pretty much an unofficial Wild thread these days, but holy f***. Some of you (not all of you) are doing everything in your power in here to discredit Bedard, while talking up Faber as, again, a top 10 defenseman. It's insane. And posting that story from The Athletic is just the evolution of that argument.
I personally see Faber as the favorite to win the Calder at the moment and think Bedard would need an excellent last 2 months to catch up; I went so far as saying Faber would be "deserving" of it yesterday in response to Jan Itor's comments (which I agreed with). I haven't criticized that kid once so far here. Weird that so many of you are critiquing Bedard this much.
this Bedard vs Faber discussion is stupid. If it's true that Bedard is back tonight he's going to have plenty of games left to rack up enough points to make him a run away unanimous choice for Calder.
- Dec 10, 2012
- 41,393
- 19,508
Your negative response was drawing out a conclusion that no one else had claimed in order to discredit the article from what it does claim (that Bedard isn't good defensively). This is more commonly called a "straw man" argument.
I didn't defend the stance that Faber should be top 10 in Norris voting, I asked you if the guy who had him top 10 on his list was so unreasonable (that is, you don't have to agree with it, but is it completely out of line), because we had an article where NHL players, coaches and GM's had him in their top 15-20 at worst.
Again, seems to be another straw man argument here.
Discredit Bedard because his defensive game, one of the most important things for a center, isn't good, and posting support/evidence of such? This is a hockey discussion board. Why are you here if you don't like people discussing hockey with actual supporting arguments to back their claims?
There are valid sources to support what we discuss, should we not include those because you don't like reading them? You're welcome to post articles "discrediting" Faber if you can find them. I even posted something from the same article that isn't necessarily a positive for Faber myself.
Again, this is a discussion board for people to have a discussion. This thread specifically is about who should win the Calder trophy. Why would you not expect to see discussion- positive and negative- to that topic? Is there a rule that I have to ignore the reasons Bedard isn't the better rookie when a large portion are claiming he is? Again, you're more than welcome to do the same with Faber if you can find the support (and again I even did it myself earlier).
If you want a completely positive echo chamber on why Bedard is the best thing to happen to this league, I think there are probably a couple threads for that here, just as the Wild have some for Faber on their board. Otherwise, if you're in this section of the website, you can expect not everyone is going to just nod and agree when you say something.
Last edited:
I do think Faber has a slightly more positive impact on winning than Bedard, today. He’s a legit #1 dman, playing a really strong 2-way game, 25 minutes a night of winning hockey plays. Bedard is far, far more talented, but he’s also weak defensively, sucks on faceoffs, tends to lose physical battles. He’s amazing at both generating offensive chances and capitalizing on those chances, but that’s only one part of winning hockey games.
This is not AT ALL a shot at Bedard’s potential, I think he’s gonna be an utter superstar, maybe even a Crosby/McDavid level player (or if not, probably Kucherov level), but he’s 18 and has the weaknesses almost all 18 year old small skill forwards have. Faber is 21 with a much more well rounded game.
With that being said, if Bedard is healthy, he wins the Calder with ease. The Calder isn’t a “most impact on winning” award, it mostly goes to exciting, high scoring rookies, and that’s Bedard to a tee.
This is not AT ALL a shot at Bedard’s potential, I think he’s gonna be an utter superstar, maybe even a Crosby/McDavid level player (or if not, probably Kucherov level), but he’s 18 and has the weaknesses almost all 18 year old small skill forwards have. Faber is 21 with a much more well rounded game.
With that being said, if Bedard is healthy, he wins the Calder with ease. The Calder isn’t a “most impact on winning” award, it mostly goes to exciting, high scoring rookies, and that’s Bedard to a tee.
Hawkaholic
Registered User
Then you don't know how to watch hockey. He's not that great yet, but he certainly isn't one of the worst in the league.
Is he great? No, obviously not. But he isn't that terrible, and certainly not one of the worst. People who dig up dumb stats like to prove their point is silly. And pointing to their stats without him in the lineup is also dumb. A few Hawks are on record saying that they realized when Bedard went out that they had to change their overall game, so acting like they improved defensively just because Bedard isn't on the ice anymore is just people acting like they know what they are talking about by putting data into a spreadsheet.Because there are stats that back up how bad he is defensively
This article is from yesterday
We can scroll to the Calder section
*A note about the chart from the author before we go further
Diving right in
And I'm sure others can find other sources that confirm that he's not good defensively, but that's as far as I'm going.
There are 5 guys on the ice, and he is never with anyone who is any good at anything, and he usually plays against the other teams best palyers. Of course they aren't going to look good when your teammates give you no help, and you play on one of the worst teams in NHL history.
Last edited:
- Dec 10, 2012
- 41,393
- 19,508
1) I don't know if he's the worst, I never claimed that myself, I'm not going to dig for that info
2) "Is he great? No, obviously not. But he isn't that terrible" - if you have any kind of stats or otherwise to support that, I'd love to see them. What I've seen indicates he's far closer to terrible than to great.
3) I'd again highlight the part of the article where those same players improved defensively without him
So it's not like these guys he's playing with are incapable of doing anything at all.
I feel like a broken record at this point, but if you have any evidence to the contrary, you are entirely welcomed to share it. People who dig up stats and stuff to prove what they're saying is true aren't silly, that's how intelligent, rational discussion happens.
Hawkaholic
Registered User
You missed my edited post.
A few Hawks are on record saying that they realized when Bedard went out that they had to change their overall game, so acting like they improved defensively just because Bedard isn't on the ice anymore is just people acting like they know what they are talking about by putting data into a spreadsheet.
- Dec 10, 2012
- 41,393
- 19,508
Seems like the way they should play all the time then. I wonder what other impacts that would have, possibly lowering Bedard's scoring?
Actually it's funny, because one big argument we keep seeing in favor of Bedard is that their scoring is down since he left, but if you want to use the Hawks players stating they changed their game to a more defensive focus, we can probably attribute as much of that scoring decrease to the change, not Bedard, as you want to attribute to the defensive increase, not Bedard.
Still, doesn't change the fact that Bedard is bad defensively.
- Apr 27, 2005
- 36,090
- 35,923
Sure, just write off my opinion because you don't like your players being criticized.
He makes 3 terrible plays on this one goal against alone:
1. Terrible high risk backhand up the middle of the ice resulting in a turnover (where he very easily could have slid it down to Jones for a 2v1 down low)
2. Lazy AF backchecking after such a terrible turnover
3. Takes a wide turn looking to fly the zone instead of staying in front of the net
The bad decision making is more forgivable considering his age, but the laziness he shows here after making a terrible giveaway is a major issue.
He and Marino are level after the turnover:
Then Bedard decides to skate back at 50% and Marino ends up 15 feet ahead of him on a breakaway:
If you don't see some of the issues here, maybe it's you who doesn't know how to watch hockey.
If Bedard can get 27 points in 29 games to finish with 70 points, the trophy is his.
Will 22 points over the last stretch to finish with 65 be enough though? If Faber does hit 50 it will be tight.
Will 22 points over the last stretch to finish with 65 be enough though? If Faber does hit 50 it will be tight.
- Dec 10, 2012
- 41,393
- 19,508
Our Lady Peace
Registered User
That would be 60 points sir
I feel if Faber hits 50 it will be tight but the media will want to toss it up to the more hyped guy, probably
I'd personally give it to Faber but it would be fairly close
- Apr 27, 2005
- 36,090
- 35,923
- Dec 10, 2012
- 41,393
- 19,508
Here's the math you're looking for:
Of course the numbers are slightly different because he's coming back tonight, not Monday, but I made this post days ago and don't care to update it because they aren't that different.
Bedard's going to have to significantly up his scoring if he wants to significantly outscore Faber. Or Faber will have to fall off where's he's been since he took over PP1 duties. Or some combination of a little of both.
JiricekSaveUs
Danila Yurov Fan Club Executive Assistant
- May 2, 2018
- 19,326
- 12,286
Really not a hot take at all. I’m not saying he’s a top 10 defenseman in the NHL, but he’s certainly been there or close this season.
CallMeShaft
Elmo is a Nazi
- Apr 14, 2014
- 16,640
- 23,636
And it's not a hot take that Bedard is among the top 32 centers in the league.
Hawkaholic
Registered User
Of course he has issues. I've seen a lot of good from him too. Backchecks well, steals pucks in the defensive zone, isn't the last guy back into his own zone.
Good for you, you found clips from one game to criticize him with, he's made many good plays as well.
Hawkaholic
Registered User
Yeah, they probably should, but they didn't. It was admitted by Foligno in an interview he did, that they realized they wouldn't be scoring as much without him, so they had to play harder, and try to focus on a more defensive scheme.
It's pretty obvious Bedard is their only offensive threat, I don't really care what people think regarding his offense. He has literally no one to help him offensively, he probably should have close to 50pts with how much he has created, but he is playing with guys with stone hands. 20GF in 14GP since he's been out says all it needs to.
- Dec 10, 2012
- 41,393
- 19,508
Yeah I don't know. Says the team shifted to a focus on defense, away from offense. Like you just said they did.
Can't have it both ways.
- Status
Latest posts
-
News Article: Quebec City, Andlauer and the Sparticat Fiasco- Latest: frightenedinmatenum2
-
-
Injury Report: 2024-2025 Injury thread | HF’s Longest Thread Just Got Longer- Latest: Bill Peckerskull
-
